nadyaiḥ in Veda

[Nityanand Misra]

Dear list

Here is काशिका on बहुलं छन्दसि (७.१.१०)

छन्दसि विषये बहुलमैसादेशो भवति। अतः इत्युक्तम्, अनतो ऽपि भवति नद्यैः इति। अतो न भवति , देवेभिः सर्वेभिः प्रोक्तम् इति।

This example नद्यैः in काशिका is also cited by Tattvabodhini on 7.1.9

नद्यैरिति काशिकोदाहृतप्रयोगस्य ऐस्करणं विना अनिर्वाहाच्च.

Where in Vedic texts (छन्दसि) is this नद्यैः example found? 

I searched the digital version of Bloomfield concordance and could not find it. Perhaps it existed in one of the lost shakha-s, but still I would like to know if anybody has traced this prayoga.

--

Nityānanda Miśra

[V Subrahmanian]

In this Rg Veda (?) sāyaṇa bhāṣya the word is found:

http://bhoomi.csa.iisc.ernet.in/ocrrep/all_OC/RV-SayanaBhashya-MM2e1.txt

मा नो अस्मिन्मघरलप८-त्वहसि नहि ते कृतः शवंसः परणिने ।
'
अदयो नद्यो२ रोरुवद्वनां कथा न क्षोणीर्भियसा समा?रत ।। ५ ।।
-
मा । नः । अस्मिन् । मुघुऽवुन् । वृत्कृसु । अहसि । नहि । ते । सुर्तः । शवसः । परिऽनशे । 

त्यक्तदयः । नद्यैः । रोरु?वत् । वना । कथा । न । क्षोणीः । भियसा । सं । ञ्जारत ।। ५ ।।  

Not sure whether it is a typo.

subrahmanian.v

--

Nityānanda Miśra

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Nityanand Misra]

On Tuesday, 6 December 2016 12:17:39 UTC+5:30, V Subrahmanian wrote:

In this Rg Veda (?) sāyaṇa bhāṣya the word is found:

http://bhoomi.csa.iisc.ernet.in/ocrrep/all_OC/RV-SayanaBhashya-MM2e1.txt

मा नो अस्मिन्मघरलप८-त्वहसि नहि ते कृतः शवंसः परणिने ।
'
अदयो नद्यो२ रोरुवद्वनां कथा न क्षोणीर्भियसा समा?रत ।। ५ ।।
-
मा । नः । अस्मिन् । मुघुऽवुन् । वृत्कृसु । अहसि । नहि । ते । सुर्तः । शवसः । परिऽनशे । 

त्यक्तदयः । नद्यैः । रोरु?वत् । वना । कथा । न । क्षोणीः । भियसा । सं । ञ्जारत ।। ५ ।।  

It's an OCR error, the Padapatha has न॒द्यः (and not नद्यैः) and अक्र॑न्दयः (not त्यक्तदयः)

The correct mantra (RV 1.54.1) is 

मा नो॑ अ॒स्मिन्म॑घवन्पृ॒त्स्वंह॑सि न॒हि ते॒ अन्त॒: शव॑सः परी॒णशे॑ । अक्र॑न्दयो न॒द्यो॒३॒॑ रोरु॑व॒द्वना॑ क॒था न क्षो॒णीर्भि॒यसा॒ समा॑रत ॥ 

and the Padapatha is

मा । नः॒ । अ॒स्मिन् । म॒घ॒व॒न् । पृ॒त्ऽसु । अंह॑सि । न॒हि । ते॒ । अन्तः॑ । शव॑सः । प॒रि॒ऽनशे॑ । अक्र॑न्दयः । न॒द्यः॑ । रोरु॑वत् । वना॑ । क॒था । न । क्षो॒णीः । भि॒यसा॑ । सम् । आ॒र॒त॒ ॥

[Ajit Gargeshwari]

I keep wondering what’s the use of having defective typed texts by hundreds that are there all over the web. This is one example

Regards

Ajit Gargeshwari

--

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

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

[Nityanand Misra]

On Tuesday, 6 December 2016 13:33:26 UTC+5:30, ajit.gargeshwari wrote:

I keep wondering what’s the use of having defective typed texts by hundreds that are there all over the web. This is one example

Regards

Ajit Gargeshwari

 

Most likely it is OCR'd (read by software from images) and not typed. I may be wrong. OCR is indispensable, but if the accuracy is bad and there is no proofreading, we end up with such examples. 

[Madhav Deshpande]

This is an interesting discussion.  Evidently the authors of the Kāśikāvṛtti found the form nadyaiḥ in some source and felt the need to discuss it.  The Tattvabodhinī reference is only a secondary reference, just pointing to Kāśikā.  While the Vaidika Padānukrama Kośa of Viśvabandhu does not find a single occurrence of nadyaiḥ in any known Vedic text, the authors of Kāśikā, coming from the region of Kashmir, must have found this form in some source.  Even back then, it could be a manuscript error, but the error probably is not just a new OCR error.  It probably has a historical depth.  Some Kashmiri manuscript probably had this variant reading.

Madhav Deshpande

Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

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

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[Dr BVK Sastry]

Namaste

 

I am referring to the observations that have come up in various posts, in connection with the word ‘नद्यैः  ‘  in vedic document -RV 1.54.1.  and word ‘vibhu = bhṛtya भृत्यः/  in another thread.  The observations are compiled at the end of this post. 

 

This is to reason out ‘why’ of my questions addressing the ‘  In House Break down in Traditional Samskruth Studies’, taking the bottom line of reference to be the same 1855 C.E – the period around, when these lexicons came in to Sanskrit studies domain . What corrective actions do we have on our hand as a team to address these deep rooted issues? Individually and Institutionally?  Let us clear the dust of < tampering, arrogance, norms violation, mischievous rectifications of text >  by impeccable scholarship and authority drawn from proper resources.

 

What the posts point to is something that makes the Battle: Sanskrit a relevant and worthwhile issue, with a much bigger spectrum of question for analysis, to be answered by  native traditional Scholars and Sanskrit enthusiasts.  These are some of the issues I hope the panel proposed by me for  Chinmaya International  Conference in 2017 will take up for discussion (and I am looking for a team of members).

 

Here are the questions, seeking in-house course correction to  clear  hundred years of ‘ apathy and inaction’ in tolerating the errors !: 

 

1)      The ‘ extent of reliability of On-line ‘  Defectively Keyed  in Text’  of  Devanagari text (-  By spelling, By diacritic signs,  By Deviant articulation  etc;, )  for scholarly studies of Samskruth documents?

2)      Reliance of ‘ OCR’  generated  ‘Samskruth Texts’ from the ‘ Earlier Print / Hand scribed / Manuscripts ?   - The ease of access is NOT a substitute or excuse for lack of precision ; leading to the errors  tagged on to the current texts.

3)      ‘Out of Context’  Translations of Words, Free-pickoffs of   Sanskrit  word- meaning  association from the plurality of meanings listed in the lexicon.

( Try a simple exercise to translate the sentence : < Ramah  shyaamalah  =    Rama is Sky Blue. > , where the common reader understands the word ‘Rama’ as noun . Now try to pick this meaning  from the lexicon entry in MW dictionary Entry reference :   rāma [L=39401] [p= 0842-c]  and see  whether this meaning can be lexically arrived at. What ‘context’ needs to be provided for making the reader comprehended sense and the filters to  be applied ? )  Veda related is a scaled  magnification of this problem ! 

4)      The scribing practice of Sanskrit  in Indic scripts (has been discussed in an earlier post in detail ! Bringing back the key issue, Sanskrit was written in several Indian scripts; and the ‘punctuation – word boundary marking was not any strong forte of Indian manuscripts or print documents!  What ruled was ‘Pronunciation and Grammar –Context’ . Take for example, the same sentence above. If there is a sentence /word break , then the sentence  would look as below:

Original Intended < Ramah  shyaamalah     > :     After word break inadevertently : < Ramahshya>  < -- word /Sentence/ line break  >  < malah  > . There is no need to expand on the deviant meanings that come out of such missing with the reasoning’  and invoking the justification of ‘ metrical balancing’.

5)       ‘ Anticipate and answer’ all the future errors of the later generations ?  Why would a traditional writer like Yaaska  do it?  He has set the guidance for study of Vedas very clearly and cautioned the otherwise situation for a ‘Scholar of Veda’  as ‘Sthanurayam bhaarahaarah / …  garte patati… ’.

 

I feel there is a need for restraint in passing a comment of frustration in public forum, on scholars of yore, of any country and faith. Our own effort to make a course correction here  probably can be translated to  a worthwhile multi-institutional  project of   updating and reviewing the available lexicons-translations of earlier period.  (  This is a project request I have voiced many times, earlier also with a focus on Monier Williams Sanskrit –English Dictionary; for which  I have received only  lukewarm response  and support. For details, contact me off line.).  

 

Whatever the Oriental scholars have written ( or for that matter ignored the ‘glaring’ obvious meanings, probably they may have had their own reasoning.  One thing is for sure, that these two orientalises had much better equipped ‘native pundits’ working for them to give the word- meaning –usage data in an objective way. 

 

These two were lexicographers of an absolutely foreign language to their nativity and nationality, having due regard for the ‘sensitivity of religions associated with the sacred  language of the Hindoo’s’, which was overpowered by the interests of the funding institutions.  The two orientalists aimed to bring the precision of classical language scholarship used for German, Latin, Greek ( how so ever inadequate  the model may be)  in to the study of Sanskrit –Texts and resources.  Both scholars worked in the ‘Dark Ages of Pre- Computer and NO-INTERNET RESOURCES’ depending upon much reliable human scholarship of far earlier generations !  

 

 Motives apart, Both scholars dedicated long years of life, pursuing Sanskrit Studies and created  publications which have shaped the course of Sanskrit studies all over the globe for over hundred plus years ( and to the shrinking of the traditional excellence !) 

Otto von Böhtlingk (May 30, 1815 – April 1, 1904) was a German Indologist and Sanskrit scholar. He worked with Rudolph Roth, to bring out many Sanskrit studies related works, His magnum opus was his great Sanskrit-German dictionary, Sanskrit-Wörterbuch (7 vols., Saint Petersburg, 1855–1875; shortened ed. (without citations) 7 vols, Saint Petersburg, 1879–1889), which with the assistance of his two friends, Rudolf Roth (d. 1895) and Albrecht Weber (b. 1825), was completed in 23 years.  He also published several smaller treatises, notably one on Vedic accent, Über den Accent im Sanskrit (1843). Also notable are his Sanskrit-Chrestomathie (Saint Petersburg, 1845; 2d ed., 1877–97), and an edition with translation of a treatise on Hindu poetics by Daṇḍin, Kāvyādarsa (Leipzig, 1890).  Böhtlingk took up Panini's grammar again, 47 years after his first edition, when he republished it with a complete translation under the title Panini's Grammatik mit Übersetzung (Leipzig, 1887).  

 

 Sir Monier Monier-Williams, (12 November 1819 – 11 April 1899) was the second Boden Professor of Sanskrit at Oxford University. His Sanskrit-English Dictionary: Etymologically and Philologically Arranged with Special Reference to Cognate Indo-European languages, Monier Monier-Williams, revised by E. Leumann, C. Cappeller, et al was published during 1899, Clarendon Press, Oxford.

 

 

Observations from the posts compiled: 

1.       I keep wondering what’s the use of having defective typed texts by hundreds that are there all over the web. This is one example  ( - Ajit Gargeswari )

2.       It is an OCR Error. ( - V.Subramanian)

3.        I have personally felt that the sanskrit words have to be interpreted in the context of use.  Bhatrhari spends enormous time on this in his book and scolds people who handle words casually. ( Bijoy Misra)

4.        Dont you think that Yaaska could have got the meaning from the AV Paippalaada? The AVP is earlier than Yaaska who cites from it in the 12th book. ( - Deepak Bhattacharya – responding to Nityananda Misra, invoking -  AVP 4.33.2. and Yaska (2-19) explanation / usage RV 1.113.1 

5.        The  probability of  scribal error   in  ‘proper hearing’  and  ‘ cover up reason of ‘ metrical balancing’ -  < मन्ये यत् स्वामिभृत्यशब्दयोः प्रायः युगपद् श्रवणं भवति तस्मात् त्रिकाण्डशेषपाठेषु स्वामिशब्दस्य सामीप्यात् छन्दोभङ्गं विनैव नित्यशब्दः दोषाक्रान्तो भृत्य इत्येवं लिखितः। यथा पूर्वमुदाहृते तेलुगुभाषासहिते त्रिकाण्डशेषमु इत्याख्ये ग्रन्थे। एवमेव कस्माच्चित् स्खलितयुक्तात् पाठाद् असमीक्ष्यैव Böhtlingk इत्यनेन भृत्यशब्दो गृहीत इति प्रतिभाति।    > - Ujjwal  Rajput 

6.       SS Murthy invoking, where in Computer related errors add up to the confusion  -  < Popular sloka usage scripted in Telugu Characters, where the Sanskrit Dental – Second letter is scripted with variance (following the regional pronunciation ?!)    ..  ..ప్రభుం ప్రాణనాథం  విభుం విశ్వనాధం...,

7.        Nityananda Misra -   who points clearly the  glaring error between the traditional Samskrutha Kosha Vachaspatyam and  Modern English Dictionary  by Monier Williams <   Now see how some famous lexicons give the meaning भृत्य, which is completely opposite to स्वामिन्. Did somebody (Böhtlingk?) err and everybody else blindly followed? Or is there an edition of Trikandashesha with a different reading?  I fail to see how etymologically vibhu can mean a servant, given other meanings of the word are omnipresent, omnipotent, Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva, etc. Nor do I recall any famous usage in this sense. 

Vacaspatyam   :     विभु ४ भृत्ये त्रिका०

Monier Williams Sanskrit-English Dictionary  (H2) वि-भु b [p= 978,3] [L=198438] mfn. or » विभू

(H3B) वि-भू [L=198445] m. a servant L.

 

Böhtlingk and Roth Grosses Petersburger Wörterbuch 

Vibhu  — 2) ṃ.  — b) Diener (bhṛtya)  Trik.   

8.       KS Kannan : <  Not too surprising. ..  Bohtlingk is notorious for tampering with the readings of texts. Arrogance unlimited, plus norms of textual criticism thrown unto winds, he has deliberately and mischievously "rectified" texts without as much as a decent warning to the readers, and misled scores of subsequent scholars.   …   Simply reprehensible. > 

 

-------

Regards

BVK Sastry

[Dr. P. Ramanujan]

Dear Dr BVK Sastry!

 

The {wrong} citation of RV is from my database of [hundreds of] OCR-ed texts which have not been proof-read.

I agree with Shri Ajit in that no text that is not verified should find place in internet resource.

I have done the only thing that is possible today, (like you have very well articulated), viz. removed the texts

from public.

I have a plan to quasi-programmatically try a solution, if that could make sense.

Manually, I am yet to find a suitable, motivated scholar  willing to toil for perfection in such a 'cause',

even if assured reasonable compensation. I would be happy if this could be proved wrong.

This may have something to do with our current education/societal system.

 

I am hopeful on that Gitacarya's assurance धर्मसंस्थापनार्थाय सम्भवामि युगेयुगे. 

 

Ramanujan

" group.

For more options, visit MailScanner has detected definite fraud in the website at "groups.google.com". Do not trust this website: https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit MailScanner has detected definite fraud in the website at "groups.google.com". Do not trust this website: https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

 

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit MailScanner has detected definite fraud in the website at "groups.google.com". Do not trust this website: https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[ C-DAC is on Social-Media too. Kindly follow us at:
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CDACINDIA & Twitter: @cdacindia ]

This e-mail is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may
contain confidential and privileged information. If you are not the
intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy
all copies and the original message. Any unauthorized review, use,
disclosure, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this email
is strictly prohibited and appropriate legal action will be taken.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Dr. Yadu Moharir]

Namaste Dr Ranganaran & BVK

This can be a wonderful project for a M.S. & Ph.D. Students from Computer Linguistic arena.  I think this would a great contribution towards preservation, if some one could write a software sub-routine to that could catch OCR erros.

Thanks you for a great discussion

Regards

Dr Yadu

---

From: Dr. P. Ramanujan <ra...@cdac.in>
To: bvpar...@googlegroups.com
Cc: Rangarajan Srirangam <r_sri...@hotmail.com>; "go...@csa.iisc.ernet.in" <go...@csa.iisc.ernet.in>; Narayanan R <naraya...@gmail.com>; Vivek S.P <vivek.sh...@gmail.com>; Software Kainkarya <software...@gmail.com>; "venkata...@gmail.com" <venkata...@gmail.com>; "Chakravarthy, V Srinivasa" <v.srinivasa....@sap.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 6, 2016 6:34 AM
Subject: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} RE: {भारतीयविद् वत्परिषत्} nadyaiḥ in Veda

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Madhav Deshpande]

Nityanand Misra has quoted: "काशिका on बहुलं छन्दसि (७.१.१०)

छन्दसि विषये बहुलमैसादेशो भवति। अतः इत्युक्तम्, अनतो ऽपि भवति नद्यैः इति। अतो न भवति , देवेभिः सर्वेभिः प्रोक्तम् इति।"

For whatever reasons, neither Nyāsa nor Padamañjarī have anything to say on this comment from Kāśikā, and this raises the question about the text of the Kāśikāvṛtti itself.  Was this comment of Kāśikā known to these commentators? Or did they simply ignore it?  Professor Malhar Kulkarni has shown that often the text of the Kāśikā as known to the Padamañjarī was different from what is found in other manuscript traditions.  I wonder if Malhar can check the manuscript readings for this line of Kāśikā.  I hope he is on this list.

Madhav Deshpande

" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

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

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

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

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[K S Kannan]

Some must have felt uneasy at my "parliamentary" language.

Especially as I offered no evidence against Bohtlingk.

But my fulminations are not without basis.

Here is one, and a solid one at that:

[Ashok Aklujkar]

On Dec 6, 2016, at 4:33 AM, Dr BVK Sastry <sastr...@gmail.com> wrote: “Otto von Böhtlingk … was a German Indologist 

The statement may be taken as essentially true, since Böhtlingk spent most of his professional life in Germany. However, one of my well-informed friends from Germany told me a few years ago that Böhtlingk was actually Dutch by birth. Also, since it is quite likely that changing citizenship (for accepting a job, etc.) was not necessary in Europe in his time, he might have legally remained Dutch throughout his life. 

Both Roth and Böhtlingk come across as over-confident from time to time. That they could have an inherent handicap because of their non-acquaintance or indirect shallow acquaintance with traditional Indian scholarship does not seem to have occurred to them. However, they must be given a place of honour in Indology for the new questions they raised and the tools they made available. Ideally, originality in historical research should rest on comprehensive collection of evidence, proper judging of the relative strengths of different strands of evidence and a good instinct for what is more probable in a specific cumulatively constructed context. However, when that is not possible to reach this high a level (for whatever reason), a researcher’s raising of (reasonably substantiated) alternative possibilities is also important in the development of a field of historical research. If one keeps this consideration in mind, Roth and Böhtlingk cannot be denied a place of unusual significance in the history of Indology. 

a.a.

[Dipak Bhattacharya]

I do not know how Bohtlingk could be a German or Dutch. There was a
Soviet Publication entitled The Image of India that stated that

Otto von Böhtlingk was born in St. Petersburg.
Best
DB

[Nityanand Misra]

On Thursday, 8 December 2016 07:34:50 UTC+5:30, Dipak Bhattacharya wrote:

I do not know how Bohtlingk could be a German or Dutch. There was a
Soviet Publication entitled The Image of India that stated that

Otto von Böhtlingk was born in St. Petersburg.
Best
DB

He was German by ancestry, Dutch (and later Russian) by nationality, and Russian by birthplace.

Ladislav Zgusta (2006), Lexicography Then and Now: Selected Essays (Volume 129 of Lexicographica, Series Maior), Walter de Gruyter, ISBN 9783110924459, p. 273:

“The first of the three lexicographic projects is a dictionary of Sanskrit compiled mainly by Otto Böhtlingk (1815-1904). Böhtlingk was a scion of an old German family of Lübeck; the family moved to St. Petersburg but had acquired Dutch citizenship through extended business with and a long residence in the Netherlands. Hence, Otto Böhtlingk was born in 1815 in St. Petersburg but was a Dutch subject; although he wrote all his works in German and spent half of his life in Germany, he never became a citizen of any German state; only late in his life did he become a Russian subject.”

 

[Nityanand Misra]

On Thursday, 8 December 2016 09:00:31 UTC+5:30, Nityanand Misra wrote:

He was German by ancestry, Dutch (and later Russian) by nationality, and Russian by birthplace.

Ladislav Zgusta (2006), Lexicography Then and Now: Selected Essays (Volume 129 of Lexicographica, Series Maior), Walter de Gruyter, ISBN 9783110924459, p. 273:

Also see Albrecht Wezler’s Preface to Pāṇini’s Grammatik (Motilal Banarsidass, 1998, ISBN 9788120810259), p. xxx:

“Otto von Böhtlingk was born in — what is now again called — St. Petersburg on June 11th, 1815 and was brought up there. His family originally hailed from Lübeck and had moved from Holland to the famous city founded by Czar Peter the Great on the bank of the Neva. (Those were the happy days when the relations between Russia and Germany were friendly and civil, and there is hope that they will return.) In fact it was only late in his life that Böhtlingk took Russian citizenship, giving up his original Dutch.” 

[Ashok Aklujkar]

Thanks to Shri Nityanand Misra for clarifying the situation regarding Böhtlingk’s citizenship. The sources he has referred to are highly dependable.

a.a.

[Ashok Aklujkar]

My source in Germany has kindly sent the following two passages about Böhtlingk’s life. Rarely can one end a discussion with all parties being partially right:

Windisch's well-known "Geschichte der Sanskrit-Philologie" (Teil 2, pp. 239–240): 

"Otto Böhtlingk, geboren 1815 in St. Petersburg, aus einer Lübecker 
Familie stammend, aber holländischer Staatsangehöriger, bis er gegen Ende 
seines Lebens russischer Staatsangehöriger wurde, gestorben 1904 in 
Leipzig, war seit 1842 Mitglied, zuletzt Ehrenmitglied der K.Akademie der 
Wissenschaften zu St. Petersburg. Es wurde ihm gestattet, seinen Wohnsitz 
in Deutschland zu nehmen. Von 1868 an lebte er in Jena, von 1885 an in 
Leipzig, wo ihm Leskien und Windisch besonders nahe standen. Schon 
während seiner Studienzeit in Petersburg war ihm Bopps Glossarium und 
Grammatik in die Hände gekommen. Er ging daher zunächst nach Berlin, von 
da nach Bonn." 

Valentina Stache-Rosen in her "German Indologists. Biographies of Scholars in Indian Studies Writing in German. With a Summary on Indology in German Speaking Countries. New Delhi 1981 (second edition New Delhi 1990; the quotation here is from the first edition):

"Otto von Boehtlingk was born on 11.6.1815 in 
St. Petersburg, he came from a Luebeck family that had acquired Dutch 
citizenship. Boehtlingk attended a German school in St. Petersburg and 
began his university studies there. He later went to Bonn and Berlin, where 
he studied with Fr. Bopp and A. W. von Schlegel. In 1842 Boehtlingk was 
appointed a member of the Imperial Academy of Sciences in St. Petersburg. 
... He was permitted to go to Germany, and in 1868 he went to Jena, later in 
1885 he moved to Leipzig, where he died on 1.4.1904.” 

My source kindly states explicitly the point I made obliquely in my initial post: “It should be borne in mind that at that time there was no Germany as we 
know this country today. But there was of course the (self-)understanding of being a German scholar writing in German.”

The source further informs: ”Agnes Stache-Weiske …has done extensive research on Böhtlingk”. 

a.a.

[Nityanand Misra]

On Tuesday, 6 December 2016 21:58:37 UTC+5:30, ks.kannan.2000 wrote:

Some must have felt uneasy at my "parliamentary" language.

Especially as I offered no evidence against Bohtlingk.

But my fulminations are not without basis.

Here is one, and a solid one at that:

Thanks Professor Kannan, this is very useful. What do you think of this example, where Böhtlingk and Roth (1855) mislead by citing the authority of Trikāṇḍaśeṣa and Medinī in giving the meaning of the word liṅga as 

“das göttlich verehrte Geschlechtsglied Çiva's (Rudra’s), Çiva in der Form eines Phallus”

English: “The divinely revered sexual organ of Śiva (Rudra), Śiva in the form of a phallus”

This is unpardonable. A Sanskrit dictionary is supposed to give meanings of words as used in Sanskrit, and not modern readings or interpretations which are controversial, to put it mildly. When both Trikāṇḍaśeṣa and Medinī give many meanings of the word liṅga and give the male organ and Śiva’s mūrti as separate meanings, what gives Böhtlingk and Roth the authority to imagine things and combine two meanings into one, that too citing the authority of famous Sanskrit lexicons? Even if Böhtlingk and Roth and people in their time in Europe misunderstood śivaliṅga to be the sexual organ of Śiva, is this skulduggery justified in a dictionary? Were Böhtlingk and Roth compiling meanings in which Sanskrit words were/are used by Sanskrit speaking peoples or were they compiling meanings as understood in the West?

Monier Williams (1872), needless to say, simply copies from Böhtlingk and Roth and gives the meaning as “Śiva's genital organ or Śiva worshipped in the form of a Phallus”

Compare this with how the Ceylonese (Sri Lankan) Buddhist commentator C A Seeakkhanda Maha Thera carefully explains the two different meanings separately in his commentary on the Trikāṇḍaśeṣa.

My experience over the years is this

1) Śabdakalpadrumaḥ and Vācaspatyam: Very useful as they (1) give grammatical derivations (2) not only cite but also give useful extracts from both texts and famous commentaries, mostly reliable and unbiased

2) Monier Willams: Simply copies from Böhtlingk and Roth. Useless if one can understand German, for one can directly refer to Böhtlingk and Roth.

3) Böhtlingk and Roth: Very useful as they give many citations, generally reliable but not necessarily unbiased, there are cases where they can be misleading

Perhaps this is a good topic for research: Sanskrit Lexicographers—Misleading scholars since 1850s.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

One Mr Rajan Menon posted on another list forum, the following from "A dictionary of Spoken Sanskrit". 

लिङ्ग	liGga	n.	image of a god
	लिङ्ग	liGga	n.	gender
	लिङ्ग	liGga	n.	evidence
	लिङ्ग	liGga	n.	symptom
	लिङ्ग	liGga	n.	mark of disease
	लिङ्ग	liGga	n.	crude base or uninflected stem of anoun
	लिङ्ग	liGga	n.	mark
	लिङ्ग	liGga	n.	sign
	लिङ्ग	liGga	n.	guise
	लिङ्ग	liGga	n.	any assumed or false badge or mark
	लिङ्ग	liGga	n.	token
	लिङ्ग	liGga	n.	order of the religious student
	लिङ्ग	liGga	n.	disguise
	लिङ्ग	liGga	n.	characteristic
	लिङ्ग	liGga	n.	sign of gender or sex
	लिङ्ग	liGga	n.	idol
	लिङ्ग	liGga	n.	anything having an origin andtherefore liable to be destroyed again
	लिङ्ग	liGga	n.	corpusdelicti  [ concrete evidence of a crime ]
	लिङ्ग	liGga	n.	organ of generation
	लिङ्ग	liGga	n.	emblem
	लिङ्ग	liGga	n.	landmark
	लिङ्ग	liGga	n.	sign of guilt
	लिङ्ग	liGga	n.	inference
	लिङ्ग	liGga	n.	badge
	लिङ्ग	liGga	n.	proof
	लिङ्ग	liGga	n.	eternal procreative germ
	लिङ्ग	liGga	n.	spot
	लिङ्ग	liGga	n.	invariable mark which proves theexistence of anything in an object
	लिङ्ग	liGga	n.	conclusion
	लिङ्ग	liGga	n.	male organ or phallus
	लिङ्ग	liGga	n.	reason
	व्यतिरेकिन्-लिङ्ग	vyatirekin-liGga	m.	negative property  [ logic ]
	व्यतिरेकिन्-लिङ्ग	vyatirekin-liGga	m.	an exclusive mark  [ logic ]

  

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Nagaraj Paturi

 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

 

Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies

 

FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education,

 

(Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA )

 

 

 

[Nagaraj Paturi]

On the same forum , in the same thread, I posted as follows:

The dictionary definitions for the entry 'linga' have been violating a very significant lexicographical convention from the beginning. It is lexicographical convention to list the meanings that are 'in use' and mention etymological / word origin information at the end of the entry separated from the list of meanings. The meaning : 'phallic image of Shiva' is not a meaning in use, it has only a word origin or 'archaeological' significance, if at all. But the dictionaries including Apte list this among the meanings of the word.   

[Nagaraj Paturi]

That thread ran during mid March 2016 there.

 

--

[Nityanand Misra]

On Wednesday, 21 December 2016 23:53:56 UTC+5:30, nagarajpaturi wrote:

On the same forum , in the same thread, I posted as follows:

The dictionary definitions for the entry 'linga' have been violating a very significant lexicographical convention from the beginning. It is lexicographical convention to list the meanings that are 'in use' and mention etymological / word origin information at the end of the entry separated from the list of meanings. The meaning : 'phallic image of Shiva' is not a meaning in use, it has only a word origin or 'archaeological' significance, if at all. But the dictionaries including Apte list this among the meanings of the word.   

I vaguely recall entries in Apte are also based on a Western dictionary. It is interesting to see that the Sabdakalpadrumah (1820s) does not have this meaning. It gives the meaning शिवमूर्त्तिविशेषः । इति मेदिनी । गे, २३ ॥ separately from शेफः which is correct and in accordance with ancient lexicons. The meaning “Śiva in the form of a phallus” (Çiva in der Form eines Phallus) is an invention of Böhtlingk and Roth and is not (rather was never) a meaning in use as you say. 

[N.R.Joshi]

Dec 21, 2016

 

If I remember correctly, the base of the Shiva Linga is called Shaal'unkaa. I may be corrected. N.R.joshi

--

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

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

____________________________________________________________
How To Remove Eye Bags & Lip Lines Fast (Watch)
Womans Weekly
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3142/585b057122e05704804st04vuc

[krishnaprasad g]

Shivalinga is referred to Phallus of Shiva in Puranas

so there is no mistake in lexicons

On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 4:11 AM, N.R.Joshi <gira...@juno.com> wrote:

Dec 21, 2016

 

If I remember correctly, the base of the Shiva Linga is called Shaal'unkaa. I may be corrected. N.R.joshi

---------- Original Message ----------
From: Nityanand Misra <nmi...@gmail.com>
To: भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत् <bvpar...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} nadyaiḥ in Veda
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2016 10:49:07 -0800 (PST)

On Wednesday, 21 December 2016 23:53:56 UTC+5:30, nagarajpaturi wrote:

On the same forum , in the same thread, I posted as follows:

 

The dictionary definitions for the entry 'linga' have been violating a very significant lexicographical convention from the beginning. It is lexicographical convention to list the meanings that are 'in use' and mention etymological / word origin information at the end of the entry separated from the list of meanings. The meaning : 'phallic image of Shiva' is not a meaning in use, it has only a word origin or 'archaeological' significance, if at all. But the dictionaries including Apte list this among the meanings of the word.   

 

 

I vaguely recall entries in Apte are also based on a Western dictionary. It is interesting to see that the Sabdakalpadrumah (1820s) does not have this meaning. It gives the meaning शिवमूर्त्तिविशेषः । इति मेदिनी । गे, २३ ॥ separately from शेफः which is correct and in accordance with ancient lexicons. The meaning “Śiva in the form of a phallus” (Çiva in der Form eines Phallus) is an invention of Böhtlingk and Roth and is not (rather was never) a meaning in use as you say. 

 

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

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

____________________________________________________________
How To Remove Eye Bags & Lip Lines Fast (Watch)
Womans Weekly
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3142/585b057122e05704804st04vuc

--

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

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way



KP

[krishnaprasad g]

The practice of referring the sources in Böhtlingk and Roth's Book is different than what you thought.

I would rather write an article showing Böhtlingk and Roth are correct quoting linja is popularly called Phallus of Shiva quoting Mahabharata and Vamana Purana.

I am not going into whether pandits helped Böhtlingk and Roth or not. However writing such a voluminous books will not make lullaby mistakes.

I am ready to challenge to prove Böhtlingk and Roth are correct

[krishnaprasad g]

..The practice of referring the sources in Böhtlingk and Roth's Book is different than what you thought.

I would rather write an article showing Böhtlingk and Roth are correct quoting linja is popularly called Phallus of Shiva quoting Mahabharata and Vamana Purana.

I am not going into whether pandits helped Böhtlingk and Roth or not. However writing such a voluminous books will not make lullaby mistakes.

I am ready to accept challenge to prove Böhtlingk and Roth are correct in this instance. While doing big works will occur mistake as Monier Williams quotes so there may be other mistakes in

German Worthbuch but this is not

[Ajit Gargeshwari]

Irrespective of what Mahabharata or Vamana Purana says and which you can quote, which is again subjected to interpretations and interpolations it would be best if you would share you reviewed paper. There are arguments to show that that “The meaning “Śiva in the form of a phallus” is not correct and Shaivaites don’t worship any Phallus. There are many schools among of Shaivites one has to consider this as well. Thanks

 

Regards

Ajit Gargeshwari

 

From: bvpar...@googlegroups.com [mailto:bvpar...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of krishnaprasad g
Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2016 9:28 AM
To: bvpar...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} nadyai ḥ in Veda

 

..The practice of referring the sources in Böhtlingk and Roth's Book is different than what you thought.

[V Subrahmanian]

There is this account in the Linga Purana about the origin of the Linga:

http://hinduonline.co/Scriptures/Puranas/LingaPurana.html

1.1.14  The Origin of Shiva Linga

The sages asked Sutji--- Lord Shiva is formless then how come Shiva Linga is worshipped? What is the significance of Shiva Linga? What is the proper method of worshipping a Shiva Linga ?

Sutji replied--- Once, Lord Brahma and Lord Vishnu developed serious different on the matter of superiority. A tremendous duel broke out between them. As they were fighting a mammoth Linga appeared on the scence, the effulgence of which made efforts both of them amazed.Both of them decided to find out the origin of that divine Linga. Lord Brahma transformed his appearance into that of a swan and flew up in the sky to determine the height of that Linga. Lord Vishnu transformed himself into a roar and entered the depth of earth to find the source of that Shiva Linga. But both of them failed in their objectives and returned to the same place exhausted.

 

Suddenly, they heard a loud sound of AUM emanating from the Shiva Linga. Very soon, the whole form of OM, consisting of all the three letters A, U and M became visible. (The letters A, U and M symbolize Lord Brahma, Vishnu and Mahesh respectively).

At last, both of them realized their mistake and stopped quarrelling. This way, Lord Shiva was successful in subduing their arrogance.Lord Rudra is beyond sensual perception. He is the supreme Almighty and the bestower of divine bliss. The mystical form of Shivalinga is a symbolical expression of sacred mantra-AUM. The letter A symbolizes Beeja (Seed), M the creator himself and U is the symbolical expression of Yoni (Vagina).

As with many topics there are often conflicting accounts in the Puranas.  Another instance is the drinking of poison by Rudra. 

regards

subrahmanian.v

--

[Nityanand Misra]

On Thursday, 22 December 2016 09:28:13 UTC+5:30, krishnaprasadah wrote:

..The practice of referring the sources in Böhtlingk and Roth's Book is different than what you thought.

I would rather write an article showing Böhtlingk and Roth are correct quoting linja is popularly called Phallus of Shiva quoting Mahabharata and Vamana Purana.

I am not going into whether pandits helped Böhtlingk and Roth or not. However writing such a voluminous books will not make lullaby mistakes.

I am ready to accept challenge to prove Böhtlingk and Roth are correct in this instance. While doing big works will occur mistake as Monier Williams quotes so there may be other mistakes in

German Worthbuch but this is not

To the best of my information, the Vāmana Purāṇa (Chapters 6, 45, etc) exclusively uses the word liṅga in the context of Śaiva orders and Sthāṇvīśvara. It does not specifically identify it as the sexual organ of Śiva, nor does it use words like śiśna, mehana, śephas, etc on the basis of which such specific identification can be made.

 

liṅgo'sya patatāṃ bhuvi VP 6.65

tataḥ papāta devasya liṅgam VP 6.66

pātayanti sma devasya liṅgam VP 44.68

pātite tu tato liṅge VP 44.68

 

Trikāṇḍaśeṣa and Medinī, citing which B-R give their meaning, use the words sthāṇu and śivamūrtiviśeṣa. Again, there is no specific identification with phallus in these words. A Sanskrit dictionary has to steer clear of interpretations which are debatable. For example, there are many theories around the origin and meaning of the word ārya, but a Sanskrit dictionary is expected to give the meaning of ārya as it is used in Sanskrit (e.g. in anāryajuṣṭam, BG 2.2) and not bring in debatable interpretations like light-skinned horse-carrying invaders from Europe who .... 

[krishnaprasad g]

B-R did not mistook Trikandasesa and it is not their style of quoting as you have interpreted now.

There are many instances in Vamana Purana which says it is a Phallus of Shiva we worship and also in  Mahabharatam

here I am giving the extracts from Sauktika Parvan with the commentary for it by Nilakantha

पितामहोऽब्रीवत्.... भूतानि सृज..... ॥ १७. अध्या १० श्लो

तथेत्युक्त्वा...

दीर्घकालं तपस्तेपे...

(तप्यमानं) गिरशं सुप्तमम्भसि दृष्ट्वा...

(ब्रह्मा स्वमेयासृजत् ततः क्रुद्धो रुद्रः)

चुक्रोध बलवद्दृष्ट्वा लिंगं स्वं चाप्यविध्यत ॥ १७. अ २१. श्लो
 (किमनेन लिंगेन प्रयोजनमिति मत्वा तमुत्पाट्य भूमावपातयदिति कथा)

तत्र नीलकंठः

"लिंगं प्रसवसामर्थ्यं मेढ्ररूपेण अविध्यत भूमौ पातितवान्। एतदेव पूजितं तत्सर्वसिद्धिप्रदमास्तिकानां भविष्यतीत्यभिप्रायेण"

It is not I am going to prove here the story to be interpreted, B-R etc have mentioned because in many puranas it is called Shivas Phallus.

One more thing

Even Amara Kosha has also flaws which were mentioned by earlier commentators.

for instance please check balapatra(putra) in Kshiratarangini.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

The issue here is lexicographical practice.

Right lexicographical practice is to provide the meaning in use as the definition in the entry and then provide the word origin information as separate additional information. The meaning in use of linga is variegated and a right lexicographical practice is to give the multiple meanings in use with different numbers. At the end, the lexicographer may provide word origin information. In the case of linga, the phallus meaning is not part of meaning in use at all. It is part of word origin information only. Even as part of word origin information, a good lexicographer gives place to both the versions: the one mentioned by AadaraNIya V. Subrahmanianji and the versions in Vamana Purana etc.   

[Nityanand Misra]

On Thursday, 22 December 2016 12:27:47 UTC+5:30, krishnaprasadah wrote:

B-R did not mistook Trikandasesa and it is not their style of quoting as you have interpreted now.

There are many instances in Vamana Purana which says it is a Phallus of Shiva we worship and also in  Mahabharatam

here I am giving the extracts from Sauktika Parvan with the commentary for it by Nilakantha

पितामहोऽब्रीवत्.... भूतानि सृज..... ॥ १७. अध्या १० श्लो

तथेत्युक्त्वा...

दीर्घकालं तपस्तेपे...

(तप्यमानं) गिरशं सुप्तमम्भसि दृष्ट्वा...

(ब्रह्मा स्वमेयासृजत् ततः क्रुद्धो रुद्रः)

चुक्रोध बलवद्दृष्ट्वा लिंगं स्वं चाप्यविध्यत ॥ १७. अ २१. श्लो
 (किमनेन लिंगेन प्रयोजनमिति मत्वा तमुत्पाट्य भूमावपातयदिति कथा)

तत्र नीलकंठः

"लिंगं प्रसवसामर्थ्यं मेढ्ररूपेण अविध्यत भूमौ पातितवान्। एतदेव पूजितं तत्सर्वसिद्धिप्रदमास्तिकानां भविष्यतीत्यभिप्रायेण"

1) This is just one of the many narratives about linga

2) The original text still does not specifically make the connection, Nilakantha does that (though it is not completely clear to me as प्रसवसामर्थ्य is an abstract concept and not something material). 

3) B-R Woerterbuch is a dictionary, not a Puranic (or Sauptika Parva) Encyclopedia

Even if one takes Nilakantha's interpretation, it does not amount to the word linga meaning Shiva's generative organ or Shiva in the form of a phallus. I agree with Nagaraj Paturi Ji that lexicographic convention is to provide meanings in use. Here is an example. The JUB 1.3.5 says ओमित्येतमेवादित्यं समयातिमुच्यते एतदेव दिवश्छिद्रम्. Even though Om is explained as a hole in the sky in this Aranyaka, is this the sense in which the word Om is used in the language? No. Then, can any lexicographer use this to say the word Om means "a hole in the sky" (दिवश्छिद्र)? No.

Now think of चन्द्रमा मनसो जातः .... Would anybody in their sane mind use this to say that the word मनस् means the moon, since the Purusha Sukta says चन्द्रमा मनसो जातः? Does not make sense. 

 

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Meaning in use for linga in relation to S'iva's worship is ' unantthropomorphic image of Shiva' .

Hence a good lexicographer , at the entry for linga lists unanthropomorphic image of Shiva along side other meanings such as mark, reason, phallus, symptom, mark of disease, and so on. At the end of the entry, if it is his policy to provide word origin information, he adds " For , (say) #3 ( if that is the number given to the meaning unantthropomorphic image of Shiva ) , there is a myth which gives the explanation to this image as  'creation - dissolving flame in its cooled down form' and another myth that gives another explanation that that it is Shiva's phallus thrown down on to the earth.

'Actual' origin of that image of Shiva is a different story that deserves a separate thread that I would like to start.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

[Nityanand Misra]

On Thursday, 22 December 2016 16:11:37 UTC+5:30, nagarajpaturi wrote:

Meaning in use for linga in relation to S'iva's worship is ' unantthropomorphic image of Shiva' .

Hence a good lexicographer , at the entry for linga lists unanthropomorphic image of Shiva along side other meanings

I cannot agree more. This is exactly what "good" (perhaps faithful is a better word) lexicons do:

मेदिनी—शिवमूर्तिविशेषे

शब्दकल्पद्रुमः—शिवमूर्त्तिविशेषः। इति मेदिनी।

वाचस्पत्यम्—५ शिवमूर्त्तिभेदे मेदि० 

[V Subrahmanian]

On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 3:40 PM, Nityanand Misra <nmi...@gmail.com> wrote:

तत्र नीलकंठः

"लिंगं प्रसवसामर्थ्यं मेढ्ररूपेण अविध्यत भूमौ पातितवान्। एतदेव पूजितं तत्सर्वसिद्धिप्रदमास्तिकानां भविष्यतीत्यभिप्रायेण"

1) This is just one of the many narratives about linga

2) The original text still does not specifically make the connection, Nilakantha does that (though it is not completely clear to me as प्रसवसामर्थ्य is an abstract concept and not something material). 

In fact the word 'yoni' occurs in the Brahmasutras, the very second one, where it does not mean the genitive organ. Also, to show Brahman as the origin, cause, source, of all beings, the Upaniṣad itself uses the term: bhūtayoniḥ. 

यत्तदद्रेश्यमग्राह्यमगोत्रमवर्णमचक्षुःश्रोत्रं तदपाणिपादम् । 
नित्यं विभुं सर्वगतं सुसूक्ष्मं तदव्ययं यद्भूतयोनिं परिपश्यन्ति धीराः ॥ ६ ॥ Mundaka 1.1.6  

The commentary for that bhūtayoni is:

यत् एवंलक्षणं भूतयोनिं भूतानां कारणं पृथिवीव स्थावरजङ्गमानां परिपश्यन्ति सर्वत आत्मभूतं सर्वस्य अक्षरं पश्यन्ति धीराः धीमन्तो विवेकिनः । ईदृशमक्षरं यया विद्यया अधिगम्यते सा परा विद्येति समुदायार्थः ॥

Also we have the yet another famous Kaivalyopaniṣat passage:

 उमासहायं परमेश्वरं प्रभुं त्रिलोचनं नीलकण्ठं प्रशान्तम् । ध्यात्वा मुनिर्गच्छति भूतयोनिं समस्तसाक्षिं तमसः परस्तात् ॥ ७॥ स ब्रह्मा स शिवः सेन्द्रः सोऽक्षरः परमः ... 

The term 'linga' acquires this sense of bhūtayoni when the meaning: prasavasāmarthyam is given.  It is certainly not a physical, albeit cosmic, organ from which the world emerges. 

regards

subrahmanian.v

 

3) B-R Woerterbuch is a dictionary, not a Puranic (or Sauptika Parva) Encyclopedia

Even if one takes Nilakantha's interpretation, it does not amount to the word linga meaning Shiva's generative organ or Shiva in the form of a phallus. I agree with Nagaraj Paturi Ji that lexicographic convention is to provide meanings in use. Here is an example. The JUB 1.3.5 says ओमित्येतमेवादित्यं समयातिमुच्यते एतदेव दिवश्छिद्रम्. Even though Om is explained as a hole in the sky in this Aranyaka, is this the sense in which the word Om is used in the language? No. Then, can any lexicographer use this to say the word Om means "a hole in the sky" (दिवश्छिद्र)? No.

Now think of चन्द्रमा मनसो जातः .... Would anybody in their sane mind use this to say that the word मनस् means the moon, since the Purusha Sukta says चन्द्रमा मनसो जातः? Does not make sense. 

 

--

[V Subrahmanian]

There is also a popular name 'bhūtalingam' that some persons have. If there are any scriptural references in any language containing this name, that may please be shared.

Thanks

vs

[V Subrahmanian]

There is a temple in TN with the deity named:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhoothalingaswamy_Temple,_Bhoothappandi

vs

[Ajit Gargeshwari]

To add to what scholars have already written. Due to lack of time I have not used any dielectrics. There are enough articles and books written by eminent scholars which shows that Linga does not correspond with Phallus. Linga stands for sign of God used for meditation and puja. Some Puranas which have tilt towards vishnavism give their own version and biased readers or propagators make their own conjectures.

 

Linga as a term requires explanation. The fundamental meaning word is a 'mark or' symbol'. In grammar, it means the gender, whereas in logic it means the mark (hetu). Even in respect of the meaning of a phallus, it has the fundamental meaning as a mark distinguishing one sex from the other. As applied to Siva, it is a visible symbol of the absolute form of Siva, which is difficult to comprehend (alinga).the sanctum sanctorum of all Siva temples. There is a Puranic legend about the appearance of Siva as an effulgent, huge column of fire in front of Lord Brahma and Lord Visnu engaged in a verbal dispute about the relative superiority of each. Sculptures of the manifestation of Siva as a linga, portraying this legend are found in all the Siva temples at the back of the sanctum sanctorum. The resemblance of the linga to the genital organ and the base of the linga to the female organ and the fertility theory have led to the mistaken notion that linga worship is identical with a phallic cult. The sarcastic reference in the Vedas to the phallic cult as sisna devah (those who sport with their genital organs) and the long-standing Hindu tradition of worshiping the linga with great devotional fervour don’t appear compatible.

 

Linga is defined as visible symbol representing formless aspect of Siva. Linga literally mean sign or symbol. It consists of a piece of short cylindrical rod called bana with a rounded top, inserted in the middle of a wider circular piece called the avudaiyar, having a pedestal or base called the pitha. As the linga represents Siva, the pitha represents his consort Parvati. The pitha symbolizes the yoni (vulva) and forms the lower part of the phallus. The principal parts of the pitha are the nala (drain), the jaladhara (gutter), the ghrtavari (water pot), the nimna (drip), and the patrika (plate). The nagara-pitha-s are square, the dravida-pithas are octagonal, and the vesara-pitha-s are circular or round. The square, octagonal, and round parts are also known as Brahma-bhdga, Visnu-bhaga, and Siva-bhaga, respectively.

 

Siva is commonly represented as a liniga (generally, a form with a conical base and a cylindrical top) .The lingas, belonging to different periods and

regions, vary in size and shape. Lingas can be termed as Saivas, Pasupata, Kalamukha, Mahavrata, Varna, and Bhairava, and can be typified  as samakarna (worshiped by brahmins), varthmana (by ksatriya-s), sivanga (by vaisyas), and swastika (by others).

 

Lingas may be cala (moveable) or acala (immoveable). The cala linga-s are of many types. Mrnnmaya or clay lingas, lonaja or metal lingas, ratnajas, made of precious or semiprecious stones, daruja or wooden linga-s. Among the Tamils of the Samgam age, the linga was worshiped in the form of a stump of wood, known as kandu, sailaja or stone linga-s, ksanika made of rice, cow dung, rudrakasa seeds, grass, flowers, or jaggery. These lingas are made for a particular occasion and are disposed of after the event.

 

Among Achala Linga Svambhu is most sacred. The other acala lingas-s are daivika lingas, which are of the shape of a candle-flame and have a rough surface dotted with trident-shape scar. Ganapatya Linga resembling the cucumber or Wood-apple; and spherical arsa Lingas are set up and worshiped by sages. The commonest acala lingas are the manusa lingas made as per religious texts. The height determined by the breadth of the sanctum, the breadth of the door, the breadth of the prasada ,the height of the adhastana, the height of pada, the length of the hand, the inch-length, the height of the yajamana, and the tunga of the linga. Based on this, the linga can be uttama, madhyama, oradhama (or combinations of these three,numbering nine).

 

In Vedanta, the Linga Sarira is said to contain only seventeen elements, ahankara and tanmatras being not recognized in Vedanta, but the five pranas (vital airs) are admitted. Patanjali does not mention linga sarira in his Yoga sutra but only Citta which carries the Smaskaras. Linga Sarira cannot mean Pahllus Sarira by any stretch of imagination.

 

References

Harshananda, Swami. 1981. Hindu Gods and Goddesses.

Chennai: Sri Ramakrishna Math Publication.

Rao, T.A. Goplnatha. 1985. Elements of Hindu Iconography.

New Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.

Satma, I.K. 1982. The Development of Early Saiva Art and

Architecture. Delhi: Sundeep Ptakashan.

Tagare, G.V. 2001. Saivism: Some glimpses. New Delhi. DK

Printworld Pvt. Ltd.

Acharya, Prasanna Kumar. 1995. Hindu Architecture in India

and Abroad. New Delhi: Low Price Publications.

Chopra, P.N. (ed.) 1999. India: Early History. New Delhi:

Publications Division.

Tadgell. Christopher. 1985. History Of Architecture in India.

London: Phaidon Series.

Tagare, G.V. 2001. Saivism: Some Glimpses. New Delhi: D K

Printworld Pvt. Ltd.

Regards

Ajit Gargeshwari

[Bijoy Misra]

Friends,

I would agree that liṅga was used as a signature (symbol) through

the language evolution.  I don't know why.  As Ajitji says in his post.

aliṅga (unmanifested) is a word used.(yogasutram).  My thinking is

that it was a depiction to distinguish wherever new "feature-like" 

geologic formations happened on the earth.  In the spirit of 

animation, these features would be considered the symbol of "life" of 

the earth.  (animated earth is a rooted vedic concept)

This thinking is purely empirical, but is connected to many

odd places where new liṅga formations are noticed and celebrated.

I have not studied why the formations happen.  Such raw geologic

structures are everywhere in Yellowstone National Park formed through

salt water sprouting out.  India is in more advanced stage of

geologic formation, but still forming.  Color of formation is a function

of salt content, sulphur and metals.

This is a speculation.  I shared because of my mind was attracted.

I have not studied in depth.  This needs scientific study.

Best regards,

BM

--

[Dr BVK Sastry]

Namaste

 

On <  the plurality of meanings for the word ‘ Linga (लिङ्ग ), listed in ‘"A dictionary of Spoken Sanskrit". >  and Nityananda Mishras note : < Perhaps this is a good topic for research: Sanskrit Lexicographers—Misleading scholars since 1850s. >

 

Question:  What would the conversational Sanskrit speaker convey or understand from the most common prayer of Shiva, titled ‘ Linga-Ashtaka’ ?  What guidance is there to fit and filter the ‘ word meaning’ ? Who is providing the regulatory guidance ?   What is a Spoken Sanskrit Educator supposed to do ?   Redirect the student  from Menon to where ? ….. To  MW , Apte, Bohtlingk, Shabda-kalpadruma……..

( Note: Prof. Subramanyam Koradas detailing on the understanding of the word ‘itihAsa, Bharata-bhArata’ is worth reading in this context.

 

IF the  answer is ‘ Seek Guru Guidance’, THEN ‘Spoken Sanskrit’ is not guided and regulated by any ‘ Guru’ !

IF the answer is ‘ Stick to Social Usage by Religion-Faith, as taught’  THEN Dictionary is of ‘minimal  help’!

The ‘Sanskrit Word Meaning Interpretation’ is Free and Open for All !   Media and academician will mount the  unregulated discourse picking the preferred meaning to explain the ‘ Title of the Prayers used by the Community to worship their (tribal God - ? ) using ‘an ancient classical language’ ? especially on a ‘Shiva-Ratri Day, explaining what could have been  the  ‘ Jyotirlinga-Darshana’  conceptuality ?! 

 

This is NOT a new line of exercise; but  the Battle :Sanskrit < Word Meaning derivation = Pada-artha Prakriyaa nishpatti >   has been existing  ‘ naked and  stripped to the skin’, for almost three centuries, as  ‘Sanskrit Documents Translation and Research’ in the academics’  violating the ‘ Panini-Patanjali –Yaska/ Amara ksoha’ guidance.  One may explore how the word  ‘Linga- Purana’ has been explored with this model of ‘ dictionary anchored translations’ , as early as 18^th century under ‘ Hindoosim’.

 

IF I need to reframe the question for this context, it would read :

Question reworded :   Using   the given  dictionary of Sanskrit,  how would a student translate and  understand the meaning of the popular Sanskrit word < Linga-Ashtaka   > ? What audit-regulatory work has been undertaken by Traditional Sanskrit Scholars to review and upgrade the ‘ Modern Tools of Sanskrit Studies’ Especially ‘ Lexicons that have  come in the post period of 1800 C.E?

 

Note: This is one project pressed by me as ‘ Monier Williams : A Lexicon Word- Meaning Entries Review with a focus on 40,000 words marked ‘L’  by MW, for meaning’;  and it’s impact on Digestion and Dilution in Standards of Samskruth Studies in two centuries’.  I am yet to get any response by  ‘ Battle :Sanskrit Enthusiasts’ who need a ‘ funding mechanism to address the fundamentals of Samskruth’. Please write to me off the forum on this topic.

 

Thanks in advance for the help.

 

Regards

BVK Sastry

[V Subrahmanian]

It is also to be noted that the idea of 'linga' is not exclusively associated with Shiva, for, the followers of Madhva believe that Vishnu abides as Lingaroopi as well:

https://in.groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/SUMADHWASEVA/conversations/messages/5427

//8.   Udupi Ananteshwara – Anantha + Eshwara

In Udupi, just opposite to Sri Krishna Mutt, one can see the Anantheshwara Temple.   In this temple, there is sannidhya of both Shiva and Srihari.  Here Srihari is in the roopa of Linga, wherein the apart from lingaroopi shiva, there is Anantha – That is why the kshetra is called as Anantheshwara.// 

regards

vs

[Nagaraj Paturi]

I am so happy to see such a detailed post with a long argument and analysis from Dr Gargeshwari.

> There is a Puranic legend about the appearance of Siva as an effulgent, huge column of fire in front of Lord Brahma and Lord Visnu engaged in a verbal dispute about the relative superiority of each. Sculptures of the manifestation of Siva as a linga, portraying this legend are found in all the Siva temples at the back of the sanctum sanctorum.

------ This sculpture is called Lingodbhavamurti by archeologists, art historians and iconography experts.

Strangely ,  Prof. Wendy Doniger writes in a few of her writings that this image in these sculptures was created in competition with the images of Narasimha form of Vishnu emerging  out of a pillar. The conspicuous difference betwwen the two is that in the Narasimha Swami's image, the actual emergence of the half-lion half-human form of Vishnu is depicted whereas in the lingodbhavamurti image, the anthropomorphic Shiva image is included in the sculpture only to communicate that what/who took birth in the form of a huge column of fire is Shiva only. It does not communicate that Shiva emerges out of any pillar or column of fire or anything like that. This difference and this communication is obvious even to a common Hindu devotee observing these two images in sculptures. She probably failed to connect this image to the Puranic narrative mentioned by you.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

[Nagaraj Paturi]

sharing linodbhava murti images

[Bijoy Misra]

Nagarajji,

With my observation, it is best to ignore persons like WD

and the likes.  There are many.  Their audience is not 

Indian scholars though they flood the market to convert 

and confuse.  We should sympathize that some are 

interested in learning about India.  But we must understand 

that their knowledge level is weak and command on the

language is weaker.  They operate as tourists to take

pictures. Quick profile impressions are always wrong and 

biased thinking is dangerous!  India has to rescue herself 

from the aggression!  It's a task that India has to win on 

behalf of herself!

Best regards, 

BM    

[krishnaprasad g]

1) This is just one of the many narratives about linga

There are many instance at least more than 5 which exactly specifies Phallus. I can't provide ref for you since all puranas are freely availably or at least in shops. You can also refer Puranic Encyclopedia by Vettam Mani

2) The original text still does not specifically make the connection, Nilakantha does that (though it is not completely clear to me as प्रसवसामर्थ्य is an abstract concept and not something material).

Did you read completely the orginal verses? in some recensions and some other stories even Shiva himself says.

प्रसवसामर्थ्यं in मेढ्ररूपेण you skipped the word मेढ्र

3) B-R Woerterbuch is a dictionary, not a Puranic (or Sauptika Parva) Encyclopedia

This is a small type of Encyclopedia giving information about Puranich Charecters and Mahabarata ramayana charecters check for yourself

Even if one takes Nilakantha's interpretation, it does not amount to the word linga meaning Shiva's generative organ or Shiva in the form of a phallus.

मेढ्र is given exactly and other PUranas we have as samvaada. As yourself being a scholar you should search that. I don't have time. I am not interested to change your misconception any more.

I agree with Nagaraj Paturi Ji that lexicographic convention is to provide meanings in use.

Shiva Linga need not to mean only Phallus but it also mean Phallus and Linga we worshipping every where. Again I am saying this not pure lexicon like Medini Amara etc. And who wrote Medini Amara or not Brahmas because even they being criticized using wrong words skipping the famous words etc.

Here is an example. The JUB 1.3.5 says ओमित्येतमेवादित्यं समयातिमुच्यते एतदेव दिवश्छिद्रम्. Even though Om is explained as a hole in the sky in this Aranyaka, is this the sense in which the word Om is used in the language? No. Then, can any lexicographer use this to say the word Om means "a hole in the sky" (दिवश्छिद्र)? No.

दिशवश्छिद्र is not famous as Linga

Now think of चन्द्रमा मनसो जातः .... Would anybody in their sane mind use this to say that the word मनस् means the moon, since the Purusha Sukta says चन्द्रमा मनसो जातः? Does not make sense.

Sri Bhagavatam uses such words again you search for yourself. for instance a star is born by Teeth and dvija is called as star but quoted in Puranas but you will not find this any Koshas. Even B-R doesnt qoute cos he would have not observed it.

The main thing is you are comparing Shivas Phallus to trNa Maanvavas Phallus that is the problem

I worship Shiva more than any one here and have heard Shiva Story from Bhagavatam umpteen Number of times.

Any one is not authority to question the interest or the style of B-R when he has a source for that.

Moreover the misconception, of telling he has mixed Trikanda etc, is nonsense

[Bijoy Misra]

BVP is reducing to propaganda!

[Nityanand Misra]

On Friday, 23 December 2016 07:48:23 UTC+5:30, krishnaprasadah wrote:

There are many instance at least more than 5 which exactly specifies Phallus. I can't provide ref for you since all puranas are freely availably or at least in shops. You can also refer Puranic Encyclopedia by Vettam Mani

Would be helpful if you can point them. If you have Vamana Purana in mind, the word used in लिङ्ग which has other meanings also. My point is that that there are also descriptions of लिङ्ग as arising from a column (स्तम्भ) and being the formless (i.e. without antropomorphic features) emblem of Shiva. For example, the fifth chapter of विद्येश्वरसंहिता in शिवमहापुराण contrasts two emblems of Shiva-the लिङ्ग and the बेर (=body, i.e. the anthropomorphic form). The former is explained as निराकार (without [anthropomorphic] form) and said to represent the formless (निष्कल) aspect of Shiva. The latter is explained as साकार (with [anthropomorphic] form) and said to represent the with-form (सकल) aspect of Shiva:

निष्कलत्वान्निराकारं लिङ्गं तस्य समागतम्॥ ११

सकलत्वात्तथा बेरं साकारं तस्य संगतम्। १२

Hindi translation of the above by Gita Press (संक्षिप्त शिवपुराण, p.22):

शिव के निष्कल या निराकार होने के कारण ही उनकी पूजा का आधारभूत लिङ्ग भी निराकार ही प्राप्त हुआ करता है। अर्थात् शिवलिङ्ग शिव के निराकार स्वरूप का प्रतीक है। इसी तरह शिव के सकल या साकार होने के कारण उनकी पूजा का आधारभूत विग्रह साकार प्राप्त होता है, अर्थात् शिव का साकार विग्रह उनके साकार स्वरूप का प्रतीक है।

The same chapter describes that the लिङ्ग as निष्कल in verses 20 and 21

शिवस्य ब्रह्मरूपत्वान्निष्कलत्वाच्च निष्कलम्॥ 20cd

लिङ्गं तस्यैव पूजायां सर्ववेदेषु संमतम्। 21ab

Hindi translation by Gita Press (ibid, p. 23)

भगवान् शिव ब्रह्मस्वरूप और निष्कल (निराकार) हैं, इसलिये उन्हीं की पूजा में निष्कल लिङ्ग का प्रयोग होता है

The same chapter describes that the लिङ्ग arose from a स्तम्भ, and not शिश्न/मेढ्र.

Similar descriptions are found in Skanda Purana, Maheshvara Khanda, Chapter 1, and other Puranic sources. 

 

2) The original text still does not specifically make the connection, Nilakantha does that (though it is not completely clear to me as प्रसवसामर्थ्य is an abstract concept and not something material).

Did you read completely the orginal verses? in some recensions and some other stories even Shiva himself says.

प्रसवसामर्थ्यं in मेढ्ररूपेण you skipped the word मेढ्र

Yes, the word मेढ्ररूपेण is there, but लिङ्गं is explained as प्रसवसामर्थ्यम्. I am not sure what to make of the comment, since प्रसवसामर्थ्यम् is abstract and has सामानाधिकरण्य with लिङ्गं, and मेढ्ररूपेण is in the instrumental case. How would one translate/explain लिङ्गं प्रसवसामर्थ्यं मेढ्ररूपेण अविध्यत भूमौ पातितवान्? “Dropped the linga, the genitive power, in the form of a medhra on the earth?” So is the linga the genitive power of Shiva then as per Nilakantha? 

 

Shiva Linga need not to mean only Phallus but it also mean Phallus and Linga we worshipping every where. Again I am saying this not pure lexicon like Medini Amara etc. And who wrote Medini Amara or not Brahmas because even they being criticized using wrong words skipping the famous words etc.

You say shivalinga need not mean phallus. Do you not agree, then, that शिवमूर्तिविशेष (a specific form/image of Shiva) is the correct and proper meaning of the word लिङ्ग? Whether it is a column (स्तम्भ) of light/fire (ज्योतिः), or the formless (निष्कल/non-anthropomorphic) emblem of Shiva, emblem of genitive energy (प्रसवसामर्थ्य), or phallus (शिश्न) depends on the source or interpreter. If B-R give Trikandashesha and Medini as a source, but give a different meaning, does it not mislead readers who cannot/do not bother to read the original Koshas? 

 

Sri Bhagavatam uses such words again you search for yourself. for instance a star is born by Teeth and dvija is called as star but quoted in Puranas but you will not find this any Koshas.

Specific examples would help (I do not know the verse you are referring to), but I think it is apt that they are not found in any Koshas, since the cosmology given in Srimadbhagavata does not change the meanings of Sanskrit words. Just like based on JUB, one would not expect a lexicographer to say that the word Om means "a hole in the sky", similarly one would not expect the word dvija to be explained as a star or तारक to be explained as tooth in a dictionary simply because the cosmology in Srimadbhagavata says that stars are born from teeth. 

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Meaning in use of Shivalinga means meaning with which

 worshippers of Shivalinga look at it

a. as documented in the past literature such as 12th century Veerashaiva literature and non-sectarian Kavyas (e.g. Raghavendra Vijaya mentions Gururaya Raghavendrateertharu worshipping Shivalinga in certain Kshetras during his teerthayatras)

b. as found in the present day worshippers of Shivalinga (no worshipper of Shivalinga worships it with the view that he is worshipping the phallus of Shiva. )

As far as origin stories are concerned, whatever be the number of Puranas that give the origin from Shiva's phallus, even if one Purana gives an alternative origin story such as from the fire column ( in fact there is a big number of sources mentioning such origin), both the versions stand on equal footing as alternatives to each other. Neither of them stands as THE correct origin story. Nevertheless, they are the origin stories not the meanings in use.  

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

I will give an example : Take the meaning of the English word Bachelor :  Meaning in use:

bachelor

ˈbatʃələ/

noun

noun: bachelor; plural noun: bachelors

1. 1.

   a man who is not and has never been married.

   "one of the country's most eligible bachelors"

   • Zoology

     a male bird or mammal prevented from breeding by a dominant male.
2. 2.

   a person who holds a first degree from a university or other academic institution (only in titles or set expressions).

   "a Bachelor of Arts"
3. 3.

   Canadian

   a bachelor apartment.

   "it's just one room, a bachelor"
4. 4.

   historical

   a young knight serving under another's banner.

Origin

Middle English: from Old French bacheler ; of uncertain origin.

Translate bachelor toChoose languageAfrikaansAlbanianAmharicArabicArmenianAzerbaijaniBasqueBelarusianBengaliBosnianBulgarianBurmeseCatalanCebuanoChinese (Simplified)Chinese (Traditional)CorsicanCroatianCzechDanishDutchEsperantoEstonianFilipinoFinnishFrenchGalicianGeorgianGermanGreekGujaratiHaitian CreoleHausaHawaiianHebrewHindiHmongHungarianIcelandicIgboIndonesianIrishItalianJapaneseJavaneseKannadaKazakhKhmerKoreanKurdishKyrgyzLaoLatinLatvianLithuanianLuxembourgishMacedonianMalagasyMalayMalayalamMalteseMaoriMarathiMongolianNepaliNorwegianNyanjaPashtoPersianPolishPortuguesePunjabiRomanianRussianSamoanScottish GaelicSerbianShonaSindhiSinhalaSlovakSlovenianSomaliSpanishSundaneseSwahiliSwedishTajikTamilTeluguThaiTurkishUkrainianUrduUzbekVietnameseWelshWestern FrisianXhosaYiddishYorubaZulu

Use over time for: bachelor

Word origin

The word is first attested as the 12th-century bacheler, a knight bachelor, a knight too young or poor to gather vassals under his own banner.^[2] The Old French bacheler presumably derives from Provençal bacalar and Italian baccalare,^[2] but the ultimate source of the word is uncertain.^[3][2] The proposed Medieval Latin *baccalaris ("vassal", "field hand") is only attested late enough that it may have derived from the vernacular languages,^[2] rather than from the southern French and northern Spanish Latin^[3] baccalaria ("cattle ranch", from bacca, "cow").^[4] Alternatively, it has been derived from Latin baculum ("a stick"), in reference to the wooden sticks used by knights in training.^{[n 2]}

From the 14th century, the term was also used for a junior member of a guild (otherwise known as "yeomen") or university and then for low-level ecclesiastics, as young monks and recently appointed canons.^[8] As an inferior grade of scholarship, it came to refer to one holding a "bachelor's degree". This sense of baccalarius or baccalaureus is first attested at the University of Paris in the 13th century in the system of degrees established under the auspices of Pope Gregory IX as applied to scholars still in statu pupillari. There were two classes of baccalarii: the baccalarii cursores, theological candidates passed for admission to the divinity course, and the baccalarii dispositi, who had completed the course and were entitled to proceed to the higher degrees.

In the Victorian era, the term eligible bachelor was used in the context of upper class matchmaking, denoting a young man who was not only unmarried and eligible for marriage, but also considered "eligible" in financial and social terms for the prospective bride under discussion. Also in the Victorian era, the term "confirmed bachelor" denoted a man who was resolute to remain unmarried.

Translations, word origin, and more definitions

[Ajit Gargeshwari]

As I have said before in a previous post on this thread. There are people primarily belonging to a particular system of thought who think shiva worshipers are Phallus worshipers hence Vishnu alone is worth worshipping they will keep twisting and quoting texts. This has not happened now on this thread but has been going on for hundreds of years. Prof. Wedy Doniger and company will be immensely pleased they have people who in India itself from hundreds of years have been propagating sexist remarks or siva and what they have done is nothing new or extraordinary by their writings Wendy Doniger uses selective psychoanalytic techniques’ and we shall use selective text twisting and argumentative techniques and shall prove Shiva worshipers worship Phallus. Thanks

 

Regards

Ajit Gargeshwari

.

[Mārcis Gasūns]

On Tuesday, 6 December 2016 11:03:26 UTC+3, ajit.gargeshwari wrote:

I keep wondering what’s the use of having defective typed texts by hundreds that are there all over the web. This is one example

First 200-400 years we'll have dirty. After that people will start cleaning as we've been doing at https://github.com/sanskrit-lexicon/ - there is plenty of automatisation possible.

Too bad nobody from India is interested in batch correction of digitized Sanskrit texts, the whole text does not need to be read, only the suspicious marked words, still...

[Mārcis Gasūns]

This topic is of greatest interest for me, because of https://github.com/sanskrit-lexicon/PWK/issues and https://github.com/sanskrit-lexicon/PWG/issues as well.

On Wednesday, 21 December 2016 20:16:54 UTC+3, Nityanand Misra wrote:

Thanks Professor Kannan, this is very useful. What do you think of this example, where Böhtlingk and Roth (1855) mislead by citing the authority of Trikāṇḍaśeṣa and Medinī in giving the meaning of the word liṅga as 

“das göttlich verehrte Geschlechtsglied Çiva's (Rudra’s), Çiva in der Form eines Phallus”

English: “The divinely revered sexual organ of Śiva (Rudra), Śiva in the form of a phallus”

This is unpardonable. A Sanskrit dictionary is supposed to give meanings of words as used in Sanskrit, and not modern readings or interpretations which are controversial, to put it mildly. When both Trikāṇḍaśeṣa and Medinī give many meanings of the word liṅga and give the male organ and Śiva’s mūrti as separate meanings, what gives Böhtlingk and Roth the authority to imagine things and combine two meanings into one, that too citing the authority of famous Sanskrit lexicons? Even if Böhtlingk and Roth and people in their time in Europe misunderstood śivaliṅga to be the sexual organ of Śiva, is this skulduggery justified in a dictionary? Were Böhtlingk and Roth compiling meanings in which Sanskrit words were/are used by Sanskrit speaking peoples or were they compiling meanings as understood in the West?

That's a good question. "compiling meanings as understood in the West" is what has been said about PWK and PWG since 1852, but anyway - it's the biggest Sanskrit dictionary still around. 

 

Monier Williams (1872), needless to say, simply copies from Böhtlingk and Roth and gives the meaning as “Śiva's genital organ or Śiva worshipped in the form of a Phallus”

Right, you are aware of Zgusta's article Copying in Lexicography, right? 

Compare this with how the Ceylonese (Sri Lankan) Buddhist commentator C A Seeakkhanda Maha Thera carefully explains the two different meanings separately in his commentary on the Trikāṇḍaśeṣa.

My experience over the years is this

1) Śabdakalpadrumaḥ and Vācaspatyam: Very useful as they (1) give grammatical derivations (2) not only cite but also give useful extracts from both texts and famous commentaries, mostly reliable and unbiased

2) Monier Willams: Simply copies from Böhtlingk and Roth. Useless if one can understand German, for one can directly refer to Böhtlingk and Roth.

3) Böhtlingk and Roth: Very useful as they give many citations, generally reliable but not necessarily unbiased, there are cases where they can be misleading

Would want to know why Apte is not listed here. Too European?

Has there ever been a review or evaluation what and how has been done in Śabdakalpadrumaḥ or Vācaspatyam?

 

Perhaps this is a good topic for research: Sanskrit Lexicographers—Misleading scholars since 1850s.

I was thinking once about doing my post-PhD work on Sanskrit Lexicography, History of the last 200 years, but it's a mega task and as I have no affiliation with a University now, no need for it. 

"A dictionary of Spoken Sanskrit" is no source to trust, just a compilation, nothing more. Use http://www.sanskrit-lexicon.uni-koeln.de/ instead or even http://www.sanskrit-lexicon.uni-koeln.de/scans/awork/apidev/sample/list-0.2.html

Marcis

[Dr BVK Sastry]

Namaste

 

1. Thanks and great initiative and work done as seen at url’s : https://github.com/sanskrit-lexicon/PWG/issues/3 and  https://github.com/sanskrit-lexicon/CORRECTIONS  

 

The need expressed is good; the need is certainly felt.  But there is  need to address the following question in greater focus and with clarity.  The ‘biggest ‘ does not mean the ‘ accurate and reliable’ by any stretch of imagination.  The good old Amarakosha still serves  good, with one tenth the vocabulary in MW. 

 

There could be a different path to undertake your passion for a  < post-PhD work on Sanskrit Lexicography, History of the last 200 years, but it's a mega task and as I have no affiliation with a University now, no need for it.   >. Nay  as an Independent research project.

 

The effort involves Two languages  (Source and Target :: Samskruth and English /German …)  using distinctly different standards of language-grammars and ‘ philosophical/ philological constructs’. The team expertise needed for such a work  needs a team of scholars who understand source and target language uniqueness distinctly and have the skills to work with the technologist ( beyond a spread sheet formulation, search engine , font-rendering and the like). In the present case, the ‘ Anglo-Anchor of Technology’ is another serious barrier for progressing in this work !

 

2. What then are the other barrier issues ?  First and foremost, limited home team resources  and priority ( or rather motivation)  to take up this daunting task. Second is  ‘Cleaning the sullied stables of Three hundred years writings using inaccurate / inadequate representations of Vedic documents in Samskruth.  In this case, the most earliest writings of ‘ Shiva worship as ‘ symbolic phallus worship’ goes back to two centuries on construction of world wide myths, cultural studies, Tantra and such exotic issues !  Example: < In 1825 Horace Hayman Wilson's work on the lingayat sect of South India attempted to refute British notions[specify] that the lingam graphically represented a human organ and that it aroused erotic emotions in its devotees. -   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lingam#cite_note-Pennington-20  >     On the top of which there are countless publications from respected names and institutions.

 

Third and most important is the evolving nature of the current language technology and content- container  handling systems. IF Samskrutham were a straight jacketed language that would fit the model of a ‘ data base’ and hyper text linking, probably much progress could have been made. Unfortunately , Samskruth belongs to a different class of ‘ Language Model and structure’ compared to the rest of the world-languages. This paradigm is represented in the simple expression : ‘Samskrutham –Prakrutham- Apabhramsha-Mlecchitam’  :: Refined and purified for excellence – Disassembled, Slackened – Distorted – Corrupted -  Language models. And expression and modeling willfully distorted in language studies of orient. Such being the case, there is a need for revisiting the base and basics of Samskruth Lexicon construction, before heading forward with ‘ Dictionaries of Word- Meaning Equivalences across languages’.  Take an illustrative example : The translation of the word ‘ Purusha’. How would a ‘ limited model word-meaning pool , called  Dictionary help and guide the user to understand the purpose and meaning of this expression ?  How many correction forms would be needed to mark up all the shades of meaning that goes with this  from on extreme of ‘ rest room marker for use by male’ to the esoteric extreme of ‘ Supreme Divine’ ?  How will a dictionary help the decoding of the word ‘ Purusha-Sukta’ ?

 

3. Such being the case, which confronts the traditional scholar, to get deeply engaged with the GITHUB Lexicon review and revision project.

 

4. Coming to the point of  OCR, Scanning and the like, Certainly they are useful. But the critical part of ‘ OCR Logic needs to be guided by the ‘ Bhashaa -Lipi-Shaastra’  Scripting convention of  Language .  This is NOT the same as ‘ Font designers discretion to display a graphic visual as a pixel display on screen under a given standard and OS /Application. The Linguist has  little knowledge and exposure on how the ‘Techno-lingusit /Font designer and programmer is writing the logic and ‘ tolerances’ in pattern recognition.

 

There are further deeper problems when it comes to Voice par , which is critical for Samskruth. The current programs and standards are  poorly designed for handling the ‘Accented variations in Vedas or the local dialects’.

 

The great interest of technologists in Samskruth is seen mainly to hover around the  rule based voice primary processing of communication’ and  ‘decoding’ -  an effort to  find  a  solution for Voice-recognition/ management organization in technology devices’.  The love for Samskruth is a means for an end goal.

 

Samskruth teams are not averse to work on this issue; but the fact stands that the current OS /App / Language-Technology Research Models are poorly made to address the key issues. There are very limited persons who understand the complexities here and have time –energy and motivation to get involved for  a ‘volunteering’.  That does not mean they are not concerned or fail to appreciate the work done. It is a matter of prioritization and resource support.

   

As this subject is of interest to a very limited number of persons, please write off forum for further  deliberation and designs.

 

Regards

BVK Sastry

--

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

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

[Dipak Bhattacharya]

Dear Madhav,

I am sorry to state that I lost the thread on nadyaih excepting the last few mails Will you kindly indicate the ocation of the word in the RV?

My New Year Greetings!

Best

Dipak

On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 5:31 PM, Madhav Deshpande <mmd...@umich.edu> wrote:

This is an interesting discussion.  Evidently the authors of the Kāśikāvṛtti found the form nadyaiḥ in some source and felt the need to discuss it.  The Tattvabodhinī reference is only a secondary reference, just pointing to Kāśikā.  While the Vaidika Padānukrama Kośa of Viśvabandhu does not find a single occurrence of nadyaiḥ in any known Vedic text, the authors of Kāśikā, coming from the region of Kashmir, must have found this form in some source.  Even back then, it could be a manuscript error, but the error probably is not just a new OCR error.  It probably has a historical depth.  Some Kashmiri manuscript probably had this variant reading.

Madhav Deshpande

Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

2016-12-06 3:03 GMT-05:00 Ajit Gargeshwari <ajit.gar...@gmail.com>:

I keep wondering what’s the use of having defective typed texts by hundreds that are there all over the web. This is one example

Regards

Ajit Gargeshwari

 

From: bvpar...@googlegroups.com [mailto:bvparishat@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Nityanand Misra
Sent: Tuesday, December 6, 2016 12:51 PM
To: भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्
Subject: Re: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} nadyaiḥ in Veda

 

On Tuesday, 6 December 2016 12:17:39 UTC+5:30, V Subrahmanian wrote:

 

 

 

In this Rg Veda (?) sāyaṇa bhāṣya the word is found:

 

http://bhoomi.csa.iisc.ernet.in/ocrrep/all_OC/RV-SayanaBhashya-MM2e1.txt

 

मा नो अस्मिन्मघरलप८-त्वहसि नहि ते कृतः शवंसः परणिने ।

'

अदयो नद्यो२ रोरुवद्वनां कथा न क्षोणीर्भियसा समा?रत ।। ५ ।।

-

मा । नः । अस्मिन् । मुघुऽवुन् । वृत्कृसु । अहसि । नहि । ते । सुर्तः । शवसः । परिऽनशे । 

त्यक्तदयः । नद्यैः । रोरु?वत् । वना । कथा । न । क्षोणीः । भियसा । सं । ञ्जारत ।। ५ ।।  

 

 

 

It's an OCR error, the Padapatha has न॒द्यः (and not नद्यैः) and अक्र॑न्दयः (not त्यक्तदयः)

 

The correct mantra (RV 1.54.1) is 

मा नो॑ अ॒स्मिन्म॑घवन्पृ॒त्स्वंह॑सि न॒हि ते॒ अन्त॒: शव॑सः परी॒णशे॑ । अक्र॑न्दयो न॒द्यो॒३॒॑ रोरु॑व॒द्वना॑ क॒था न क्षो॒णीर्भि॒यसा॒ समा॑रत ॥ 

and the Padapatha is

मा । नः॒ । अ॒स्मिन् । म॒घ॒व॒न् । पृ॒त्ऽसु । अंह॑सि । न॒हि । ते॒ । अन्तः॑ । शव॑सः । प॒रि॒ऽनशे॑ । अक्र॑न्दयः । न॒द्यः॑ । रोरु॑वत् । वना॑ । क॒था । न । क्षो॒णीः । भि॒यसा॑ । सम् । आ॒र॒त॒ ॥

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

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

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

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

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

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.