शूद्रैः संस्कृतभाषणे विधिनिषेधाः
विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki)
न शिखां नोपवीतं च नोच्चरेत् संस्कृतां गिरम् ॥
तदेतत् करपात्रियतिनोदाहृतम् भाति ('संस्कृत भाषा ही सबकी भाषा है' यह कहना प्रत्यक्ष विरुद्ध है। शास्त्र की दृष्टि से भी संस्कृत द्विजातियों की ही भाषा कही गयी है । कई लोगों के लिए तो संस्कृत शब्दों का उच्चारण भी निषिद्ध है । 'नोच्चरेत् संस्कृतां गिरम्' (स्कन्दपुराण)। यही कारण है कि नाटकों में प्राकृत का प्रयोग अबाध रूप से होता है ।), शङ्कराख्येनात्रत्यसदस्येन चान्विष्य प्रकाशितम्।
अथ श्रीमन्नित्यानन्देन मिश्रोपाह्वेन "The hemistich न शिखी नोपवीती स्यान्नोच्चरेत्संस्कृतां गिरम् is quoted by Kamalākara Bhaṭṭa in his Nirṇayasindhu (निर्णयसिन्धु) under स्त्रीशूद्रयोः शिखाविचारः. He ascribes the quote as पाद्मे, i.e., to the पद्मपुराण. - https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.326320/page/n211/mode/1up " इति चोक्तम्।
Vishvas /विश्वासः
Kushagra Aniket
--
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/CAFY6qgHD8Z0vVwfDyK7Xx%2Bym9-an1nBY1oWUeUyDnkJZYyeNGg%40mail.gmail.com.
विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki)
Dear Vishvas Ji,One basic fact is that in all the shastras (Puranas and the epics), non-Dvija and female characters speak only in Sanskrit. Are all their words supposed to be translations from Prakrita-s? I would highly doubt that. Then, if there was such a restriction, why have the Rishis recorded them as speaking in Sanskrit?
my request to all respondents - as far as this thread is concerned, kindly restrict yourself to the questions raised - vidhi/ niShedha-s in shAstra-s. That is very tight focus. Questions such as "was this a regional practice? was it a later development? what was the motivation? what I/ you/ think about it? etc.." should kindly be moved to a separate thread.
--Best,KushagraOn Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 11:45 AM विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki) <vishvas...@gmail.com> wrote:--नमांसि।विदितम् एव बुधैर् यद् अवर्तन्त वर्तन्ते च शूद्राश् चण्डालाश्च स्त्रियोऽपि संस्कृतभाषका शास्त्रविशेषज्ञाः कवयश्च। नात्र प्रश्नः।शास्त्रे का स्थितिर् इति जिज्ञासा। तन्त्रेष्व् आगमेषु च शूद्रादिभ्योऽपि संस्कृतमन्त्रप्रयोगोपदेशादयो विहिताः। शुद्धवैदिकपरम्परायाम् - इतिहासपुराणादौ का दशा? विशिष्य भाषणविषये? (भाषणहीनो भाषाभ्यासो लेखनपठनश्रवणमात्रसिद्धो विचित्रो भाति। )स्कन्दपुराणे प्रभासक्षेत्रमाहात्म्ये २८तमे ऽध्याये निषेधो दृश्यते (७.१.२८.६९) -नोच्चरेत् प्रणवं मन्त्रं पुरोडाशं न भक्षयेत् ॥ ६९ ॥
न शिखां नोपवीतं च नोच्चरेत् संस्कृतां गिरम् ॥
तदेतत् करपात्रियतिनोदाहृतम् भाति ('संस्कृत भाषा ही सबकी भाषा है' यह कहना प्रत्यक्ष विरुद्ध है। शास्त्र की दृष्टि से भी संस्कृत द्विजातियों की ही भाषा कही गयी है । कई लोगों के लिए तो संस्कृत शब्दों का उच्चारण भी निषिद्ध है । 'नोच्चरेत् संस्कृतां गिरम्' (स्कन्दपुराण)। यही कारण है कि नाटकों में प्राकृत का प्रयोग अबाध रूप से होता है ।), शङ्कराख्येनात्रत्यसदस्येन चान्विष्य प्रकाशितम्।
अथ श्रीमन्नित्यानन्देन मिश्रोपाह्वेन "The hemistich न शिखी नोपवीती स्यान्नोच्चरेत्संस्कृतां गिरम् is quoted by Kamalākara Bhaṭṭa in his Nirṇayasindhu (निर्णयसिन्धु) under स्त्रीशूद्रयोः शिखाविचारः. He ascribes the quote as पाद्मे, i.e., to the पद्मपुराण. - https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.326320/page/n211/mode/1up " इति चोक्तम्।सम्बन्धेऽस्मिन् शास्त्रवाक्यान्तराणीष्यन्ते।----
Vishvas /विश्वासः
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/CAFY6qgHD8Z0vVwfDyK7Xx%2Bym9-an1nBY1oWUeUyDnkJZYyeNGg%40mail.gmail.com.
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/7aihuwshbl4/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/CADrasQpnXiOoMNuU4zf7jc%3DkuhoLcRWwzhrV4Bj0_1d2K1pswQ%40mail.gmail.com.
Satyan Sharma
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAFY6qgF5KRCjWskzHpGAebaA12868CAs248cPhg9w_s%2BAx1RNw%40mail.gmail.com.
विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki)
NamasteThe verse of स्कान्दपुराण (न शिखां नोपवीतं...) is said to be 'अपकृष्टशूद्रपरम्' in शूद्राचारशिरोमणि. The similar verse of पाद्मपुराण (न शिखी नोपवीती...) is said to be 'असच्छूद्रपरम्' in संस्कारदीपक. In the निर्णयसिन्धु, the same verse is said to be for असच्छूद्र as per some authorities.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAC%2Bp%3DfBxc%3D9VQmpjqeRmVssJP0D-kjtxKp98D6z2sD_NTvx-Rg%40mail.gmail.com.
shankara
shankara
Satyan Sharma
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/1699762208.336211.1627008775964%40mail.yahoo.com.
BVK Sastry (G-S-Pop)
Namaste
On < I think if 'संस्कृतां गिरम्' here means the non-Vedic Sanskrit language, and if reciting it is prohibited for Śūdras, then it is to be noted that in Śūdrācāraśiromaṇi and Śūdrakamalākara, in the portion for bhūtayajña, the Śūdra is told to recite a Sanskrit prayer (देवा मनुष्याः पशवो वयांसि ... तेषामिदं ते मुदिता भवन्तु॥). Also, in Śūdrācāraśiromaṇi, regarding Brahmayajña it is said 'किञ्च येषु स्तोत्रादिषु साक्षाच्छूद्रस्य पाठाभ्यनुज्ञानं पुराणे दृश्यते तत्पाठेन वा ब्रह्मयज्ञं निवर्त्तयेदिति (पृ० ११३, भाग १)'. > :
Some inconvenient questions, with a focus on < vidhi/ niShedha-s in shAstra-s. That is very tight focus >
The highlighted conditions set the worry on ‘ how tradition’ is being presented and ‘ misaligned’.
शास्त्रे का स्थितिर् इति जिज्ञासा - धर्म-शास्त्रं नदीवत् गङ्गावत् प्रवहति लोककल्याणाय. कूप-वापी-फलं. देवकल्याणीवत् –न सार्वजनीनंभवति
If the debate is limited to ‘ text- interpretation issue, then the term अपकृष्ट-शूद्र in शूद्राचारशिरोमणि – with the qualifying term ‘अपकृष्ट has all the explanation covered.
Why is the ‘ status of shudra reduced to’ – is a different question like ‘ why did the other varnas ( Brahmana/ Kshatriya/ Vaishya) fall in their status. ( Manu’s thoughts ! not mine). The entire section of ‘ Prayaschitta’ in dharma-shaastra’ has more details for this ‘ apa-krushtataa’.
If the individual ‘शूद्र’ has not come under the status of ‘अपकृष्ट’(= non compliant practices) the rule will not apply. As the book शूद्राचारशिरोमणि is a context- specific work, stretching it back and forth is not a right way to get at the intention of text. The ‘samskara’ for ‘shudra’ has its own unique format; and there are practices justifying the same with texts. It is for the individuals in the community to be complinat or other wise. The logic is a direct continuation of Gita (16-23 to 16-6) :
In current period, ‘ Saamjika-Dharma- Shaastra’ for ‘ prajaa (citizen) ’ of ‘ Bharath-Rashtra, now known as ‘ India’ ‘The Constitution, for ‘We the people of ….’.
If any ‘Varna-ashrama- individual’ -community desires and thinks that they need to carry a special identity based on ‘ PEROSNAL DHARMA-SHAASTRA ( Vyakti – Vishista Dharma Shaastra) by the authority of historical / sacred/ practice/ culture/ tradition/ special texts, THEN, the stake needs to be claimed as a petition for ‘Amendment –Review of Fundamental rights (Articles: 25-28) of citizens under appropriate provisions and forums’.
Why is this right approach? The constitution of India stands by the standard: यतो धर्मः ततो जयः – For more details, one may read (Late) Hon.justice Rama Jois’s work.
Additional points which one may prefer to ignore if not interested.
A) Why constrict < 'संस्कृतां गिरम्' > to < Vedic Sanskrit / classical Sanskrit > ? – Any specific reason ? why overlook/ discredit the precept and practice of ‘Samskrutha-Stotra’ for EVERY ONE in society since 6th century where we see a proliferation of ‘bhakti-stora sahitya’ composed and socially adapted under the guidance of ‘acharyas’ ? Example: Soundarya lahari , morning prayers and many other ‘prarthana’?
B) Why overlook the backdrop of ‘Varna-Ashrama- Aachara –paddhati’ framework of social dynamics in Indian society which made ‘ local cultural adaptations of ‘ shaastra’ as ‘ practical ‘aachaara- sampradaya’ ? Take any specific historic cross section in time: the ‘desha-aachara’ – regional custom-culture mode of ‘shaastra-abhyaya –anushthana’ was at variance., even amongst ‘brahmanas’.
C) The institutional model of ‘teaching ‘Samskruth Language’ was a ‘Guru-Kul’. Teaching ‘Chandas and Bhashaa, Prakrut and other desi languages was discipline options by pre-qualification. The size and model operations of ‘ Gur-kul’ did change from its famed ‘ Nalanda’ model to ‘ family Gurukuls’ over a period of centuries. So did the student admission, teachers preference to teach, learners interest and social support to ‘practicing teachers’. The modern schooling model- starting with ‘Montessori’ model to ‘Government funded university’ institutional education has distanced out itself from all types of ‘gur-kul’ frame work.
So, why mix up and compare ‘Samskruth- language -education model’ used for ‘ sacred texts as sacred language’ at incompatible institutional frameworks?
- ‘Personalized Teacher run –Vedic Guru-kul’ model (in mediavel period) to the ‘historical outlived model of ‘Nalanda- open school ( which lost its sheen with Buddhism) ’ or ‘ Kulapati- run King /state supported ancient model ( of BCE period) ’ or modern ‘Home school / religion institutions/ government funded social agenda language-schools and universities’?
- The meaning-practice- social identity associated with the term ‘shudra’ moved from the contexts of ‘Vedas, Gita, Kavya, itihasa-purana, Dharma-shaastra, Yoga-Vedanta’ . The boiling point is seen at Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar’s writings: The unanswered questions in his work : Who Were the Shudras? How they came to be the Fourth Varna in the Indo-Aryan Society, published in 1946. The book was dedicated to Mahatma Phule (or Fule): “Inscribed to the Memory of MAHATMA JOTIBA FULE,”. The questions in the book are based on several mix ups and bad social practices of day is a different issue for debate. How this projection of ‘shudra’ has percolated to Indian governance in the name of ‘religious minorities and others’ is out of scope issue.
D) The reforms of the kind being asked here went in to social correction mode, at least in Mysore ( Now Karnanataka) under the leadership of then Highness Wodeyars
in 19th and 20th century. It was nothing to do with British or muslim demands.
It is on record that ‘ doors opened by Brahmana communities inviting others to study Samskruth and Vedas was ‘ honourably rejected by the local communities’ and
‘ local communities wanted only brahmanas to learn-practice-profession related to Veda –Samskruth’. One may look for details of this historical annals and
Footprints of ‘Establishment and development of Sri Chamarajendra Samskruth Maha-Pathashaalaa’ : the for and against, the way the professor chairs were
established and student admissions were taken.
Regards
BVK Sastry
Nagaraj Paturi
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAC%2Bp%3DfDpL%3DsdQuv40Qxep1EYdHEdTD%2B%2BYLwx1_r-8cLbGC_FEA%40mail.gmail.com.
Subrahmanyam Korada
Professor of Sanskrit (Retd)
Ph:09866110741
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAJGj9eZuxvHCp%2BK1kLWQhmSDAoB9nOQ-2dGWXbmEMN8WXKcUAA%40mail.gmail.com.
विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki)
संस्कृतां गिरम् - इति वैदिकीं वाचमिति लिङ्गेन निर्णीयते --
श्रुतिलिङ्गवाक्यप्रकरणस्थानसमाख्यानां पारदौर्बल्यम् अर्थविप्रकर्षात् -- जै सू , पू मी - - 3-3-14 - अत्र लिङ्गं च - ’ यज्ञोपवीत्येवाधीयीत , इति वाक्यम् ।शूद्रैः भारतरामायणपुराणादिकम् अध्येयम् ।
एवं श्रवणम् एवानुज्ञातं न त्व् अध्ययनम् अपि ।
> अध्येतव्यं न चान्येन
> ब्राह्मणं क्षत्रियं विना।
श्रोतव्यम् एव शूद्रेण
> नाध्येतव्यं कदाचन ।
संस्कृतेन च भाषणीयम् इति निश्चप्रचम् ।
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAKj2ELSJThhtrqHb2k2D18x4aNYh7bBrFf5kgNXS-7S%3DotQZtQ%40mail.gmail.com.
विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki)
Satyan Sharma
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAFY6qgEOOowKSpSJZsbaA%3DeBC29Fzv6Z5T_ojAfyiV6pVQO-rw%40mail.gmail.com.
shankara
shankara
विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki)
> एतच्छूद्रातिरिक्तविषयम् ; 'शूद्रस्यानियताः केशवेशाः' इति वसिष्ठोक्तेः। यत् तु पाद्मे-'न शिखी नोपवीती स्यान् नोच्चरेत् संस्कृतां गिरम् ।' इति शुद्रम् उपक्रम्योक्तम् , तद् असच्छूद्रस्येति केचित् । विकल्प इति तु युक्तम् । अत एव हारीत:-'स्त्रीशूद्रौ तु शिखां छित्त्वा क्रोधाद् वैराग्यतो ऽपि वा । प्राजापत्यं प्रकुर्यातां निष्कृतिर् नान्यथा भवेत् ॥'- एतत्परिग्रहपक्षे । अत्र देशभेदाव्यवस्थेति दिक् ।।
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/520990117.638427.1627107208243%40mail.yahoo.com.
विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki)
On Sat, Jul 24, 2021 at 1:01 PM 'shankara' via भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत् <bvpar...@googlegroups.com> wrote:Namaste,Sudrakamalakara with Marathi translation published by NSP, 1915.
प्रसङ्गात् तत्र रुचिरं किञ्चिद् दृष्टम् - "अत एव गौड-स्त्रीणां विधवानां शिखा दृश्यते॥"
> नोच्चरेत् संस्कृतां गिरम् ॥२॥
> न पठेद् वेदवचनं
> त्रिषवं न हि सेवयेत् ॥
> नमस्कारेण मन्त्रेण
> क्रियासिद्धिर् भवेद् ध्रुवम् ॥ ३ ॥ > न शिखी नोपवीती स्यान्
> नोचरेत्संस्कृतां गिरम् ॥
> मध्यपत्रे न भुञ्जीत