दामोदराष्टकं

[valerio virgini]

This prayer seems to be taken from the Padma purāṇa.

Can anyone tell me the sloka references?

This is the first verse:

नमामीश्वरं सच्-चिद्-आनन्द-रूपं
लसत्-कुण्डलं गोकुले भ्राजमानम्  ।
यशोदा-भियोलूखलाद् धावमानं
परामृष्टम् अत्यन्ततो द्रुत्य गोप्या ॥ १ ॥

tanks

valerio

[Hnbhat B.R.]

I saw the verses composed by Sadananda Yati in some blog.

--
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.

[valerio virgini]

There is a commentary on this work written in the early 1500s by Sanātana Gosvāmī.

Is it possible that sadananda is from that era?

thanks

valerio

[S. L. Abhyankar]

According to the स्तोत्रम् available at this link, this स्तोत्रम् was composed by सत्यव्रत, who was born in सिन्धुदेश but traveled to वृन्दावन and composed this अष्टकम् - नमामीश्वरं सच्चिदानन्दरूपं लसत्कुण्डलं गोकुले भ्राजमानम् ... All this preface is mentioned in the first four verses. So, the अष्टकम्  itself starts from verse #5 and goes up to verse #12. Actually verse #12 is sort of an epilogue put up as a quote by नारद. The portion सत्यव्रत उवाच is in verses 5 to 11 only. 

[valerio virgini]

Thanks Abhyankar ji

I read the stotram,  and I saw that there are some variations.

The metric is perfectly the same.

The verses are 7. Missing 3.

Except for दूत , for the other variants the text makes sense.

What do you think about it?

यशोदाभियोलूखले धावमानं परामृष्टमत्यन्ततो दूतगोप्या ॥ ५॥ Stotram

यशोदा-भियोलूखलाद् धावमानं परामृष्टम् अत्यन्ततो द्रुत्य गोप्या ॥ १ ॥ 

मुहुःश्वासकं पत्रिरेखाङ्ककण्ठं स्थितं नौमि दामोदरं भक्तवन्द्यम् ॥ ६॥  Stotram

मुहुः श्वास-कम्प-त्रिरेखाङ्क-कण्ठ स्थित-ग्रैव-दामोदरं भक्ति-बद्धम् ॥ २ ॥

वरं देव देहीश मोक्षावधिं वा न चान्यं वृणेऽहं वरेशादपीह ।  Stotram 

वरं देव मोक्षं न मोक्षावधिं वा न चान्यं वृणे ऽहं वरेशादपिह

इदं ते मुखाम्भोजमत्यन्तनीलैर्वृतं कुन्तलैः स्निग्धवक्त्रैश्च गोप्या ।  Stotram 

इदं ते मुखाम्भोजम् अत्यन्त-नीलैर् वृतं कुन्तलैः स्निग्ध-रक्तैश् च गोप्या  । 

कृपादृष्टिवृष्ट्याऽतिदीनं च रक्ष गृहाणेश मामज्ञमेवाक्षिदृश्यम् ॥ ९॥ Stotram 

कृपा-दृष्टि-वृष्ट्याति-दीनं बतानु-गृहाणेष माम् अज्ञम् एध्य् अक्षि-दृश्यः ॥ ६ ॥

कुबेरात्मजौ वृक्षमूर्ती च यद्वत्त्वया मोचितौ भक्तिभाजौ कृतौ च । Stotram 

कुवेरात्मजौ बद्ध-मूर्त्यैव यद्वत् त्वया मोचितौ भक्ति-भाजौ कृतौ च  ।

नमस्ते सुदाम्ने स्फुरद्दीप्तधाम्ने तथोरस्थविश्वस्य धाम्ने नमस्ते ।  Stotram 

नमस् ते ऽस्तु दाम्ने स्फुरद्-दीप्ति-धाम्ने त्वदीयोदरायाथ विश्वस्य धाम्ने  ।

2018-02-06 15:08 GMT+01:00 S. L. Abhyankar <sl.abh...@gmail.com>:

According to the स्तोत्रम् available at this link, this स्तोत्रम् was composed by सत्यव्रत, who was born in सिन्धुदेश but traveled to वृन्दावन and composed this अष्टकम् - नमामीश्वरं सच्चिदानन्दरूपं लसत्कुण्डलं गोकुले भ्राजमानम् ... All this preface is mentioned in the first four verses. So, the अष्टकम्  itself starts from verse #5 and goes up to verse #12. Actually verse #12 is sort of an epilogue put up as a quote by नारद. The portion सत्यव्रत उवाच is in verses 5 to 11 only. 

--

[Sunder Hattangadi]

May be of some help:

https://nitaaiveda.com/Other_Scriptures_by_Acharyas/Damodarashtakam_Kartika_Glories/Damodarastakam.htm

[Sanatana Goswami (1488–1558) was a principal disciple of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu]

[Sunder Hattangadi]

Pranams Abhyankara-ji,

             You may not have to struggle too much with this text as it is available in Devanagari script (atṭ.)

https://ia801608.us.archive.org/15/items/hbv_vol2/haribhaktivilasa_hindi_part2.pdf

सुंदर हट्टंगडी

On Wednesday, February 14, 2018, 10:08:16 PM CST, S. L. Abhyankar <sl.abh...@gmail.com> wrote:

धन्योऽस्मि श्रीमन् सुंदर-हत्तंगडी-वर्य ! (I hope, spelling of your surname as हत्तंगडी is okay.)

One good thing is that every shloka is followed by break-up of all conjugated words and English translation of every such broken-up word. Although this appeals to be good at first glance, translation of compound words becomes subjective. Also translation of विभक्त्यर्थ-s also becomes subjective.

I have made for myself a Google-document <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1MFmHmqYtFC-35CPhtBHARghjT84G7So4wwE40YR78iY/edit?usp=sharing>. The Roman transliteration of Sanskrit texts is looking challenging, because it does not seem to follow any particular well-known scheme. There are the words transliterated as "drutya", "gopya", which may be read as द्रुत्य / द्रुत्या, गोप्य / गोप्या. 

I am left wondering why people do not put Sanskrit texts in देवनागरी.

I shall have to do lot of self-study work on it, starting with putting all Sanskrit text in देवनागरी. 

[S. L. Abhyankar]

Dear Mr. Valerio Virgini,

I also checked up the stotram at http://www.krishna.com/damodarastakam 

Here, 

• The stotram is in Roman transliteration.
• English translation is also given. 
• Number of verses is exactly eight.
  

Coming to the variations pointed out by you,

1. उलूखले धावमानं is wrong. उलूखलात् धावमानम् is correct.
2. दूतगोप्या can be interpreted as "by the गोपी, who was a messenger, who brought the message, rather the complaint (of Krishna stealing the butter)". 
• Grammar of द्रुत्य is not clear.  If द्रुत्यगोप्या is taken as a compound word, it can be deciphered as द्रुत्या गोपी इति द्रुत्यगोपी (कर्मधारयः) => तया द्रुत्यगोप्या. Here द्रुत्या गोपी should be interpreted as गोपी, who ran around to catch Krishna. Derivation of द्रुत्य is to be taken from धातुः दॄ similar to derivation of भृत्य from धातुः भृ. Complex; right ?
  
3. मुहुःश्वासकं पत्रिरेखाङ्ककण्ठम् versus मुहुःश्वास-कम्प-त्रि-रेखा-अङ्क-कण्ठम् 
• पत्रिरेखाङ्ककण्ठम् can be deciphered as पत्रीणाम् रेखाणाम् अङ्कः कण्ठे यस्य सः पत्रिरेखाङ्ककण्ठः => तम् 
• In श्वास-कम्प-त्रि-रेखा-अङ्क-कण्ठम् the component श्वास-कम्प has no significance OR connectivity with त्रि-रेखा-अङ्क-कण्ठम्
• Also if त्रि-रेखा-अङ्क is to be taken to mean त्रिपुण्ड्र, that त्रिपुण्ड्र is marked on the भालप्रदेश not on कण्ठम्
• मुहुःश्वासकं lends to interpretation as "one, whose breath is palpating", due to running around (?) So sweet !
4. Both versions स्निग्धवक्त्रैः and स्निग्धरक्तैः seem to be okay.
• The word रक्त is grammatically past passive participle of रञ्ज् and means affection. But as a noun रक्त also means blood. So it brings forth some negative potential. 
• By such consideration स्निग्धवक्त्रैः appeals to be the better option.
5. When writing कृपादृष्टिवृष्ट्यातिदीनं it is not mandatory to write it with the अवग्रह i.e. as कृपादृष्टिवृष्ट्याsतिदीनं
• But writing it as कृपादृष्टि-वृष्ट्याति-दीनं would separate अति from दीनं. That is not good. अति is more connected with दीनं than with वृष्ट्या.
6. रक्ष गृहाणेश versus बतानु-गृहाणेष 
• रक्ष गृहाणेश = रक्ष गृहाण ईश This is good and straightforward.
• बतानु-गृहाणेष can be deciphered as बत अनुगृहाण ईष. 
• Since अनु is connected with गृहाण, the hyphen is wrong.
• ईश is more correct than ईष, since ईश means Lord. ईष has a shade of wishing.
  
• Both गृहाण (adopt me) अनुगृहाण (Bless me) have their own nicety.
7. मामज्ञमेवाक्षिदृश्यम् versus मामज्ञमेध्यक्षिदृश्यः 
• मामज्ञमेवाक्षिदृश्यम् = माम् अज्ञम् एव अक्षिदृश्यम् If this is paraphrased as माम् अक्षिदृश्यम् एव अज्ञम् it can mean Me, who is ignorant, unintelligent, only by looks (actually I am not unintelligent ?). The word एव is not necessary. 
  
• मामज्ञमेध्यक्षिदृश्यः = माम् अज्ञम् एधि अक्षिदृश्यः This brings in an additional verb एधि in addition to अनुगृहाण. The paraphrasing माम् अज्ञम् अक्षिदृश्यः एधि = Become manifest to me and अनुगृहाण bless me. This is beautiful !!
  
8. वृक्षमूर्ती versus बद्धमूर्त्यैव 
• Both qualify कुबेरात्मजौ (two sons of कुबेर) The word वृक्षमूर्ती can be deciphered as वृक्षः च मूर्तिः च द्वावपि (both) इति वृक्षमूर्ती (इतरेतर-द्वन्द्वः Hence by द्विवचनम्) I do not know the mythology of कुबेर and whether he is said to have two sons वृक्ष and मूर्ति. 
• बद्धमूर्त्यैव would split as बद्धमूर्त्या एव and would translate as "having made idol". The interpretation sounds irrelevant.
  
9. नमस्ते सुदाम्ने versus नमस्तेऽस्तु दाम्ने 
• सुदाम्ने becomes adjectival as a बहुव्रीहि-compound word. सुष्ठु दाम यस्य सः सुदामा => तस्मै इति सुदाम्ने 
• There is no compounding in दाम्ने. That makes दामन् itself as an epithet of the deity of this स्तोत्रम्.
• In Apte's dictionary <दामन् a. Liberal, donor; Mb.12.92.17> 
• But the title / theme of this स्तोत्रम् is दामोदराष्टकम् In that context I also get, again in Apte's dictionary only <दामन् n. [दो-मनिन्] 1 A string, thread, fillet, rope. -2 A chaplet, a garland in general; आद्ये बद्धा विरहदिवसे या शिखा दाम हित्वा Me.93; कनकचम्पकदामगौरीम् Ch. P.1; Śi.4.5. -3 A line, streak (as of lightning); वुद्युद्-दाम्ना हेमराजीव विन्ध्यम् M.3.2; Me.27. -4 A large bandage. -5 Ved. A gift. -6 A portion, share. -7 A girdle.> 
• Actually the word दामोदर is to be deciphered as दाम उदरे यस्य सः दामोदरः 
• By its extended meaning <दामन्> means regulation or regulator. Since the deity regulates the universe, it aptly becomes eligible for the epithet <दामन्>
• नमस्ते सुदाम्ने and नमस्तेऽस्तु दाम्ने both are good options.
  
10. स्फुरद्दीप्तधाम्ने versus स्फुरद्दीप्तिधाम्ने 
• We need to look into the deciphering of the two words. 
•  स्फुरद्दीप्तधाम्ने = स्फुरत्-दीप्त-धाम्ने = स्फुरन् (अस्ति) दीप्तम् धाम अयम् इति स्फुरद्दीप्तधामा => तस्मै इति स्फुरद्दीप्तधाम्ने = (1) To Him, who inspires a lighted abode OR (2) to Him who inspires an abode to be lighted. In meaning (2), the wording "to be lighted" is not the correct translation grammatically.
• स्फुरद्दीप्तिधाम्ने = स्फुरन् (अस्ति) दीप्तिम् धाम्नि अयम् इति स्फुरद्दीप्तिधामा => तस्मै इति स्फुरद्दीप्तिधाम्ने Here दीप्तिम् धाम्नि actually causes juxtaposition of the conventional sequence of the words दीप्तिम् and धाम्नि. For conventional correctness, the deciphering should be धाम्नि या दीप्तिः तां स्फुरन् अयम् 
• There is some awkwardness in deciphering both the versions.
11. तथोरस्थविश्वस्य धाम्ने नमस्ते versus त्वदीयोदरायाथ विश्वस्य धाम्ने 
1. तथोरस्थविश्वस्य धाम्ने नमस्ते = तथा उरस्थाविश्वस्य धाम्ने नमस्ते = ( उरसि स्थितम् विश्वम् इति उरस्थविश्वम् => तस्य इति उरस्थविश्वस्य ) धाम्ने नमस्ते | उरस् = chest, heart | उरस्थ = residing in the heart | Having described विश्व by the adjective उरस्थ, calling the deity as विश्वस्य धाम is duplication. 
• There is also the word तथा which seems to have been employed as a conjunction, because there are two clauses with two verbs नमस्ते - one at the beginning of the line, another at the end of the line.
2. त्वदीयोदरायाथ विश्वस्य धाम्ने = ( त्वदीयम् उदरम् इति त्वदीयोदरम् => तस्मै इति त्वदीयोदराय = unto your stomach, belly ) / ( विश्वस्य धाम्ने = abode for the universe ) / This is becoming like paying obeisance "unto your belly, which is abode for the universe." One does not pay obeisance to the belly ! Even if it is a poetic thought, it does not appeal to be chaste.
   
• There is also the word अथ, which seems to have been employed to fit to the meter.
3. One phrase has duplication. The other is not chaste.

Hope, this helps. 

[S. L. Abhyankar]