अजादेर्द्वितीयस्य

Of that whose first syllable begins with a vowel, there are two in the room of the second portion containing a single vowel.
This debars the reduplication of the first syllable. In a verbal root beginning with a vowel, and consisting of more than one syllable, the second syllable is to be reduplicated and not the first. Thus the सनन्त root अटिष, (अट् + सन् = अट् + इट् + सन् 7.2.35 = अटिष), reduplicates the second syllable टिष् and the 3rd per. sing is अटि टिषति, the ष् being elided by 7.4.60: and स changed to ष by 8.3.59. So also अशिशिषति, अरिरिषति ॥ The last form is thus evolved, ॠ + सन् = ऋ + इट् + सन् 7.2.74 = अर + इ + स 7.3.84, and 6.1.51. Here now we have to make reduplication, and if 1.1.59 be applied, then since a vowel affix इ follows, the reduplication of अर should take place i. e. the ॠ the sthani should be reduplicated. But we have explained the sutra द्विर्वचनेऽचि 1.1.59, by the phrase द्विर्वचननिमित्तेऽचि, i. e. the vowel-affix causing reduplication. Here the vowel-affix इट् does not cause reduplication, but the consonant-affix सन् that does so. Therefore rule 1.1.59 does not apply, for इट् itself is a कार्यी, and the maxim applies कार्यमनुभवन्हि कार्यी निमित्ततया नाश्रीयते "surely that which undergoes an operation can, so for as it undergoes that operation, not be made the cause of the application of a grammatical rule". Thus from the root शीङ् is formed शयिता; here the root शी is gunated before the augment इट्. Rule 1.1.5 declaring the prohibition of gunation with regard to कित् or ङित् words does not apply here. For though शीङ् has an indicatory ङ, yet as it undergoes an operation itself, it cannot be the cause of the application of another rule.

Some persons explain the word अजादेः as the Ablative singular (and not Genitive Singular) of अजादिः and they consider the word as a Karmadharaya compound and not a Bahuvrihi compound. According to them the word means:-"The syllable following the initial vowel is reduplicated". (अच्चासावादिश्वेत्यजादिः, अजादेरुत्तरस्य एकाचो द्वे भवतः) ॥ According to this interpretation, the word द्वितीयस्य is merely explanatory.