Pronunciation of Gayatri Mantra (सुवः vs स्वः)

[Vivek Rallabandi]

Pranams to the esteemed scholars present here.

I have come across two versions of the Gayatri Mantra wherein the following difference exists: (1) भूर्भुवः सुवः or (2) भूर्भुवः स्वः 

What is the reason for this difference? Does the variation depend on one's veda-shakha?

I belong to Krishna-Yajurveda, Taittiriya Shakha — based on that, which one, in particular, would be applicable? 

With gratitude,

रा. विवेककृष्णः

[Mahamaho. Subrahmanyam Korada]

नमो विद्वद्भ्यः

The tradition is this - ऋग्वेदिन्s pronounce स्वः whereas यजुर्वेदिन्s pronounce सुवः -- no difference in meaning .

There are 1131 वेदशाखाs - only 12 / 13 are available . Rest of the शाखाs can be perceived through योगिप्रत्यक्षम् - so that one would become 

मन्त्रद्रष्टा -- दृष्टं साम पा  4-2-7 ।

So one should never say - it is not there in वेद / वेदs - rather one should say - it is not there in available वेद  (if he really checked with all available शाखाs) .

There can be variants in terms of - पद - स्वर - कर्म  etc. across वेदशाखाs . But following the विकल्प accepted in the case of -- उदिते जुहोति / अनुदिते जुहोति , अतिरात्रे षोडशिनं गृह्णाति / नातिरात्रे षोडशिनं गृह्णाति etc (even if they  are opposite) one can take either as per his शाखा - follow the tradition the family has been following . Because both are said by / in वेद -- वेदाः प्रमाणम् (सङ्गीतरत्नाकरः - 4)  -- this is as per पूर्वमीमांसा ।

ऋग्वेदः -- गणानां त्वा गणपतिं हवामहे ....।

यजुर्वेदः -- गणानां त्वा गणपतिग्ं हवामहे ...।

सामवेदः -- शुक्रं ते एन्यत् । यजतं ते एन्यत् ।

यजुर्वेदः -- शुक्रं ते अन्यत् । यजतं ते अन्यत् ।

>I belong to Krishna-Yajurveda, Taittiriya Shakha — <

In सन्ध्यावन्दनम् etc you would say (प्रवरः - चतुस्सागरपर्यंतम् ...) - यजुश्शाखाध्यायी  (but not तैत्तिरीयशाखाध्यायी) -- 

तैत्तिरीय is a portion of कृष्णयजुश्शाखा -  तित्तिरिवरतन्तुखण्डिकोखाच्छण् 4-3-102 -- तित्तिरिणा प्रोक्तम् अधीयते तैत्तिरीयाः । छ is replaced by ईय -- आयनेयीनीयियः फढखछघां प्रत्ययादीनम् पा 7-1-2 .

धन्योस्मि

Dr.Korada Subrahmanyam

Prof of Sanskrit (Retd)

Adj Professor , Dept of Heritage Science and Technology

IIT , Hyderabad

Chairman , Bharateeya Vidvat Parishat

Ph:09866110741

https://sites.google.com/view/koradeeyam/home

--
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 visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/e1ed3339-86bd-4862-b97f-086a5be4a33an%40googlegroups.com.

[Prakash Raj Pandey]

I was taught by my guru to say स्वः and not सुवः.

Please listen to this recital of 3rd chapter of   माध्यन्दिनीय शाखा of शुक्लयजुर्वेदः,   at 1:30 and at 11:18 for the rendering of भूर्भुवःस्वः। 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2vWjxyf2yw

It is clearly स्वः not सुवः; I do not know how a काण्विन् renders it. 

regards, 

Prakash

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAKj2ELR9C6955z8WjSD%3DquV4L10p7oXk1sio_wvzt1G8d_P1_g%40mail.gmail.com.

[Prakash Raj Pandey]

नमो विद्वद्भ्यः 

In the rrecitation of Kanva Shakha स्वः is rendered  as स्वः, as in the recitation of Madhyandiniya.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3cTmCa39Hok&list=PLIo0bv0eno8O6TUOjn76CszfqXvULZUYH&index=37 

It is in the recitation of Taittariya that स्वः is rendered as सुवः 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aW_M7U-6KE0  

And surely, we need to delve deeper to find minute differences 

regards, 

Prakash

[Prakash Raj Pandey]

नमो विद्वद्भ्यः 

Mahamahopadhyaya was correct to remark that यजुर्वेदिन्s render स्वः as सुवः, but they are तैत्तरीयशाखिन्s.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aW_M7U-6KE0  

But काण्विन्s render as स्वः 

regards, 

Prakash

On Thu, Jul 9, 2026 at 6:32 PM Prakash Raj Pandey <prakash...@gmail.com> wrote:

[K S Kannan]

People often conflate TaittirIya and Aitareya, and make it TaittarIya. Relating the word with tittiri helps.

Dr. K.S.Kannan  D.Litt.

Hon. Prof., Chanakya University, Bangalore.,

Emeritus Prof. and Director, Vishnugupta VishwaVidyapeetham, Gokarna.,

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

Member, Advisory Board, "Prof. A K Singh AURO Chair of Indic Studies", AURO University, Surat.
Member, Expert Committee for Review of Criticism of Indian Knowledge Traditions, Central Sanskrit University (under MoE, GoI), Ganganath Jha Campus, Prayagraj.
Adjunct Faculty, Dept of Heritage Science and Technology, IIT Hyderabad.

Nominated Member, Academic Committee, Kavi Kula Guru Kalidasa University, Ramtek.
Member, Academic Council, Veda Vijnana Shodha Samsthana.
Academic Director, Swadeshi Indology.
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.

https://sites.google.com/view/kskannan

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAAcMvrct96NWsOp5ktEe25s0P_B2b6QWfpa%2BuBc8aoLngR5DEA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Prakash Raj Pandey]

I stand corrected -- it is तैत्तिरीय

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAN47gm64EN-W52N2obZ6SazugyaccdDBmEdEh%2BtL-WWub4n4cw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Chandrasekar B]

Yes, it could be different based on Veda Shakha.

Regards,

B Chandrasekar

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAAcMvrcXaK1Enn-A5qkoakfH8DBrARZrGuLBPE2%3Dkwb%3Dna5V1w%40mail.gmail.com.

[Rajaram Krishnamurthy]

SIR IF THE PRONUNCIATION IS VARIABLE ACCORDING TO SHAKA AND REGIONS DO YOU HAVE ANY CONFIRMED SUCH PRACTICE EITHER PERMITTED IN VEDAS OR AS ALOCA HABITS, TO GAIN KNOWLEDGE OF SUCH VARIATIONS? K RAJARAM IRS 16726

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CALa38cxFGBFEfQGQgW1zFhWN3cremZKZ4Bsfawk_sXG5kU%3DNAA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Mahamaho. Subrahmanyam Korada]

नमो विद्वद्भ्यः

It is श्रुति - to be learnt through physical interaction between आचार्य and वटु । 

Prefer the term आचार्य to गुरु ।

A ब्राह्मण is called द्विज (having two births) - दंतविप्राण्डजा द्विजाः -- अमरः (teeth, ब्राह्मणs and birds are called द्विजाः) ।

The first birth is from father and mother (ब्राह्मण and ब्राह्मणी only)  -- 'जन्मना जायते शूद्रः’ -- शूद्रः = कर्मसु अनर्हः (लक्ष्यार्थः) ।

In the second birth सावित्री is माता and आचार्य is पिता --

मातुरग्रे’धिजननं द्वितीयं मौञ्जिबन्धने ।

तृतीयं यज्ञदीक्षायां द्विजस्य श्रुतिचोदनात् ॥ 2-169, मनुस्मृतिः

तत्र यद्ब्रह्मजन्मास्य मौञ्जीबन्धनचिह्नितम् ।

तत्रास्य माता सावित्री पिता त्वाचार्य उच्यते ॥ 170, ibid

वेदप्रदानादाचार्यं पितरं परिचक्षते ।

न ह्यस्मिन्युज्यते कर्म  किञ्चिदामौञ्जिबन्धनात् ॥ 171, ibid

Who is आचार्य ?

उपनीय तु यः शिष्यं वेदमध्यापयेद्द्विजः ।

सकल्पं सरहस्यं च तमाचार्यं प्रचक्षते ॥ 140,ibid

A द्विज , who, having administered the उपनयनसंस्कार , teaches वेद, कल्पशास्त्रम् (उपलक्षणम् to other वेदाङ्गs like शिक्षा,व्याकरणम् etc. - there is पाठान्तरम् - साङ्गम्) and उपनिषत् (रहस्यम्) to शिष्य is called आचार्य ।

ब्रह्मोपदेश (गायत्री-उपदेश) is part and parcel of उपनयनम् ।

So, the शिष्य would receive गायत्रीमन्त्र and other parts of वेद from आचार्य । If the शिष्य belongs to ऋक्शाखा he would receive स्वः and if he belongs to

कृष्णयजुश्शाखा he would receive सुवः । No need of any 'book of quick reference' . Some( rarely ) पुरोहितs can manage both ऋग्वेद and यजुर्वेद । 

गृह्यसूत्रम् (कल्पशास्त्रम्) prescribes procedures for different कर्मs as per वेदशाखा ।

धन्यो’स्मि

Dr.Korada Subrahmanyam

Prof of Sanskrit (Retd)

Adj Professor , Dept of Heritage Science and Technology

IIT , Hyderabad

Chairman , Bharateeya Vidvat Parishat

Ph:09866110741

https://sites.google.com/view/koradeeyam/home

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAL5XZorDe9iJjjwso1uV0DjCj5TfC0UTH_oGeg45SnAKZSyy_A%40mail.gmail.com.

[Rajaram Krishnamurthy]

THANK U KR IRS

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAKj2ELTgNGmGzJLh4EM08FcnrM1%3Dcrdew5%2ByjnNHxX7NpZK0ng%40mail.gmail.com.

[venkat veeraraghavan]

Namaste Shri Korada Mahodaya:

Your posts are wholesome and informative as ever.

Regarding the dvija's second birth where the acharya becomes second father, is it the case that traditionally the upanayana samskara  and brahmopadesha were given by the acharya as opposed to the modern practice of father to son transmission?

The second related question I have is that Sri Damodara Dikshitar a  popular upanyasaka (the grandson of Sri Anantharama Dikshitar) claimed in an upanyasam, that kShatriyas take their gotra from their acharya. When describing SIta-Rama vivaha, he claimed Rama's gotra was yoked to Vasishtha who was His acharya and kulaguru.

Is there any support for this claim in kalpa?

The third related question on the subject of upanayana of kShatriyas and Vaishyas. In the Bhishma-Yudhisthira samvada Bhishma clearly mirrors your statement on birth of brahmanas "..(ब्राह्मण and ब्राह्मणी only)"  , but avers that kShatriyas and vaishyas can be created by a mix of choice and karma/samskara after birth irrespective of birth origins. I would like your thoughts on why none of the mattas that supposedly exist for the upliftment of veda dharma have worked forward in this direction to protect the respective varnas and veda since the kalpa gives them very specific anushthana mantras like the AsatyenarajasA mantra in trishtubh for kShatriyas and yunjate mana ...in jagati for vaishyas. This lacuna seems to have resulted in a (pardon the phrasing) rahuvian society with a head (brahmanas) while lacking hands (kShatriyas) or thighs (Vaishyas) leaving the societal "purusha" more of a Rahu like entity than the one envisioned by the rishis. 

Isn't the whole ocean required to create a pearl?   

Thanks,

Venkat

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Dear Sri Venkata Veeraraghavan ji,

Your question is not a shaastric but a sociological, historical , current affairs question. 

If you can list a Kshatriya caste/kula(mu)/ jaati in the region of your focus that you have in mind for which you see that the due upanayana samskaara is not being performed , officiated or encouraged , the answer can be as specific. 

In the case of Vaishyas, the issue is not that complicated. 

The trader  caste/kula(mu)/ jaati that calls  itself and is called by others as Aarya Vaishya has Upanayana and Sandhya Vandanam being continued as a tradition even today. 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/db9c2625-1a5b-42f8-ba72-4b17880b9312n%40googlegroups.com.

--

Nagaraj Paturi

Hyderabad, Telangana-500044

 

 

 

[Mathukumalli Vidyasagar]

Dear Sree Veeraraghavan,

"is it the case that traditionally the upanayana samskara  and brahmopadesha were given by the acharya as opposed to the modern practice of father to son transmission?"

I am not sure how "modern" this practice is!  When I had my upanayanam in 1957 (OK, I am really old!), the brahmopadesham was done by our family guru.

I am not competent to address the various thought-provoking questions you have raised.  I am eagerly looking forward to the responses from the learned scholars on this forum.

Best regards.

Sagar

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/db9c2625-1a5b-42f8-ba72-4b17880b9312n%40googlegroups.com.

[venkat veeraraghavan]

Dear Shri Nagaraj Paturi Garu,

It very much is a shastric question with sociological, political, historical undertones.

I know a few brahmin families who have fallen off their ritualistic cycles not just in praxis but culturally in that they do not wear a yajnopavita except when convenient to do so.

The shastra is pretty straightforward that dvijatva is lost after 3 generations of non-performance of nityakarma. 

This in a way makes children victims  of the nonperformance of their parents and and the omissions of theirs. They basically grow up not knowing their roots because the context is missing.

And a person who does not stand for something, will fall for everything (not my words but wise ones nonetheless).

I was in Nashik recently at a place where 140 purascharanas of the Gayatri mantra have been performed. I was confused to see many brahmins attending sleeping past sandhyaakaala and not performing nityakarma. It was like a dress up party of fine dhotis, if you know what I mean.

If this is the mental compass of those interested in the vedic ecosystem (they were there by choice), what chance or choice did those who were born into amnesiaic families  have? Ones that did not even know their gotra or shakha?

Bhishma's words give a way back into the vedic fold even for fallen V1s maybe not as V1 but as a V2 or V3.

Do kShatriyas and Vaishyas know that they have a ritualistic corpus mirroring that of the brahmins?

Why are these rituals important? 

Brushing esoteric questions of "connecting with" shakti, rishi mandala etc aside, let us just consider the political and sociological implications of such a unification. 

What is repeated daily, becomes habit. Habit becomes nature and nature decides destiny.

The mattas have a clear cut mandate on "protection of dharma" which includes the dharma of v2s v3s and v4s not just v1.

The Ramayana and the Mahabharata are the stories of V2s a class that has been entirely lost to popular sight. 

The entire ocean is needed to create the oyster and the pearl. The entire weight of the earth is required to create diamonds.

It is the same with men.

This is all shastra with attendant undertones.

Regards,

V

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/EExhgFWaMHs/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAJGj9eadkGB%3DCM%2BeY79X%3Db0QayNR%3DaAXgZTnRSwM%2BYWw8vYT%2BA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Your question is about why mathas are not doing so and so. 

" . I would like your thoughts on why none of the mattas that supposedly exist for the upliftment of veda dharma have worked forward in this direction to protect the respective varnas and veda since the kalpa gives them very specific anushthana mantras like the AsatyenarajasA mantra in trishtubh for kShatriyas and yunjate mana ...in jagati for vaishyas. "

If I know which Kshatriya kula/jaati, for example, in Karnataka, you have in mind, I will try to get things done from mathas. 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAOWN-Cb7vWh%3D0WgZeBw4_fuwcaA5LpUqXqQL-LqM8kA6NSDYzA%40mail.gmail.com.

Nagaraj Paturi

Hyderabad, Telangana-500044

 

 

 

[Mahamaho. Subrahmanyam Korada]

नमो विद्वद्भ्यः

आयुष्मान् भव वेङ्कट

1.is it the case that traditionally the upanayana samskara  and brahmopadesha were given by the acharya as opposed to the modern practice of father to son transmission? -- Vid Venkat

I am not sure how "modern" this practice is!  When I had my upanayanam in 1957 (OK, I am really old!), the brahmopadesham was done by our family guru -- Vidvan Vidyasagar

आपस्तंबगृह्यसूत्रम् (खं 11 सू 8,9,10) - (यजुर्वेदः) --

पुरस्तात् प्रत्यङ्ङासीनः कुमारो दक्षिणेन पाणिना दक्षिणं पादमन्वारभ्याह सावित्रीं भो अनुब्रूहीति ।

तस्मा अन्वाह तत्सवितुरिति ।

पच्छोर्धशः ततः सर्वाम् ।

आचार्य facing east कुमार facing west - both sit opposite to each other - वटु , with his right  hand, holding right foot of आचार्य , requests आचार्य preach me सावित्री (गायत्री) ।

आचार्य pronounces - तत्सवितुर्वरेण्यम् (etc.) . How --

पाद by पाद - then half of the ऋक् - then the complete ऋक् । (पच्छः = पदशः = पादशः -- तद्धितः शस्) ।

आश्वलायनगृह्यसूत्रम् (अध्यायः 1 कण्डिका 21 सूत्राणि 4,5,6) - (ऋग्वेदः) --

मयि मेधां मयि प्रजाम् ..... तेनाहं हरस्वी भूयासम् - इत्युपस्थाय जान्वाच्योपसंगृह्य , ब्रूयात् ’ अधीहि भोः सावित्रीं भो अनुब्रूहीति’ ।

तस्य वाससा पाणिभ्यां पाणी संगृह्य सावित्रीमन्वाह पच्छो’र्धशः सर्वाम् ।

यथाशक्ति वाचयीत ।

So , in both the cases it is clear that the  सावित्री-उपदेश is done directly by आचार्य to वटु  - no interference of father.

We have discussed - who is आचार्य ? - the one who administers उपनयनम् -then teaches वेद - वेदाङ्ग - उपनिषत् and आचार । Is it being followed in modern times ? It is पुरोहित rather than आचार्य who is making उपनयनम् happen . Later, in most of the cases , the पुरोहित does not turn up to see if the वटु performs सन्ध्यावन्दनम्  - let alone अग्निकार्यम् ।

Then the  father or some other relative may have to take care of the वटु - his नित्यकर्मानुष्ठानम् ।

So in the absence of  the concept of  आचार्य , prescribed , the real पिता enters the scene .

2.When describing SIta-Rama vivaha, he claimed Rama's gotra was yoked to Vasishtha who was His acharya and kulaguru.

Is there any support for this claim in kalpa?

वाल्मीकिरामायणम् - बालकाण्डः (Gita Press) --

चत्वारस्ते चतसृणां वसिष्ठस्य मते स्थिताः ।

अग्निं प्रदक्षिणं कृत्वा वेदिं राजानमेव च ॥ 

ऋषींश्चापि महात्मानः सहभार्या रघूद्वहाः ।

यथोक्तेन ततश्चक्रुः विवाहं विधिपूर्वकम् ॥ 73 - 35,36

There is no any information related to Rama's गोत्रम् ।

निर्णयसिन्धौ - श्राद्धपरिभाषानिर्णयः --

हेमाद्रौ - तत्रैव चन्द्रिकायां च स्मृत्यन्तरे --

गोत्रस्यत्वपरिज्ञाने काश्यपं गोत्रमुच्यते ।

यस्मादाह श्रुतिस्सर्वाः प्रजाः कश्यपसंभवाः॥

यत्तु सत्याषाढः --

अथाज्ञातबन्धोः पुरोहितगोत्रेण आचार्यगोत्रेण वेति तद्वैवाहपरम् ।

So the गोत्रम् of पुरोहित or आचार्य can be taken in विवाह only for a person who is not a well known relative.

3.I would like your thoughts on why none of the mattas that supposedly exist for the upliftment of veda dharma have worked forward in this direction to protect the respective varnas and veda 

For every पुष्करवत्सराः (13years) the मठाधिपतिs are supposed to meet , discuss the problems of धर्म faced by people and offer मार्गदर्शनम् - including आपद्धर्माः । If it is difficult to have the knowledge of अष्टादशविद्यास्थानानि they can ask the विद्वांसः for help . That has not been happening for a long time . We regret .

In स्वर्गारोहणपर्व of महाभारतम् , वेदव्यास says - people turn deaf to his words --

ऊर्ध्वबाहुर्विरौम्येष न हि कश्चिच्छृणोति माम् ।

धर्मादर्थश्च कामश्च स धर्मः किं न सेव्यते ?

With raised hands I am shouting full throttle here -- nobody pays attention ...

पुरुषा बहवो राजन् सततं प्रियवादिनः ।

अप्रियस्य च पथ्यस्य वक्ता श्रोता च दुर्लभः ॥ महाभारतम् ?

धन्यो’स्मि

Dr.Korada Subrahmanyam

Prof of Sanskrit (Retd)

Adj Professor , Dept of Heritage Science and Technology

IIT , Hyderabad

Chairman , Bharateeya Vidvat Parishat

Ph:09866110741

https://sites.google.com/view/koradeeyam/home

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAJGj9eY90NaWe14313_BiQsSTvVzfJ5B1x-Z3DNWt%2BjGZkswhw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Mathukumalli Vidyasagar]

Thank you Sir!  I am hardly a Vidwan!😃😃

Sagar

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAKj2ELTw3OZaAfJryggVVbT3KHrrb4K5_dsRbP4erjhioJ%3DENQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[venkat veeraraghavan]

Namaste Shri Korada Garu:  Thank you for the extensive references and explanation.

There is a section of the Valmiki Ramayana where the actual lineage is mentioned by Vasishtha: https://valmikiramayan.net/baala/sarga70/bala_70_frame.htm

So, I am really clueless how this upanyasakar concluded kShatriyas took their gotra from kulaguru.

With respect to point 1, father-son vedic transmission, the only pauranic references I can think of are Kahola-Ashtavakra (garbhashriimaan) and Drona-Ashvathhama (the astras were after all mantras).

Regarding point 3, Your diplomacy and understatement is admirable.

Thanks again,

Venkat

 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAKj2ELTw3OZaAfJryggVVbT3KHrrb4K5_dsRbP4erjhioJ%3DENQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Mathukumalli Vidyasagar]

Saar, Can I share this passage on my Twitter account?

In स्वर्गारोहणपर्व of महाभारतम् , वेदव्यास says - people turn deaf to his words --

ऊर्ध्वबाहुर्विरौम्येष न हि कश्चिच्छृणोति माम् ।

धर्मादर्थश्च कामश्च स धर्मः किं न सेव्यते ?

With raised hands I am shouting full throttle here -- nobody pays attention ...

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAOWN-CZyw6CRgEqDbED4rsRH-26bEz6BsjwP7wwqja1f9wDK%2Bw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Mahamaho. Subrahmanyam Korada]

नमो विद्वद्भ्यः

विद् विद्यासागरः --

Certainly share with anybody who is interested -  it is -- 5-62, स्वर्गारोहणपर्व, महाभारतम् ।

I am hardly a Vidwan!😃😃

Whoever joins BVP is considered a विद्वान् । 'तदधीते तद्वेद’ पा सू 4-2-58 -- the one who is learning or the one who (already) knows - in both the senses there will be अण् प्रत्ययः - व्याकरणम् अधीते वेत्ति वा वैयाकरणः । We follow पाणिनि । No room for doubt or discussion .

Why to share ? 

For लोकसङ्ग्रह --

कर्मणैव हि संसिद्धिम् आस्थिता जनकादयः ।

लोकसङ्ग्रहमेवापि संपश्यन् कर्तुमर्हसि ॥  3-20, भगवद्गीता

भाष्ये शंकरभगवत्पादाः -- लोकस्योन्मार्गप्रवृत्तिनिवारणम्  लोकसङ्ग्रहः ।

We cannot expect everybody to be knowing  the nuances of धर्म । Many people go through the wrong path (due to greed etc.) and it is the responsibility of  those who are learned to put such people on the right path by quoting scriptures, explaining the अन्तरार्थ and the result , without expecting anything in return - they should love निस्सङ्गत्वम् (detachment) .

जनक was a  ज्ञानी - nevertheless he was performing कर्माणि ।

If a friend or relative  is awarded/rewarded or blessed with a child this person feels happy  (सकलः)  and if  a person who is near and dear faces some difficulty or death this person suffers grief (विकलः) - the noumenon is that there is neither birth nor death - आत्मा नित्यः and it is a weakness caused by  lack of ज्ञानम्  --

अध्यासो नाम अतस्मिन् तद्बुद्धिरित्यवोचाम । तद्यथा पुत्रभार्यादिषु  विकलेषु सकलेषु वा विकलः सकलो वेति बाह्यधर्मान् आत्मनि अध्यवस्यति ( अध्यासभाष्यम्, ब्रह्मसूत्रशांकरभाष्यम्) ।

सन्ध्यावन्दनम् is a ब्रह्मकर्म -- ब्रह्मकर्म समारभे  -- that certainly leads one to मोक्ष  by generating ज्ञानम् ।

अलं पल्लवितेन ।

धन्यो’स्मि

Dr.Korada Subrahmanyam

Prof of Sanskrit (Retd)

Adj Professor , Dept of Heritage Science and Technology

IIT , Hyderabad

Chairman , Bharateeya Vidvat Parishat

Ph:09866110741

https://sites.google.com/view/koradeeyam/home

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CANKK_oW%2BOhoSXvyOnsPGXoA_%2BXY9rK-i7tS%3DUc-qUxxeN9ZBQw%40mail.gmail.com.

[K S Kannan]

Is " अन्तरार्थ" a valid word?

Should it not be  अन्तरर्थ 

or  आन्तरार्थ?

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAKj2ELTv7x86FcYA5-56sVbPsbGKZgT8gYQSTRP7p9GThZOmGw%40mail.gmail.com.

--

[Mathukumalli Vidyasagar]

Very well put Sir!  Thank you very much!

Best salutations.

Sagar

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAKj2ELTv7x86FcYA5-56sVbPsbGKZgT8gYQSTRP7p9GThZOmGw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Mathukumalli Vidyasagar]

https://x.com/stellensatz/status/2081774949682032720

[Mahamaho. Subrahmanyam Korada]

नमो विद्वद्भ्यः

Is " अन्तरार्थ" a valid word?

Should it not be  अन्तरर्थ 

or  आन्तरार्थ?  --- विद्  कण्णन्

अर्थात् आगतः आर्थः - ’ तत आगतः ’ पा 4-3-74  -- अन्तर्गतः आर्थः अन्तरार्थः -- 

वार्तिकम् ( पा सू 1-4-65  अन्तरपरिग्रहे) - अन्तः शब्दस्य अड्-किविधि-समास-णत्वेषूपसंख्यानम् (उपसर्गत्वम्) ।

धातूनाम् उपसर्गाणां निपातानां च अनेकार्थत्वम्--

अन्तर्वाणिस्तु शास्त्रवित्  -- अमरः । अन्तः शरीरे वाणी अस्य अन्तर्वाणिः ।

महाभाष्यम् - पस्पशाह्निकम् (ज्ञान एव धर्मः) -- तदेवं  ’ज्ञाने धर्मः’ इति ब्रुवतः अर्थादापन्नं भवति - ’ अपशब्दज्ञानपूर्वके शब्दज्ञाने धर्मः ’ इति ।

This is called अर्थापत्ति (प्रमाणम्) ।

Example for अर्थापत्ति , across शाश्त्राणि is - पीनो देवदत्तः दिवा न भुङ्ते (अर्थादापन्नं भवति  रात्रौ देवदत्तः द्विगुणं भुङ्ते इति) ।

अर्थापत्तिप्रमाणम् is acceptable to वैयाकरणs - मीमांसकs - अद्वैतवेदान्तिन्s etc. नैययिकs claim its अन्तर्भाव in अनुमानप्रमाणम् ।

रामायणस्य शाब्दी महावाक्यसंज्ञा -- ’तत्त्वमसि’ इत्यादीनां तु आर्थी महावाक्यसंज्ञा इति विवेकः ।

अर्थादागतः आर्थः - ’ स्त्रियाम् ’ (स्त्रीत्वविवक्षायाम्) पा 4-1-3 ङीप् - ’टिड्ढाणञ्द्वयसज्दघ्नञ्मात्रच्तयप्ठक्ठञ्कञ्क्वरपः’ पा 4-1-15 - ’अनुदात्तौ सुप्पितौ’ पा 3-1-4 -- आर्थी ।

धन्यो’स्मि

Dr.Korada Subrahmanyam

Prof of Sanskrit (Retd)

Adj Professor , Dept of Heritage Science and Technology

IIT , Hyderabad

Chairman , Bharateeya Vidvat Parishat

Ph:09866110741

https://sites.google.com/view/koradeeyam/home

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CANKK_oUpgZ3PwqC1UgdC32N05zRivt6zXqP%2Br1RmGE0EMaN61g%40mail.gmail.com.

[K S Kannan]

I have some questions:

We are familiar with [शाब्दी भावना and] आर्थी [भावना] in Mīmāṁsā also.

But what  is अर्थात् आगतः in the present context ?

Shall we take it as अर्थापत्ति, and  अन्तरार्थ, therefore, as some "inner अर्थापत्ति" ?

And what would that imply?

Again, is there an अपरिग्रहार्थ here?

Or was it stated just to show that it can be an  उपसर्ग, 

hence polysemic (अनेकार्थ)?

(or that hence any meaning can be valid?)

The dissolutions I have found for  अन्तर्वाणि are

(a) अन्तः [अन्तःकरणे] वाणी [शास्त्रात्मिका] यस्य or

(b) अन्तर्गता [अन्तःकरणे स्थिता] [शास्त्रवाक्यात्मिका] वाणी यस्य or

(c) अन्तर्वाणयति (from वण शब्दे+ णिच्).

The first two, (a) and (b), give the तात्पर्य effectively, and

the third (c) gives the basic etymology.

If you interpret  अन्तः as just शरीरे,

would it not apply to all  वाणी (of all humans/beings)? [=अतिव्याप्ति ?]

In which case, can it mean  शास्त्रवित् (only accidentally)?

Can you pl. clarify?

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAKj2ELRj-%3DuU-MGjqD244%2B8UCx8tx5bmgT9eurh6PLz_zAQSyw%40mail.gmail.com.

--

[Mahamaho. Subrahmanyam Korada]

नमो विद्वद्भ्यः

अन्तर् - is a  निपात / अव्ययम् - स्वरादि । । उपसर्गत्वम् is required for some usages . Also श्रदन्तरोरुपसर्गवद्वृत्तिः (कौमुदी etc.) . गतिसंज्ञा परिग्रहभिन्नार्थे ।

The meaning of an उपसर्ग is decided by शास्त्रम् / निघण्टु - not any meaning .

सिद्धे शब्दार्थसंबन्धे लोकतः , लोकतः अर्थप्रयुक्ते  शब्दप्रयोगे शास्त्रेण धर्मनियमः , यथा लौकिकवैदिकेषु (वार्तिकम्) ।

I did not decide any meaning - it is a भ्रम - I quoted  अमरकोश -  लिङ्गाभट्टीयम् (गुरुबालप्रबोधिका) --

अन्तः अन्तश्शरीरे शास्त्ररूपा वाणी यस्येति अन्तर्वाणिः ।

अन्तर्वाणिस्तु  शास्त्रवित् - अमरः । कोश says both these words are being used as synonyms . 

The following verses from वाक्यपदीयम् would explain / clarify  many issues  raised . It is dificult to explain the meaning --

अपि प्रयोक्तुरात्मानं शब्दमन्तरवस्थितम् ।

प्राहुर्महांतमृषभं येन सायुज्यमिष्यते ॥ 1-131

अर्थभागैस्तथा तेषाम् आन्तरो’र्थः प्रकाश्यते ।

एकस्यैवात्मनो भेदौ शब्दार्थावपृथक् स्थितौ ॥ 2-81

एकस्यापि च शब्दस्य निमित्तैः अव्यवस्थितैः ।

एकेन बहुभिश्चार्थो बहुधा परिकल्प्यते ॥ 2-137   Different meanings are created by one or different people in different ways  to a single शब्द  showing causes that are not standard .

अन्वाख्यानानि भिद्यन्ते शब्दव्युत्पत्तिकर्मसु ।

बहूनां संभवे’र्थानां निमित्तं किञ्चिदिष्यते ॥ 2-170

वैरवासिष्ठगिरिशाः तथैकागारिकादयः ।

कैश्चित् कथञ्चित् आख्याता निमित्तावधिसङ्करैः ॥ 2-171

कैश्चिन्निर्वचनं भिन्नं गिरतेर्गर्जतेर्गमेः ।

गवतेर्गदतेश्चापि गौरित्यत्रानुदर्शितम् ॥ 2-174

निपाता द्योतकाः केचित् पृथगर्थाभिधायिनः ।

आगमा इव के’पि स्युः संभूयार्थस्य वाचकाः ॥ 2-192

In the present context we can take an example --

सर्वधर्मान् परित्यज्य मामेकं शरणं व्रज ... 18-66, भगवद्गीता |

Having given up all धर्मs .... . It means one need not give up अधर्मान् -- पारिशेष्यात् (implication ?) ? - this is what we get as वाच्यार्थ !

शांकरभाष्यम् -- धर्मान् अधर्मांश्च , नैष्कर्म्यस्य विवक्षितत्वात् । How do ordinary people know this meaning ?

अन्तर् can be a द्योतक - need not necessarily be a वाचक । पाकं पचति -- प्रजापतिं मनसा ध्यात्वा ।

धन्यो’स्मि

Dr.Korada Subrahmanyam

Prof of Sanskrit (Retd)

Adj Professor , Dept of Heritage Science and Technology

IIT , Hyderabad

Chairman , Bharateeya Vidvat Parishat

Ph:09866110741

https://sites.google.com/view/koradeeyam/home

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAN47gm5YXMjkAvSG1%2BqFaNT%2B9vfE2_0wRYdqJGfR8Fq-RzJZPA%40mail.gmail.com.

[K S Kannan]

उपकृतोऽस्मि |

🙏

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAKj2ELTPxf-D5ZXZiKtRh%3D-J8Cb4A41qBZurSdTfwLEZhF5t8Q%40mail.gmail.com.

[Mahamaho. Subrahmanyam Korada]

नमो विद्वद्भ्यः

Here is a chart I prepared to exhibit as to how a single term is understood by different systemists due to their शास्त्रवासना । 

This is not available elsewhere .

्

धन्यो’स्मि

Dr.Korada Subrahmanyam

Prof of Sanskrit (Retd)

Adj Professor , Dept of Heritage Science and Technology

IIT , Hyderabad

Chairman , Bharateeya Vidvat Parishat

Ph:09866110741

https://sites.google.com/view/koradeeyam/home

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAN47gm6F0SE6vdVtLTj3Kf3M3TJq3nbT0WKgJ3VuHi7vJ0i9jQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[BVK Sastry (G-S-Pop)]

Namaste

 

Picking a snippet point from the deep down thread dated  < On Sun, Jul 26, 2026 at 7:25 PM >   from MM Prof. Korada ji,

 

<  3.I would like your thoughts on why none of the mattas that supposedly exist for the up liftment of veda dharma have worked forward in this direction to protect the respective varnas and veda.   

For every पुष्करवत्सराः (13years) the मठाधिपतिs are supposed to meet , discuss the problems of धर्म faced by people and offer मार्गदर्शनम् - including आपद्धर्माः । If it is difficult to have the knowledge of अष्टादश विद्या स्थानानि they can ask the विद्वांसः for help . That has not been happening for a long time . We regret .  >  

 

The personal privilege to claim belonging and staying  in  ‘Varna Category:  Brahmana (Identity) has almost boiled down to the display of wearing the thread ( poo-nool) and face marks of choice and parental (claimed status inheritance) and /or some prayschitta performance.

 

Some fact checks to pin down the accountability on this and social ground reality for strategic action  

 

What is the reference by which Varna- Dharma ( Not Ashrama Dharma) is fixed ? to filter out varna-sankara / varna-bhrashtaa?  The textual resources of different time period vary on this criterion.

 

1.  Nirnaya Sindhu (~1534 C.E)  Dharma Sindhu ( ~1790 C.E )  -  are  two main references followed by traditional Brahmin (Vaidika- Hindu ?) communities as a live tradition in south India ( mainly Karnataka / Andhra side). Dharma sindhi work is contribution of Panditha Kashinaatha, a famed devotee of Bhagavan Panduranga in Pandaripura (1790 AD),  patron by  the Maratha Peshwa’s. 

 

The reference is  from link of Kanchi Kamakoti peetham - Chapter 2: Preface - Essence of Dharma Sindhu | Sri Kanchi Kamakoti Peetham https://www.kamakoti.org/kamakoti/dharmasindhu/bookview.php?chapnum=2

 

The link shows how much time line (200 BCE to 1750 CE) and resources surveyed by Pandiata Kashinatha  in providing the guidelines.

 

Question-1:  If the last updated reference is year 1790, in the duration till 2026, a duration of 236 years equal to about 18 pushkaras, if the mathadhipati’s / Dharmadhikaris at Matha have not fulfilled their obligation of < the मठाधिपतिs are supposed to meet , discuss the problems of धर्म faced by people and offer मार्गदर्शनम्  ( to society) >,  who is to be held accountable ?

 

Options being:

 

1. A) Those holding the position (b) Specific community which by passed and accepted convenience – of - compromised Dharma –practice and  compartmentalized adoption modes invoking rule of  < आपद्धर्माः > and < kali yuga>   loop holes and < Prayaschitta> solutions ?  like Viswamitra eating meat (?) Vasishta marrying arundhati (?) (c ) Specific State heads ( or people with money and muscle power: the yaja-maana) who passed through shaastra –loop holes to justify their own carnal pleasures ? (d) The foreign invaders – Macaulay people (?) who dispensed judgements on ‘Dharma disputes- Social property and inheritance rights, well documented in MM PV Kane’s History of Dharma Shaastra?

 

If my memory serves right, such debates were conducted in closed circles of traditional scholars to assess the status of socially well positioned people and by what ‘sampradaya’ should they be guided ? rituals conducted for them? Dakshina was a no –compromise; but the ethical issue did bother them internally and needed resolution. I remember only the last line for the present . It was : when no traditional shastra option is valid and available/ applicable, go  by bhaagavata sampradaya;  the last resort is to conduct services  bhaagavata ( I don’t intend to explain this term; those who know it know it; for those who do not know, it does not matter ! There is no need to glorify or stretch the term for its meaning. I am just noting the social usage of the term carried about fifty years).

 

2. ) Post Independence India (1947) the people who wrote and accepted the Indian constitution as ‘New Dharma Shaastra for the Nation’ and switched from ‘Dharma Rule’ to Secular rule’? 

 

3. ) Post Independence India (1947)  and year the people who wrote and accepted the Indian constitution as ‘New Dharma Shaastra for the Nation’ and switched from ‘Dharma Rule’ to Secular rule’? 

 

4. )  Practicing Rules of Dharma as Rules of Religion and who have tolerated all that has transpired between 1979 - to

        1990 ? in the social governance ? [ Raaja- Dharma / Rajya dharma / Prajaa dharma … ]? Violating fundamental

         rights to citizens ?

 

1979 -Establishment of The Mandal Commission or the Socially and Educationally Backward Classes Commission (SEBC),  a report using the data of the 1931 census, the last caste-aware census, extrapolated with some sample studies, with a mandate to identify the socially or educationally backward classes of India; to consider the question of reservations for people to address caste discrimination, and to use eleven social, economic, and educational indicators to determine backwardness.

1980- Report completed.

1990 - Government implemented the same at Nation to meet the wish of  Article 15 (4): Nothing in this Article or in clause (2) of Article 29 shall prevent the State from making any provision for the advancement of any socially or educationally backward classes of citizens or for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled tribes".

 

5. )  Post globalization, especially year 2000 onwards, the search for minimal compliance to Dharma (more so for a Brahmana claimant) has been high priority social  media debate ! and even for ‘Heads of Matha’s’. The deeper issue at stake was clarity on Ashrama Dharma – beyond the glorified social practice of  [ wear saffron cloth –discard <poo-nool> - hold the danda-stick ]  and become the executive head of the property of institution.  Doing Social good as a claim is different from conscious compliance to Shaastra.  The new genre of Guruji - Swamy ji leadership exploded and  social clans of dharma brands by caste creed book history faith belief galore  in secular nation.  Dharma debate yielded its place to Jati Mata Kula and wraps of ethics !  Vedic and Non vedic teams have an equal run on this turf.

This is  the cultural social eco systemic reality of current generation who are being guided by ‘A I search engine outputs and social media consultants.

 

 

It is in this context, I am yet to get a focused answer to the question and connect traditional textual resources to reality of : Dharma –Peetham / Matha Adhi pati / Swamy –Guru- Government and Constitution:: Secularism wrap over Religion. core.

 

Can this dialogue help me to steer forward and get an answer, which I can provide to my ward :

 

You are entitled to hold a lifelong Varna (Brahmana) Identity  intact, inherited, unchallenged, never going away from you, by rule book (  .. ?... )   because …(?) ….

 

Sorry if this issue hurts any one.

 

Regards

BVK Sastry

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAN47gm5YXMjkAvSG1%2BqFaNT%2B9vfE2_0wRYdqJGfR8Fq-RzJZPA%40mail.gmail.com.