When elision of an affix has taken place (lopa), the affix still exerts its influence and the operations dependant upon it, take place as if it were present.,
This sutra declares that when an affix disappears by lopa-elision its potency does not disappear. Thus the term 'pada' is defined to be that which ends in a case-affix or a conjugational-affix. But after certain bases, these affixes vanish; still those bases become 'pada' in spite of the vanishing of the whole affix. How can an operation directed by an affix take place, when the affix itself vanishes, is a doubt which may naturally arise. This sutra answers the question. Though an affix may be elided by lopa, yet an operation of which such an affix was the cause, must take place. Thus अग्निचित् is a pada though the case-termination has been elided. Similarly the word अधोक् 'he milked;' which is the Imperfect (लङ्) of दुह्, and is thus formed. अदोह् + तिप् = अदोह् + त् 3.4.100 = अदोह् + ० 6.1.68 = अदोघ् + ० 8.2.32 (here ह् is changed into घ् by taking the word 'aduh' as a 'pada') अधोघ् + ० 8.2.37 = अधोग् 8.2.39 = अधोक्.
Why have we used the word प्रत्यय in this aphorism again, when its anuvritti was understood in this sutra from the last ? This repetition indicates that the present rule applies where the whole of the affix is elided, and not when a portion of an affix is elided. The present sutra, therefore, does not apply to forms like आघ्नीय and सङ्ग्मीय. These forms are the 1st person sing. लिङ् Atmanepada of हन् and गम्. Thus आहन् + इट् = आहन् + अ 3.4.106 = आहन् + सीयुट् + अ 3.4.102 = आहन् + ईय् + अ. Here, स् a portion of the affix सीयुट् is elided by 7.2.79; now there will be no प्रत्ययलक्षण of this partial elision of an affix. Had it been so, the final nasal न् of आहन् would have been elided by 6.4.37: but that is not so: and we have आघ्नीय 7.3.54 and 6.4.98.
The word लक्षण means that by which a thing is recognised. The word प्रत्ययलक्षण, therefore, means the effect by which an affix could be recognised. The orthographical changes, like the following, are not however pratyaya-lakshana. In forming the genitive singular of रै 'wealth,' we have रै + अस् = रायः, here, the change of ऐ into आय् by the rules of sandhi, though caused by the affix अस्; is not such an effect, which the affix causes, by virtue of being an affix, but it is an effect caused by the accidental fact, that the affix begins with a vowel, and thus gives scope to the euphonic rule 6.1.78. Therefore, when in forming the genitive compound of रायः + कुलं, we elide the case-affix अस्, we get the form रैकुलम्. Here the elided affix will not cause the peculiar orthographic change mentioned above, which is dependent upon its letters, and not upon the affix as such.,