Audio of some Sanskrit texts

[K S Kannan]

Released just now

against the background of Vasanta Navarātra

(around 3 minutes):

https://youtu.be/zAEpt7gfvFM

Suggestions for improvement are welcome.

(and one more shortly).

--

Dr. K.S.Kannan  D.Litt.

Sant Rajinder Singh Ji Maharaj Chair Professor, IIT-Madras.

Senior Fellow, ICSSR, New Delhi.

Academic Director, Swadeshi Indology.

Member, Academic Council, Veda Vijnana Shodha Samsthana.

Nominated Member, IIAS, Shimla.

Former Professor, CAHC, Jain University, Bangalore.

Former Director, Karnataka Samskrit University, Bangalore.

Former Head, Dept. of Sanskrit, The National Colleges, Bangalore.

[krishnap...@gmail.com]

Consult some good scholar for the usage of avagraha. Rest all is good.

[Madhav Deshpande]

Excellent rendition! Thanks for sharing.

Madhav M. Deshpande

Professor Emeritus, Sanskrit and Linguistics

University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

Senior Fellow, Oxford Center for Hindu Studies

Adjunct Professor, National Institute of Advanced Studies, Bangalore, India

[Residence: Campbell, California, USA]

--
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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/bde6fa83-98a0-4c74-9ac3-99b4f595b9dfn%40googlegroups.com.

[K S Kannan]

Thank you Prof. Deshpande for your kind words.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAB3-dzdT-t%3Dq21VpnV41ikHAbFeAdpQUURH0ysT8v9_8%2BnOgMA%40mail.gmail.com.

[K S Kannan]

Thank you Krishnaprasad-ji for your input.

As far the avagraha, the policy here is clear:

It has been used to indicate pūrvarūpa-sandhi as usual,

and in addition, for savarṇa-dīrgha (all types feasible) also

- immaterial of whether it is a simple sandhi situation

or a samāsa situation.

This has been adhered to fairly uniformly

(exempt rare typos).

The double avagraha indicates the commencement of

the latter word with a dīrgha letter.

Others might have used avagraha to cover

only some of the above aspects. But I have tried

to be more user-friendly.

Thank you for your concern.

Regards

[Sivasenani Nori]

I salute the saattvic nature of Prof. Kannan who ignored the slight and explained his policy of using the avagraha.

The short message of Sri Krishnaprasad might not have been intended to offend, but it does so. 

The tone is jarring, as if a beginner is being advised. Surely, a learner or master of Sanskrit should be capable of better expression. 

Secondly, it is improper that the the very definition of a good scholar is asked to consult a good scholar. For starters, if one goes by upaadhi, Prof. Kannan's titles are mentioned in the email, a Doctor of Philosophy, a Doctor of Literature and a Professor at a prestigious institution. If one goes by vyutpatti, anyone who has even a fleeting familiarity with BVP knows the knowledge of Prof. Kannan. What is especially insouciant is that Prof. Kannan sets and expects high standards in avoiding mistakes. There have been long debates of the optional doubling of consonants. One ought to pause and think for a while before dishing out advice on orthography to such a person. 

Finally, familiarity with Sanskrit literature would expose anyone to the fact that Avagraha is used differently across works. For the record, I prefer a limited use, but there is nothing sacrosanct about using it to indicate lopa of 'a' only after 'e' and 'o'. One can argue that in Savarnadeergha-sandhi, there is not lopa but aadeSa and that if we cannot always indicate that change, say, in surendra, ans therefore it is better to limit avagraha to indicate lopa. Constructive discussion is beneficial and enjoyable and so is welcome, irrespective of age and accomplishment of the participants.  The very shortness of the comment is a dosha here. All the indifference and offensiveness would still be worth ignoring, if there were res, but that is also absent.

BVP would benefit if we conduct discussions in a dignified manner, showing some restraint. विद्वान सर्वत्र पूज्यते, it is said. Let us do so. 

Regards 

N Siva Senani 

--

[उ॒ज्ज्व॒लः]

यु॒क्तमु॑च्यते। म॒हत्सु॒ प्रम॑त्ते॒ष्वपि॒ "किञ्चि॒दत्र॒ विचा॑रितं प्र॒योज॑नं स्या॒द्" इत्य॒नया॑ धि॒या त ए॒वाभि॑प्रा॒यं प्र॑ष्ट॒व्याः॑। किं पुन॑रि॒ह गौ॑रशासनका॒लात् प्राक् प्रसि॑द्धम् इ॒दानी॒मपि॒ भूय॑सा॒ प्रयु॑क्तं लोकानुरो॒धिनं॑ लेखनवि॒धिम॑नुपा॒लय॑त्सु।

रविवार, 18 अप्रैल 2021 को 7:58:52 am UTC+5:30 बजे sivas...@gmail.com ने लिखा:

[Krishnaprasad G]

Sorry I did not know the guide was Prof Kannan ji. I just thought he is forwarding the message.

You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/bvparishat/ooSSA1Dkxz8/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAAs%2BaZM8tpzEDvXyX%2BqvM1MoD31LyHL_0Qs%3DKyd9AUGGjtmoFA%40mail.gmail.com.

[K S Kannan]

I am thankful to Professors Sivasenani Nori and Ujjval for their generosity.

I have admiration for the work of Krishnaprasad-ji, especially his creation of new fonts

and creating searchable versions of many texts, which is no small service.. 

He has anyhow made amends for what must have happened somewhat inadvertently.

I am fortunate to be a member of this Parishat which has many guṇa-grāhin-s.

Though I endeavour not to err, mistakes can happen, and the many sahr̥daya-s here

are always keen to lend a helping hand, for which I am grateful.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAODNnZjYaOP5vDVKUKy9kceGBRCPLRiKLDj0jvGYdJRLwMNupQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Balasubramanian Ramakrishnan]

Well said by Sri Sivasenani. But I have a tangential question on the avagraha in publications. Do old manuscripts indicate this? The word avagraha also has a different meaning in the prAtishAkhyA-s. It is the first member of a separable word in the pada pAtha.

Ramakrishnan

On Sun, Apr 18, 2021 at 7:58 AM Sivasenani Nori <sivas...@gmail.com> wrote:

I salute the saattvic nature of Prof. Kannan who ignored the slight and explained his policy of using the avagraha.

orth ignoring, if there were res, but that is also

https://youtu.be/zAEpt7gfvFM

Suggestions for improvement are welcome.

(and one more shortly).

--

Dr. K.S.Kannan  D.Litt.

Sant Rajinder Singh Ji Maharaj Chair Professor, IIT-Madras.

Senior Fellow, ICSSR, New Delhi.

Academic Director, Swadeshi Indology.

Member, Academic Council, Veda Vijnana Shodha Samsthana.

Nominated Member, IIAS, Shimla.

Former Professor, CAHC, Jain University, Bangalore.

Former Director, Karnataka Samskrit University, Bangalore.

Former Head, Dept. of Sanskrit, The National Colleges, Bangalore.

--
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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/bde6fa83-98a0-4c74-9ac3-99b4f595b9dfn%40googlegroups.com.

--
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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAAs%2BaZM8tpzEDvXyX%2BqvM1MoD31LyHL_0Qs%3DKyd9AUGGjtmoFA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Krishnaprasad G]

For the benefit of others  I am writing this. But the concept of avagraha is modern there is no hard and fast rules(see Bhaimi for more details. Hence no question of dispute). As prof said he has made is own conventions which is not at all a problem. and the below rules I am writing here is accepted widely.

the examples and counterexamples are here:

1.examples avagraha (ऽ) representing hrasva a(अ)

रामोऽवदत् = रामः अवदत्

तेऽत्र= ते अत्र

2.examples avagraha (ऽ) representing deergha a (आ)

रामो वाऽत्ति= रामो वा अत्ति

यथाऽऽगच्छति= यथा अगच्छति

The below exs; are wrong.

सूत्राऽर्थः

रामाऽऽलयः

because these are compound words.

You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/bvparishat/ooSSA1Dkxz8/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAH8aEvs6w1m7krB_miLC6rXZ%3D8ykmJ0wXN5dHpiZE-HDDvudCQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Krishnaprasad G]

Please read

यथा आगच्छति

[Krishnaprasad G]

One more example is important forgot to add (for deergha a आ )

इवाsगमनम्

इव आगमनम्

Whether the deergha a आ is left or right the rule is same

[Krishnaprasad G]

इव अहम् is इवाहम् but not इवाsहम्

[Kushagra Aniket]

Thank you, Professor Kannan, for rendering this service to both Sanskrit and classical music. 

Few recordings of Sanskrit prose compositions in the classical genre are available. However, judging from the rhythm, alliteration, onomatopoeia, etc. of these गद्य pieces, they were probably meant for dramatic public readings or even singing in th आलाप style. In this regard, the renditions of सीताविवाहचूर्णिका and श्रीरङ्गगद्यम् are valuable to the Sanskrit and music community.

If I may, I would also request you to attempt a rendition of the श्यामलादण्डकम् and other दण्डककाव्य-s. Few recordings of the श्यामलादण्डकम् are available, and in my opinion, only one of them is satisfactory. Numerous other दण्डककाव्य-s lie hidden from the broader public.

May I hope that Sanskrit writers of the past and present may find greater recognition through these compositions, just as Dickens achieved his greatest fame through the public readings of his novels.

Kushagra Aniket

Cornell University'15

ka...@cornell.edu

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAODNnZiaYFeHG%2BAr%2Buwys-nbPGvqv1_yoGP%3DMbJ-gigeTNHxjQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[K S Kannan]

Thank you very much Kushagra-ji for your appreciation.

Equally thankful to you for your kind suggestions.

We will add the items to our list.

Regards

KSKannan

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CADrasQoPLaWGQH-QPamCuHSGeeEJiEGzchYKpW%2BMus8GyBpMwQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Kushagra Aniket]

Regarding the अवग्रह issue, my untrained ears didn't catch any दोष. Be as it may, I was reminded of an old Doha in Braja Bhasha that I altered:

गुनन्ह गहत गुन-गाहक अवगुन देत बिसारि।
मथनिहार तजि छाछ को माखन लेत निकारि॥

A Rasika (गुण-ग्राहक) seeks gunas and forgets doshas, just as a one who churns milk extracts butter and discards buttermilk (छाछ)

Kushagra Aniket

Cornell University'15

ka...@cornell.edu

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAN47gm6DGLhGjX5yswVu3SR%3DNXDhVqz%2BShNmrpPdXRR7o0e4Eg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

गद्य here is not 'prose' at all the way we understand it in English. 

Yes, you are right when you say, 

"However, judging from the rhythm, alliteration, onomatopoeia, etc. of these गद्य pieces, they were probably meant for dramatic public readings or even singing in the आलाप style. "

The most well known and popular  गद्य that people are familiar with through regular hearing from All India Radio at least, is Sri Venkateswara Gadya. 

https://youtu.be/7tSVL7eW28c

https://youtu.be/Ht4HLHL5HYk

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAN47gm6DGLhGjX5yswVu3SR%3DNXDhVqz%2BShNmrpPdXRR7o0e4Eg%40mail.gmail.com.

--

Nagaraj Paturi

 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

Director, Indic Academy

BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, Maharashtra

BoS, Chinmaya Vishwavidyapeeth, Veliyanad, Kerala

BoS Veda Vijnana Gurukula, Bengaluru.

Member, Advisory Council, Veda Vijnana Shodha Samsthanam, Bengaluru

BoS Rashtram School of Public Leadership

Editor-in-Chief, International Journal of Studies in Public Leadership

Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies, 

FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education, 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

 

 

 

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Five 'verses' of the Aksharaanka Gadya by the 12th century Veerashaiva spiritual leader and poet Palkuriki Somanathudu have become very popular as 'tongue twisters' on YouTube. 

As such multiple 'showing off' videos of the rendering of these 'verses' are uploaded. 

One of them :

https://youtu.be/zlVxmgelHTY

The rendering by baby children like the following are also very popular:

https://youtu.be/6pJ0Qrsg5mg

[Sivasenani Nori]

Sri Balasubramanian Ramakrishnan wrote on 19 Apr 2021: 

>> I have a tangential question on the avagraha in publications. Do old manuscripts indicate this? The word avagraha also has a different meaning in the prAtishAkhyA-s. It is the first member of a separable word in the pada pAtha.

True, Sir. This and related usages are indeed very ancient. As shown below the Taittiriya Pratisakhya gives the name 'avagraha' to the first element of a separable word. Panini also mentions this (8.4.26). This usage of avagraha is attested to in the Mahabhashya on two separate occasions (mentioned below) and the first element is clearly mentioned as the avagraha by Kaiyyata. The Atharva Pratisakhya also indicates the same along with the practice of using the sign ऽ  to separate the elements of a separable word. In some cases, usage similar to the modern usage is seen (highlighted below). Some comments of Kaiyata and Nagesa are interesting (highlighted below).

If one could make a conjecture, it seems that the sign was initially used to separate padas into avagraha and ingya in padapATha, and the practice was later carried into secular works. The name avagraha seems to have attached itself due to its association with the prior element 'avagraha'. As to when this was done needs to be investigated. Most manuscripts are not older than 400 years (द्रव्यस्य नश्वरत्वात्). We know that the critical edition of Mahabharata used manuscripts older manuscripts (about 600 to 800 years old). They are one source, if still accessible. Older writing is on rocks - so epigraphical evidence may be investigated for a better fix.

तैत्तिरीयप्रातिशाख्यम् - नानापदवदिङ्ग्यमसङ्ख्याने। 1.48॥

त्रिरत्नभाष्यम्  - इङ्ग्यपदं नानापदवद्भवत्यसङ्ख्याने। ...

तैत्तिरीयप्रातिशाख्या - तस्य पूर्वपदमवग्रहः।1.49॥

त्रिरत्नभाष्यम् - तस्य इङ्ग्यपदस्य पूर्वपदमवग्रह इत्युच्यते। यथा देवायत इति देव-यते। (In देवायते यजमानाय (तैत्तिरीयसंहिता 3.5.5), the element 'deva' is called avagraha. Elongation of अ in देव is on account of देवसुम्नयोर्यजुषि काठके।7.4.38, अष्टाध्यायी॥ 

वैदिकाभरणम् - तस्येङ्यस्य यत् पूर्वखण्डरूपं  पदं तस्यावग्रह इति संज्ञा। यथा "उपायवः" (तैत्तिरीयसंहिता 1.1.1)  इत्यत्र उपशब्दः, "श्रेष्ठतमाय" (तैत्तिरीयसंहिता 7.4.4)  इत्यत्र श्रेष्ठशब्द इति।

If we taken another example, in the word गणपतिम् , the element gaNa is avagraha and the element patiM is इङ्ग्यः. 

अथर्वप्रातिशाख्यम् - 

ङकारवग्रहाणि । 2.3.24॥ हिङ्कृण्वती वसुपत्नी वसूनाम् (7.73.8) हिङ्ऽकृणवती। ... हिङ्कार उछिष्ठे हिङ्ऽकारः।

नकारावग्रहे प्रकृतिभावश्च । 2.3.25॥ वृत्रहन्तमा वृत्रहन्ऽतमा (7.110.1)। मदिन्तमः मदिन्ऽतम्ः। (11.7.7)

मकारावग्रहाणि। 2.3.26 ॥ यज्ञस्य विद्वान्त्समये न धीर। सम्ऽअये। (2.35.3) भीता समरे वधानाम्। सम्ऽअरे (5.20.5) ...

लुप्तशेषेणावग्रहः प्रकृत्यादेशश्च । 2.4.5 ॥  दद्भ्यः दत्ऽभ्यः। पद्भ्याम् पत्ऽभ्याम्। पत्सङ्गिनीः पत्ऽसङ्गिनीः। पद्घोपैः पत्ऽघोपैः। हत्सु हत्ऽसु। उदधिम्   उदऽधिम्। आसभिः आसऽभिः। आसन्वत् आसन्ऽवत्। सान्तर्देशाः सऽअन्तर्देशाः (9.4.37)। सनीडाः सऽनीडाः (समाननीडाः)। त्रयोदशम् त्रयःऽदशम्। दम्पती दम्ऽपती। द्रुपदे द्रुऽपदे। पुंसुवनम् पुम्ऽसुवनम्। 

पाणिनीयम् - छन्दस्यृदवग्रहात्। 8.4.26 ॥ 

छन्दसि ऋत् अवग्रहात् इति पदच्छेदः। 

ऋकारान्तात् अवग्रहात् पूर्वपदात् उत्तरस्य णकारेदेशो भवति छन्दसि विषये। नृमणाः। इति काशिका।ऽ

अवगृह्यते विच्छिद्य पठ्यते इत्यवग्रहः ऋच्चासाववग्रहश्चेति ऋदवग्रहः। इति न्यासः, पदमञ्जरी च।

वार्तिकम् - महो वा छन्दस्यानङोऽवग्रहदर्शनात्। (Under 4.2.36 - पितृव्यमातुलमातामहपितामहाः।)

महाभाष्यम् - महो वा पुनरेष भविष्यति छन्दस्यानङोऽवग्रहदर्शनात्। छन्दस्यानङोऽवग्रहो दृश्यते - पिता-मह इति।

प्रदीपः - तेन पदसंज्ञायां सत्यां पितेत्यवग्रहो भवति। 

महाभाष्यम् - आङ्पूर्वस्य प्रयोगो भविष्यति। यद्येवमवग्रहः प्राप्नोति। न लक्षणेन पदकाराः अनुवर्त्याः, पदकारैर्नाम लक्षणमनुवर्तव्यम्। यथालक्षणं पदं कर्तव्यम्। (Under 3.1.109) (Here the discussion is about the rUDhi Sabda आज्यम्. Purvapakshin is suggesting that it be derived with आङ्). 

प्रदीपः - न लक्षणेनेति। संहिताया एव नित्यत्वम्। पदविच्छेदस्य तु पौरुषेयत्वम्। तथा च यत्रार्थनिश्चयाभावस्तत्रावग्रहो न क्रियते।  तदुक्तम् हरिद्रूनवगृह्यते इति। हरिद्रूरित्यत्र कि हरिशब्द इकारान्तः। अथ हरित्शब्दस्तकारान्त इति सन्देहात्।  

उद्द्योतः अर्थनिश्चयाभाव इति। आज्यशब्दस्य रूढत्वात् आङर्थोस्ति न वेति निश्चयाभाव इत्यर्थः। समासे संहिता नित्येत्यवग्रहस्य साधुत्वाभावात्सम्प्रदायमात्रशरणस्य तस्य लक्षणा विषयतेत्यर्थमन्ये।

Finally, here is a usage from a manuscript (https://archive.org/details/MahabhashyaPradeep4thAdhyaya2GhaAlm1Shlf1DevanagariVyakarana/page/n2/mode/1up). Please see the last line of the Mahabhashya ... वीधीयंते तेऽपवादत्वात् ... 

Regards

N. Siva Senani

[K S Kannan]

Abundant material to reflect on!

Thanks to both the pracchaka and the uttarayitr̥ - the latter especially!

--

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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAAs%2BaZNt-%2BrgGpitZtW%3DFnhSu1_3sRcy0_-YfiLnHQePSatTbw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Madhav Deshpande]

     On Avagraha. In 1972-73, I was reading with a student at Michigan W.D. Whitney's edition and translation of the Śaunakīya Caturādhyāyikā alias Atharvaveda Prātiśākhya. There was a rule vivr̥taṃ [karaṇam] svarāṇāṃ and the next rule was given as eke spr̥ṣṭam. The first rule was rendered as "the karaṇa for vowels was open," and the second as "According to some it was in contact."  Whitney thought that the second rule proposed an alternative that did not make any sense whatsoever.  At that time, I made a note to myself that the second rule actually must read eke 'spr̥ṣṭam [= eke aspr̥ṣṭam], and the two alternative descriptions were simply "open" versus "without contact."

     Later on I took it upon myself to produce a critical edition of this text with the help of some 20+ manuscripts, and among those manuscripts most did not use the avagraha at any place, but one or two manuscripts that did use the avagraha had the reading एकेऽस्पृष्टम् as I had suspected.

     The moral of the story is that the use of an avagraha in such cases is a rather late development, and therefore, while reading older texts with older manuscripts, we have to be careful. On this particular issue, different commentaries on the Bhagavadgita read नासतो विद्यते भाव: or नासतो विद्यतेऽभाव:.

     With best regards,

Madhav M. Deshpande

Professor Emeritus, Sanskrit and Linguistics

University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

Senior Fellow, Oxford Center for Hindu Studies

Adjunct Professor, National Institute of Advanced Studies, Bangalore, India

[Residence: Campbell, California, USA]

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAN47gm6LnspfVK5Fcy5SXXOVdnpG4cEfbg5V5z9vyiGByp5q3w%40mail.gmail.com.

[K S Kannan]

Yes, an avagraha can resolve, or even create problems.

Consider these instances :

(a)

नमो द्वैत-तत्त्वाय मुक्ति-प्रदाय  or

नमोऽद्वैत-तत्त्वाय मुक्ति-प्रदाय ?

(b)

तमाखुपत्रं राजेन्द्र भज मा ज्ञान-दायकम् ।

तमाखुपत्रं राजेन्द्र भज माऽज्ञान-दायकम् ॥

(c)

पथ्ये सति गदार्तस्य किमौषधनिषेवणैः?।

पथ्येऽसति गदार्तस्य किमौषधनिषेवणैः?॥

(b) and (c) are known as samudgaka-s

where the pūrvārdha and the uttarārdha are the same.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAB3-dzcS2Z3dV%2Bmpg_ET8KLEmNV_tL6Utptru-BkORDWAQ434Q%40mail.gmail.com.

[Shashi Joshi]

अदितिश्चाजपाविद्याप्यरविन्दनिभेक्षणा ।

अन्तर्बहिःस्थिताविद्याध्वंसिनी चान्तारात्मिका ।।

- देवीभागवतान्तर्गतागायत्रीसहस्रनामस्तोत्रम् १३

vidyA or avidyA ?🙂

Thanks,
Shashi

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAN47gm7chPOo2N-6uAx-_QDT5eT5zz20EuA%3Dhh3skHezhKukow%40mail.gmail.com.

[BVK Sastry]

Namaste

 

Another illustration  [ From Vedabhashya sara of Bhattoji Dikshita].:

 Avagraha is used as a ‘word-separator  in padapatha, without recourse to अ.   

Notice visarga before avagraha, which is clearly the need for ‘word-split’  and not ‘ masking अ’.

 

 

Regards

BVK Sastry

 

Regards

N. Siva Senani

--
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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAAs%2BaZNt-%2BrgGpitZtW%3DFnhSu1_3sRcy0_-YfiLnHQePSatTbw%40mail.gmail.com.

[BVK Sastry]

Namaste Nori and Ramakrishnan ji

 

1.   I agree with you that < shift in the usage and meaning associations with the term ‘avagraha’ needs to be investigated.  

 

      Summary Point: When ‘ Vedic documents / resources are  subject to  Scholars -Academic study and interpretative freedom,  allowing violation of  ‘ Language -Tools- rules provided by   Vedanga-

      resources’,  and a ‘ Documented living ( Healthy or otherwise) tradition,  we can continue to amuse ourselves about the intent of text as ‘ Jnana’  - or- ‘a-jnana’ upadesha.

 

2.     Here is another case that may be of interest for analysis for ‘Print use of avagraha’.

 

        Resource : Bharatiya Vidya series No.12 [ Vikrama Samvit 2003/ A.C.1947]  - Vedabhashya sara of Bhattoji Dikshita - Edited by Pandit R.N.Patankar - Page 11.

 

        Point for analysis : Grammarian Bhattoji Dikshita is providing a 'Vedanga -Nirukta - Guidance Handbook' .

        The teaching is on how Veda should be studied-taught according to Vedanga tradition, combining Vyakarana and Nirukta'.

         The primary resource he is drawing upon is Sayana Madhava Veda Bhashya. The rig-veda -mantra is given in the snap shot.

          The focus is on the analysis of the term 'dive-dive'   and its print-presentation with 'avagraha' in pada-patha.

 

Careful reading of 'original commentary' shows 'dive-dive' is ONE WORD, without ' intervening अ ' . The repetition is due to 'veepasaa'.

 In Pada-patha, the display of 's-mark -avagraha  is shown. 

This ‘ unwarranted symbol here, could lead to the interpretation-confusion in splitting the vedic term ending up in unintended contrary meaning'. A simple ‘dash (-) could have been better.

 

The print typography composition  is the result of having lost the technicality of 'avagraha' as a ' word-separator'  and pointing  to the new meaning of ' invisible अ  '

A letter  which can be freely introduced by  scholars fancy !  When later teaching schools live by the ‘ errors of scribing’ at the cost of ignoring the source tradition, the disaster can be inferred.

 

 

 

 

 

Select excerpt from the  mail below for reference :     

 

           1A)  related to   symbol  ‘s’    (unicode 093D) used as a marker to indicate ‘ masked अ (Unicode 0905).  

          1B) Technical term not related to ‘ अ’ -   as < तस्य पूर्वपदमवग्रहः।  …..      the element 'deva' is called avagraha.  >  

 

            1C)  Panini referred technicality in (8-4-26:   छन्दस्यृदवग्रहात्। 8.4.26 ॥  -  छन्दसि ऋत् अवग्रहात् इति पदच्छेदः।   ऋकारान्तात् अवग्रहात् पूर्वपदात् उत्तरस्य णकारेदेशो भवति छन्दसि विषये। नृमणाः। इति काशिका।ऽ

                    अवगृह्यते विच्छिद्य पठ्यते इत्यवग्रहः ऋच्चासाववग्रहश्चेति ऋदवग्रहः। इति न्यासः, पदमञ्जरी च।    वार्तिकम् - महो वा छन्दस्यानङोऽवग्रहदर्शनात्। (Under 4.2.36 - पितृव्यमातुलमातामहपितामहाः।) महाभाष्यम् - महो वा पुनरेष भविष्यति  

                    छन्दस्यानङोऽवग्रहदर्शनात्। छन्दस्यानङोऽवग्रहो दृश्यते - पिता-मह इति। प्रदीपः - तेन पदसंज्ञायां सत्यां पितेत्यवग्रहो भवति। 

 

 

As noted in this exchange  on ‘avagraha’,   there  seem to be different technicalities related to ‘avagraha’  ; The ‘Paninian -Vedanga’ Technicality of ‘Avagraha’  was not limited to ‘ अ’. ; Paniian technicality of ‘avagraha’ was more connected with ‘ Chandas’ (  it is only one sutra where  Panini has  referred  exclusively to ‘avagraha’. ).

 

 

From: bvpar...@googlegroups.com On Behalf Of Sivasenani Nori
Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2021 1:06 AM

 

Regards

N. Siva Senani

--
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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAAs%2BaZNt-%2BrgGpitZtW%3DFnhSu1_3sRcy0_-YfiLnHQePSatTbw%40mail.gmail.com.

[K S Kannan]

RV 1.1.1 itself has purohitam

shown in pada-pāṭha as

पुरःऽहितम्

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/00a801d735af%24ecaf7670%24c60e6350%24%40gmail.com.

[Sivasenani Nori]

Below are instances of avagrahas in inscriptions, along with images of the inscriptions, the earliest one being around 800 AD. So, we can say usage of the sign has been occurring for at least 1,200 years.

I found one instance of avagraha being used around 800 AD, the 32nd regnal year of Dharmapala, in the Khalimpur Copper Plate inscription.

 

In his report on the plates, Kielhorn states: "The sign of avagraha is employed three times, in grāmo ఽsya, 1 31,  tato ఽsmābhis, 1 52, and yathā ఽsmābhir, 1 49” (Epigraphia Indica, Vol 4, p. 244). Though image of a plate is included, it is too small to really see the avagraha. He adds an interesting footnote: “The sign of avagraha occurs once (in line 8) in the Kotā inscription of Devadatta of Vikrama Samvat 847 (?) and once (in line 5) in the Gwalior inscription of Bhojadeva of Kannauj of Vikrama Samvat 933, Ep Ind Vol 1 p 159. In the Ghosrāwā inscription it is used no less than seven times, but in the Badāl pillar inscription only twice.

 

I looked up the references given.

 

 

In the Koṭa inscription, the context is

 

येषां भूतिरियं परेति न परैरालोक्यतेऽर्थार्थिभिर्येषाम्मुद्विभवः परः (Hultzsch, E. “A Buddhistic Sanskrit Inscription from Koṭâ.” Zeitschrift Der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft, vol. 38, no. 3/4, 1884, pp. 546–552. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/43361692. Accessed 20 Apr. 2021). The date is given as Samvat 841 and could be 919/20 AD, or some other date as the era is unknown. No image of the avagraha could be found by me.

 

 

In the ‘second’ Gwalior inscription of Bhojadeva (https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.69993/page/n186/mode/1up), avagraha is used in the following context: तथाऽनेनैव स्थानेनास्मिन्नेव सम्वत्सरे

 

 

 

The particular letters have been highlighted in the figure above. It may be noticed that avagraha is not used between ‘sthānena’ and ‘asmin’, while being used between ‘tathā’ and ‘anena’. Eugen Hultzsch, who transcribed and translated this inscription, describes the inscription as written in incorrect Sanskrit, and gives the date as 876 AD (933 Vikrama Samvat).

 

Though Kielhorn mentions that there are no less than seven occurrences of the avagraha in the Ghosrāvā inscription available at https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.530439/page/n339/mode/1up, I could not locate them, yet.

 

In the Badāl pillar inscription (inscription image, text and translation), which is dated just after 900 AD, avagraha occurs in the following occasions:

 

 तस्य पत्नी वव्वाभिधाऽभवत्। (line 17) and धर्मावतारोऽवदत् (line 21). Both instances are highlighted in the inscription below:

 

 

 

Another instance of the avagraha is in the copper plates of Vākpatirājā of Dhāra, dated 974 AD. The image is reproduced below (from The Indian Antiquary, Vol IV, p52) with the line where the avagraha occurs being highlighted:

  

 

The particular line (line 25, when numbering starts from the first 7 in the plate reproduced above), line reads: 

लं बुद्ध्वाऽस्मद्वंशजैरन्यैरपिभाविभोक्तृभिरस्मत्प्रदत्तधर्म्मादायोयमनुमन्तव्यः पालनीयश्च उक्तं

It would be noticed that in the same line an expected avagraha between dharmmādāyo and anumantavyaḥ is missing.

Regards

N. Siva Senani

PS: The charming image of Garuda holding a snake in the last figure is etched on a copper plate.

--

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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAAs%2BaZNt-%2BrgGpitZtW%3DFnhSu1_3sRcy0_-YfiLnHQePSatTbw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Madhav Deshpande]

Dear Siva Senani Ji,

     Thank you so much for this inscriptional evidence for the use of Avagraha sign in its new context.  Yes, it is some 1200 years old, and yet in the available manuscripts it does not become commonplace. As this sign is introduced in this new context, it already represents a particular interpretation of older texts, and often such interpretations are contested in the commentaries on texts like the Bhagavadgita.  In any case, it is good to know the beginning of its use in writing. With best regards,

Madhav M. Deshpande

Professor Emeritus, Sanskrit and Linguistics

University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

Senior Fellow, Oxford Center for Hindu Studies

Adjunct Professor, National Institute of Advanced Studies, Bangalore, India

[Residence: Campbell, California, USA]

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAAs%2BaZO0TK-42Js%2BiQPQ2V-vN2g5T%2BfsSyj41Z6xApz5Q%3DmDPA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Sivasenani Nori]

नमो विद्वद्भ्यः।

My sense is that there are not too many technicalities.

1. For more than a couple of thousand years, if not more, avagraha means and continues to mean the first element in a separable word. In other words the definition of Nyaasa अवगृह्यते विच्छिद्य पठ्यते इत्यवग्रहः remains a valid definition[1]

2. The symbol ऽ is used after an avagraha, in padapATha. Due to this association that symbol itself came to be called avagraha.

3. This usage of separating a component in saMhitA using this symbol was extended to laukika works also.

4. Over a period of time, a settled practice evolved - from at least 1,200 years ago - to use the symbol ऽ in the case of a missing a or aa. 

Point. no. 4 is in addition to the first three and does not replace the first three. It is an Agama, not an AdeSa, to use grammatical terms.

Regards

Senani

[1].I say continues to mean because when Vikriti pAThas of Veda are taught, even today, this terminology of avagraha and इङ्ग्यम् is used. For instance the rules for making vikriti (say 1 2 2 1 1 2 3 3 2 1 1 2 3 , 2 3 3 2 2 3 4 4 3 2 2 3 4, ... for ghana) is valid only for what are called saamaanya padas; these rules change for a) upasargas, b) ingya, c) saamaanya pragraha and d) ingya pragraha. We think that the rule for vikriti pAThas is always the same, but that is not so. For instance, there is what is called sapta-pada-ghana (2 3 3 2 2 3 3) which occurs for samaana padas or tulya padas (where every syllable and svara is similar like नमः नमः in namakam).

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAN47gm5CSEB1rtJ5%3DaP5xP3%3DYyMi%2B7_NDtM6pswdywPbtC0evA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Sivasenani Nori]

Respected Professors Kannan and Deshpande, 

Many thanks for your kind words. Approval from accomplished and renowned scholars like you is very valuable. Dhanyo'smi.

BudhajanavidheyaH

Senani

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAN47gm6LnspfVK5Fcy5SXXOVdnpG4cEfbg5V5z9vyiGByp5q3w%40mail.gmail.com.

[K S Kannan]

Dear Prof. Nori,

Your reach across disciplines/śāstra-s

is a veritable model for scholarship for members of BVP.

Many thanks for the information from inscriptions

and Vedic recitational practices.

Regards

KSKannan

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAAs%2BaZMJK1n%3Dx_9cbvMQ%2B_rbd8H8W%3DqkfBNrxp4iaxv2NMK%3DyQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Ganesh R]

Dear Sri. Nori Sivasenani garu, 

I am very happy and grateful to you. I also join with Prof. Kannan in admiring and thanking your multifaceted erudition. Yes, nowadays such honest and dispassionate scholarship that is rooted in truth, flowering as innumerable aspects of learning and bearing delicious fruits of educating the needy is becoming a rarity. I remembered your illustrious grand father's writings that are replete with such interdisciplinary learning. 

With utmost respectful regards

Ganesh

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAN47gm7JCzuQ1q8iU%3DXBfJS1AmEBB2j_c57cDbjn6tO4pAueVg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Balasubramanian Ramakrishnan]

I would like to echo the appreciative comments that many other more illustrious members of this list have expressed. Thank you Sri Sivasenaniji.

An interesting note perhaps is that the oldest available printed edition of the Taittiriiya pada pATha from the now defunct  Vaidikavardhini Press in Kumbhakonam uses the - symbol after the “real” avagraha and uses the S like symbol or SS symbol for the loss of the akAra or AkAra. 

If the S like symbol has been described, then it should mean that at least the pada pATha was written long time back.

Ramakrishnan

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAAs%2BaZMrKEGUAk4gA8tvYJhcJ8%3DAtWb1KNbQd2zNxUNNu9TeOg%40mail.gmail.com.

[K S Kannan]

And thus do we witness a well-deserved shower of praise on

(authentic info about) avagraha  (excuse the play on words:

avagra(ā)ha means drought (=vr̥ṣṭi-vighāta) too)!

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAH8aEvv9WQnEoqjghqi7oq_BG-V4daMKHePxg99wnTVZ-mDVqA%40mail.gmail.com.

[BVK Sastry]

Namaste

 

Here is an additional input  on ‘avagraha’ as ‘ masking of अ’  coming from None other than Patanjali,  taking the interpretation challenge deeper in to grammarians tradition.  This in a way settles the antiquity  and authenticity of usage also [ at least in voice, if not the script].

       [ I am not diverging to masked अ in mahavakya context triggering vedantacharya debates pl.].   

 

Reference: Paspashanika

 

Context:  vyakarana adhyayana - prayojana :  

 

Key term to focus:  Patanjali’s  Explanation of ‘Vak-Yoga’  in two ways , explicitly;  without need for scripted ‘avagraha’.

 

 

Regards

BVK Sastry

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAN47gm7NhzRb3wXZjPuToXjXOX4qA3kUV46ZFoNPRWvmeDJtTw%40mail.gmail.com.

[K S Kannan]

Ambiguous Avagraha in Bhagavad-gītā:

1.44  नरके[ऽ]नियतं वासः

2.20  नायं भूत्वा[ऽ]भविता वा न भूयः

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/012501d73744%2496123b40%24c236b1c0%24%40gmail.com.

[K S Kannan]

In Pāṇini

3.1.90 vāsarūpostriyam ?

[Sivasenani Nori]

Sir

Namaste. In the words underlined by you, भूयांसोऽपशब्दाः, बहवोऽपभ्रंशाः योऽवाग्योगवित् are all valid examples of the usage of the sign avagraha, but not परत्र वाग्योगविद्। I am sure that you did not mean to include परत्र वाग्योगविद् as an example of the sign avagraha, and highlighted it only because the entire discussion revolves around Vāgyogavit. I am taking the liberty to add a few lines of explanation, mainly to avoid confusion for those who might not have studied Paspaṣāhnika thoroughly.

The two interpretations of the latter half of the verse (सोऽनन्तमाप्नोति जयं परत्र वाग्योगविद्दुष्यति चापशब्दैः) are not on account of a missing अ. Rather, it is about which noun and verb should be taken together as forming one sentence. The pUrvapaksha view is thus:

Siddhanti: कः (दुष्यति चापशब्दैः)?

Purvapkashin: वाग्योगविदेव।

Siddhantin: कुत एतत्?

Purvapakshin: The sloka should be parsed as follows: यः तु कुशलः विशेषे व्यवहारकाले शब्दान् यथावत् प्रयुङ्क्ते सः परत्र अनन्तं जयं आप्नोति। वाग्योगवित् च अपभब्दैः दुष्यति। Therefore, it is the Vāgyogavit who is burdened with the sin of Apaṣabdas whereas the one who uses Sabdas correctly attains endless victory in heaven (paratra, a place beyond here - i.e. stays in heaven for a very long time).

 

The Siddhantin dismisses this absurd view and presents the correct interpretation: यः वाग्योगवित् तु कुशलः विशेषे व्यवहारकाले शब्दान् यथावत् प्रयुङ्क्ते सः अनन्तम् आप्नोति जयं परत्र च। अपभब्दैः दुष्यति। (Vāgyogavit attains heaven and also liberation – anantam, the endless eternal state of Brahman. Cf. ब्रह्मविदाप्नोति परम्। तै. उ. आनन्दवल्ली॥ As Prof BVK Sastry garu himself mentions so many times, this  Vāgyoga is a Brahmavidyā. If it is asked how two mutually incompatible results are possible, here is the resolution: paratra jayam is the sādhāraṇa phala available to one who practices, the viseshaphala of anantam is available to the one who attains perfection of  Vāgyoga - because usage of correct Sabdas is both a means to accruing dharma and a means to liberation)[1] .

 

Now, the question again arises कः अपशब्दैः दुष्यति?

The answer is that the subject of this second sentence is not supplied in the Sloka and so, that it should be taken as someone else, अन्यः a अवाग्योगवित्।

While this is clear from the context, we have additional clarifications from Kaiyaṭa and Nageśa. 

Kaiyaṭa in Pradīpa (gloss on the Mahābhāṣya) says: प्रकरणात्सामर्थ्यं बलीय इत्याह – अवाग्योगविदिति। 

Prakaraṇa (context) and Sāmarthya (fitness) are two technical terms of both Mīmāṃsā [2] and also Vyākaraṇa [3], both  used to determine the meaning of a sentence. The usage of Prakaraṇa here does not straight away meet the Mīmāṃsā definition of उभयाकाङ्क्षा प्रकरणम् (Prakaraṇa is that where there is mutual expectancy) and Vyākaraṇa does not do balābalanirṇaya of the two terms, that is seen in Mīmāṃsā. 

Therefore, Nāgeṣa in his gloss on Pradīpa called Uddyota, clarifies: प्रकरणादिति। संनिधेरित्यर्थः। Prakaraṇa here should be taken as proximity. 

Then, the explanation is that though the words "Vāgyogavit" and "duṣyati" are close to each other (proximity), on account of fitness (सामर्थ्यम्), Vāgyogavit should be read as the subject of the verb āpnoti, and not duṣyati, because fitness prevails over proximity.

 

Regards

N. Siva Senani

[1] The interpretation of this Sloka is mine, not found in any text to my knowledge, but the sense is consistent with the overall teaching of Munitrayam and Bhartrihari. 

[2] Śruti, Liṅga, Vākya, Prakaraṇa, Sthāna and Samākhya are six pramāṇas, in decreasing order of preference listed in Mīmāṃsā to decide the correct interpretation of a text (एतस्य (विनियोग)विधेः सहकारिभूतानि षट्प्रमाणानि श्रुतिलिङ्गवाक्यप्रकरणस्थानसमाख्यारूपाणि। - अर्थसङ्ग्रहः।).

[3] Bhartṛhari enumerates 14 hetus for fixing the meaning of a Sabda (which can mean word, sentence or discourse amongst others) in the Vākyakāṇḍa of Vākyapadīyam.

वाक्यात् प्रकरणादर्थादौचित्याद् देशकालतः। शब्दार्थाः प्रविभज्यन्ते न रूपादेव केवलात् ॥ 2.314॥

संसर्गो विप्रयोगश्च साहचर्यं विरोधिता। अर्थः प्रकरणं लिङ्गं शब्दस्यान्यस्य सन्निधिः॥ 2.315॥

सामर्थ्यमौचिती देशः कालो व्यक्तिः स्वारादयः। शब्दार्थस्यानवच्छेदे विशेषस्मृतिहेतवः॥2.316॥

The last two verses are often quoted by Ālaṅkārikas as well.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/012501d73744%2496123b40%24c236b1c0%24%40gmail.com.

[BVK Sastry]

Namaste

Thanks for the explanation. It helps

Regards

BVK Sastry

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAAs%2BaZPaUJ5TNHQWUrfjFjPo-LQjzC5wd7rAhN6_iyomTwXLPA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Achyut Karve]

In music an avagrah is placed to denote one matra as well as signifying that there is no viram in between the two swaras or letters. I think that the same applies to Sanskrit verse. 

Regards,

Achyut Karve. 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/00a301d738b7%24f5797f70%24e06c7e50%24%40gmail.com.