359.

Additional remarks. — 1. As participles of the future in the active may be considered also a.) the kṛts in -u, derived from desideratives, as cikīrṣu (wishing to do, being about to do), cp. 52 a, f. i. Daç. 166 tatra ca svādu pānīyamedhāṃsi kandamūlaphalāni saṃjighṛkṣavaḥ… avātarāma (and there [on that island] we descended, desiring to take sweet water, fuel, turnips, roots and fruits); b.) some in -in, mentioned by P. 3, 3, 3, as gamī grāmam (one, who will go to the village), they do even duty as finite verbs: Kathâs. 35, 104 uttiṣṭha rājan bhāvī te vīro vaṃśadharaḥ sutaḥ (get up, my king, a son will be born to you —), Vikram, V, p. 181 surāsuravimardo bhāvī = -bhavitā; c.) those in -aka, when put close to the chief verb; they are expressive of a purpose, cp. 52 c. (*1).

2. Further there are the old participles of the past, formed with reduplication, such as cakṛvān, f. cakruṣī, n. cakṛvat for the active voice, and cakrāṇaḥ for the passive. In classic Sanskrit they have almost wholly got out of use. Already Pâṇini restricts them to Holy Writ, with the exception of six, viz. sedivān, ūṣivān, śuśruvān, the compounds anāśvān, upeyivān, anūcānaḥ. {P. 3, 2, 106-109.} The participle in -vān (vāṃs) is, however, oftener met with in the post-Pâṇinean literature, than would be expected by this rule, but it occurs chiefly in epic poetry and in kâvyas. Mhbh. 1, 44, 10 vijahrivān, R. 1, 26, 25 vineduṣī, Kathâs. 25, 72 anidrasya niṣeduṣaḥ, Kumâras. 2, 4 namastubhyaṃ… bhedam upeyuṣe, ibid. 6, 72 padam ātasthuṣā tvayā, ibid. 6, 64 ity ūcivāṃs tam evārtham, Kathâs. 81, 31, Çiçup. 1, 17 etc. That it may even do duty as finite verb, has been mentioned 338. But the participle of the past in -ān has wholly antiquated, and is only met with in the archaic dialect, see f. i. Çat. Br. 3, 9, 1, 1; 11, 1, 6, 8 etc.

(*1)
I was wrong, in doubting, on p. 39 N. 3 of this book (52-note3), at the correctness of the example (Mhbh. 3, 73, 25 = Nala. 21, 22) bhavantam adhivādakaḥ quoted by Whitney. When reading once more not only that passage, but the whole sarga, I clearly saw, that bhavantam cannot but depend here on adhivādakaḥ.

359. 備考

1. 能動態の未来分詞は以下のものとも見なされうる：
a.) 意欲活用（desiderative）から派生した、kṛt接尾辞-uのもの；cikīrṣu（wishing to do, being about to do）。52-aをみよ。 Daç. 166 tatra ca svādu pānīyamedhāṃsi kandamūlaphalāni saṃjighṛkṣavaḥ… avātarāma (and there [on that island] we descended, desiring to take sweet water, fuel, turnips, roots and fruits)

b.) P. 3, 3, 3に言及される、語尾が〔kṛt接尾辞〕-inのもの；gamī grāmam（one, who will go to the village）。これらは定動詞としてもはたらく。
Kathâs. 35, 104 uttiṣṭha rājan bhāvī te vīro vaṃśadharaḥ sutaḥ (get up, my king, a son will be born to you —)
Vikram, V, p. 181 surāsuravimardo bhāvī = -bhavitā

c.) 主要な動詞の近くに置かれた場合の〔kṛt接尾辞〕-aka。これらは目的を表す。52-cをみよ（*1）。

2. 加えて、重字（reduplication）を伴って形成される古い過去分詞がある；能動態だとcakṛvān、f. cakruṣī、n. cakṛvat、受動態ではcakrāṇaḥ、のような。古典サンスクリットではこれらはほぼ全く用いられなくなった。既にPāṇiniがこれらを聖典〔での用途のみ〕に限定している（ただし6つの例外がある；sedivān、ūṣivān、śuśruvān、および複合語anāśvān、upeyivān、anūcānaḥ）（P. 3, 2, 106-109）。実際には、分詞-vān（vāṃs）は、この規則から予期されるよりも〔＝ヴェーダでの用例よりも〕Pāṇini以後の文献に多く見られ、主に叙事詩やkāvyaで用いられている。
Mhbh. 1, 44, 10 vijahrivān
R. 1, 26, 25 vineduṣī
Kathâs. 25, 72 anidrasya niṣeduṣaḥ
Kumâras. 2, 4 namastubhyaṃ… bhedam upeyuṣe
ibid. 6, 72 padam ātasthuṣā tvayā
ibid. 6, 64 ity ūcivāṃs tam evārtham
Kathâs. 81, 31, Çiçup. 1, 17 …etc.

これが定動詞としてもはたらくことに関しては338で言及した。けれども、過去分詞-ānは全く古風なもので、古いサンスクリットにしか見られない。Çat. Br. 3, 9, 1, 1; 11, 1, 6, 8等をみよ。

（*1）
52-の注3に関して、Whitneyの引く用例：bhavantam adhivādakaḥ（Mhbh. 3, 73, 25；Nala. 21, 22）の正しさを疑ったのは間違いであった。この1文だけでなくsarga全体をもう一度読むと、ここでbhavantamがadhivādakaḥに係らざるを得ないのはあきらかであった。