औङ आपः

Karika

औकारोयं शीविधौ ङिद्गृहीतो ङिच्चास्माकं नास्ति कोयं प्रकारः ।
सामान्यार्थस्तस्य चासंजनेस्मिन्ङित्कार्यं ते श्यां प्रसक्तं स दोषः ॥
ङित्त्वे विद्याद्वर्णनिर्द्देशमात्रं वर्णे यत्स्यात्तच्च विद्यात्तदादौ ।
वर्णश्चायं तेन ङित्त्वेप्यदोषो निर्देशोयं पूर्वसूत्रेण वा स्यात् ॥

Thus खट्वे तिष्ठतः, खट्वे पश्य, बहुराजे (IV. I. 13), कारीषगन्ध्ये ॥ The ङ् in औङ् is for the purposes of included औट् also. There is, in fact, no such affix as औङ् taught by Panini any where. The following Karika raises this question and certain doubts in the first verse and then answers them in the second.

Karika:- In this rule about शी, the letter ओ has been enunciated with an indicatory ङ्; but we have no औ with a ङ्, taught any where. What sort of sutra construction is this? If you say, the use of ङ् is to form a coming term for the two affixes औ and औट्, then by so doing, ङित् operations must be performed with regard to this शी of yours, and this is an error. [शी replacing ङित् औङ् will be considered as ङित्, and being ङित्, it will take the augment याट् by 7.3.113: and the form will be खट्वाये and not खट्वे] ॥

Ans:- The ङ् should be considered here as merely indicating the letter औ, and as not an इत्, so that whatever will apply to the letter औ will apply to any form beginning with it, by the maxim यस्मिन् विधि तदादावल् ग्रहणे ॥ Or औङ् may be considered as merely the letter औ and not any particular affix, and ङ् is added only for the sake of facility of pronounciation, like द् in ऋदोरप् औ being merely a letter, will include all affixes having the letter औ as their significant part: and thus the औङ् is not being a ङित् affix the rule 7.3.113, will not apply: and so there is no anomaly. Or the form औङ् may be considered as the affix of the dual, for Nominative and Accusative in the terminology of Ancient Grammarians, and will not produce their effects, because the anubandhas of the Ancients do not produce their effects in this Grammar of Panini: i.e. the rules regarding anubandhas made by Panini refer to the anubandhas made by him and not by older authors.,