एहिमन्ये प्रहासे लृट्

In connection with एहिमन्ये used diversely in the लृट् (I Future) that follows it, retains its accent.
The word प्रहास means great laughter, i.e. derision, mockery, raillery, jeering, gibing, sneering. Thus एहि मन्ये ओदनं भोक्ष्य꣡से, नहि भोक्ष्यसे, भुक्तः सोऽतिथिभिः ॥ एहि मन्ये रथेन यास्य꣡सि, नहि यास्यसि, यातस् तेन पिता ॥ The word एहि is the Imperative second Person of the root इण् preceded by the preposition आङ् ॥

Why do we say 'used derisively'? Observe एहि मन्यसे ओदनं भोक्ष्ये इति; सुष्ठु च मन्यसे, साधु च मन्यसे ॥

By sutra 8.1.51, infra, after the Imperative एहि which is a verb of 'motion' (गत्यर्थ), the following First Future (लृट्) would have retained its accent. The present sutra makes a niyama or restriction, namely that in connection with the Imperative एहि मन्ये, the लृट् is accented only then when 'derision' is meant and not otherwise. Thus the लृट् loses its accent here:- एहि मन्यसे ओदनं भोक्ष्ये ॥ The employment of the First Person in मन्ये in the sutra is not intended to be taught: for by 1.4.106, the verb मन् (मन्यते) takes the affix of the First Person instead of the second, when 'derision' is meant and not otherwise. When प्रहास is not intended, the proper personal affix of the Second Person is employed. The employment of the First Person ceases there also by this restrictive rule. Thus एहि मन्यसे ओदनं भोक्ष्ये ॥

The above counter example is given according to Kasika, according to which एहि मन्यसे इति उत्तमोपादानमतन्त्रम् ॥ But according to Mahabhashya, the counter-example is एहि मन्ये रथेन या॒स्य॒सि॒ ॥ Here यास्यसि loses its accent. The meaning of the above is त्वं रथेन यास्यसि इति अहं मन्ये, एहि ॥ According to Kaiyyata, this would be an example also under the rule, the First Person not being necessary:- एहि मन्यसे रथेन यास्यामि ॥