Re: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} All sp oken languages (Vaak) deserve appellation Daivee Vak

[N.R.Joshi]

March 5, 2015

 

Dear Prof M. Deshpande, Dr. H.N.Bhat, Prof N. Paturi, Thanks for meaningful comments on my posting on Sanskrit as Daivi Vak. N.R.Joshi

---------------------------------------------

---------- Original Message ----------
From: Madhav Deshpande <mmd...@umich.edu>
To: "bvpar...@googlegroups.com" <bvpar...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} All spoken languages (Vaak) deserve appellation Daivee Vak
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2015 10:08:29 +0530

Such feelings of primacy for a given language are shared by numerous traditions across the world.  I have read publications arguing for the primacy of Hebrew, Arabic, and Tamil among other languages.  The Jain tradition claims that the Ardhamagadhi is the language of the Gods, while the Pali tradition claims Pali to be the original language of all beings (sabbasattānaṃ mūlabhāsā).  The Sanskrit tradition claimed such a position of primacy for Sanskrit.  While reading works belonging to any particular tradition, we need to keep it specific context in mind, and understand the claims of a given tradition within that specific context.  The Sanskrit grammarians and philosophers denying a primary meaning-conveying ability (śakti) to Apabhraṃśas, and granting them only the ability to remind the listener of the proper Sanskrit word, which only conveys meaning, are a good example of this insular tendency.  Granting the primary meaning-signifying ability to Apabhraṃśas and regional languages is seen only as an exceptional opinion, and only very late.  

 

Madhav Deshpande

 

--

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

 

--

____________________________________________________________
How Old Men Tighten Skin
63 Year Old Man Shares DIY Skin Tightening Method You Can Do From Home
healthylivinglifeguide.com

[Nagaraj Paturi]

The following is the portion of vAkyapadIyam that includes the phrase दैवीवाक् :

 

शब्दः संस्कारहीनॊ यॊ गौर् इति प्रयुयुक्ष्यतॆ /

तम् अपभ्रंशम् इच्छन्ति विशिष्टार्थनिवॆशिनम् // वाक्य_१।१७५ //

अस्वगॊण्यादयः शब्दाः साधवॊ विषयान्तरॆ /

निमित्तभॆदात् सर्वत्र साधुत्वं च व्यवस्थितम् // वाक्य_१।१७६ //

तॆ साधुष्व् अनुमानॆन प्रत्ययॊत्पत्तिहॆतवः /

तादात्म्यम् उपगम्यॆव शब्दार्थस्य प्रकाशकाः // वाक्य_१।१७७ //

न शिष्टैर् अनुगम्यन्तॆ पर्याया इव साधवः /

तॆ यतः स्मृतिशास्त्रॆण तस्मात् साक्षाद् अवाचकाः // वाक्य_१।१७८ //

अंब्वंब्व् इति यथा बालः शिक्षमाणॊ ऽपभाषतॆ /

अव्यक्तं तद्विदां तॆन व्यक्तौ भवति निश्चयः // वाक्य_१।१७९ //

ऎवं साधौ प्रयॊक्तव्यॆ यॊ ऽपभ्रंशः प्रयुज्यतॆ /

तॆन साधुव्यवहितः कश् चिद् अर्थॊ ऽभिधीयतॆ // वाक्य_१।१८० //

पारंपर्याद् अपभ्रंशा विगुणॆष्व् अभिधातृषु /

प्रसिद्धिम् आगता यॆन तॆषां साधुर् अवाचकः // वाक्य_१।१८१ //

दैवी वाग् व्यतिकीर्णॆयम् अशक्तैर् अभिधातृभिः /

अनित्यदर्शिनां त्व् अस्मिन् वादॆ बुद्धिविपर्ययः // वाक्य_१।१८२ //

उभयॆषाम् अविच्छॆदाद् अन्यशब्दविवक्षया /

यॊ ऽन्यः प्रयुज्यतॆ शब्दॊ न सॊ ऽर्थस्याभिधायकः // वाक्य_१।१८३ /

 

1. Nowhere in these verses is there a claim that Sanskrit is the origin of all the languages.

 

2. There is not even a claim that only Sanskrit words communicate meaning to any human being.

 

3. The verses are written from the standpoint of a Sanskrit speaker. Hence 'sAdhu words alone can communicate meaning' here means "words correct according to Sanskrit grammar alone can communicate meaning to a Sanskrit speaker. 

 

4.The awareness that a (grammatically correct) Sanskrit word does not communicate meaning to a peaker of apabhrams'a is also evident in the verse :

 

पारंपर्याद् अपभ्रंशा विगुणॆष्व् अभिधातृषु /

प्रसिद्धिम् आगता यॆन तॆषां साधुर् अवाचकः // वाक्य_१।१८१ //

 

5. Even the line दैवी वाग् व्यतिकीर्णॆयम् अशक्तैर् अभिधातृभिः is an evidence for the awareness that there are words that are not Sanskrit mixed in Sanskrit. But that mixing is attributed here to the inability of the less able Sanskrit speakers to retain the purity of Sanskrit. 

 

6. The expression दैवी वाग् here has reference only to 'the divinity' ( a word of veneration based on the understanding that the purity preserves the original culture and spirit embodied in the language) of the 'pure' Sanskrit.

 

Sorry for being long.

 

Thanks for the patience.     

--
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

[Hnbhat B.R.]

The same wih recently discussed word English word in its apabhramsa   in Sanskrit   form kekasya convey its saadhu form in  English cake, to the knower's of English word by reminding the meaning of its saadhu prayoga and not to those who do not kn9w English word. From this point, keksya is apabhramsa of English and not it is apabhramsa inSanskrit. 

[Nagaraj Paturi]

This is not response to the post of Dr Bhat.

 

Contnuing with my previous post,

 

of course , the verses are focussed on S'abdanityatva and S'abda anityatva also.

दैवी वाग् व्यतिकीर्णॆयम् अशक्तैर् अभिधातृभिः /

अनित्यदर्शिनां त्व् अस्मिन् वादॆ बुद्धिविपर्ययः // वाक्य_१।१८२ //

has its second half: 

अनित्यदर्शिनां त्वस्मिन् वादॆ बुद्धिविपर्ययः 

S'abda anityatvavaadins cite the very fact of mixing as evidence for speech being man-made.

But S'abdanityatva positi

on taken in these verses too does not mean Sanskrit is the origin of all the languages. Nor does it mean that only Sanskrit words communicate meaning to any human being.

 

 

On Sat, Mar 7, 2015 at 2:30 PM, Hnbhat B.R. <hnbh...@gmail.com> wrote:

The same wih recently discussed word English word in its apabhramsa   in Sanskrit   form kekasya convey its saadhu form in  English cake, to the knower's of English word by reminding the meaning of its saadhu prayoga and not to those who do not kn9w English word. From this point, keksya is apabhramsa of English and not it is apabhramsa inSanskrit. 

--

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

[Subrahmanyam Korada]

नमो विद्वद्भ्यः

Dear Prof Joshi - please try to understand the real position (in fact we have already discussed) -

स्फोट  is नित्यशब्द that is there and is the cause in denoting the meaning - वैखरी cannot denote the meaning .

When मध्यमा or स्फोट is always there how come it is not  being  heard (always) ?

It is due to  lack of व्यञ्जकध्वनि - वैखरी ।

वैखरी is प्रकाशक and स्फोट is प्रकाश्य -  and these two are the cause of the meaning -

द्वावुपादनशब्देषु शन्दौ शब्दविदो विदुः।

एको निमित्तं शब्दानाम् अपरो’र्थे प्रयुज्यते ॥ वाक्यपदीयम्, ब्रह्मकाण्डः, 44

Panini etc महर्षिs had identified two शब्दs , which are the real cause of denoting the meaning - one, वैखरी, is the cause of  स्फोटशब्द , the second one, स्फोटशब्द is the one that is useful in denoting the meaning (प्रयुज्यते = उपयुज्यते) .

विखरः = शरीरम् , तत्र भवः , सा  वैखरी वाक् ।

The above सिद्धान्त is सार्वत्रिकी / universal --

The स्फोटसिद्धान्त is for language in general - it can be Arabic or any other , including संस्कृतम् ।

Panini is compiling a व्याकरणम्  for an असत्यशब्द  called वैखरी thru असत्यमार्ग , i e  the प्रक्रिया may differ from वैयाकरण to वैयाकरण , but the शब्द , such as रामः, पचति etc. is नित्य । It can be राम + सु (पाणिनि) or राम + सि (शाकटायन) ।

Panini intends to get मोक्ष to the learners thru his व्याकरणम् ।

--------------------

दैवी वाक् -

संस्कृतम् means which has got संस्कार - 

संस्कृतम् = संस्कारः - सम् क्रु क्त - ’ नपुंसके भावे क्तः " (पा सू) , ’ संपरिभ्यां करोतौ भूषणे ’ (पा सू) सुडागमः , or निपातः - ’ संस्कृतं भक्षाः " (पा सू) 

संस्कृतम् अस्य अस्तीति मतुबर्थे अकारः , तस्य लोपश्च - संस्कृतम्

A language which has got व्याकरणसंस्कार --

व्याकरणम् is not grammar - it is a rough translation .

व्यकरणम् includes grammar (parts of speech etc) but not vice versa.

’ सिद्धे शब्दार्थसंबन्धे लोकतः, लोकतः अर्थप्रयुक्ते शब्दप्रयोगे शास्त्रेण धर्मनियमः क्रियते’ - is the first वार्तिकम् (पस्पशाह्निकम् - महाभाष्यम्)

शब्द , अर्थ and the संबन्ध between them, is नित्य , this is known thru शिष्टलोक (in व्याकरणम् - लोक means शिष्टलोक only) , thru शिष्टलोक  only it is also known that the शब्द is employed for अर्थ , and in such a situation what शास्त्रम्  is for ?

- it is for धर्मनियम - धर्माय नियमः -  ' if you use a शब्द (= साधुशब्द) like गौः as गौः , you will get धर्म (untranslatable) ' - needless to say धर्म leads one to मोक्ष - शब्दब्रह्मणि निष्णातः परं ब्रह्माधिगच्छति (भारतम् - शान्ति)

So संस्कृतम् is the only language that is associated with धर्म ।

In other words , in Indian tradition it is not possible to separate language from Philosophy .

Such a language , used to be called दैवी वाक् - the term संस्कृतम् is seen in वाल्मीकिरामायणम् ।

दैवी वाक् has been the (spoken) language not only in भूलोक but also in other लोकs and in वेदs वेदाङ्गs , Sciences etc - declares Patanjali  (पस्पशाह्निकम्)-

सर्वे देशान्तरे (वार्तिकम्)

भाष्यम् -

सर्वे खल्वप्येते शब्दाः देशान्तरेषु प्रयुज्यन्ते ।

नचैवोपलभ्यन्ते !

उपलब्धौ यत्नः क्रियताम् \ ( यत्नः = योगाभ्यासः - Korada)

महान् शब्दस्य प्रयोगविषयः । सप्तद्वीपा वसुमती, त्रयो लोकाः , चत्वारो वेदाः साङ्गाः सरहस्याः बहुधा भिन्नाः - एकशतम् अध्वर्युशाखाः , सहस्रवर्त्मा सामवेदः, एकविंशतिधा बाह्वृच्यम्, नवधा आथर्वणो वेदः , वाकोवाक्यम् , इतिहासः , पुराणम् , वैद्यकम् इत्येतावान्  शब्दस्य प्रयोगविषयः । 

एतावन्तं  शब्दस्य प्रयोगविषयम् अननुनिशम्य ’ सन्ति अप्रयुक्ताः ’ इति वचनं केवलं साहसमात्रमेव ।

So , without complete knowledge of all these things one should not  comment.

Since you are born in India I need not explain the use of दैवी वाक् in all संस्कारs .

Please take the help of a good scholar and study पस्पशाह्निकम् ।

The tradition has been uninterrupted -

साधुत्वज्ञानविषया सैषा व्याकरणस्मृतिः ।

अविच्छेदेन शिष्टानाम् इदं स्मृतिनिबन्धनम्॥( वा प , ब्र 142)

नैयायिकs argue that when an असाधुशब्द is employed then the relevant साधुशब्द is reminded  and one would get the meaning - just like in the case of a बाल -

अम्बाम्बेति यथा बालः शिक्ष्यमाणः प्रभाषते ।

अव्यक्तं तद्विदां तेन व्यक्ते भवति निश्चयः॥ ibid 152

एवम् साधौ प्रयोक्तव्ये यो’पभ्रंशः प्रयुज्यते ।

तेन साधुव्यवहितः कश्चिदर्थो’भिधीयते ॥ ibid 153

गौः is साधुः - गवी , गोता , गोपोतलिका etc are अपभ्रंशs. The latter are not accepted as पर्याय of the former .

Hari does not accept the above theory of नैयायिकs -this is not universal as those who do not know the साधुशब्द also , as we observe , speak to each other and there is no hitch in the transaction - after some time the असाधुशब्दs get established and people get the meaning thru them only -

पारंपर्यादपभ्रंशाः विगुणेष्वभिधातृषु ।

प्रसिद्धिमागता येषां साधुरवाचकः ॥ ibid 154

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

Personal Website: www.korada.org

On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 5:59 AM, N.R.Joshi <gira...@juno.com> wrote:

--

[Nagaraj Paturi]

 Prof. Korada's affirmation confirms the following:

 

1. The appellation Daivee Vaak for Sanskrit, at least to the extent of its mention in Vaakyapadeeyam, does not carry the sense which is the same as or similar to the claims made about various languages that that language is the origin of all other languages.

2. This appellation has got to do with the 'dharma' believed to be embodied /encapsulated in the 'original' Sanskrit due to its use by S'ishTas.

3. Though many of the aspects of language/speech discussed in vaakyapadeeyam such as stages of speech production are सार्वत्रिकी / universal , the appellation Daivee Vaak is not intended to be सार्वत्रिकी / universal as  'dharma' believed to be embodied /encapsulated in the 'original' Sanskrit due to its use by S'ishTas is believed to be the exclusive feature of Sanskrit. 

--

Prof.Nagaraj Paturi

Hyderabad-500044

[Bvk sastry]

Namaste

The discussions in this thread have  clarified many subtle points , taking reference to Panini- Patanjali tradition as given in Bhartruhari (- as vyakarana/ shabdaBrahma darshana). 

This spiritual linguistics approach (adhi-vacham/ daivee vak/ vak yoga) is the anchor of indian shaastra tradition in analyzing the vedic document.

As is clear from the extracts, the patanjali- endorsement is six- perspective unified analytics of veda=  Six vedanga systems augmentation to arrive at the meaning of veda. This vedanga tradition and tools is the foundation to build a vedanta thought from vedas.

This approach also shows why and how the historical social degenerative model of linguistics ( apabhramsha- prakrutha- desha bhashaa- videsha bhashaa) fail to explain vedic language analytics, highly praised over last two hundred years all over the world, by positioning vedic Sanskrit as a language in the basket of Indo-European languages.if this position of Vedic language is to be treated as poorva-paksha(- from 19th century time line), it may seem anachonistic that the answers are already present way back in prechristian era writings of Patanjali.

The position of vedanga vyakarana of Panini(- and vakyapadeeya philosophy) deals with a TRUE language that would be capable if TOTAL Expression of Intention in communication in a time- transcendent way. ( विवक्षाया: सत्येन समग्रतया उच्चारणम् = वैखरी )-संप्रत्ययार्थं -

This total process happens only in a refined expression and through a conscious ,user applied , rule anchor compliance in Sanskrit. Not to that full extent in other languages.

The designation- prakrit, apabhramsha, mlecchita is a marker if slippage from total true rule compliance. Each irreversible phase of language- usage degeneration (- like an isotope in chemistry) is given a name.

But the universality of Sphota process continues irrespective of the degenerate state; what lacks is the awareness of details. The clarity of how a thing works is different for a designer and end user. Every driver of car is not a designer of car or manufacturer! 

I hope this clarifies some subtle points in the thread pointed by Prof Korada and Paturi, especially on Apabhramsha - which may lead to inaccurate surmises.

Regards

Bvk Sastry

Sent from my iPhone

[N.R.Joshi]

March 10, 2015

 

Dear Prof. Korada,

 

I do not have proper words to appreciate your efforts to explain certain words and phrases to me. I have saved every of your posting on BVP. Your postings has lion’s share in increasing my knowledge about finer points in the thought process of the ancient India Vaiyākaraņas and Philosophers.

Now I would like to add this.

(1) I am happy to know the etymology of Samskritam word from your posting.

(2) I am happy to know that the Sphota siddhānta is for languages in general-it can be Arabic or any other, including Samskritam.

(3) In the verse listed here, am I correct in my understanding that out of two śabdas Upādāna śabda is Nimitta śabda and Sphota śabda is for meaning (Artha)?

द्वावुपादनशब्देषुशन्दौशब्दविदोविदुः।

एकोनिमित्तंशब्दानाम्अपरो’र्थेप्रयुज्यते

(4) Different people may pronounce Upādāna śabda slightly differently (Vaikharī) but for understanding of meaning one resort to sphota śabda. (Apabhraṁśas are exdcluded from consideration).

(5) Could we say that Upadana sabda is Kaarya sabda?

Please feel free to correct me and pardon my ignorance.

Thanks. N.R.Joshi.

____________________________________________________________
Old School Yearbook Pics
View Class Yearbooks Online Free. Search by School & Year. Look Now!
classmates.com

[N.R.Joshi]

Dated March 10, 2015

 

Dear Prof N.Paturi,

 

I agree fully with all 6 points from your posting and especially your explanation of Daivee Vak in the point # 6. I have no problem with the word ‘divinity’ as the word of veneration. THanks. N.R.Joshi.

 

-------------------------------------

---------- Original Message ----------
From: Nagaraj Paturi <nagara...@gmail.com>
To: bvpar...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} All sp oken languages (Vaak) deserve appellation Daivee Vak

Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2015 12:13:17 +0530

The following is the portion of vAkyapadIyam that includes the phrase दैवीवाक् :

 

 

शब्दः संस्कारहीनॊ यॊ गौर् इति प्रयुयुक्ष्यतॆ /

 

तम् अपभ्रंशम् इच्छन्ति विशिष्टार्थनिवॆशिनम् // वाक्य_१।१७५ //

 

अस्वगॊण्यादयः शब्दाः साधवॊ विषयान्तरॆ /

 

निमित्तभॆदात् सर्वत्र साधुत्वं च व्यवस्थितम् // वाक्य_१।१७६ //

 

तॆ साधुष्व् अनुमानॆन प्रत्ययॊत्पत्तिहॆतवः /

 

तादात्म्यम् उपगम्यॆव शब्दार्थस्य प्रकाशकाः // वाक्य_१।१७७ //

 

न शिष्टैर् अनुगम्यन्तॆ पर्याया इव साधवः /

 

तॆ यतः स्मृतिशास्त्रॆण तस्मात् साक्षाद् अवाचकाः // वाक्य_१।१७८ //

 

अंब्वंब्व् इति यथा बालः शिक्षमाणॊ ऽपभाषतॆ /

 

अव्यक्तं तद्विदां तॆन व्यक्तौ भवति निश्चयः // वाक्य_१।१७९ //

 

ऎवं साधौ प्रयॊक्तव्यॆ यॊ ऽपभ्रंशः प्रयुज्यतॆ /

 

तॆन साधुव्यवहितः कश् चिद् अर्थॊ ऽभिधीयतॆ // वाक्य_१।१८० //

 

पारंपर्याद् अपभ्रंशा विगुणॆष्व् अभिधातृषु /

 

प्रसिद्धिम् आगता यॆन तॆषां साधुर् अवाचकः // वाक्य_१।१८१ //

 

दैवी वाग् व्यतिकीर्णॆयम् अशक्तैर् अभिधातृभिः /

 

अनित्यदर्शिनां त्व् अस्मिन् वादॆ बुद्धिविपर्ययः // वाक्य_१।१८२ //

 

उभयॆषाम् अविच्छॆदाद् अन्यशब्दविवक्षया /

यॊ ऽन्यः प्रयुज्यतॆ शब्दॊ न सॊ ऽर्थस्याभिधायकः // वाक्य_१।१८३ /

 

1. Nowhere in these verses is there a claim that Sanskrit is the origin of all the languages.

 

2. There is not even a claim that only Sanskrit words communicate meaning to any human being.

 

3. The verses are written from the standpoint of a Sanskrit speaker. Hence 'sAdhu words alone can communicate meaning' here means "words correct according to Sanskrit grammar alone can communicate meaning to a Sanskrit speaker. 

 

4.The awareness that a (grammatically correct) Sanskrit word does not communicate meaning to a peaker of apabhrams'a is also evident in the verse :

 

पारंपर्याद् अपभ्रंशा विगुणॆष्व् अभिधातृषु /

 

प्रसिद्धिम् आगता यॆन तॆषां साधुर् अवाचकः // वाक्य_१।१८१ //

 

 

5. Even the line दैवी वाग् व्यतिकीर्णॆयम् अशक्तैर् अभिधातृभिः is an evidence for the awareness that there are words that are not Sanskrit mixed in Sanskrit. But that mixing is attributed here to the inability of the less able Sanskrit speakers to retain the purity of Sanskrit. 

 

6. The expression दैवी वाग् here has reference only to 'the divinity' ( a word of veneration based on the understanding that the purity preserves the original culture and spirit embodied in the language) of the 'pure' Sanskrit.

 

Sorry for being long.

 

Thanks for the patience.     

Prof.Nagaraj Paturi

Hyderabad-500044

[N.R.Joshi]

March 11, 2015

 

Dear BVK Namaste!

 

 I read your posting. According to Dr. Kalyanraman and Puranic Encyclopedia, there were people Mlecchaa living in the land now called the western Pakistan. Thanks NRJoshi

---------- Original Message ----------
From: Bvk sastry <sastr...@gmail.com>
To: "bvpar...@googlegroups.com" <bvpar...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} All sp oken languages (Vaak) deserve appellation Daivee Vak

Date: Sun, 8 Mar 2015 09:22:16 -0400

Namaste

 

The discussions in this thread have  clarified many subtle points , taking reference to Panini- Patanjali tradition as given in Bhartruhari (- as vyakarana/ shabdaBrahma darshana). 

This spiritual linguistics approach (adhi-vacham/ daivee vak/ vak yoga) is the anchor of indian shaastra tradition in analyzing the vedic document.

As is clear from the extracts, the patanjali- endorsement is six- perspective unified analytics of veda=  Six vedanga systems augmentation to arrive at the meaning of veda. This vedanga tradition and tools is the foundation to build a vedanta thought from vedas.

 

This approach also shows why and how the historical social degenerative model of linguistics ( apabhramsha- prakrutha- desha bhashaa- videsha bhashaa) fail to explain vedic language analytics, highly praised over last two hundred years all over the world, by positioning vedic Sanskrit as a language in the basket of Indo-European languages.if this position of Vedic language is to be treated as poorva-paksha(- from 19th century time line), it may seem anachonistic that the answers are already present way back in prechristian era writings of Patanjali.

 

The position of vedanga vyakarana of Panini(- and vakyapadeeya philosophy) deals with a TRUE language that would be capable if TOTAL Expression of Intention in communication in a time- transcendent way. ( विवक्षाया: सत्येन समग्रतया उच्चारणम् = वैखरी )-संप्रत्ययार्थं -

This total process happens only in a refined expression and through a conscious ,user applied , rule anchor compliance in Sanskrit. Not to that full extent in other languages.

The designation- prakrit, apabhramsha, mlecchita is a marker if slippage from total true rule compliance. Each irreversible phase of language- usage degeneration (- like an isotope in chemistry) is given a name.

 

But the universality of Sphota process continues irrespective of the degenerate state; what lacks is the awareness of details. The clarity of how a thing works is different for a designer and end user. Every driver of car is not a designer of car or manufacturer! 

 

I hope this clarifies some subtle points in the thread pointed by Prof Korada and Paturi, especially on Apabhramsha - which may lead to inaccurate surmises.

 

Regards

Bvk Sastry

Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 7, 2015, at 6:19 AM, Subrahmanyam Korada <kora...@gmail.com> wrote:

 

--

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.

____________________________________________________________
TaxSlayer
Max your refund with TaxSlayer.
taxslayer.com

[Subrahmanyam Korada]

नमो विद्वद्भ्यः

(3) In the verse listed here, am I correct in my understanding that out of two śabdas Upādāna śabda is Nimitta śabda and Sphota śabda is for meaning (Artha)?

द्वावुपादनशब्देषुशन्दौशब्दविदोविदुः।

एकोनिमित्तंशब्दानाम्अपरो’र्थेप्रयुज्यते

(4) Different people may pronounce Upādāna śabda slightly differently (Vaikharī) but for understanding of meaning one resort to sphota śabda. (Apabhraṁśas are exdcluded from consideration).

(5) Could we say that Upadana sabda is Kaarya sabda?  

                                        --विद्वान् जोशी

3.both are called उपादानशब्दs - means वाचकशब्दौ - the sound of rivers , वीणा (lute), birds , animals etc are also शब्दs(ध्वन्यात्मक) , but they cannot be the cause of 'understanding' - वाचक (वर्णात्मक) means the one that is useful in generating अर्थज्ञानम् - this is what is meant by उपादानशब्दौ ।

between them वैखरी does not denote meaning but is the निमित्तम् /प्रकाशिका / व्यञ्जिका of स्फोटशब्द , which denotes the meaning - both these are विषय of व्याकरणशास्त्रम्।

4. Be it अपभ्रंश or संस्कृतम् - स्फोटशब्द is common - one would get meaning if it is a शब्द in use - here व्याकरणम् comes into picture - if शब्दs acceptable to 

व्याकरणम्  are employed one would get धर्म - this is धर्मनियम । just like anything can be eaten to kill appetite but for धर्म - पञ्चपञ्चनखा भक्ष्याः। Any lady will do for खेदविगम (खेदः = कामः , दुःखकारणत्वात्) but विवाह would fetch धर्म ।

It is simple - any language(including अपभ्रंश) would do for अर्थ , but संस्कृतम् will be for अर्थ as well as धर्म।

5. वैखरी is कारणम् of स्फोट , which is कार्यम् । स्फोट is कारणम् of अर्थ , which is कार्यम् ( this pattern is there in सांख्यदर्शनम्)

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

Personal Website: www.korada.org

[N.R.Joshi]

 

 

Dated March 14, 2015

 

Dear Prof. S.Korada, I apologize for asking this question.

I found your posting from June 2012.

 

From it I realized my mistake in understanding of the word Upādāna. It seems that all vācaka śabdas (varņātmaka śabdas with meaning) are upādāna śabdas. And Vaikharī is prakaśaka and sphoṭa is prakaśya. I assume my understanding is correct now. I misunderstood Upādāna śabda. Thank you. I really appreciate your patience and eagerness to help me.

[Saleel Kulkarni]

Dear Dr. Joshi,

 

Namo namah.

 

If you have no great difficulty in reading Marathi books, please do try to read the Marathi translation (with explanation) of Vakyapadiya by Pandit Bhagwat Guruji. That will clarify all these basic concepts.

 

Warm regards,  

 

 

Saleel Kulkarni