om = tūṣṇīṃbhāva and ‘kadvad oṃ kuru’

[Nityanand Misra]

Dear list

The ‘Avyayakosa’ of V Srivatsankacharya (2004: Samskrit Education Society, Chennai) on p. 144 gives ‘tūṣṇīṃbhāve’ as one of the meanings of ‘om’ and cites the example ‘kadvad oṃ kuru’.

1. Does any ancient Kosha list ‘tūṣṇīṃbhāva’ as one of the senses of om? This meaning is not listed in Amara, Medini, or Vishva. What, then, would be the source of Srivatsankacharya?

2. Where is this example ‘kadvad’ oṃ kuru from? What would it mean given that the only meaning of ‘kadvad’ cited in ‘Vācaspatyam’ is in ‘a mantra containing the sound “ka”’.

Any pointers are welcome.

Nityānanda

[Jaya Prakash]

Hari Om,

I got this information in this link[http://www.vedantavichara.com/laghuvasudevamanana-varnaka-4.html]

आत्मनः दुःखस्वभावत्वे सुषुप्त्यवस्थायां तूष्णींभावे योगिनां समाधौ च दुःखमेव प्रतीयेत । तता न दृश्यते, किन्तु त्रयाणामपि व्युत्थानानन्तरम् "एतावत् पर्यन्तं सुखमेवाहमासम्" इति सुखमेव स्मर्यते । तस्मादात्मनः सुखमेव स्वाभाविकं ...

Thanks

[Jaya Prakash]

Hello Sir,

One more I got in वाचस्पत्यम्

तूष्णीम्भाव पु० तूष्णीम् + भू--घञ् । तूष्णीम्मवने मौनावल-

म्बने “अनिमिषनयननिरीक्षणे तूष्णींभावादयस्तत्र” सा०

द० “तूष्णींभावेऽपि विज्ञेयं न चेद्भवति कारणम्” भा०

शा० १०३ अ० ।

One more in [http://sanskrit.uohyd.ac.in/scl/sbg/2/2-9/2-9_a.html]

when I splited the word तूष्णीं भावे more meanings came in google page.

On Friday, September 23, 2016 at 4:13:40 PM UTC+5:30, Nityanand Misra wrote:

[Nityanand Misra]

Thanks Jaya Prakash Ji for the citations. They are helpful, but they do not answer the two questions I raised.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

AadaraNIya Nityanandji,

1. 'Om' having ‘tūṣṇīṃbhāva’  as a meaning is possible if 'om is taken as an interjection /exclamatory expression such as 'Oh!' 'Ah!'

'Mm!!' as a response-exclamation or a soliloquy expression is well known. Placing a vowel in front of such expressions with consonants alone is usual.

An actual usage /lakshya on which the compiler/lexicographer is basing his ‘tūṣṇīṃbhāva’  meaning needs to be located.

2. 'kuru' 'kurukuru' are frequent in spells. What probably the lexicographer means is that just as the 'k' in kuru has a spell effect, Om too has a spell effect.

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

--

Nagaraj Paturi

 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

 

Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies

 

FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education,

 

(Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA )

 

 

 

[Dr. P. Ramanujan]

प्निय नित्यानन्द महोदयाः,

 

अहं श्रीवत्साङ्काचार्यान् पृष्टवान् ।

ते अवदन् - श्रौते प्राजापत्यहविषां मनसैव होतव्यत्वं विहितम् । तत्र तूष्णीमेव (मनसा मन्त्रानुसन्धानेन) प्रयोगः अनेन सूच्यते ।

शतपथब्राह्मणे कद्वत्यो याज्यानुवाक्याः प्राजापत्यस्य इति श्रूयते । ततः अङ्गीकारः तूष्णीं सूचनीयमिति फलतीति ॥

 

रामानुजः

--

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

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

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.

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

 

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

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

[Dr. P. Ramanujan]

Correction:

सूचनीय इति फलतीति ॥

रामानुजः

On September 23, 2016 at 4:13 PM Nityanand Misra <nmi...@gmail.com> wrote:

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit MailScanner has detected definite fraud in the website at "groups.google.com". Do not trust this website: https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[V Subrahmanian]

तैत्तिरीयोपनिषद्भाष्यम् । शीक्षावल्ली । अष्टमोऽनुवाकः । मन्त्रः १

ओमिति ब्रह्म । ओमितीदं सर्वम् । ओमित्येतदनुकृतिर्ह स्म वा अप्यो श्रावयेत्याश्रावयन्ति । ओमिति सामानि गायन्ति । ॐ शोमिति शस्त्राणि शंसन्ति । ओमित्यध्वर्युः प्रतिगरं प्रतिगृणाति । ओमिति ब्रह्मा प्रसौति । ओमित्यग्निहोत्रमनुजानाति । ओमिति ब्राह्मणः प्रवक्ष्यन्नाह ब्रह्मोपाप्नवानीति । ब्रह्मैवोपाप्नोति ॥ १ ॥

अत्र भाष्यम् प्रकृतविषये

ओङ्कारस्तुत्यर्थ उत्तरो ग्रन्थः, उपास्यत्वात्तस्य । ॐ इत्येतत् अनुकृतिः अनुकरणम् । करोमि यास्यामि चेति कृतमुक्त ओमित्यनुकरोत्यन्यः, अतः ओङ्कारोऽनुकृतिः । ह स्म वै इति प्रसिद्धार्थद्योतकाः । प्रसिद्धं ह्योंकारस्यानुकृतित्वम् । अपि च ओश्रावय इति प्रैषपूर्वमाश्रावयन्ति प्रतिश्रावयन्ति । तथा ॐ इति सामानि गायन्ति सामगाः । ॐ शोमिति शस्त्राणि शंसन्ति शस्त्रशंसितारोऽपि । तथा ॐ इति अध्वर्युः प्रतिगरं प्रतिगृणाति । ॐ इति ब्रह्मा प्रसौति अनुजानाति । ॐ इति अग्निहोत्रम् अनुजानाति जुहोमीत्युक्ते ॐ इत्येव अनुज्ञां प्रयच्छति । ॐ इत्येव ब्राह्मणः प्रवक्ष्यन् प्रवचनं करिष्यन् अध्येष्यमाणः ओमित्याह ओमित्येव प्रतिपद्यते अध्येतुमित्यर्थः ; ब्रह्म वेदम् उपाप्नवानि इति प्राप्नुयां ग्रहीष्यामीति उपाप्नोत्येव ब्रह्म । अथवा, ब्रह्म परमात्मानम् उपाप्नवानीत्यात्मानं प्रवक्ष्यन् प्रापयिष्यन् ओमित्येवाह । स च तेनोंकारेण ब्रह्म प्राप्नोत्येव । ओङ्कारपूर्वं प्रवृत्तानां क्रियाणां फलवत्त्वं यस्मात्, तस्मादोंकारं ब्रह्मेत्युपासीतेति वाक्यार्थः ॥

अत्र डा.रामानुजन्महाभागैः यदुक्तं श्रौते तूष्णीं अनुज्ञाप्रदानं इति तदपि पूर्वोक्ततैत्तिरीयेऽन्तर्भावितं मन्ये ।  

इति

सुब्रह्मण्यशर्मा

[Madhav Deshpande]

The Vācaspatya on kadvat: "कद्वत् {@कद्वत्@}¦ त्रि० कः कशब्दोऽस्त्यस्य मतुप् मस्य वः पृषो० .कशब्दयुक्ते मन्त्रादौ स्त्रियां ङीप् .“ कद्वत्यो याज्यानु-वाक्याः कोहि प्रजापतिः” शत० ब्रा० ६, २, २, ५ ."  I am not an expert on the Brāhmaṇa literature, but the expression "kadvat mantra" most likely refers to the hymn from the Ṛgveda where the verses have the refrain "kasmai devāya haviṣā vidhema".  I am still not clear what "kadvat OM kuru" refers to.  Does it possibly refer to saying this "kadvat mantra" only mentally, as some have suggested?

Madhav Deshpande

Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

[K S Kannan]

The idea of "Ka standing for Prajapati" is very common in Vedic literature. There are numerous statements to that effect.

Numerous, again, are references that equate Manas and Prajāpati. Manas, as pitted against vāc, is also a common theme. The two are represented as anirukta and nirukta, "unuttered" and "spelt out", and hence set forth as tūṣṇīm and mantra respectively. Śatapatha-brāhmaṇa, for example, bears this out.

Prajāpatiṁ manasā dhyāyan is also a recurrent formula in the prayoga-s.

What pertains to Prajāpati is hence done silently (sometimes referred to as upāṁśu also). Om as acceptance is also a regular usage in Vedic literature, the vestiges of which are found in Classical literature also.

It should not surprise us, then, that in the context of hymns addressed to Ka in particular, "Silence is consent".

[Madhav Deshpande]

Thanks, Professor Kannan.

Madhav Deshpande

Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

[V Subrahmanian]

On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 7:50 PM, K S Kannan <ks.kann...@gmail.com> wrote:

 Om as acceptance is also a regular usage in Vedic literature, the vestiges of which are found in Classical literature also.

This 'Om' (consent) alone is uttered colloquially as 'O' in Malayalam, Tamil, Kannada, etc. 

regards

subrahmanian.v  

[Nityanand Misra]

On Saturday, 24 September 2016 20:43:40 UTC+5:30, Madhav Deshpande wrote:

Thanks, Professor Kannan.

Madhav Deshpande

Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

Thanks to all the scholars who responded. Prof. Paturi’s response offers some directions to look further into and specific references would help achieve some results. 

(1) From the kind explanations offered by Dr. Ramanujam and Prof. Kannan, it becomes clear that in hymns addressed to Prajāpati, “silence is consent”.

(2) We also know that one of the meanings of ‘om’ is consent (‘anujñā’), as is evident from the ‘Viśvakoṣa’ citation (‘omityanumatau proktaṃ praṇave cā'pyupakrame’, Avyayāni 47; interestingly the Chowkhambha 1911 publication edited by Sri Silaskandha Sthavira has the wrong reading ‘num’ instead of ‘om’ here) as well as the Chāndogyopaniṣad statement ‘tadvā etadanujñākṣaraṃ yaddhi kiñcānujānātyomityeva tadāha’ (Chāndogyopaniṣad, 1.1.8).

However, I fail to see how the (1) and (2) above can imply that silence (‘tūṣṇīṃbhāva’) is a meaning of ‘om’. One can probably say that silence is the equivalent of ‘om’ in the specific context of hymns addressed to Prajāpati, but this does not imply that ‘om’ means silence in general. To establish that, one needs a Kośa citation or an attested use of the word ‘om’ in the sense of silence. 

Also, as pointed out by Prof. Deshpande, the example ‘kadvad oṃ kuru’ is rather puzzling. Firstly, if applied to a ‘mantra’ (masculine in Sanskrit), the nominative form would be ‘kadvān’ and the accusative form would be ‘kadvantam’. ‘kadvad’ would be the nominative and accusative form in the netuer gender (the context probably requires us to take ‘kadvad’ as the accusative). Secondly, what is the neuter ‘viśeṣya’ for the word ‘kadvad’? More importantly, where is this example ‘kadvad oṃ kuru’ to be found? Is it only to be found in some oral traditions or is it attested to in some standard ritual work (in which case we may know the context and actual meaning of the phrase better)? Perhaps Srivatsankacharya Ji alone can answer this question satisfactorily. If he uses a mobile/email, may I request scholars in the know to share his mobile and/or email address with me off the list?

 

[Nityanand Misra]

On Saturday, 24 September 2016 22:27:29 UTC+5:30, Nityanand Misra wrote:

the ‘Viśvakoṣa’ citation (‘omityanumatau proktaṃ praṇave cā'pyupakrame’, Avyayāni 47; interestingly the Chowkhambha 1911 publication edited by Sri Silaskandha Sthavira has the wrong reading ‘num’ instead of ‘om’ here)

Here is the link to the 1911 Chowkhambha Viśvakoṣa edition where the citation has the reading ‘num’ [?] in place of ‘om’

https://archive.org/stream/VishvaPrakash/vishva_prakash#page/n194/mode/1up

It has to be ‘om’! Or am I missing something very obvious here? Do other Viśvakoṣa editions have the correct reading? 

 

[Nagaraj Paturi]

My suggestions, which were in the absence of an explanation from the lexicographer, need not be given significance now after so much material has come from the Vedic tradition itself.

Dr P Ramanujan has brought in the explanation from the compiler himself.

All the venerable senior scholars have been adding information from within the Vedic tradition.

Since all these are not so obvious to the audience not acquainted with the actual practice of Vaidika kriyaas , Sri Vatsaankaaryaji should have been more elaborate in his words.

I for one, am feeling lucky to get all the knowledge being provided by the scholars.   

--

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

[K S Kannan]

A conjecture:

Construe Oṁ kuru on the analogy of vaṣaṭ karoti,
where root kṛ has a quotative implication.

And construe kadvad adverbially.

This, assuming that
kadvad oṁ kuru
is a śiṣta-prayoga.

Does this work?

[Nityanand Misra]

On Sunday, 25 September 2016 00:49:34 UTC+5:30, ks.kannan.2000 wrote:

A conjecture:

Construe Oṁ kuru on the analogy of vaṣaṭ karoti,
where root kṛ has a quotative implication.

And construe kadvad adverbially.

Thanks Prof. Kannan for this suggestion. Do you have the vati suffix in mind, either by tena tulyaṃ kriyā cedvatiḥ (A 5.1.115) or tadarham (A 5.1.117), to get an adverbial indeclinable usage similar to brāhmaṇavadvartate (Kāśikā on 5.1.115) or rājavatpālanam (Kāśikā on 5.1.117)? I do not think one could get an adverbial usage with the matup (vatup) suffix by tadasyāstyasminniti matup‌ (A 5.2.94), but I may be corrected here.

It is still unclear to me, however, how this usage implies that silence (tūṣṇīṃbhāva) is a meaning of the word om. 

[krishnaprasad g]

Vishvakosha edited by Anand RAM has correct reading. OM
So that's a typo

--

[Nityanand Misra]

On Sunday, 25 September 2016 08:59:31 UTC+5:30, krishnaprasadah wrote:

Vishvakosha edited by Anand RAM has correct reading. OM
So that's a typo

On Sep 24, 2016 10:33 PM, "Nityanand Misra" <nmi...@gmail.com> wrote:

Thanks for confirming. Is this edition available online? 

[Nagaraj Paturi]

> However, I fail to see how the (1) and (2) above can imply that silence (‘tūṣṇīṃbhāva’) is a meaning of ‘om’

---- AadaraNIya Nityanandji,

From whatever I heard from the venerable scholars in this thread, what I understand is as follows : The meanings listed by Srivatsankacharyaji are part of idiomatic expressions of Vedic yajnakarma-practioners' world.

Expressions in contemporary Indian languages for consent are: such as U (pronounced nasally) in Telugu, Um in Kannada, aam in Tamil, haa pronounced nasally in Hindi etc. Om seems to be a Vedic equivalent of these.

For example, तत्र तूष्णीमेव (मनसा मन्त्रानुसन्धानेन) प्रयोगः अनेन सूच्यते । मनसा मन्त्रानुसन्धानेन is the meaning of Om here. The word तूष्णीम् is a kriyAvis'EshaNAtmaka avyaya. मनसा मन्त्रानुसन्धानेन appears to be trtIyAnta rUpa. There was a discussion in another thread on BVP how trtIyAnta rUpa can be adverbial. Silently, is being used here metaphorically in the sense of mentally, meditationally. The syllable Om here is being used here metaphorically in an adverbial silence : silently->mentally->meditationally. Culturally conventionalized metaphorical expressions settle down as idioms in any culture. The syllable 'Om' with an extreme unparalleled unquestionable topmost sacrality in the Vedic culture being used as a substitute for many routine expressions such as expression of consent or silently->mentally->meditationally and such usage turning into the idiom of that culture is not only natural but seems to be the beauty of that culture.

--

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

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Correction:

The syllable Om here is being used here metaphorically in an adverbial sense : silently->mentally->meditationally.

not

The syllable Om here is being used here metaphorically in an adverbial silence : silently->mentally->meditationally.

[Dr. P. Ramanujan]

Actually, I paraphrased what SriVatsankacharya Swami explained over phone.

मम विवरणम् - 

1. कद्वद् ओं कुरु इति श्रुतिः (आकरः मृग्यः)

2. कद्वद् इत्यस्य प्राजापत्यवदित्यर्थः । (तेन तुल्यं क्रिया चेद्वतिरिति विहितः वतिप्रत्ययः एव)

(व्याघ्री यथा हरेत् पुत्रं दंष्ट्राभ्यां न च पीडयेत् । भीता पतनभेदाभ्यां तद्वद्वर्णान् प्रयोजयेत् इत्यत्रेव)

3. मनसा प्रजापतये जुह्वति इति तैत्तिरीये सोपाख्यानं विवृतमस्ति ।

4. तूष्णीम् इत्यस्य अमन्त्रकम् इति श्रौते प्रसिद्धिरस्ति । 

यथा - यश्च यजुषाऽजुहोद्यश्च तूष्णीम् । तावुभावार्ध्नुताम् ।

तस्माद्यजुषाऽऽहुतिः पूर्वा होतव्या । तूष्णीमुत्तरा ।

गृह्यप्रयोगेषु च - अङ्करार्पणादौ, सकृन्मन्त्रेण द्विस्तूष्णीम् इति ।

5. तन्देवास्तूष्णीँहोमेनावृञ्जत, यत्तूष्णीमाघारमाघारयति इत्यादिषु होमादयः तूष्णीं विहिताः (नाम,अमन्त्रकाः)

6. अतः कद्वत् - तूष्णीम् - मनसा, ओं - अभ्यनुज्ञां - (ओमित्यग्निहोत्रमनुजानाति इत्यत्रेव) कुरु - शिरःकम्पादिना अनुमतिं सूचय 

इति विवरणमिति मया अधिगतम् ॥ तथा ओमित्यस्य प्राजापत्येष्विव तूष्णींभावः (अमन्त्रकत्वम्) अर्थत्वेन फलति ।

 

रामानुजः

On September 25, 2016 at 8:06 AM Nityanand Misra <nmi...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Sunday, 25 September 2016 00:49:34 UTC+5:30, ks.kannan.2000 wrote:

A conjecture:

Construe Oṁ kuru on the analogy of vaṣaṭ karoti,
where root kṛ has a quotative implication.

And construe kadvad adverbially.

 

 

 

Thanks Prof. Kannan for this suggestion. Do you have the vati suffix in mind, either by tena tulyaṃ kriyā cedvatiḥ (A 5.1.115) or tadarham (A 5.1.117), to get an adverbial indeclinable usage similar to brāhmaṇavadvartate (Kāśikā on 5.1.115) or rājavatpālanam (Kāśikā on 5.1.117)? I do not think one could get an adverbial usage with the matup ( vatup) suffix by tadasyāstyasminniti matup‌ (A 5.2.94), but I may be corrected here.

 

It is still unclear to me, however, how this usage implies that silence ( tūṣṇīṃbhāva) is a meaning of the word om. 

 

 

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

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

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.

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

[Nityanand Misra]

On Sunday, 25 September 2016 15:22:25 UTC+5:30, Ramanujam CDAC/B wrote:

Actually, I paraphrased what SriVatsankacharya Swami explained over phone.

मम विवरणम् - 

1. कद्वद् ओं कुरु इति श्रुतिः (आकरः मृग्यः)

2. कद्वद् इत्यस्य प्राजापत्यवदित्यर्थः । (तेन तुल्यं क्रिया चेद्वतिरिति विहितः वतिप्रत्ययः एव)

(व्याघ्री यथा हरेत् पुत्रं दंष्ट्राभ्यां न च पीडयेत् । भीता पतनभेदाभ्यां तद्वद्वर्णान् प्रयोजयेत् इत्यत्रेव)

3. मनसा प्रजापतये जुह्वति इति तैत्तिरीये सोपाख्यानं विवृतमस्ति ।

4. तूष्णीम् इत्यस्य अमन्त्रकम् इति श्रौते प्रसिद्धिरस्ति । 

यथा - यश्च यजुषाऽजुहोद्यश्च तूष्णीम् । तावुभावार्ध्नुताम् ।

तस्माद्यजुषाऽऽहुतिः पूर्वा होतव्या । तूष्णीमुत्तरा ।

गृह्यप्रयोगेषु च - अङ्करार्पणादौ, सकृन्मन्त्रेण द्विस्तूष्णीम् इति ।

5. तन्देवास्तूष्णीँहोमेनावृञ्जत, यत्तूष्णीमाघारमाघारयति इत्यादिषु होमादयः तूष्णीं विहिताः (नाम,अमन्त्रकाः)

6. अतः कद्वत् - तूष्णीम् - मनसा, ओं - अभ्यनुज्ञां - (ओमित्यग्निहोत्रमनुजानाति इत्यत्रेव) कुरु - शिरःकम्पादिना अनुमतिं सूचय 

इति विवरणमिति मया अधिगतम् ॥ तथा ओमित्यस्य प्राजापत्येष्विव तूष्णींभावः (अमन्त्रकत्वम्) अर्थत्वेन फलति ।

 

रामानुजः

Thanks a lot, Dr. Ramanujan. Based on what we have seen so far on this thread, I agree with you on both कद्वद् here having the वति suffix explained by तेन तुल्यं क्रिया चेद्वतिः and om having the meaning of तूष्णींभावः only in the specific context of prājāpatya hyms (ओमित्यस्य प्राजापत्येष्विव तूष्णींभावः अर्थत्वेन फलति).

Once again, thanks to all scholars for their responses. Any information regarding the actual source of कद्वद् ओं कुरु would be welcome. 

 

 

[Madhav Deshpande]

I agree with Nityanand-ji.  With all this useful discussion, the source of this passage is not yet known.  I checked in Bloomfield's index and could not find this passage.  Finding the textual source and context would be the first step in making sense of this passage.

Madhav Deshpande

--

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

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

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.

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

[K S Kannan]

It was I who first raised the question
being now asked by Nityananda-ji and Prof Deshpande

- when I sought for the authenticity of the statement in question

by way of saying that we are only assuming
that the statement kadvad oṁkuru is a śiṣṭa-prayoga.

The problem would not have  arisen in the first place

had Vid. Srivatsankacharya provided the Vedic source of the statement

right in his Avyaya-koṣa itself (where it was to be naturally expected),
or at least in the course of his recent clarification to Dr.Ramanujan.

Or, alternatively, he should have shown an archetypal sentence
after which he modelled this, were it his own construction by any chance.

I remember an occasion when Prof. Cardona and Prof. Kiparsky had a tiff

(perhaps in the context of the discussion of the gaja-sūtra),

where a sentence was erected without revealing at the outset
the model śiṣṭa-prayoga after which it was fashioned),

and that raised strong question marks for a while
in respect of its acceptability as a valid prayoga.

In any case, my speculation that kadvad could be adverbial in role

seems to be vindicated in the explanation/clarification presented by Dr. Ramanujan.

KSKannan,

Professor, Jain University,

Bangalore.

[Dr. P. Ramanujan]

Prof. Srivatsankacharya Swami is not keeping good health and hence he could only speak for less than a minute.

However, when feasible, I would try to locate the source.

 

Ramanujan

On September 26, 2016 at 12:19 AM K S Kannan <ks.kann...@gmail.com> wrote:

It was I who first raised the question
being now asked by Nityananda-ji and Prof Deshpande

- when I sought for the authenticity of the statement in question

by way of saying that we are only assuming
that the statement kadvad oṁkuru is a śiṣṭa- prayoga.

The problem would not have  arisen in the first place

had Vid. Srivatsankacharya provided the Vedic source of the statement

right in his Avyaya-koṣa itself (where it was to be naturally expected),
or at least in the course of his recent clarification to Dr.Ramanujan.

Or, alternatively, he should have shown an archetypal sentence
after which he modelled this, were it his own construction by any chance.

I remember an occasion when Prof. Cardona and Prof. Kiparsky had a tiff

(perhaps in the context of the discussion of the gaja- sūtra),

where a sentence was erected without revealing at the outset

the model śiṣṭa- prayoga after which it was fashioned),

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

To post to this group, send email to

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

 

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

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

To post to this group, send email to

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

 

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

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

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.

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

[Shrinivasa Varakhedi]

Hari om

Very interesting discussion. I am just guessing may sometimes be wrong.

कद्वतीनाम् ओम् = कद्वदोम् प्राजापत्यांगीकार इति यावत् । कद्वदोम् = मौनेन अंगीकृतिं, कुरु इत्यर्थः ।

अत्र विद्वांसः प्रमाणम्

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

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

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

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

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

--
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.

[K S Kannan]

I guess Prof. Varakhedi would be right 

if kadvadom is a single, i.e. compounded, word. 

Furthermore, you have to take kadvadom 

as possessing an accusative termination.

But Avyaya-kośa gives it as two distinct words 

(kuru being the third one) 

(and presuming that there is no printing error!).

Had it been presented as or even perceived as a compound word,

the suppositions for its possible adverbial construction 

would not have arisen at all, 

as there would be no scope for the same.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[K S Kannan]

This last response of Dr Ramanujan bears out very well and corroborates my understanding/interpretation of the debated statement. It was recorded in this List just a few hours before Ramanujan's.

The pitting by Ramanujan of tūṣṇim against mantra 

was also set forth by me 

in terms of the anirukta pitted against the nirukta mode, 

   or equally, the manasā pitted against the vācā mode.

The logic of the acts pertaining to Prajāpati being done mentally was also brought out in my mail.

My adverbial supposition also got a confirmation.

It was my attempt to understand something 

that I had come across, in fact, for the first time.

I have only to say, with Kālidāsa,

ā paritoṣād viduṣām 

na sādhu manye prayoga-vijñānam !

A testimony from Dr Ramanujan would always be highly valued, especially in the context of Vedic interpretation, where we have to struggle to find a match for him in the entire country.

KSKannan

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

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit MailScanner has detected definite fraud in the website at "groups.google.com". Do not trust this website: https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

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

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

--

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

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

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.

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

[Shrinivasa Varakhedi]

Thanks for valuable remarks by prof Kannan. I agree with him.

My guess was based on the statement "कद्वतीनाम् ......"

Anyway better to go with proper analysis of Dr. Ramanujan.

Shrinivasa Varakhedi

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

--
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.

[sunil bhattacharjya]

Namaste,

When we want to say in Sanskri that Yogis do dhyana on "Om", should we say "Omam Dhyayanti" or "Omkaram dhyayanti"

Regards,

Sunil KB

[krishnaprasad g]

Kadvad om kuru - this seems to be from some kaarika. Example as in sthali paka prayoga etc. Again guess but this guess is helpful to search some srouta or grhya sutras.

[sunil bhattacharjya]

May be, it means that one should silently pray to "OMKARA', the Saguna Brahman.

[Nityanand Misra]

On Monday, 26 September 2016 21:09:21 UTC+5:30, Gitarthi wrote:

Namaste,

When we want to say in Sanskri that Yogis do dhyana on "Om", should we say "Omam Dhyayanti" or "Omkaram dhyayanti"

The word om which is derived from the root ava (av) rakṣaṇa-gati-kānti-prīti-tṛptyaavagama-praveśa-śravaṇa-svāmyartha-yācana-kriyecchā-dīptyavāptyāliṅgana-hiṃsdāna-bhāga-vṛddhiṣu (DP 600) by the Uṇādi Sūtra avateṣṭilopaśca (US 1.128) is an avyaya (indeclinable) due to the rule kṛnmejantaḥ (A 1.1.29). Therefore, in all vibhakti-s and in all vacana-s, the form would be om alone. 

Hence, omaṃ dhyāyanti is incorrect. It should be simply oṃ dhyāyanti. 

This is why Durgādāsa in his second interpretation of oṃ namaḥ śivāya in his commentary on the Mugdhabodha Vyākaraṇa interprets the word oṃ to be in the dative case, and gives the meaning as 'Salutations to Om (oṃ namaḥ), for auspiciousness (śivāya).

oṃkāraṃ dhyāyanti is also correct, as the word oṃkāra is not an avyaya. The word oṃkāra is formed from om and the suffix kāra used in the sense of imitation of a sound (anukaraṇa) by the vārttika varṇātkāraḥ (V 3.3.108) on which the Mahābhāṣya comments varṇātkārapratyayo vaktavyaḥ, akāraḥ. Although the rule says varṇāt, in some cases this suffix is also seen from a varṇasamudāya, for example in the word vaṣaṭkāra which is explicitly used by Pāṇini in the rule uccaistarāṃ vā vaṣaṭkāraḥ (A 1.2.35). This is also noted by Kaiyaṭa who says in the Pradīpa: tathā kvacidvarṇasamudāyānukaraṇādapi evakāra iti.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

AadaraNIya Nityanandji,

As always, your corrections to Omam dhyayanti etc. are all impeccable.

Durgādāsaji's second interpretation to oṃ namaḥ śivāya  also was a pleasant addition to my knowledge.

I would only add that your derivation of Om from the root 'av' , though undoubtedly justifiable, is, in my opinion , only one of the ways of understanding  that 'discovered' 'revealed' sound.  As you know, it is one of the 'sound'-form manifestations of Brahman. It is derivable and underivable, meaningful and beyond 'meaning'  at the same time. Human articulation or oral sound production can get as close as possible to it, but can never reproduce it perfectly. It is the 'audible' form of silence.

Om.

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

[Nityanand Misra]

On Thursday, 29 September 2016 09:27:50 UTC+5:30, Nityanand Misra wrote:

The word om ... is an avyaya (indeclinable) due to the rule kṛnmejantaḥ (A 1.1.29). Therefore, in all vibhakti-s and in all vacana-s, the form would be om alone. 

I forgot to add. As om is an avyaya, the rule avyayādāpsupaḥ (2,4.82) results in the the luk-elision of all the sup (vibhakti) affixes.

[Nityanand Misra]

On Thursday, 29 September 2016 09:54:04 UTC+5:30, nagarajpaturi wrote:

AadaraNIya Nityanandji,

As always, your corrections to Omam dhyayanti etc. are all impeccable.

Durgādāsaji's second interpretation to oṃ namaḥ śivāya  also was a pleasant addition to my knowledge.

I would only add that your derivation of Om from the root 'av' , though undoubtedly justifiable, is, in my opinion , only one of the ways of understanding  that 'discovered' 'revealed' sound.  As you know, it is one of the 'sound'-form manifestations of Brahman. It is derivable and underivable, meaningful and beyond 'meaning'  at the same time.

It is one of the derivations, yes. However, it is my preferred derivation as it is has a beautiful prakriyā accounted for by the Aṣṭādhyāyī (with the suffix coming from the Uṇādisūtra-s).

ava (av) rakṣaṇa-gati-kānti-prīti-tṛptyavagama-praveśa-śravaṇa-svāmyartha-yācana-kriyecchā-dīptyavāptyāliṅgana-hiṃsādāna-bhāga-vṛddhiṣu (DP 1.600) → uṇadayo bahulam (PS 3.3.1) → avateṣṭilopaśca (US 1.128) → av man → ṭilopa → av m → jvaratvaraśrivyavimavāmupadhāyāśca (PS 6.4.20) → ū m → sārvadhātukārdhadhātukayoḥ (7.3.84) → ārdhadhātuka-guṇa → o m → om → kṛnmejantaḥ (A 1.1.29) → avyaya designation → kṛttaddhitasamāsāśca (A 1.2.46) → prātipadika designation → ṅyāpprātipadikāt‌ (A 4.1.1) → svaujasamauṭchaṣṭābhyāmbhisṅebhyāmbhyasṅasibhyāmbhyasṅasosāmṅyossup‌ (A 4.1.2) → om su̐ → avyayādāpsupaḥ (A 2,4.82) → luk-elision → om

It is a startling coincidence that the root av has the maximum number of meanings (nineteen) in the Dhātupāṭha. Yudhishira Mimamsaka lists a few more meanings.

One can consider the avyutpanna pakṣa also. In that case the prātipadika designation will come from arthavadadhāturapratyayaḥ prātipadikam (A 1.2.45) and the avyaya designation from svarādinipātamavyayam (A 1.1.37), with the nipāta designation itself coming from cādayo'sattve (A 1.4.57). The Kāśikā indeed lists om in the cādigaṇa. 

I must add that there is another strong reason for me being in favour of the vyutpanna pakṣa. There is a śruti in support of om derived from the root āp (āpnoti) or the root av (avati). The Gopathabrāhmaṇa says: 

ko dhāturityāpṛr dhāturavatimapyeke

rūpasāmānyādarthasāmānyanedīyastasmādāperoṃkāraḥ 

sarvaṃ āpnotītyarthaḥ 

kṛdantam arthavatprātipadikam 

adarśanaṃ pratyayasya nāma sampadyate nipāteṣu cainaṃ vaiyākaraṇā udāttaṃ samāmananti 

tadavyayībhūtaṃ anvarthavācī śabdo na vyeti kadācaneti (1.1.26)

References:

[1] T. R. Chintamani (ed.) (1933), The Uṇādisūtras with the Vṛtti of Śvetavanavāsin, Madras: University of Madras, pp. 49–50.

[2] Pushpa Dikshit (ed., tr.) (2011), Pāṇinīyadhātupāṭhaḥ Sārthaḥ, Mahādevaśāstrigranthamālā 19, New Delhi: Samskrita Bharati ISBN 978-93-81160-12-1, p. 17.

[3] Pt. Ishwar Chandra (ed., tr.) (2004), Aṣṭādhyāyī of Maharṣi Pāṇini (Volume 1), Delhi: Chaukhambha Sanskrit Pratisthan, p. 351.

[4] Pt. Ishwar Chandra (ed., tr.) (2004), Aṣṭādhyāyī of Maharṣi Pāṇini (Volume 2), Delhi: Chaukhambha Sanskrit Pratisthan, p. 784.

[Narayan Dutt Mishra]

ॐशब्द ऊनविंशतिसङ्ख्याकार्थकः, सम्भवतो विषयसम्बद्धत्वात् 

    सुशकमत्र तदीयसमुद्धरणमिति विचिन्त्येदम् -- 

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yISl3tQas-4  

-नारायणदत्तमिश्रः

[sunil bhattacharjya]

Thank you Mishraji for giving all the nineteen meanings of the word "Om". We pray to the Omkara, the Lord Shiva, who can give us the Kamya things and Moksha. I guess that covers all the nineteen meanings.

Sunil KB

--

[Nityanand Misra]

On Thursday, 29 September 2016 09:54:04 UTC+5:30, nagarajpaturi wrote:

Durgādāsaji's second interpretation to oṃ namaḥ śivāya  also was a pleasant addition to my knowledge.

Please see attached for the full comment. It is one of the most ingenious expositions I have come across in Sanskrit commentaries. The adbhuta rasa in the explanation shows that Sanskrit commentaries can be as sarasa as Sanskrit poetry.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

> The adbhuta rasa in the explanation shows that Sanskrit commentaries can be as sarasa as Sanskrit poetry.

Indeed. I would say, its an ecstasy beyond the names of rasas.

Thanks for all the feast.

--

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

[K S Kannan]

​Enjoyable !

[Narayan Dutt Mishra]

आर्य्यमिश्रेभ्यः सर्व्वेभ्यो ज्ञानवारिधिभूतेभ्यो नमः। 🙏

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/IQ5gYRYxUS4/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[Nityanand Misra]

On Friday, 23 September 2016 16:13:40 UTC+5:30, Nityanand Misra wrote:

Dear list

The ‘Avyayakosa’ of V Srivatsankacharya (2004: Samskrit Education Society, Chennai) on p. 144 gives ‘tūṣṇīṃbhāve’ as one of the meanings of ‘om’ and cites the example ‘kadvad oṃ kuru’.

1. Does any ancient Kosha list ‘tūṣṇīṃbhāva’ as one of the senses of om? This meaning is not listed in Amara, Medini, or Vishva. What, then, would be the source of Srivatsankacharya?

2. Where is this example ‘kadvad’ oṃ kuru from? What would it mean given that the only meaning of ‘kadvad’ cited in ‘Vācaspatyam’ is in ‘a mantra containing the sound “ka”’.

Dear list

Sorry for reviving an old thread. I noticed another publication with the exact examples कद्वदों कुरु. This is the Nipatavyayopasargavritti of Tilaka, edited by Appalla Somesvara Sarma (1951: TTD Press, Tirupati). The book is available from DLI and also on Wikimedia under

www.dli.ernet.in/handle/2015/368471

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/40/निपाताव्ययोपसर्गवृत्तिः.pdf

On pages 15 and 16 of the book, the meanings of Om are given. The वृत्ति says तूष्णींभावोऽन्त एव, and then gives the example कद्वदों कुरु. 

https://sa.wikisource.org/wiki/पुटम्:निपाताव्ययोपसर्गवृत्तिः.pdf/15

https://sa.wikisource.org/wiki/पुटम्:निपाताव्ययोपसर्गवृत्तिः.pdf/16

So there are two things that come to mind.

1) The example कद्वदों कुरु seems to be a famous one, at least at the time of तिलक who composed the वृत्ति. Any pointers to the time of this Tilaka would be welcome. 

2) Tilaka seems to suggest that तूष्णींभावः is nothing but the अन्त (or happens at the अन्त, depending on whether one parses अन्त एव as अन्तः + एव or अन्ते + एव). This details is not given in Avyaya Kosha though, which seems to suggest तूष्णींभावः as a separate meaning of Om.

Thanks, Nityananda

[ushavishnuvamsi .]

सरस्वतीदेवताके - यद्वाग्वदन्त्यविचेतनानि राष्ट्री देवानां निषसाद मन्द्रा चतस्र ऊर्जं दुदुहे पयांसि क उ स्विदस्याः परमं जगाम ।। इति मन्त्रे चतुर्थपादे केचन क्वस्विदस्याः इति केचन क्वदस्याः इति केचन कदस्याः इति पठन्ति ।। अत्र कदस्याः इति पठतां कत् इति क उ स्विद् इति पठतां कः इति च ब्रह्मपर्यायः ।। विष्णुनम्पूतिरिः।।