Laghu vs full Siddhanta Kaumudi

[Irene Galstian]

Dear experts,

I currently have a copy of Laghu Kaumudi, which I have 'mapped' by post-it notes in and can navigate fine.
However, one of my teachers often remarks that I should get the full Siddhanta Kaumudi. Today he mentioned it again. Having glanced at the scans on archive.org, I am afraid that I'll simply fall into that book like into a bottomless pit and never get out again. During my 20+ stays in India I have never seen a learning environment that would use the full version; they all use Laghu. Please help me understand when should one consult the full version, and when the abridged version is sufficient.

Thank you in advance for your advice.

Kind regards,
Irene

[S. L. Abhyankar]

नमस्ते ऐरीन्-महोदये !

Does not your teacher explain to you, which aspect is covered only in सिद्धान्तकौमुदी and not covered in लघुसिद्धान्तकौमुदी  and thereby the reason why he wants you to get सिद्धान्तकौमुदी ? 

I think the answer to your question is in your own question. भवत्याः प्रश्ने एव तस्य उत्तरम् | 

Just a look at the contents of the two books also brings out some major differences. For example second chapter in सिद्धान्तकौमुदी is परिभाषाप्रकरणम्. There is no such chapter itself in लघुसिद्धान्तकौमुदी  So, if one wants to understand what परिभाषा is, then one needs to study it only in सिद्धान्तकौमुदी. 

To my understanding परिभाषाः are premises, which are inherent in the structure of the book. 

For example there is  सूत्रम् - विप्रतिषेधे परं कार्यम् (पा. 1-4-2). In the instance of dilemma, go by the latter. 

• An example of dilemma is अच्सन्धिः of इ + इ, say इति इच्छा 
• If one should go by इको यणचि (6-1-77) the संधि should be इत्यिच्छा. 
• But by अकः सवर्णे दीर्घः (6-1-101) the संधि would be इतीच्छा. 
• So we have a dilemma - should इति इच्छा be इत्यिच्छा or इतीच्छा ? 
• विप्रतिषेधे परं कार्यम् resolves the dilemma saying "go by the latter." Between (6-1-77) and (6-1-101) the latter is (6-1-101) इतीच्छा only. 
• So विप्रतिषेधे परं कार्यम् is the परिभाषा, the premise behind पाणिनि's sequencing of the सूत्राणि in अष्टाध्यायी. 
• But this premise विप्रतिषेधे परं कार्यम् does not extend all across. It extends only up to (8-1-74). Its application beyond (8-1-74) is stopped by पूर्वत्रासिद्धम् (8-2-2). 
  
• For example, what should be संधि of ते अज्ञानम् ?
• By एचोऽयवायावः (6-1-78) तयज्ञानम् 
• By लोपः शाकल्यस्य (8-3-19) तेऽज्ञानम् 
• Going by विप्रतिषेधे परं कार्यम् it should be only तेऽज्ञानम्. However since application of विप्रतिषेधे परं कार्यम् does not extend beyond (8-1-74), तयज्ञानम् as per एचोऽयवायावः (6-1-78) is also valid. 

So a totally different answer to your question "when should one consult the full version" is, "go by अष्टाध्यायी itself." Even the full version सिद्धान्तकौमुदी may not explain many such nuances, much less, the short or abridged version लघुसिद्धान्तकौमुदी.

One may get intrigued by the सूत्राणि listed in different chapters, both in लघुसिद्धान्तकौमुदी and सिद्धान्तकौमुदी. For example अच्सन्धिप्रकरणम् in both lists the सूत्रम् - झलां जश्झशि (8-4-53). Prima facie, the वर्ण-s dwelt upon in this सूत्रम् are all हलः. Why is this सूत्रम् in अच्सन्धिप्रकरणम् at all ?

Having said all this, one needs to ask oneself, how deep one wants to go. Looks like, your question seeks clear identification as "लघुसिद्धान्तकौमुदी will take one as much deep, सिद्धान्तकौमुदी that much deeper and for further depth only अष्टाध्यायी itself." I don't think any such identification exists.  

[Neelesh Bodas]

Namaste.

Whether you should study Laghu Kaumudi or Kaumudi depends on what aspect of grammar you want to study.

There are three aspects of grammar that can be studied separately, which can be referred as "What", "How" and "Why".

a) "What" - This is the most fundamental aspect, where we concentrate on final form rather than the प्रक्रिया or the reasoning. For example - "What" is the चतुर्थी एकवचन of राम?  Ans - रामाय. 

This is what is typically taught in schools.

b) "How" - In this aspect, we concentrate on the prakriya in details. This is what Laghu Kaumudi covers. 

For example - "How" does चतुर्थी एकवचन of राम become रामाय?

Ans: Using sutras like स्वौजस्,.. द्वेकयोर्द्विवचनैकवचने, ङेर्य:, सुपि च and others. (The prakriya comes in the picture here). 

c) "Why" - In this aspect, we concentrate on the underlying शास्त्र. For example - 

Why does चतुर्थी एकवचन of राम involve application of सुपि च even when it contradicts the सन्निपातपरिभाषा?

Answer - Because अनित्यत्व of the सन्निपातपरिभाषा is demonstrated by the word  "कष्टाय" in the sutra "कष्टाय क्रमणे".

So in essence, the answer to your question is this - 

If you want to study prakriya, Laghu Kaumudi might be sufficient for you.

If you want to study and understand the underlying शास्त्र, Siddhanta kaumudi is your first step. 

Hope this helps

Thanks

Neelesh

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

[SriKanth!]

I am no expert but when you asked what to read, I am feeling myself in your position.  You said it right, if you are past middle age, then learning grammar is a daunting task or "falling into bottomless" pit indeed. 

In my limited time, I have tried to study, memorize, practice etc over the past few years and my opinion is learning of grammar has to be a daily undisturbed task, not a single day repeat not a single day of study should be missed. It is said one of the famous grammarian (Nagesha bhatta?) studied mahabhashyam 29 times. That much effort is required. 

So my conclusion is, again if one is past middle age or Sanskrit learning is a part-time one, then I suggest one can learn Laghu Siddhanta Kaumudi, memorize Amarakosha as much as possible, Dhatu Rupani of as many dhatus as possible. And while learning one has to start using Sanskrit daily such as reading Sanskrit magazines, books, laghu kavyas. That gives a much better Sanskrit experience in my opinion. 

After all, the authors of laghu and siddhanta kaumudi assume that you already know a lot of Sanskrit words, can conversate fluently and on top of that memorized the entire Ashtadhyayi. Those were the days when they thought Vyakarana is also one of the means to attain salvation (You will never come out :) ). The Rishi-munis have chiseled it so perfectly and now not even God can fathom the myriad delicacies of Sanskrit grammar.

Every nook and corner there will be a grammar rule grinning at you and making you trip to a fall. One Swamiji who is teaching Sanskrit grammar advised me to not get stuck in grammar and move on to read knowledge (of course after acquiring the basic abilities). I am following his widom.  

[Irene Galstian]

I can understand Nagesha Bhatta completely for studying Mahabhashya 29 times. When something truly majestic is encountered, no effort is felt, it's a joy to study.

Siddhanta Kaumudi arouses no longing in me, to be frank. Laghu Siddhanta Kaumudi is a useful handbook, and I value it as such.

Thank you all for the advice. I appreciate your input.

--

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

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

[सीताराम]

Irene,

Middle aged or not one must learn Sanskrit grammar only though ashtadhyayi method. Even if you learn little bit, its much better to learn the right way. I agree to the part if must be daily task. reading for few days and giving up for few weeks is not the way to progress.

There are sections of Ashtadhyayi if one learns those sections Grammar is not such a daunting task as Kaumudi followers make it to be. In the old days 3 years of dedicated studies were given to grammar - this is later year corruption that created statements like 14 years are required to learn grammar etc.

All it Sangya sutras are all one place

vruddhi sutras are at one place

मृजेर्वृद्धिः। ७.२.११४

applies to 3 chapter pratyayas

अचो ञ्णिति। ७.२.११५

अत उपधायाः। ७.२.११६

applies to 4th and 5th chapter pratyayas

तद्धितेष्वचामादेः। ७.२.११७

किति च। ७.२.११८

There are any such blocks in ashtadhyayi that makes learning must faster and easier.

I know i disturbed the hornet's test and will get lot of firing for this.

Learn something new everyday

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

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

--

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

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

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

--

धन्यवाद: - राम 

[Irene Galstian]

Not sure about firing, but you have sincere gratitude from me. 

What you said is very true. 

Every technical task I have ever come across had its fair share of legends about its supernatural difficulty. But all is down to discipline and following an effective strategy. For example, can't learn swimming by practising once a month (insufficient discipline). Can't learn swimming by standing under the shower every day (ineffective strategy). 

Kind regards,

Irene

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

[hnbhat]

On 19 February 2017, at 21:01, Irene Galstian <gnos...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
>Not sure about firing, but you have sincere gratitude from me. 
>
>What you said is very true. 

But not complete true, what he has learnt and advised is best method.

>
>Every technical task I have ever come across had its fair share of legends about its supernatural difficulty. But all is down to discipline and following an effective strategy. For example, can't learn swimming by practising once a month (insufficient discipline). Can't learn swimming by standing under the shower every day (ineffective strategy). 
>
  

In this analogy, one cannot learn by taking shower daily to swim or jumping once into deep water one can only be drowned or flown somewhere by stream instead of learning swimming. But gradual effort in a methodical way.

Siddhantakaudi --- Laghu, Madhya or Siddhanta Kaumudi are graded introduction to Ashtadhyayi commentaries ending with Mahabhashya meant for Indian students. It better to follow graded exercise, though it may be a waste of time in practice for today's learners as I am seeing daily.

This my experience. I myself started learning Sanskrit with LSK and once you have you completed the  method learning, it is easier the next step. Even for this, you have to learn conjunction and declension of verbs and nouns well in Sanskrit. Otherwise it is the same in any methods Ashtadhyayi or Siddantakaumudi. Only difference is in its approach. Siddhantakaumudi instruction of etymology of the words in graded manner through the Rules of Ashtadhyayi, where as Ashtadhyayi is code of Rules itself without any instruction about a word to be derived.

[Irene Galstian]

Dear H. N. Bhat,

Of course, LSK is very useful, that's a given. 

You said that you see in daily practice that the graded approach is a waste of time for modern learners. Could you please explain why?

In your teaching practice, have you come across students who went directly from LSK to Ashtadhyayi? I ask because modern students in India have the benefit of teachers like yourself to navigate Ashtadhyayi, but when Bhattoj Dikshita compiled SK this wasn't the case. His was the task of reviving Panini's system.

Also, Balamanorama is a practical and detailed book too, but it's rarely mentioned. Why is this so?

Kind regards,

Irene

--

[सीताराम]

I did not find in another book that gave a system of studies to approach these esoteric subjects.
-------
THE SCHEME OF STUDIES - Given by Maharshi Dayananda in Satyartha Prakash

. First of all comes Phonetics (shikshaa) by Panini. Parents and teachers should teach their children and pupils how to pronounce different letters in their right places, with the right amount of effort and the right agent. For example, take the letter P. The right place to pronounce it is the lips, the proper amount of effort is what is called full and the right agent is the tongue.

Then comes grammar. It includes
Ashtaadhayayi;
Dhaatupaath(Book of roots),
Ganapath (book of groups),
Unaadikosh (Book of prefixes and suffixes, etc.).
Last of all comes Mahaabhaashya(Exposition of the above four books of Panini or Patanjali.

If the teachers and their scholars be intelligent, energetic, honest and extremely anxious to advance their knowledge, the pupils can master the Science of Grammar in three years, and thus become profound Grammarians thoroughly acquainted with the construction of every word – Vedic or Laukika (i.e., of ordinary Sanskrit literature)

Other sciences are easier to learn. The amount of labor that is required to learn the Science of Grammar is greater than that required to master any other subject; and the amount of knowledge acquired by the study of the above books on Grammar in three years cannot be gained by the study of such books as Saarswata Chandrikaa, Kaumadi, and Manormaa, in fifty years.

The reason is that the great sages have expounded the most abstruse subjects in their books in such an easy way that it is entirely impossible for ordinary men to approach it. The aim of those great souls in writing their books was to make the subject so easy as to be readily grasped in the shortest possible time; whilst the object of little minds has always been to clothe their subject with such a difficult-round -about style as would necessitate great labour and waste of time, on the part of the student, to comprehend it, whilst he would profit but very little.

We can liken this to digging up a whole mountain and finding a penny-worth of gold; whilst the study of the books of the great sages can be well likened to the diving of a man into the sea and finding most valuable pearls in one plunge.

Then let them read Nighantoo and Nirukta (books on Vedic Vocabulary and Philology) by Yaska in six to eight months, but not waste years of their valuable time over Amarkosha and other such books written by atheists.

Thereafter they should study Chhandograntha (Prosody) by Pingala, so that they may thoroughly master the rules that govern versification – Vedic and Sanskrit –and be able to compose poems of their own. This can be done in four months. They should not waste their time over Vritratnaakar and the like books written by mean scholars.

Then they should study the Manu Smriti, the Vaalmiki Raamaayana, the Vidurniti and other selections like this from the Mahabhaarat. The tutor should teach these as poetry ought to be taught. The study of these books tends to eradicate evil habits and bring culture. It should not take the students more than a year to finish them.

Then they should study the six Shaastraas (commonly called the six schools or systems of philosophy) with the expositions of Rishis – the enlightened great souls, the true seers of nature – as far as possible, or in the absence of these, with the help of the true commentaries of other honest scholars. But before taking up Vedant Shaastraa They should learn the ten Upnishads.** All these books should be finished in two years.

Thereafter, they should study the four Vedas*** with their four Braahmanaas**** with proper accent meanings, (and finish this course in six years). The Vedaas should be both taught by example and precept.

Copied above text from http://satyarthprakash.in/english/

 

Dr Bhat

I do not mean any disrespect you, I am sorry if any part of the mail offends you. I have a long way to go before I can reach to your level of scholarship. I am learning through ashtadhyayi style teachings available on archive and youtube.  These two teachers learned grammar in the above proposed system. Its just a pure myth that ashtadhyayi does not deal with Shabda siddhi.

First sutra is taught then Siddhi's are taught immediately. for example

वृद्धिरादैच्। १.१.१

and immediately following siddhi's are taught - one from each row. And students are told to derive similar words until they get good practice on these siddhi's.

भागः, राग:, याग:, त्याग:, पाक:, शाप:, वास:, राम:, काम:, पाठ:

नायकः,चायकः,पावकः, स्तावकः,कारकः,हारकः,पाठकः,पाचकः॥

शालायांभवः =शालीयः, मालीयः॥

उपगोरपत्यम्=औपगवः, औपमन्यवः॥

ऐतिकायनः,आश्वलायनः, आरण्यः॥

अचैषीत् । अनैषीत् ॥

This way after complete first Pada alone students get enough insight how ashtadhyayi is organized, that is mare 75 sutras and about 150 to 200 Shabad Siddhi.

When entire ashtadhyayi is taught this way it is prathamaVrutti

Then DvitiyaVrutti = Kashika is taught

Finally Mahabhashyam.

I have met many Kaumudi lovers who almost fell when I told them that first I was taught "घञ्" pratyaya - they shook their heads and said start with Laghu first. Believe me when my friends were doing RamaSiddhi I was memorizing ashtadhyayi.

I guess these two schools of thought will always exist and give choice to meet ones learning inclination.

With Regards

Raama

[hnbhat]

On 19 February 2017, at 23:13, Irene Galstian <gnos...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
>Dear H. N. Bhat,
>
>Of course, LSK is very useful, that's a given. 
>
>You said that you see in daily practice that the graded approach is a waste of time for modern learners. Could you please explain why?

I have given my guess.  Dr. Rama has explained with his first hand experience of learning grammar based on the scheme presented in his post.

>
>In your teaching practice, have you come across students who went directly from LSK to Ashtadhyayi?

I have not taught Ashtadhyayi or learnt Ashtadhyayi during my learning.

I ask because modern students in India have the benefit of teachers like yourself to navigate Ashtadhyayi, but when Bhattoj Dikshita compiled SK this wasn't the case. His was the task of reviving Panini's system.
>
>Also, Balamanorama is a practical and detailed book too, but it's rarely mentioned. Why is this so?
>

Simply because Balamanorama is not a text book but a commentary on SK. I would have suggested to learn SK with Balamanorama.

[Irene Galstian]

Thank you very much.

Irene

--

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

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

[SriKanth!]

For studying Laghu Siddhanta Kaumudi, (especially for non-Indian or non-Hindi students), this three volume set of books are immensely helpful. 

http://www.amazon.in/Laghusiddhantakaumudi-Varadaraja-Primer-Paninis-Grammar/dp/8120835336/

http://www.amazon.in/Laghusiddhantakaumudi-Varadaraja-Primer-Paninis-Grammar/dp/8120834518

http://www.amazon.in/Laghusiddhantakaumudi-Varadaraja-Primer-Paninis-Grammar/dp/8120836162/

These books have more fluent detail in English and refers additional sutras though not mentioned in Laghu, to make the material easy to digest. 

Though the cost is high, the effort put in by the authors is worth the buy. 

On Monday, February 20, 2017 at 1:25:21 PM UTC+5:30, Irene Galstian wrote:

[Irene Galstian]

Laghu Siddhanta Kaumudi is fairly straightforward as it is. If you have these books, could you please give some examples of explanations that make this set valuable?

[SriKanth!]

Couple of sample pages I scanned with my mobile.