ABSTRACT
If we take Bhartrhari' s characterization of statements which are not sutras in the full sense of the word seriously, we arrive at an interesting result with regard to a passage which has since long been suspected to be an inter-
polation in Pfu.1ini's grammar, viz. P 1.2.53-57.50 The sUtras in this passage are clearly argumentative in character (note, for instance, the frequent use of compounds in -tviit), in contradistinction to all other sutras of Pfu.1ini. Hence, they suit an aim which Bhartrhari mentions only for the bhtifYasutras, namely that of corroboration (samanhana). In P 1.2.53-57 we find this corroboration together with its negative counterpart, refutation. If sutras in the full sense of the term should only give general rules and specific amplifications, and otherwise be as brief as possible, this passage should certainly be relegated to the commentarial statements.
