अस्ति काचित् प्रस्तावना अष्टाध्याय्याः ?

[अभ्यंकरकुलोत्पन्नः श्रीपादः]

नमो नमः !
ज्ञातुमिच्छामि अस्ति काचित् प्रस्तावना अष्टाध्याय्याः यत्र सूत्राणां अन्वयार्थस्य विषये किञ्चिन्मार्गदर्शनं प्राप्यते ? मम अपेक्षा अस्ति, "वृद्धिरादैच्" अस्मिन् प्रथमे सूत्रे आत् = "आ" इति एकः वर्णः एव ज्ञातव्यः अथवा ऐच् = "ऐ"-वर्णतः "च्"-पर्यन्तौ द्वौ वर्णौ शिवसूत्रेभ्यः ज्ञातव्यौ एतद्विधं किञ्चित् विवरणं कस्यामपि प्रस्तावनायां प्राप्यते ।
अस्ति काचित् एतद्विधा प्रस्तावना ?
सस्नेहम्
अभ्यंकरकुलोत्पन्नः श्रीपादः ।
"श्रीपतेः पदयुगं स्मरणीयम् ।"
संस्कृताध्ययनम् ।http://slabhyankar.wordpress.com 

गीतान्वेषणम् http://study1geetaa2sanskrit.wordpress.com
उपनिषदध्ययनम् http://upanishat.wordpress.com
http://slez-musings.blogspot.com

[hnbhat]

On Monday, January 30, 2012 6:58:29 PM UTC+5:30, SL Abhyankar wrote:
> नमो नमः !
>
> ज्ञातुमिच्छामि अस्ति काचित् प्रस्तावना अष्टाध्याय्याः यत्र सूत्राणां
> अन्वयार्थस्य विषये किञ्चिन्मार्गदर्शनं प्राप्यते ? मम अपेक्षा अस्ति,

> "वृद्धिरादैच्" अस्मिन् प्रथमे सूत्रे आत् = "आ" इति एकः वर्णः एव
> ज्ञातव्यः अथवा ऐच् = "ऐ"-वर्णतः "च्"-पर्यन्तौ द्वौ वर्णौ शिवसूत्रेभ्यः
> ज्ञातव्यौ एतद्विधं किञ्चित् विवरणं कस्यामपि प्रस्तावनायां प्राप्यते <b style="font-weight:normal">।</b>

>
> अस्ति काचित् एतद्विधा प्रस्तावना ?

विधेर्यथैव संकल्पो मुखतां प्रतिपद्यते ।
प्रधानस्य प्रबन्धस्य तथा प्रस्तावना मता
1. अर्थस्य प्रतिपाद्यस्य तीर्थ प्रस्तावनता मता ।' इति
सूत्रधारों नटी ब्रूते मार्ष वापि विदूषकम् ।
स्वकार्य प्रस्तुताक्षेधि चित्रोक्त्या यत्तदामुखम् ।
प्रस्तावना वा। ...

इति रूपकादौ प्रस्तावना, आमुखमिति वस्तुनो निर्देश उच्यते प्रेक्षकाणामाभिमुखीकरणार्थम्। व्याकरणे तथा प्रस्तावना नाम काचित् न दृष्टा श्रुता वा।

व्याकरणे तावत् -

"संज्ञा च परिभाषा च विर्धिर्नियम एव च।
अतिदेशोऽधिकारश्च षड्विधं सूत्रलक्षणम्॥"

सूत्राणां व्याकरणे प्रवृत्तिविषय़ः संगृहीतः।

सूत्रम्, वृत्तिः, अनुवृत्तिरिति सूत्राणामन्वयक्रमः प्राचीनैरादृतः। एतदतिरिच्य काचन प्रस्तावनानामकग्रन्थो न मया दृष्टः।

[Venetia Kotamraju]

You could try the three volume 'Asthadhyayi-bhashya-prathamavritti' by Pandita Brahmadatta J Jijnasu.  It is designed to be an introductory text following the order of the Asthadhyayi and gives the basic meaning of each sutra plus examples and a very useful section in the back showing the prakriya for each example.  I use it and would recommend it.

Apologies for writing in English rather than Sanskrit due to paucity of time.

2012/1/31 hnbhat <hnbh...@gmail.com>

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "samskrita" group.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/samskrita/-/fUq6bsGdABYJ.

To post to this group, send email to sams...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to samskrita+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/samskrita?hl=en.

--

Venetia Kotamraju

+91 997230 5440

www.rasalabooks.com

www.venetiaansell.wordpress.com

[अभ्यंकरकुलोत्पन्नः श्रीपादः]

नमो नमः श्रीमन् "धनञ्जय वैद्य"-महोदय !

By प्रस्तावना I have in mind the concept of a preamble. I am inclined to believe that when one is composing something cryptic, so cryptic as अष्टाध्यायी, there should be a preamble. Rather I would think that an author of a cryptic composition should consider giving a preamble as his responsibility. Possibly there could have been a preamble of अष्टाध्यायी compiled by पाणिनी himself. If it is there, that would be interesting, is it not ? If it is lost over time, that is a great loss !

I respect and value suggestions given by many that to study अष्टाध्यायी one should study सिद्धान्तकौमुदी, काशिकावृत्ति, etc. But are they not secondary compositions ? I am always keen to study anything in its original. That is the concept of my गीतान्वेषणम् also. I presume that composers of secondary works such as सिद्धान्तकौमुदी studied अष्टाध्यायी by its original text. If they could do that, should I also not be able to do so ? In my study of any original text, I would of course have an open mind to take cognizance of studies done by others. But study should be of the original text. That is my anxiety. Such anxiety is my second nature, you can say.

सस्नेहम्
अभ्यंकरकुलोत्पन्नः श्रीपादः ।
"श्रीपतेः पदयुगं स्मरणीयम् ।"
संस्कृताध्ययनम् ।http://slabhyankar.wordpress.com 

गीतान्वेषणम् http://study1geetaa2sanskrit.wordpress.com
उपनिषदध्ययनम् http://upanishat.wordpress.com
http://slez-musings.blogspot.com

2012/1/30 Jay Vaidya <deejay...@yahoo.com>

न जानामि काऽपि "प्रस्तावना", ईदृशी ।

> सूत्राणां अन्वयार्थस्य विषये किञ्चिन्मार्गदर्शनं प्राप्यते ?

प्राप्यते । सन्ति व्याख्याश्च वृत्तयश्च । अन्वयः वृत्तौ प्राप्यते । वृत्तिषु प्राथमिका काशिकावृत्ति: ।

> "वृद्धिरादैच्" अस्मिन् प्रथमे सूत्रे आत् = "आ" इति एकः वर्णः एव
> ज्ञातव्यः अथवा ऐच् = "ऐ"-वर्णतः "च्"-पर्यन्तौ द्वौ वर्णौ शिवसूत्रेभ्यः

> ज्ञातव्यौ एतद्विधं किञ्चित् ...
एतद्विधं तु काशिकायां नास्ति । "आदिरन्त्येन सहेता " सूत्रस्य वृत्तौ अस्ति एतद्वर्णनम् - शिवसूत्राभ्यां कथं भवन्ति "ऐच्"आदयः प्रत्याहारा:  । तस्मात् एकेकस्य सूत्रस्य वृत्तौ "ऐच्"="ऐ औ" इति लेखनं व्यवहार्यं न ।  एतद्विधं विवरणं छात्राणां सुखबोधार्थं कतिपयसूत्रार्थम् एव दत्तं सिद्धान्तकौमुद्याम् । तत्रापि बालमनोरमा टीका सुलभा ।

ज्ञापयामि सविनयो धनञ्जयः ।

---

From: अभ्यंकरकुलोत्पन्नः श्रीपादः <sanskr...@gmail.com>
To:

Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 8:28 AM

Subject: अस्ति काचित् प्रस्तावना अष्टाध्याय्याः ?

[Ajit Gargeshwari]

Incidentally the work has no Magala Sholka as well. I don't know if it is mandatory for shastric work to have a preamble.

Regards
Ajit Gargeshwari

2012/1/31 अभ्यंकरकुलोत्पन्नः श्रीपादः <sanskr...@gmail.com>

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "samskrita" group.

[अभ्यंकरकुलोत्पन्नः श्रीपादः]

नमनानि धन्यवादाश्च सर्वेभ्यः येषां टीकाभिः मार्गदर्शनं लब्ध्वा उपकृतः धन्यश्चाभवम् ।

[Hnbhat B.R.]

2012/1/31 Ajit Gargeshwari <ajit.gar...@gmail.com>

Incidentally the work has no Magala Sholka as well. I don't know if it is mandatory for shastric work to have a preamble.

This is really a question worth answering. 

मङ्गलादीनि मङ्गलमध्यानि मङ्गलान्तानि हि शास्त्राणि प्रथन्ते वीरपुरुषाणि च भवन्त्यायुष्मत् पुरुषाणि चाऽध्येतारश्च मङ्गलयुक्ता यथा स्युरिति ॥ 

if by preamble, this Mangala is meant and the purpose of this preamble is different than a preamble to any rule under any Code of Law  which serves to understand scope of the meaning of the  words used in specific or technical sense. In Ashtadhyayi, it is already present in the form of माहेश्वरसूत्र-s which serves as the key to all the technical terms coined and used in the body of Ashtadhyayi. The ascription of these Maheshvara themselves serve as Mangala also in the context of a शास्त्र. This is accepted if these 14 Maheshvare Sutra=s are accepted as composed by Panini himself or revealed to him by Maheshvara. If one doesn't consider them as an integral part of the text of Ashtadhyayi, which strictly begins with वृद्धिरादैच्, by an inquisitive mind, the मङ्गल required by a शास्त्र is served by the word वृद्धि itself in the initial position in the सूत्र, as subject predicate order is reversed in the initial Sutra to accommodate this Mangala by the use of the word denoting prosperity.  Otherwise, just like अदेङ् गुणः =  अद् एङ्  are termed as गुणः (=bhavati) which is the normal prose order of subject + predicate. Since the meaning is not dependent on the word order   as in English, it could be changed conveniently for the requirement of metrical structure. In prose order it can be some times changed as in this encrypted style. as वृद्धिः आदैच्. The meaning is the same. वृद्धिः (denotes) आद् ऐच्. The word order is usually important in technical texts, is called उद्देशविधेय relation between the subject and the predication.

I think this satisfies the query raised by Ajit. And there is no need for a Mangala, to be a श्लोक also. It can be any auspicious word in encrypted style of the सूत्र-s which do not use any redundant words in their style. It is not mandatory to. It is better to start to with a Mangala, as you can see from the quotation. Prathante are popular with their Mangala-s or they are generally started with a Mangala, and a Mangala in the beginning or Mangala in the end also. It is different from the Mangala in metrical structures, especially in poetry, where imagination plays the important role than the content. Hence in Shastra-s, its scope is also limited.

--
Dr. Hari Narayana Bhat B.R. M.A., Ph.D.,
Research Scholar,

Ecole française d'Extrême-OrientCentre de Pondichéry

16 & 19, Rue Dumas

Pondichéry - 605 001

[murthy]

I have read that "vRuddhiH" of "vRuddhiraadaic" is itself "mangala".

Regards,

Murthy

[Ajit Gargeshwari]

I agree its similar to the word atha used is Brahma Sutras , Yoga sutras etc. I understand ancient sutras act as aid to memory and is not written in a style of a modern book with a forward, preface, table of contents, introduction, conclusion, appendix Bibliography and index etc.

If a mangala is not explicitly mentioned in the text it can be assumed a a Mangala shloka was recited in the composers mind. I agree with the arguments and counter arguments presented in Mimamsa, Nyaya and other works on this matter.

I also agree with  the view that we being born  2,500 years or more after Panini composition cannot decide if Panini should have written a preamble or not for a preamble doesn't strictly fall within the domain of a Sutrakara.

Regards
Ajit gargeshwari

2012/2/1 Hnbhat B.R. <hnbh...@gmail.com>

[Hnbhat B.R.]

I think Mr. Abhyankar's idea of his relying only on the original text for the study is inspired by our Great revolutionary writer of 18th century Jagannatha Bhatta who boldly declared that he won't rely on others compositions:

निर्माय नूतनमुदाहरणानुरूपं काव्यं मयात्र निहितं न परस्य किंचि

किं सेव्यते सुमनसां मनसापि गन्धः

कस्तूरिकाजननशक्तिभृता मृगेण?

who propounded his own theories in Literary Criticism against the earlier rhetoricians supplying examples from his own poetic compositions as and when needed as example without following any poem of others. 

I was reminded of this rhetoric question when he chose a fresh approach of learning without relying on any primary texts. If they could do it, why he could not do it? 

[Hnbhat B.R.]

परस्य किंचित्।

किं सेव्यते सुमनसां मनसापि गन्धः

कस्तूरिकाजननशक्तिभृता मृगेण?

Sorry for the typo error in the previous message. The translation of the idea in the verse is thus:

Why should a musk-deer endowed with the capability of producing musk, should think of the fragrance of the flowers for it? When he himself can compose the poetry, why should he rely on others' poems for examples to expound his theory?

This is the idea of the rhetoric question in the second half. Congratulations and best wishes to the endeavor of Abhyankar in his learning approach.

[Viswanath B]

Shri Abhyandar Mahodaya,

It is inspiring for rest of us to see the path you are taking. I hope we will benifit from that as well, by way of your blog.

Your point about the composers of the kaumudi etc, having studied the ashtadhyayi in original form could be true. However they may not have done it independently, which is really the aspect in question here. In  the good old days, the adhyayana is done with Guru who is expected to be well versed on the topic.

Anyway, please make a path, we will follow as well.

Thanks
Viswanath.

2012/1/31 अभ्यंकरकुलोत्पन्नः श्रीपादः <sanskr...@gmail.com>