दायाद्यं दायादे

Thus विद्या꣡दायादः, ध꣡नदायादः ॥ The word विद्या꣡ is formed by the affix क्यप् 3.3.99 which is udatta 3.3.96. The word धन is derived by adding क्यु to धाञ् (Unadi. II. 81). Though the Unadi Sutra II. 81 ordains क्यु after the root धा preceded by नि, yet by बहुल 3.3.1 rule it comes after धा also when it is not preceded by नि and धन has acute on the first 3.1.3.

In the forms विद्यादायादः &c, what Genitive case has been taken? If it is the Genitive case which the word दायाद requires by Rule 2.3.39, then by the Vartika प्रतिपदविधाना च षष्ठी न समस्यते (II. 2. 10 Vartika), there can be no compounding. The Genitive case there is the ordinary Genitive case of 2.3.50. i. e. a शैषिक Genitive case, and not a प्रतिपद Genitive. If it is a शेषलक्षण Genitive case, then why the other Genitive case is taught in 2.3.39 with regard to दायाद &c. That sutra only indicates the existence of the Locative case in the alternative, and does not prevent the Genitive. In fact, had merely Locative been ordained in that sutra, this particular case would have prevented the Genitive on the maxim that a particular rule debars the general. But the employment of both terms Genitive and Locative in that sutra indicates the alternative nature of the rule and shows that the Genitive case so taught is not a प्रतिपद Genitive, but a general Genitive. In short the Genitive taught in 2.3.39, is not an apurva-vidhi, the words naturally would have taken Genitive; the taking of the Locative is the only new thing taught there.

Why do we say 'when meaning inheritance'? Observe परमदायादः 6.1.223 taking the final acute of a compound.,