Brahmin affiliation to Veda and Sutra?

[Madhav M. Deshpande]

Dear Colleagues,

     We know that each Brahmin is affiliated traditionally with a particular Veda/Shakha and a particular Sūtra.  However, what is the ritual affiliation for those Brahmins who are traditionally called Dvivedi, Trivedi and Chaturvedi?  Do they have concurrent multiple Vedic/Sutra affiliations?  I was told by the Ratate family in Banaras that their personal Vedic affiliation is with Ṛgveda, and yet academically/professionally they became Atharvavedins.  I am wondering if the situation with Dvivedis, Trivedis and Chaturvedis is similar, in the sense that they academically study two, three or four Vedas, and yet have a particular one Veda as their family affiliation.  Any information, including textual references, would be helpful.  With best wishes,

Madhav Deshpande

Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

[Sivasenani Nori]

Sir

I know a Yajurvedin who learnt Rigveda and Asvalayana because there was only a Rigveda teacher nearby. Nowadays it is difficult to find a kramaantasvaadhyaayin who learnt one Veda. I guess those who have learnt two thoroughly would be very rare. There are two Krishnayajurveda-ghanapaaThins who grace our Vedasabhaa, who seem to know quite a bit of Rigveda but they don't claim to be Rigvedic pundits.

From a Saastric view, all Saakhaas and all Smrtis are authoritative to all (Mimaamsaa: SaakhaantaraadhikaraNam) with the following rules of conflict resolution:

1. In case of Sruti vs.  Smrti, former prevails.
2. Own Sutra vs.  Other Sutra, former prevails.
3. Other Sutra 1. Vs.  Other Sutra 2, one consistent with aacaara prevails

Also,  one is supposed to learn all Vedas starting with ones own. So it may be concluded that subject of study does not have a bearing on the custom of ones family.

Regards
N. Siva Senani

--
निराशीर्निर्ममो भूत्वा युध्यस्व विगतज्वरः।। (भ.गी.)
---
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.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bvparishat.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[sunil bhattacharjya]

Namaste,

Is there the practice that if a non-athavavedin (by birth)  wants to study the  Atharvaveda (in the traditional setup) one has to undergo a second upanayana ?  If this is so, then traditionally the Chaturvedis alone should be able to study the Atharvaveda by birth.

Regards,

Sunil KB

[Dipak Bhattacharya]

At present, affiliation to a particular Veda is something immutable. But this position could not be very old. Is there any relevant rule in the late Vedic scripture or the Dharmaṥāstras on that? One finds gotra rules of endogamy and exogamy (Baudhāyana) but none about Vedic affiliation. It must have been later that the situation gained a static position. I found objection raised against my (and earlier my father’s) working on the Atharvaveda. The particular word used by the person, revered by many, when he came to know that I was a Ṛgvedin, was so demeaning that I cannot print it here. But is not this strictness non-Ṥāstric? As far as I know there is no Ṥāstric entity as Ṛgvedin or Sāmavedin or Yajurvedin.

It is not impossible that Dayānand Sarasvati knew the position of the Ṥāstras in this regard. He changed his object in Vedic study and was not quite vocal about his Vedic affiliation. He was in agreement with the scriptures in that.  

If my idea is not correct someone may kindly point out.

Bset

DB

[Shrivathsa B]

hariH OM,

I think you are referring to the word 'shaakhaaraNDa'. I heard this word for the first time about two years ago. I wasn't careful enough to ask the scholar who used the word for the reference thereof.

The position that there may not have been strict shaakhaa entities and gotras such as Rgvedin, vishvaamitra etc. cannot be sustained because
1. Veda has usages such as udgaataa, hotaa, adhvaryu etc.
2. in yaj~na there are certain rituals which pertain to particular Vedas and also particular gotras. (e.g. soma lataa can be bought only from a braahmaNa of kutsa gotra. There should be some justification for this in Veda, else it wouldn't have been so in yaj~na).
3. Many instances in the Veda which say that the descendants of a particular gotra did so and so etc.

svasti,
      JAYA BHAVAANII BHAARATII,
                                                      shrivathsa.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

>I found objection raised against my (and earlier my father’s) working on the Atharvaveda.

 

"working on " is different from learning to recite.

 

There is no rule restricting anyone from "working on " any of the four Vedas.

 

With regard to learning to recite too, how would it have been possible for persons learning more than one Veda if there would have been prohibition on a person belonging to one s'AkhA from learning another one ?

 

The rule is, to my knowledge that one can learn to recite any other branch after learning one's own.

 

One who does not learn his own s'AkhA and tries to learn another s'AkhA could have been treated as 'not loyal to' 'infidel to'  his own s'AkhA.

 

 

 

 

Prof.Nagaraj Paturi

Hyderabad-500044

[K S Kannan]

Even abhidhAna-cintAmaNi cites this word with its definition:

s'AkhA-raNDo'nya-s'AkhakaH

On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 11:54 AM, Shrivathsa B <shrivath...@gmail.com> wrote:

--

Dr. K.S.Kannan

Professor, 

Centre for Ancient History and Culture,

Jain University

CMS Annex, 319, 17th Cross, 25th Main,

6th Phase, J P Nagar, Bangalore - 560 078

(Ex-Director, Karnataka Samskrit University)

[Hnbhat B.R.]

I remember this point had been discussed earlier in this group. I could not remember the exact title of the topic enough to enable the search.

As Nagaraj has replied the learning of one's own शाखा is mandatory though it does neither prohibit nor prescribe learning another शाखा than his own as the sentence of तैत्तिरीयोपनिषत् lays down is generally applicable to learning Veda-s

सत्यं वद। घर्मं चर। स्वाध्यायान्‌ मा प्रमदः।

Though there is no reference to any thing to specific to any Veda or Yajus Taittiriya for that matter, the adjectives स्व one's own makes it specific to the शाखा of Veda one belongs if any prescribed. The question is about the source restriction and related to one's family or Gotra are prescribed. It is customary to state one's शाखा, गोत्र, प्रवर etc. during अभिवादन during Sandhyavandana daily. The question is where this relation between these is prescribed mandatory restricting their relation.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Coming to the question of Prof. Deshpande, that initiated the thread, the surnames/family names dvivedi, trivedi, chaturvedi etc. may have nothing to with the s'AkhA affiliations of the families with those surnames.

 

Even if there would have been one person who learnt two, three or four vedas, the title acquired by that person can become the family name.

 

There is a Telugu speaking family name 'dvivedula'. That does not mean they are affiliated to two different s'AkhAs of veda.

 

--
निराशीर्निर्ममो भूत्वा युध्यस्व विगतज्वरः।। (भ.गी.)
---
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.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bvparishat.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Prof.Nagaraj Paturi

Hyderabad-500044

[rniyengar]

On Thursday, August 20, 2015 at 2:51:01 PM UTC+5:30, nagarajpaturi wrote:

Coming to the question of Prof. Deshpande, that initiated the thread, the surnames/family names dvivedi, trivedi, chaturvedi etc. may have nothing to with the s'AkhA affiliations of the families with those surnames.

 

I think the above is the correct explanation. Firstly end-names like dvivedi, trivedi, chaturvedi do not appear in Vedic texts. The counting of the learnt Vedas as 2, 3 and 4 indicates that the default was 1 which was the rule and exceptions arose later.

Geographically the above surnames are prevalent in UP, Gujarat, MP,... north of Vindhyas. I remember to have read in a historical novel by name : Banabhatta's Autobiography (Original Hindi by HP Dwivedi. I read the Kannada translation) that King Harsha during his coronation as Emperor gave away titles which included Dwivedi, Trivedi etc ( or may be Trivaarii-> Tiwari? Writing from memory E& O.E !). The first attested appearance of such names as Brahmins is seen in the Khajuraho inscription (10th Cent.) of the Chandellas. Hence my feeling is the three special surnames are part of social history of the classical period rather than of the Vedic times which is still retained at the most basic level in the gotra, sutra and S'aakha. 

RN Iyengar

[Ajit Gargeshwari]

Coming to the question of Prof. Deshpande, that initiated the thread, the surnames/family names dvivedi, trivedi, chaturvedi etc. may have nothing to with the s'AkhA affiliations of the families with those surnames.

 

​I agree with the above view. I know many Chaturvedis and dvivedis who don't know  to recite any Vedas not even the Purusha Sukta​

[Venkata Sriram]

Namaste,

With my limited knowledge, I vaguely remember certain verses from "bhATTa-chintAmaNi" which says:

yE kulamparayaiva dvivEdinaH trivEdinO vA tEshAm api EkashAkhA nityaM, anyat abhyudayArthaM aicchikaM iti dyOtanArthatvEna sArthakyAt / tEna vEdAn adheetya vEdau vA vEdaM vApi yathAkramam iti smrutEH iyaM Eva shrutirmUlam iti draSTavyaM //

One may be chaturvedi, trivedi, dvivedi or ekavedi but even those who have learnt 4 vedas, they should undergo "nitya-swAdhyAya" of their swa-vEda shAkha which is coming down from their forefathers.  This nitya swAdhyAya of swa-shAkha is the "nitya-karma" for them whereas other rest of the veda-shAkhAs can be taken up for "abhyudaya" (abhyudayArthaM aicchikaM iti....).

regs,

sriram

[Venkata Sriram]

Namaste,

Whether chaturvedi / trivedi / dwivedi can recite purusha sukta or not is not the issue.  Somewhere up above in the hereditary line, a mahAtma studied 4 / 3 / 2 vedas and the name stuck down the line to their descendants.  Similarly, the title "somayAji" in telugu smArta families.  A great person in their family might have performed sOmayAga and the title stuck down the line to their descendants.  This is something as the saying goes "my grandfather consumed lots of ghee; for evidence come and smell my palm".  

There is a greatness associated with these names that inspire awe and reverence for such noble souls who sacrificed their lives for vEda-samrakSaNa and karma-kANDa.  

For that matter, the title "sarma" has got a very deep significance but unfortunately, the telugu brahmin families without knowing it's importance put this before their names.  The shatapatha brAhmaNa discusses this aspect and says that the vaTu after donning the "kriSNa jeenaM" (the deer skin), pledges that he would protect the vaidika dharma with his anuSTAna. 

atha kriSNAjInaM AdattE "sharmasi" iti 

"sharmAsi sharma mE yaccha" 

The yajna-purusha having left the company of dEvatAs, assumed the form of kriSNa-mriga.  The dEvatAs followed that mriga and took the kriSNAjeenaM (the skin). Hence, the yajna-shareera is called "kriSNAjEnaM".  The three colours viz., shukla,kriSNa and babhru on the kriSNAjeena represent rg, sAma & yajurvEda.  Hence, the kriSNAjInaM represents "vEda-trayi". 

While taking the "yajna-deeksha", the yajamAni wears this kriSNAjInaM and thus gets protected from the vEda-chandas.  Such a vaTu / yajna-dIkSitaH is supposed to be "sarma".  

The word "samhita" is also derived from the same meaning "yasmAt ayaM chandObhiH swasharIraM samAhitavAn tasmAt samAdhAnahEtutvAt chandaH pATaH samhitA iti uchyatE" 

So, such words have deeper meanings but unfortunately the later family members don't know the importance of such lofty secrets behind it.  

Unfortunately, we know only such "sOmayAjis" who hang around bars, restaurants and are chain-smokers.

No offence meant.

regs,

sriram

[sunil bhattacharjya]

Namaste,

In the Vedic rituals the Atharva priest (the Brahma-priest) had the exalted status that he supervised the performance of the rituals by the Rig, Yajur and the Sama priests, and that should mean that the Atharva-priest was the expert on the rituals of Chaturveda. It could be that this exalted status was accorded to the Atharva priests by the time of the Mahabharata, by which time the Atharva veda not only achieved parity with the Veda-trayee, even the kings were advised to appoint the Atharvavedin priest only. Whether the Atharvavedin priests had the surname (family-name)  of Chaturvedi or not, there must have indeed been Chaturvedi brahmins in the past.

Regards,

Sunil KB

[Ajit Gargeshwari]

​Dear Venkat Sriram,

I did not ask for you preaching please don't make uncalled remarks. I don't think you have contributed anything substantial to the questions raised.​ Thanks for letting me know that Chaturveds Dvivedis Trivedis donot know" ​deeper meanings but unfortunately the later family members don't know the importance of such lofty secrets behind it" and you got divine revelations about the the great inner significance associated with Sir including Sarma which is just a common Sir name used all over India.

No offense meant

[Nityanand Misra]

On Wednesday, August 19, 2015 at 5:04:06 PM UTC+5:30, Madhav M. Deshpande wrote:

Prof. Deshpande Ji

The following information on dvivedī/dūbe, tripāṭhī/tivārī, and caturvedī/caube families among the Sarayūpārīṇa Brahmins may be of help for your research. The Sarayūpārīṇas are originally from eastern Uttar Pradesh, and they have 26 gotras in all. From the gotra and family name, one can find out the śākhā, sūtra, etc.

Source: Panḍita Rājanārāyaṇa Śāstrī (1998). Sarayūpārīṇa Brāhmaṇa Vaṃśāvalī (11th edition). Varanasi: Master Kheladilal Sankataprasad Sanskrit Library. pp. 71-75.

Rājanārāyaṇa Śāstrī was formerly the Head of Department of Sāṅkhya and Yoga at the Sampurnanda Sanskrit University. He was also a Ghaṭikaśataka and Śatāvadhāna poet.

गोत्र	वंश	वेद	शाखा	सूत्र	प्रवर	उपवेद	शिखा	पाद	देवता
गौतम	द्विवेदी	शुक्लयजुर्वेद	माध्यन्दिनी	कात्यायन	आङ्गिरस, बार्हस्पत्य, गौतम	धनुर्वेद	दक्षिण	दक्षिण	शिव
शाण्डिल्य	त्रिपाठी	सामवेद	कौथुमी	गोभिल	शाण्डिल्य, असित, कश्यप/देवल	गन्धर्ववेद	वाम	वाम	शिव
भरद्वाज	द्विवेदी, चतुर्वेदी	शुक्लयजुर्वेद	माध्यन्दिनी	कात्यायन	आङ्गिरस, बार्हस्पत्य, भरद्वाज	धनुर्वेद	दक्षिण	दक्षिण	शिव
कश्यप	दूबे, चौबे	सामवेद	कौथुमी	गोभिल	कश्यप, असित, देवल	गन्धर्ववेद	वाम	वाम	विष्णु
अत्रि (कृष्णात्रि)	दूबे	ऋग्वेद	शाकल्य	आश्वलायन	अत्रि, अर्चनानस, शयावाश्व	आयुर्वेद	वाम	वाम	ब्रह्मा
वत्स	दूबे, तिवारी	सामवेद	कौथुमी	गोभिल	वत्स, च्यवन, आप्नवान, और्व, जामदग्न्य	गन्धर्ववेद	वाम	वाम	विष्णु
अगस्त्य	त्रिपाठी	शुक्लयजुर्वेद	माध्यन्दिनी	कात्यायन	अगस्त्य, माहेन्द्र, मायोभुव	धनुर्वेद	दक्षिण	दक्षिण	शिव
कात्यायन	चतुर्वेदी	शुक्लयजुर्वेद	माध्यन्दिनी	कात्यायन	विश्वामित्र, किल, कात्यायन	धनुर्वेद	दक्षिण	दक्षिण	शिव
साङ्कृत	चतुर्वेदी, त्रिपाठी	शुक्लयजुर्वेद	माध्यन्दिनी	कात्यायन	साङ्कृत, साङ्ख्यायन, किल	धनुर्वेद	दक्षिण	दक्षिण	शिव
भार्गव	तिवारी	सामवेद	कौथुमी	गोभिल	भार्गव, च्यवन, आप्नवान, और्व, जामदग्न्य	गन्धर्ववेद	वाम	वाम	विष्णु
वशिष्ठ	तिवारी, चौबे	शुक्लयजुर्वेद	माध्यन्दिनी	कात्यायन	वशिष्ठ, शक्ति, पराशर	धनुर्वेद	दक्षिण	दक्षिण	शिव
कौशिक	द्विवेदी				विश्वामित्र, कौशिक, अघमर्षण
कुशिक	चौबे				विश्वामित्र, देवरात, देवल

Regards, Nityanand

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Since s'AkhA affiliation meant only the allocated/accepted share of responsibility in preserving the Veda by learning to recite it, 

1. The rule must be one can learn any number of branches of the Veda provided he learns the branch affiliated to his  family lineage first.

2.  For 'working on' a branch of the Veda, there are no  such restrictions. Hence those who used offensive words against Prof. Bhattacharya and his father when they proposed to 'work on' Atharva Veda were wrong. Such comments usually come from personality problems such as jealousy.

--
निराशीर्निर्ममो भूत्वा युध्यस्व विगतज्वरः।। (भ.गी.)
---
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.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bvparishat.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Prof.Nagaraj Paturi

Hyderabad-500044

[Dipak Bhattacharya]

Is there any rule in the Sastras restricting a reciter from reciting any Veda?

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Rule that  one can learn any number of branches of the Veda, provided he learns the branch affiliated to his  family lineage first,

is a result of putting together

a. Purana evidencs for allocation of branches of vedas to Brahmin lineages

b. Current memory of families about the branch allocated to them

c. Numerous evidences of a single veda pundit knowing to recite more than one Veda

d. attempt to identify the rationale behind the notion of s'AkhAraNDa

and resolving the relation between a, b, c and d without mutual conflict.

[Nityanand Misra]

On Wednesday, August 19, 2015 at 5:04:06 PM UTC+5:30, Madhav M. Deshpande wrote:

Dear Colleagues,

I was told by the Ratate family in Banaras that their personal Vedic affiliation is with Ṛgveda, and yet academically/professionally they became Atharvavedins.  

Prof. Deshpande Ji

Is this the family of Paṇḍita Janārdana Gaṅgādhara Raṭāṭe?

Thanks, Nityanand

[Madhav Deshpande]

Dear Nityanand Ji,

     I don't know the current members of the Ratate family.  I visited Banaras around 1980 in search of manuscripts of the Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā, and at that time met Pandit Narayan Shastri Ratate at his home on Durga Ghat.  As an aside, it turned out that his wife was from Pune, and that my father was involved in arranging her marriage.  Pandit Ratate allowed me to make a photocopy of the manuscript he had in his collection, and I used it, along with 20 other manuscripts, in the preparation of my edition of this text.

     In any case, this whole discussion has been very informative, and I want to thank everyone who contributed to it.  With best wishes,

Madhav Deshpande

Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

     

--

निराशीर्निर्ममो भूत्वा युध्यस्व विगतज्वरः।। (भ.गी.)
---
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.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bvparishat.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Madhav M. Deshpande
Professor of Sanskrit and Linguistics
Department of Asian Languages and Cultures
202 South Thayer Street, Suite 6111
The University of Michigan
Ann Arbor, MI 48104-1608, USA

[Dipak Bhattacharya]

Could you please indicate the sources?

[Nityanand Misra]

On Friday, August 21, 2015 at 3:47:01 PM UTC+5:30, Madhav Deshpande wrote:

Dear Nityanand Ji,

     I don't know the current members of the Ratate family.  I visited Banaras around 1980 in search of manuscripts of the Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā, and at that time met Pandit Narayan Shastri Ratate at his home on Durga Ghat.  As an aside, it turned out that his wife was from Pune, and that my father was involved in arranging her marriage.  Pandit Ratate allowed me to make a photocopy of the manuscript he had in his collection, and I used it, along with 20 other manuscripts, in the preparation of my edition of this text.

     In any case, this whole discussion has been very informative, and I want to thank everyone who contributed to it.  With best wishes,

Madhav Deshpande

Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

     

Dear Prof. Deshpande Ji

 

It is the same family. Janārdana Gaṅgādhara Raṭaṭe was the nephew of Nārāyaṇa Śāstrī Raṭaṭe. Janārdana Raṭaṭe’s magnum opus is the Sanskrit verse translation of Tulasīdāsa’s Rāmacaritamānasa, named the Mānasabhāratī, published by Bhuvan Vani Trust (Lucknow) in 1981. The work was blessed by none other than Dharmasamrāṭ Karapātra Svāmī, and had praise from the who’s who of Varanasi in 1981 including Paṭṭābhirāma Śāstrī. I have a copy of the work, and as a lover of both Sanskrit and Rāmacaritamānasa, I find it a worthy and unparalleled tribute in Sanskrit to Tulasīdāsa’s original work.

 

Janārdana Gaṅgādhara Raṭaṭe is no more. His son Mādhava Janārdana Raṭaṭe is a professor at the Faculty of Sanskrit Vidya Dharma Vijnan, BHU.

 

As per the Inventory of Sanskrit Scholars, the family still lives at Durga Ghat, Varanasi. The book also lists the contact details of Mādhava Janārdana Raṭaṭe. 

Thanks, Nityanand  

[Madhav Deshpande]

Dear Nityanand Ji,

     If, by chance, you have a pdf of this Sanskrit translation of Tulasiramayan, I would love to have it.

     I still remember the interesting conversation with Mrs. Ratate during our visit to Banaras in 1980.  She asked me where I was from.  I said I came from Pune, and that my name was Madhav Murlidhar Deshpande.  She told me that there was a Murlidhar Deshpande, a friend of her uncle, who lived in Juni Tapkir Galli in Pune, and whether he was my relation.  Indeed, that was the same as my father.  To this, she mentioned that my father, along with her uncle, were involved in arranging her marriage.  It was such a surprising connection that not only made my access to their Sanskrit manuscript easy, we had a dinner invitation from the Ratate family.  Sometimes, interesting connections are revealed by pure accident.  With best wishes,

Madhav Deshpande

Thanks, Nityanand  

--

निराशीर्निर्ममो भूत्वा युध्यस्व विगतज्वरः।। (भ.गी.)
---
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.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bvparishat.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Sources ? For what?

Dear Prof. Bhattacharya,

You said, 

"I found objection raised against my (and earlier my father’s) working on the Atharvaveda. The particular word used by the person, revered by many, when he came to know that I was a Ṛgvedin, was so demeaning that I cannot print it here. But is not this strictness non-Ṥāstric? " (emphasis mine)

I said in my recent post :

  For 'working on' a branch of the Veda, there are no  such restrictions. Hence those who used offensive words against Prof. Bhattacharya and his father when they proposed to 'work on' Atharva Veda were wrong. Such comments usually come from personality problems such as jealousy. (emphasis new)

I do not know if you were happy or unhappy with my saying that those who offended you were wrong.

Your recent question was:

Is there any rule in the Sastras restricting a reciter from reciting any Veda?

My response was:

Rule that  one can learn any number of branches of the Veda, provided he learns the branch affiliated to his  family lineage first,

is a result of putting together a, b, c & d. 

Only #(a) among them is connected to book sources as you can see. b and c are ethnographic. d is lexicographic and is obviously a documentation of usages. 

Which of them do you want me to provide here?

Regards,

Nagaraj

[sunil bhattacharjya]

Dear Nityanandaji,

I came across a story (but do not have any reference with me at this time) that the Sarayupariya brahmins alone agreed to help Lord Ram to perform a sacrifice to atone for the killing of Ravana, who was a brahmin and a  great vedic scholar, and for this reason the other brahmins shunned them. Then those brahmins moved to one side of the Sarayau river and settled thereand hence earned that name.  Are you aware of any such story and the associated details?

Regards,

Sunil KB

--

[Dipak Bhattacharya]

Dear Professor Paturi,

I had a simple question. The statement 'provided he learns the branch affiliated to his  family lineage first,' was the occasion. I just wanted to know where the concept of a Vedic ;saakhaa affiliated to one's family lineage occurs in the Sastras. I am sorry if I have not been clear in my expression of the query or if I unknowingly became the cause of any different and wrong impression. I offer unqualified apology if such an impression has been created. But the query was absolutely inoffensive.

I hope that query is clear. I shall be gratified to know the answer.

Best

DB. 

[Subrahmanyam Korada]

नमो विद्वद्भ्यः

Brahmin affiliation to Veda and Sutra?

Any information, including textual references, would be helpful

                                                     - विद्वान् माधव देशपाण्डे                                                          

Is there any rule in the Sastras restricting a reciter from reciting any Veda?

                                     

                                                     - विद्वान् दीपक् भट्टाचार्यः

1. वेदः  2.सूत्रम्

कृष्णयजुर्वेदः - तैत्तिरीयोपनिषत् - व्याकरणम् - मीमांसा - कल्पः (गृह्यसूत्रम् , धर्मशास्त्रम्) 

1. कृष्णयजुर्वेदः (तैत्तिरीयारण्यकम् - स्वाध्यायब्राह्मणम् ) --

स्वाध्यायो’ध्येतव्यः (यं यं क्रतुमधीते तेन तेनास्येष्टं भवति .. ) - 2-15

Here स्वाध्याय means सु + अध्यायः = अध्ययनम् ( see कैयट for निष्पत्ति) of entire वेद , i.e. all वेदs.

स्वाध्यायः अध्येतव्यः (कर्तव्यः) - like पाकं पचति ।

सायणाचार्य in his 

ऋग्वेदभाष्यभूमिका says the following -

तेषां च वेदानां सर्वेषाम् अन्यतमस्य वा स्वप्रज्ञानुसारेण  अध्ययनम् उपनीतेन कर्तव्यम् । तथा च याज्ञवल्क्यः स्मरति (also मनुः) - 

वेदानधीत्य वेदौ वा वेदं वापि यथाक्रमम् - इति ।

एकवेदपक्षे  पितृपितामहादिपरम्पराप्राप्त एव वेदो’ध्येतव्य इत्यभिप्रेत्य  ’स्वाध्यायो’ध्येतव्य’ (तै आ 2-15) इति  ’स्व ’ शब्दः आम्नातः । तच्चाध्ययनं  न काम्यम् किन्तु नित्यम् ।

काण्वसंहिताभाष्योपक्रमणिका --

अत एव ’स्वाध्यायो’ध्येतव्य ’ इति स्वकीयशाखाध्ययनम् अनुष्ठानविशेषाय विहितम् ।

अथर्ववेदभाष्यभूमिका --

’ स्वाध्यायो’ध्येतव्य ’ इत्यनेन विधिना कृत्स्नस्यापि वेदराशेः अर्थावबोधपर्यन्तं तस्य बोधितत्वात् ।

 In तैत्तिरीयोपनिषत् - शिक्षावल्ली -

वेदमनूच्याचार्यो’न्तेवासिनम् अनुशास्ति -  सत्यं वद । धर्मं चर । स्वाध्यायान्मा प्रमदः ...

Both , Samkaracarya (भाष्यम्) and  Vidyaranya ( बृहद्विवरणम् ) , say that स्वाध्याय means अध्ययनम् ।

व्याकरणम् -

Panini  puts the term स्वाध्याय in द्वारादिगण -

under न य्वाभ्यां पदान्ताभ्यां पूर्वौ तु ताभ्यामैच् (7-3-3) there is the सूत्रम् - द्वारादीनां च (7-3-4) - the words in द्वारादिगण won't get either वृद्धि or ऐजागम ।

Here Patanjali says the following --

कः पुनः अर्हति स्वाध्यायशब्दं द्वारादिषु पठितुम् ? एवं किल पठ्येत - स्वम् अध्ययनं स्वाध्याय इति ।तच्च न । सुष्ठु वा अध्ययनं स्वाध्यायः ( शोभनं वा अध्ययनं स्वाध्यायः । अथापि स्वम् अध्ययनं स्वाध्यायः) एवमपि न दोषः।

कैयटः -

सुष्ठु वा अध्ययनम् इति । ’ अन्येषामपि दृश्यते ’ इति दीर्घः । आङ् वा मध्ये प्रक्षेप्तव्यः । (also पदमञ्जरी) ।

So स्वाध्याय means सु अध्ययनम् ।

महाभाष्यम् --

ब्राह्मणेन निष्कारणं षडङ्गो वेदो’ध्येतव्यो ज्ञेयश्च ।

मीमांसा  (न्ययप्रकाशिका) --

तथा हि - ’स्वाध्यायो’ध्येतव्यः ’ इत्यध्ययनविधिः सकलस्य  वेदस्य अध्ययनकर्तव्यतां बोधयन्  सर्वो वेदः प्रयोजनवदर्थपर्यवसायीति सूचयति , निरर्थकस्य अध्ययनानुपपत्तेः।

So  the entire वेद has to be learnt - but since  it is difficult to study all the four Vedas ( अनन्ता वै वेदाः - काठके) one may first go for the वेद that is being recited by his fore fathers and father .

सूत्रम् --  

यः स्वशाखोक्तम् उत्सृज्य परशखोक्तम् आचरेत् ।

अप्रमाणमृषिं कृत्वा सो’न्धे तमसि मज्जति । ( वसिष्ठः)

स्वे स्वे गृह्ये यथा प्रोक्ताः तथा संस्कृतयो’खिलाः ।

कर्तव्या भूतिकामेन नान्यथा भूतिमृच्छति । (अङ्गिराः)

But

यन्नाम्नातं स्वशाखायां परोक्तमविरोधि च ।

विद्वद्भिरनुष्ठेयम् अग्निहोत्रादिकर्मवत् ॥ (कात्यायनः)

So one has to follow his own सूत्रम् , but when something is not prescribed in his own गृह्यसूत्रम् , then he may borrow from other शाखागृह्यसूत्रम् ।

धन्यो’स्मि

                            

Dr.Korada Subrahmanyam
Professor of Sanskrit, CALTS,
University of Hyderabad,
Ph:09866110741(M),91-40-23010741(R),040-23133660(O)

Skype Id: Subrahmanyam Korada

Blog: Koradeeyam.blogspot.in 

[Dipak Bhattacharya]

Dear Vidvadvara,

I did not question the compulsion of svādhyāya. My query is about the  śāstric injunction that one cannot go beyond a family śākhā. <अत एव ’स्वाध्यायो’ध्येतव्य ’ इति स्वकीयशाखाध्ययनम् अनुष्ठानविशेषाय विहितम् ।> I like to trace the copncept of स्वकीयशाखा in the śāstras.
Best

DB .

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Veda-recitation is older than the event through which Vedavyasa classified the Vedas. Whichever is the evidence for classifying the Vedas into śākhas is the evidence for s'ākha affiliations of Brahmins too, since to imagine Veda separated from its reciter is not possible. In fact, it can be said that Vyasa classified the reciters by informing them to which śākhā the mantras they had been reciting belonged. So śākhā affiliations of the Veda-reciting families can be said to be older than the classification of the Vedas. But that affiliation can be said to be just informal, the reciters not knowing  to which śākhā their repertoire of mantras belonged. Nevertheless, they had been reciting only a certain group of mantras as handed down to them from their forefathers. Vyasa did not disturb this informal, unconscious share-'allocation' or share-acceptance in the preservation of the huge repertoire of oral tradition. He just formalized the sharing by informing the reciters what they had been reciting is to be called as per the principles enshrined in the Vedas itself. The sharing then became conscious, organized, reinforced and thus better established. 

 

How else can the classification of a material preserved only in the oral recitation tradition be done?

 

In folk-narrative-performing communities, for example, a certain community as a whole has a huge repertoire of narratives and narrative songs. But each family within the community has certain number of those narratives and narrative songs in which it specializes. The family itself may not know that all the narratives and the narrative songs in which they specialize belong to a certain category of narratives. A folklorist, ethnologist or a cultural anthropologist after studying the whole community may come up with an observation that some of the families are specializing in heroic ballads, some others in village goddess narratives, some others in deified women narratives, some others in fairy tale narratives and so on. These specializations could continue even if the artists are not informed about this organization among themselves that existed without heir knowledge. As a researcher engaged in such studies professionally I can tell you that a feedback from research to the performer about such facts always reinforced the organization of specializations.   

[Ajit Gargeshwari]

स्वकीयशाखा  the terms usage has to be traced in Dharma Shastra . There are injunctions and details about Veda Adhyana and how much one can learn when can one stop etc.  I did not find specific texts in Dharma Sastra or Mimamsa literature which talk about studying ones own shakha and can person study more than one shakha. Its clear in from Dharma Shastra  one can study one two or even three Vedas.

The position on Atharvana Veda study is also not clear when Dharma Shastras say one can study One two and three Vedas is Atharvan Veda excluded when the mention Threeor Trayi?

Can a Rig vedin learn atharvana Veda in stead of Rig Veda or is a persons Veda also determined by birth? Is a person affiliated to a veda or to shakha?

Regards
Ajit Gargeshwari
न जायते म्रियते वा कदाचिन्नायं भूत्वा भविता वा न भूयः।
अजो नित्यः शाश्वतोऽयं पुराणो न हन्यते हन्यमाने शरीरे।।2.20।।

[Nagaraj Paturi]

What does the word Rigvedin mean ?

 

To me, it means the specialization of the family in the preservation of the Vedas.

 

Any specialization as part of such systems in traditional Indian society has been right cum duty.

 

It is a potter's right to make pots. Since others have been prohibited from making pots under this right, it becomes the potter's duty to make pots.

 

Yes, it is a good and useful textual research to trace the origin of the term स्वकीयशाखा or a synonymous or a related term, though textual research alone can not all the questions of a predominantly oral tradition correctly. 

 

Concept of Vedtrayee excluding Atharvaveda has been widely discussed.   

--
निराशीर्निर्ममो भूत्वा युध्यस्व विगतज्वरः।। (भ.गी.)
---
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.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bvparishat.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Prof.Nagaraj Paturi

Hyderabad-500044

[Ajit Gargeshwari]

Sorry If I am not clear I am riposting a Rig Vedin is person who studies or learns rig veda similarly a Yajur Vedin and Sama Vedin. Thanks Prof Paturi for you comments. My questions have not been answered.

स्वकीयशाखा  the terms usage has to be traced in Dharma Shastra . There are injunctions and details about Veda Adhyana and how much one can learn when can one stop etc.  I did not find specific texts in Dharma Sastra or Mimamsa literature which talk about studying ones own shakha and can person study more than one shakha. Its clear in from Dharma Shastra  one can study one two or even three Vedas.

The position on Atharvana Veda study is also not clear when Dharma Shastras say one can study One two and three Vedas is Atharvan Veda excluded when the mention Threeor Trayi?

Can a Rig vedin learn atharvana Veda in stead of Rig Veda or is a persons Veda also determined by birth? Is a person affiliated to a veda or to shakha?

Regards
Ajit Gargeshwari
न जायते म्रियते वा कदाचिन्नायं भूत्वा भविता वा न भूयः।
अजो नित्यः शाश्वतोऽयं पुराणो न हन्यते हन्यमाने शरीरे।।2.20।।

[sunil bhattacharjya]

Namaste,

It is not about study of a particular Veda alone, the rituals and the Sanskara-vidhis also  have to conform generally to the ways of the particular veda. For example, we are yajurvedins and we follow mostly the yajurvedic ways for the rituals, with some rituals being performed by the tantric ways and probably with an option to adopt a few of the ways of the Rigvedins.

As regards the studying the different Vedas I understand that the restrictions are not unsurmountable, provided one can get the right teacher/ Vedic school for the same.

Regards,

Sunil KB

[Ajit Gargeshwari]

Each Veda has more than one shakha. When the rules about study of one veda apply does it mean study of at particular shakha  and its associated ritual texts with which the family of the learner belongs and then move to another shakha and then to another veda. Can a person study a Shakha to which his family doesn't belong to? Can a person study another Veda itself first that his family belong to? Is Veda with its Shakha also fixed by birth or can it be changed as per the learners choice?

Are answers to these questions  explicitly stated in any Dharma Shastra or it commentaries. Can scholars please give specific references.

Regards
Ajit Gargeshwari
न जायते म्रियते वा कदाचिन्नायं भूत्वा भविता वा न भूयः।
अजो नित्यः शाश्वतोऽयं पुराणो न हन्यते हन्यमाने शरीरे।।2.20।।

[K S Kannan]

Quoting from memory, I think the smRti-verse defining s'AkhA-raNDa itself begins with

yas sva-s'AkhAm parityajya

Dr. K.S.Kannan

Professor, 

Centre for Ancient History and Culture,

Jain University

CMS Annex, 319, 17th Cross, 25th Main,

6th Phase, J P Nagar, Bangalore - 560 078

(Ex-Director, Karnataka Samskrit University)

[Ajit Gargeshwari]

Can you please elaborate

Regards
Ajit Gargeshwari
न जायते म्रियते वा कदाचिन्नायं भूत्वा भविता वा न भूयः।
अजो नित्यः शाश्वतोऽयं पुराणो न हन्यते हन्यमाने शरीरे।।2.20।।

[K S Kannan]

The query was about the word svakIya-s'AkhA.

The word sva-s'AkhA, of the same signification, is of common occurrence - is what I wanted to convey.

[Dipak Bhattacharya]

The authority has to be pinpointed. The existence of dvivedins, trivedins and catuirvedins points to the permissibility of one priest performing duties of hotr or udgaatr or adhvaryu. Restricting one to a single Veda, then, is not sastric.

DB  

[Nagaraj Paturi]

By using the words quoted by Prof. Kannan from his memory, I searched and found the following :

 

At

 

 http://www.sanskritworld.in/public/assets/book/book_50dadad005300.txt,

 

The text begins with

 

केशवकृता कौशिकपद्धतिः

ओं नमोऽथर्ववेदाय । अथर्ववेदस्य संहिताविधेर्विवरणं क्रियते । तत्राथर्ववेदस्य नव भेदा भवन्ति । तत्र चतसृषु शाखासु शौनकादिषु कौशिकोऽयं संहिताविधिः । स च गोपथब्राह्मणादर्थवादादि परित्यज्य विधिमात्रं कल्पयित्वा विधिः कृतः । तत्र यथोपयोगं टीका क्रियते संहिताविधेः । तत्राह सूत्रं कौशिकः

[दर्शपूर्णमासविधिः]

Inside the text, there is,

 

पश्चात्श्राद्धं सर्वेषु संस्कारेषु कुर्यातिति दारिलभाष्यकारस्याभिप्रायेण व्याख्यात इति । श्राद्धं कृत्वा पश्चात्कर्मेति रुद्रभद्रौ । एते भाष्यकाराः कौशिकस्य । तथा च मनुः ऽअकृत्वा मातरः श्राद्धं न कुर्यात्कर्म वैदिकम्ऽ । वैदिकेषु कर्मसु नित्यनैमित्तिककाम्येषु श्राद्धं कृत्वा ततः कर्म कुर्यात् । सर्वत्र श्राद्धं कृत्वा शान्तिकपौष्टिकाभिचारकाद्भुतानि अथर्ववेदविहितानि कर्तव्यानि । पुंसवनादिसंस्काराः स्वशाखाविहिताः कर्तव्या न कुर्यात्पारतन्त्रिकाः । पुनः
स्वशाखां तु परित्यज्य परशाखामुपासते.
स शूद्रवद्बहिः कार्यो हव्यकव्येषु गर्हितः ॥

 

http://www.sanskritdictionary.com/asat/5860/4

 

has under entry असत्

 

 असत् -अध्येतृ m. a Brāhmaṇa who reads heterodox works, one who neglects his own Śākhā and studies another; also calledशाखारण्डः, स्वशाखां यः परित्यज्य अन्यत्र कुरुते श्रमम् । शाखारण्डः स विज्ञेयो वर्जयेत्तं क्रियासु च ॥ -आगमः - See more at: http://www.sanskritdictionary.com/asat/5860/4#sthash.1zm3mDQV.dpuf

 

 

[K S Kannan]

Preoccupied with some urgent work as I am, I can't find time to trace the first sources. However, here is what I could easily lay my hands on.

1. Vasis"Tha says 

ekades'e'pi s'AkhanAm madhye yo'nyatamam vrajet /

sva-s'AkhAm samparityajya s'AkhA-raNDas sa ucyate//

svas'AkhAm yaH parityajya pArakyam adhigacchati/

sa s'Udravad bahis"kAryas sarva-karmasu sAdhubhiH//

Atma-s'AkhAm parityajya para-s'AkhAsu vartate/

ucchettA tasya vams'saya rauravam narakam vrajet//

svIya-s'AkhojjhitA yena brahma tenojjhitam param/

brahma-haiva sa vijn"eyas sadbhir nityam vigarhitaH//

2. LogAks"hi says

yas sva-s'AkhAm parityajya pArakyam adhigacchati/

sa sUdravad bahis"kAryo havya-kavyes"u dAtRbhiH//

3. Vasis"Tha further says, and this very relevant here :

adhItya s'AkhAm AtmIyAm para-s'AkhAm tataH paThet//

4. A second definition of s'AkhAraNDa is given by Vasis"Tha :

na jAtu para-s'Akhoktam budhaH karma samAcaret/

Acaran paras'Akhoktam s'AkhA-raNDaH prakIrtitaH//

5. However, a license has been given by KAtyAyana thus :

yan nAmnAtam sva-s'AkhAyAm paroktam avirodhi ca/

vidvadbhis tad anus"Theyam agnihotrAdi-karmavat//

_______________________________________

All these are gleaned from pp. 132-134,

SmRti-candrikA (of devana-bhaTTa),

(ed.)L. Srinivasacharya,

Pub : Mysore 1914

Government Oriental Library Series

(Bibliotheca Sanskrita No. 43).

_______________________________

I hope this suffices for the present.

[R. N. iyengar]

The discussion seems to be drifting in various directions. When one talks of authority my understanding is Paddhatis are weaker than Sutras. Hence if we accept Grihya sutras to be at a higher level the choice of how many Vedas to be practiced is left to the person concerned. We read in the Bodhayan Grhya Sutra

The above injunction defines S'rotriya and goes up to R.shi. This seems to encourage one to become a Dwivedi, Trivedi,....... When only one branch of Veda had to be studied, it must have been the hereditary branch as kuladharma.

 I may be corrected if I am wrong.

RNI

On Saturday, August 22, 2015 at 12:22:10 PM UTC+5:30, Dipak Bhattacharya wrote:

The authority has to be pinpointed. The existence of dvivedins, trivedins and catuirvedins points to the permissibility of one priest performing duties of hotr or udgaatr or adhvaryu. Restricting one to a single Veda, then, is not sastric.

DB  

On Sat, Aug 22, 2015 at 12:10 PM, K S Kannan <ks.kann...@gmail.com> wrote:

The query was about the word svakIya-s'AkhA.

The word sva-s'AkhA, of the same signification, is of common occurrence - is what I wanted to convey.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

While describing an atithi, Apastamba dharma sutra too defines a S'rotriya as

 

धर्मेन वेदानां एकएकां शाखां अधीत्य श्रोत्रियो भवति  2.3.6.4.

--
निराशीर्निर्ममो भूत्वा युध्यस्व विगतज्वरः।। (भ.गी.)
---

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.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bvparishat.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Prof.Nagaraj Paturi

Hyderabad-500044

[Madhav Deshpande]

Dear BVP Colleagues,

     This whole discussion has been very useful.  I have discussed some of these issues in an article that was published a few years ago, and I have attached the pdf of that article.  In posting a question on this list, I was specifically interested in what happens to Dvivedis, Trivedis and Chaturvedis, and some of the responders have pointed out that even these reciters perform their personal/family rituals only according to their svaśākhā.  I once again thank everyone who responded to my questions.  With best wishes,

Madhav Deshpande

Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

[Dipak Bhattacharya]

Is it assumed that the there was a historical development from the ekaśākhin śrotriya up to the kalpādhyāyin ṛṣi. The grades are intended in the passage as qualitative ones and not as stagewise developed. So the existence of bahuśākhins in earlier stages is not contradicted by that.

DB

 

On Sat, Aug 22, 2015 at 2:38 PM, R. N. iyengar <narayana...@gmail.com> wrote:

--
निराशीर्निर्ममो भूत्वा युध्यस्व विगतज्वरः।। (भ.गी.)
---

[Subrahmanyam Korada]

नमो विद्वद्भ्यः

I did not question the compulsion of svādhyāya. My query is about the  śāstric injunction that one cannot go beyond a family śākhā. <अत एव ’स्वाध्यायो’ध्येतव्य ’ इति स्वकीयशाखाध्ययनम् अनुष्ठानविशेषाय विहितम् ।> I like to trace the copncept ofस्वकीयशाखा in the śāstras  

                                                 - Vidvan  Deepak Bhattacarya

In fact, I quoted the norm ' स्वाध्यायो’ध्येतव्यः ’ and the commentaries to show that one should study all वेदs - which means that वेद directly ordains study of all वेदs - so the question of restricting one to study the family शाखा does not arise - even if any शास्त्रम् says so (as far as my knowledge goes there is no such norm) it will not be authoritative - श्रुतिस्मृत्योः विरोधे तु श्रुतिरेव गरीयसी ।

I agree I should have been clearer .

स्वकीयशाखा --

Here is Kumarila -

स्वशाखाविहितैश्चापि शाखान्तरगतान्विधीन् ।

कल्पकारा निबध्नन्ति सर्व एव विकल्पितम् ॥

सर्वशाखोपसंहारो जैमिनेश्चापि सम्मतः ।  तन्त्रवार्तिकम् , 1-3-2-3

धन्यो’स्मि

Dr.Korada Subrahmanyam
Professor of Sanskrit, CALTS,
University of Hyderabad,
Ph:09866110741(M),91-40-23010741(R),040-23133660(O)

Skype Id: Subrahmanyam Korada

Blog: Koradeeyam.blogspot.in 

[Ajit Gargeshwari]

Thank you Prof. Korada. An option would be as you have suggested श्रुतिस्मृत्योः विरोधे तु श्रुतिरेव गरीयसी but in this context the Shrutis as texts don't say much on स्वकीयशाखा. Grahya Sutras downwards in terms of chronology give varying different and contradicting  views as Prof Kannas, Prof Paturi  and Prof Iyengars postings have indicated.

Regards
Ajit Gargeshwari
न जायते म्रियते वा कदाचिन्नायं भूत्वा भविता वा न भूयः।
अजो नित्यः शाश्वतोऽयं पुराणो न हन्यते हन्यमाने शरीरे।।2.20।।

[Dipak Bhattacharya]

Many thanks Professor Korada. I am in full agreement with your assertion ' so the question of restricting one to study the family शाखा does not arise'. In that case our use of terms like Rgvedin, Yajurvedin etc should be just pointers to only later locally developed conventions without any implication of restriction of right or access to other Vedas. But are we not to draw another inference too -- that the hautra, audgaatra or aadhvaryava practice, or even aatharvana pracrtice, is not compulsorily hereditery?

Best

DB.

[K S Kannan]

Let me add a little more to the confusion, or rather, clarification, by supplying one specific information, 

which I thought was more or less evident, hence did not choose to cite. Scholars are welcome to draw their own inferences.

In the source that I cited, it is categorically stated that 

svAdhyAyo'dhyetavyaH means sva-s'AkhA first, others next. 

So, svadhyAya  = sva-s'AkhAdhyAya first.

Studying others, therefore, to the neglect of one's own was what was held reprehensible. 

It only says then : First things first; the rest, next. 

There it ends I suppose.

Now, the statement is :

manuH -

vedah kRtsno'dhigantavyas sarahasyo dvijanmanA //

rahasyam upanis"at/

adhigantavyo'dhyetavya ityarthaH/

tathA ca s'rutiH -

svAdhyAyo'dhyetavyaH - iti/

svakula-paramparAgatA s'AkhAdhyetavyeti yAvat/

After about 18 lines, it cites Vasis"Tha again, even more categorically :

adhItya s'AkhAm AtmIyAm para-s'AkhAm tataH paThet.

K.S. Kannan

[Nityanand Misra]

On Friday, August 21, 2015 at 9:11:21 PM UTC+5:30, Gitarthi wrote:

Dear Nityanandaji,

I came across a story (but do not have any reference with me at this time) that the Sarayupariya brahmins alone agreed to help Lord Ram to perform a sacrifice to atone for the killing of Ravana, who was a brahmin and a  great vedic scholar, and for this reason the other brahmins shunned them. Then those brahmins moved to one side of the Sarayau river and settled thereand hence earned that name.  Are you aware of any such story and the associated details?

Regards,

Sunil KB

Dear Dr. Bhattacharjya

I have heard this narrative and some similar ones but to the best of my knowledge, this is not found in any authentic historical or Purāṇic source. Panḍita Rājanārāyaṇa Śāstrī (whose work Sarayūpārīṇa Brāhmaṇa Vaṃśāvalī I cited earlier) discusses this narrative and dismisses it as kapolakalpita.

More can be discussed in a new thread.

Thanks, Nityanand

[Nityanand Misra]

On Friday, August 21, 2015 at 5:11:40 PM UTC+5:30, Madhav Deshpande wrote:

Dear Nityanand Ji,

     If, by chance, you have a pdf of this Sanskrit translation of Tulasiramayan, I would love to have it.

     I still remember the interesting conversation with Mrs. Ratate during our visit to Banaras in 1980.  She asked me where I was from.  I said I came from Pune, and that my name was Madhav Murlidhar Deshpande.  She told me that there was a Murlidhar Deshpande, a friend of her uncle, who lived in Juni Tapkir Galli in Pune, and whether he was my relation.  Indeed, that was the same as my father.  To this, she mentioned that my father, along with her uncle, were involved in arranging her marriage.  It was such a surprising connection that not only made my access to their Sanskrit manuscript easy, we had a dinner invitation from the Ratate family.  Sometimes, interesting connections are revealed by pure accident.  With best wishes,

Madhav Deshpande

Dear Prof. Deshpande Ji

Here are some more details of the book. The Mānasabhāratī is a facing page Sanskrit verse translation of the Rāmacaritamānasa which runs into 700+ pages and covers all the ~11,000 verses of the epic. I am attaching a sample page of the book from the Sundarakāṇda along with a photograph of the poet Janārdana Gaṅgādhara Raṭaṭe (also from the book). The book has praise from praśastis by Baṭukanātha Śāstrī Khiste, Revāprasāda Dvivedī, Karapātra Svāmī, Janārdana Datta Śukla, Viśvanātha Bhaṭṭācārya, and N. Paṭṭābhirāma Śāstrī. The book costs INR 400 to buy in India, and 35 USD to buy on Amazon. 

I do not have a PDF of the book, and it is still copyrighted. Moreover, the publishers who own the copyright have been neighbours of my paternal family for the last three generations in Lucknow. However, I can have a copy of the book sent to you. I will write to you off the list for the same.

Nityanand

[Subrahmanyam Korada]

नमो विद्वद्भ्यः

1. Vidvan Ajit Gargeswari --

Yes , you are right -- here is Kumarila (1-3-2) --

यद्वा विद्यमानशाखागतश्रुतिमूलत्वम् एव अस्तु । कथम् अनुपलब्धिः इति चेत् ? उच्यते -

शाखानां विप्रकीर्णत्वात् पुरुषाणां प्रमादतः।

नानाप्रकरणस्थत्वात् स्मृतेर्मूलं न दृश्यते ॥

.....तत्र वेदप्रलयः प्रसज्येत ।

न च अवश्यं मन्वादयः सर्वशाखाध्यायिनः । तं हि प्रयत्नेन शाखान्तराध्यायिभ्यः श्रुत्वा अर्थमात्रं स्ववाक्यैः अविस्मरणार्थं निबध्नीयुः ।

2. Vidvan Deepak Bhattacarya -

"our use of terms like Rgvedin, Yajurvedin etc should be just pointers to only later locally developed conventions without any implication of restriction of right or access to other Vedas. But are we not to draw another inference too -- that the hautra, audgaatra or aadhvaryava practice, or even aatharvana pracrtice, is not compulsorily hereditery? "

Yes ऋग्वेदिन् , यजुर्वेदिन् etc are  later developments - in the sense the गृह्यसूत्रs are formed on the lines of  four वेदs - a ऋग्वेदिन्  does not require an अग्निहोत्रम् - it is in his palm - so on and so forth . So like स्वशाखा , there is स्वसूत्रम् also and these things are known to those who studied गौतमधर्मसूत्रम् etc. with commentary .

होता , उद्गाता , अध्वर्युः , ब्रह्मा --

The practice  need not  necessarily be hereditary - but  it is !  Why?

Generally , whichever वेद is there in the family / वंश , the same is studied . This practice is meaningful - one has to preserve the tradition / सूत्रम् of that वेद - so one is bounden by the circumstances to make it hereditary .

एष एव यज्ञः तस्य मनश्च वाक् च वर्तनी । तयोरन्यतरां मनसा संस्करोति ब्रह्मा , वाचा होताध्वर्युरुद्गातान्यतराम् ( छान्दोग्योपनिषत् 4-16-1-2)

स्मर्यते च --

ऋग्वेदेन होता करोति सामवेदेन उद्गाता यजुर्वेदेन अध्वर्युः सर्वैः ब्रह्मा ( सायणः - 

अथर्ववेदभाष्यभूमिका)

यद् ऋचैव हौत्रं क्रियते  यजुषा आध्वर्यवं साम्ना उद्गीथं व्यारब्धा त्रयी विद्या भवति । अथ केन ब्रह्मत्वं क्रियते ? त्रय्या विद्ययेति ब्रूयात् ( ऐतरेयब्राह्मणम् 5-33) .

ब्रह्मा should know all the  four वेदs .

3. Vidvan K S Kannan

स्वाध्यायो’ध्येतव्यः - स्वशाखाध्यायः 

I vaguely remember Nagesa saying this - but where ?

The same meaning is ' also ' supported by Sayanacarya - I quoted yesterday.

The problem is that in all other भूमिकाs Sayana said that it is सकलवेदाध्ययनविधि । 

If we take महाभाष्यम् - ’ द्वारादीनां च ’ - it is all वेदs .

Finally , I think that we can arrive at a conclusion that - one should first learn स्वशाखा and if he can - may learn other शाखाs also .

गौतम and आश्वलायन - both have prescribed 12 years of ब्रह्मचर्यम् for each वेद - total 48 years !! Of course , there is some concession .

धन्यो’स्मि

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Finally , I think that we can arrive at a conclusion that - one should first learn स्वशाखा and if he can - may learn other शाखाs also .

 

 

                                                                                                                                                             -------------- Prof. Korada

 

Vasis"Tha further says, and this very relevant here :

adhItya s'AkhAm AtmIyAm para-s'AkhAm tataH paThet//

                                                                                                                                    ---------- Prof. Kannan

 

With regard to learning to recite too, how would it have been possible for persons learning more than one Veda if there would have been prohibition on a person belonging to one s'AkhA from learning another one ?

 

The rule is, to my knowledge that one can learn to recite any other branch after learning one's own.

 

                                                                                              

                                                                                                ------------ Nagaraj very early in the thread.

 

There seems to be a consensus in this regard.

 

[Nityanand Misra]

On Saturday, August 22, 2015 at 11:10:19 PM UTC+5:30, korada wrote:

The practice  need not  necessarily be hereditary - but  it is !  Why?

 

If I may add to the discussion, the Bhāgavata Purāṇa says that the various branches arose from the the four original niṣṇāta (perfectly versed) teachers of the RV, YV, SV and AV—Paila, Jaimini, Vaiśampāyana, and Sumantu respectively—dividing their own branch (स्वं स्वं वेदं) variously and passing them on to their śiṣya-s, praśiṣya-s, and śiṣya-s of praśiṣya-s. This confirms the notion that the concept of śākhā may not have been hereditary to begin with, but was more aligned with the guru-śiṣya paramparā. This may have become hereditary with time due to practical considerations.

 

तत्रर्ग्वेदधरः पैलः सामगो जैमिनिः कविः। वैशम्पायन एवैको निष्णातो यजुषामभूत्॥ १.४.२१ ॥

अथर्वाङ्गिरसामासीत्सुमन्तुर्दारुणो मुनिः। इतिहासपुराणानां पिता मे रोमहर्षणः॥ १.४.२२ ॥

त एत ऋषयो वेदं स्वं स्वं व्यस्यन्ननेकधा। शिष्यैः प्रशिष्यैस्तच्छिष्यैर्वेदास्ते शाखिनोऽभवन्॥ १.४.२३ ॥

 

Note the words used are शिष्यैः प्रशिष्यैस्तच्छिष्यैः, and not पुत्रैश्च पौत्रैस्तत्पुत्रैः or पुत्रैः प्रपुत्रैस्तत्पुत्रैः which would also have fit the metre.

 

[Nityanand Misra]

On Saturday, August 22, 2015 at 11:53:26 PM UTC+5:30, Nityanand Misra wrote:

On Saturday, August 22, 2015 at 11:10:19 PM UTC+5:30, korada wrote:

The practice  need not  necessarily be hereditary - but  it is !  Why?

 

the four original niṣṇāta (perfectly versed) teachers of the RV, YV, SV and AV—Paila, Jaimini, Vaiśampāyana, and Sumantu respectively—

Please read that as Paila, Vaiśampāyana, Jaimini, and Sumantu respectively.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Portion relevant to the present thread from Prof. Deshpande's article shared recently in the thread by him is as follows (pp. 345-346):

 

In support of this conclusion, Rāmakriṣṇa cites a number of traditional

authorities (Saṃskāragaṇapati, pp. 9–10):

 

tathā cāṅgirāḥ: sve sve gr̥hye yathā proktās tathā saṃsktayo ’khilāḥ, kartavyā bhūtikāmena nānyathā bhūtim r̥cchati.

 

gr̥hyakārikāyām api: pāramparyagato yeṣāṃ vedaḥ saparibṃhaṇaḥ, tacchākhaṃ karma kartavyaṃ tacchākhādhyayanaṃ tathā. adhītya śākhām ātmīyāṃ paraśākhāṃ tataḥ paṭhet, svaśākhāṃ tu parityajya śākhāraṇḍaḥ sa ucyate.

 

tathā ca vīramitrodaye vasiṣṭhaḥ: yacchākhīyais tu saṃskāraiḥ saṃskr̥to brāhmaṇo bhavet, tacchākhādhyayanaṃ kāryam anyathā patito bhavet.

 

śākhāntarīyakarmakaraṇe doṣam āha vasiṣṭhaḥ: na jātu paraśākhoktaṃ budhaḥ karma samācaret, ācaran paraśākhoktaṃ śākhāraṇḍaḥ sa ucyate. yaḥ svaśākhoktam utsr̥jya paraśākhoktam ācaret, apramāṇam r̥ṣiṃ kr̥tvā so ’ndhe tamasi majjati.

 

Thus (says) Angiras: “A person who wishes to attain well-being should carry out all rites of passage as they are prescribed in his own Gruhyasūtra. One performing these rites otherwise does not attain well-being.”

 

It is also said in the Gr̥hyakārikā: “Whichever Veda, along with its ancillary texts, is traditionally associated with a person, he should perform rites according to that specific Śākhā, and one should also study that particular Śākhā. After studying

one’s own Śākhā, one may study another Śākhā. One (who studies another Śākhā) abandoning one’s own Śākhā is called ‘traitor to his Śākhā’ [śākhāraṇḍa]”.

 

So is the quotation from Vasiṣṭha in Vīramitrodaya: “A person initiated with rites from a particular Śākhā should study that particular Śākhā. Otherwise he becomes a fallen person.”

 

Vasiṣṭha stipulates a fault in performing rites prescribed in a Śākhā which is not one’s own: “A wise man should never perform rites prescribed in another’s Śākhā. One who performs rites prescribed in another’s Śākhā is called a traitor to one’s own Śākhā. He who abandons rites taught in his own Śākhā and carries out rites taught in another’s Śākhā invalidates his own ṣi and sinks into blinding darkness.”

 

The only concession Rāmakr̥ṣṇa offers is that a person can accept rites prescribed in another Śākhā if they are not described in one’s own Śākhā, and do not contradict one’s own Śākhā.

 

This, he supports with a quotation from Kātyāyana :

 

yannāmnātaṃ svaśākhāyāṃ paroktaṃ avirodhi ca, vidvadbhis tad anuṣṭheyam agnihotrādikarmavat.

 

The rites which are not taught in one’s own Śākhā, and those which are prescribed in another Śākhā and do not contradict one’s own may be carried out by the learned, like the performance of the Agnihotra.

 

With such strictures, the various Śākhās of the Vedas gradually evolved into jātis, sub-caste communities with distinct social identities, and the relations between them became ever so complex.

--

निराशीर्निर्ममो भूत्वा युध्यस्व विगतज्वरः।। (भ.गी.)
---
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.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bvparishat.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Prof.Nagaraj Paturi

Hyderabad-500044

[विश्वासो वासुकेयः]

दक्षिणपादो नाम? वामपादो नाम?

गुरुवार, 20 अगस्त 2015 को 8:38:20 अपर UTC-7 को, Nityanand Misra ने लिखा:

On Wednesday, August 19, 2015 at 5:04:06 PM UTC+5:30, Madhav M. Deshpande wrote:

Dear Colleagues,

     We know that each Brahmin is affiliated traditionally with a particular Veda/Shakha and a particular Sūtra.  However, what is the ritual affiliation for those Brahmins who are traditionally called Dvivedi, Trivedi and Chaturvedi?  Do they have concurrent multiple Vedic/Sutra affiliations?  I was told by the Ratate family in Banaras that their personal Vedic affiliation is with Ṛgveda, and yet academically/professionally they became Atharvavedins.  I am wondering if the situation with Dvivedis, Trivedis and Chaturvedis is similar, in the sense that they academically study two, three or four Vedas, and yet have a particular one Veda as their family affiliation.  Any information, including textual references, would be helpful.  With best wishes,

Madhav Deshpande

Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

Prof. Deshpande Ji

The following information on dvivedī/dūbe, tripāṭhī/tivārī, and caturvedī/caube families among the Sarayūpārīṇa Brahmins may be of help for your research. The Sarayūpārīṇas are originally from eastern Uttar Pradesh, and they have 26 gotras in all. From the gotra and family name, one can find out the śākhā, sūtra, etc.

Source: Panḍita Rājanārāyaṇa Śāstrī (1998). Sarayūpārīṇa Brāhmaṇa Vaṃśāvalī (11th edition). Varanasi: Master Kheladilal Sankataprasad Sanskrit Library. pp. 71-75.

Rājanārāyaṇa Śāstrī was formerly the Head of Department of Sāṅkhya and Yoga at the Sampurnanda Sanskrit University. He was also a Ghaṭikaśataka and Śatāvadhāna poet.

गोत्र	वंश	वेद	शाखा	सूत्र	प्रवर	उपवेद	शिखा	पाद	देवता
गौतम	द्विवेदी	शुक्लयजुर्वेद	माध्यन्दिनी	कात्यायन	आङ्गिरस, बार्हस्पत्य, गौतम	धनुर्वेद	दक्षिण	दक्षिण	शिव
शाण्डिल्य	त्रिपाठी	सामवेद	कौथुमी	गोभिल	शाण्डिल्य, असित, कश्यप/देवल	गन्धर्ववेद	वाम	वाम	शिव
भरद्वाज	द्विवेदी, चतुर्वेदी	शुक्लयजुर्वेद	माध्यन्दिनी	कात्यायन	आङ्गिरस, बार्हस्पत्य, भरद्वाज	धनुर्वेद	दक्षिण	दक्षिण	शिव
कश्यप	दूबे, चौबे	सामवेद	कौथुमी	गोभिल	कश्यप, असित, देवल	गन्धर्ववेद	वाम	वाम	विष्णु
अत्रि (कृष्णात्रि)	दूबे	ऋग्वेद	शाकल्य	आश्वलायन	अत्रि, अर्चनानस, शयावाश्व	आयुर्वेद	वाम	वाम	ब्रह्मा
वत्स	दूबे, तिवारी	सामवेद	कौथुमी	गोभिल	वत्स, च्यवन, आप्नवान, और्व, जामदग्न्य	गन्धर्ववेद	वाम	वाम	विष्णु
अगस्त्य	त्रिपाठी	शुक्लयजुर्वेद	माध्यन्दिनी	कात्यायन	अगस्त्य, माहेन्द्र, मायोभुव	धनुर्वेद	दक्षिण	दक्षिण	शिव
कात्यायन	चतुर्वेदी	शुक्लयजुर्वेद	माध्यन्दिनी

...

[Hnbhat B.R.]

On 29-Sep-2015 9:40 pm, "विश्वासो वासुकेयः" <vishvas...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> दक्षिणपादो नाम? वामपादो नाम?

कस्मिन् सन्दर्भे  अत्र वा अन्यत्र वा इति सप्रकरणमुद्ध्रियताम्!

[विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki)]

from mobile - excuse spelling

nanu praaktane patray aavalir dattaa nityAnandamishreNa, yatra vaamavaametrapaadaas suucitaaH.

>
> --
> निराशीर्निर्ममो भूत्वा युध्यस्व विगतज्वरः।। (भ.गी.)
> ---

> 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/Ieby6emiYf4/unsubscribe.
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

[Hnbhat B.R.]

nanu praaktane patray aavalir dattaa nityAnandamishreNa, yatra vaamavaametrapaadaas suucitaaH.

"सप्रकरणमुद्ध्रियताम्!"  इत्येव भवान् प्रार्थितः, येन झटिति अर्थनिर्धारणं कर्तुं शक्यते।

[विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki)]

2015-09-30 19:37 GMT-07:00 Hnbhat B.R. <hnbh...@gmail.com>:

"सप्रकरणमुद्ध्रियताम्!"  इत्येव भवान् प्रार्थितः, येन झटिति अर्थनिर्धारणं कर्तुं शक्यते।

​अधस्तनावल्या॑म् पादा॑ख्यस्य​ स्तम्भ॑स्यार्थं जिज्ञासे।

--

--
Vishvas /विश्वासः

[Hnbhat B.R.]

​"अधस्तनावल्या॑म् पादा॑ख्यस्य​ स्तम्भ॑स्यार्थं जिज्ञासे।"

कुत्र दक्षपाद-वामपाद-शब्दौ प्रकोष्ठके ययोरर्थः जिज्ञास्यते? न मया दृश्येते एतौ शब्दौ!

--
निराशीर्निर्ममो भूत्वा युध्यस्व विगतज्वरः।। (भ.गी.)
---

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.

[विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki)]

2015-09-30 19:51 GMT-07:00 Hnbhat B.R. <hnbh...@gmail.com>:

कुत्र दक्षपाद-वामपाद-शब्दौ प्रकोष्ठके ययोरर्थः जिज्ञास्यते? न मया दृश्येते एतौ शब्दौ!

शिखाख्यस्थूणापार्श्वभूते॑ पादनामस्थम्भे॑ ननु लिखितौ॑ दृश्येते "वामदशिण"​शब्दौ॑? य॑था गौतमगोत्रका द्विवेदिवंशा भवन्ति दक्षिणशिखा दक्षिणपादा इति गम्यते?

[विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki)]

2015-09-30 20:04 GMT-07:00 विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki) <vishvas...@gmail.com>:

पादनामस्थम्भे॑

​स्तम्भ इत्येव :-)​

[Nityanand Misra]

On Tuesday, September 29, 2015 at 9:40:41 PM UTC+5:30, विश्वासो वासुकेयः wrote:

दक्षिणपादो नाम? वामपादो नाम?

दक्षिणपाद = extreme end of the right posterior appendage of the human body

वामपाद = extreme end of the left posterior appendage of the human body