Re: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} ~ A wheel-prayer for Lord Jagannatha's cart-wheel ~
Mamata Dash
~~ śrī-śrī-rādhā-dāmodarāya namaḥ ~~--
dear vidvaj-janas,
my pranamas.
please find a newly composed prayer for Lord Jagannatha's cart-wheel attached to this email.
I hope that this feeble attempt brings some pleasure to Lord Jagannatha and his devotees.
sādhu-caraṇa-rajo 'bhilāṣī,
hari pārṣada dāsa.
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.
Shrivathsa B
हरिः ॐ,
ननु णिजा सह विरामयेदिति भवितव्यम् । प्रकृते विरमेदित्यस्य हिन्दी भाषायां रुके इत्यर्थस्स्यान्न तु रोके इति॥
अन्तर्भावितण्यर्थस्तु वेदे रामायणे च दृश्यते । टीकाकर्तारोऽत्र प्रमाणम् । लौकिके साहित्येऽप्यस्य प्रयोगः साधु वेति मम जिज्ञासा ॥
स्वस्ति,
भवानीभारती जयतेतराम्,
श्रीवत्सः॥
hari pārṣada dāsa.sādhu-caraṇa-rajo 'bhilāṣī,Respected Smt. Mamata Das ji and Dr. Kulkarni,my pranams and thanks for the kind words.
For Dr. Kulkarni — Please find the same verse in devanagari-lipi attached to this message.
------------------------------------
On Sunday, July 12, 2015 at 12:30:57 PM UTC+5:30, Hari Parshad Das wrote:~~ śrī-śrī-rādhā-dāmodarāya namaḥ ~~
dear vidvaj-janas,
my pranamas.
please find a newly composed prayer for Lord Jagannatha's cart-wheel attached to this email.
I hope that this feeble attempt brings some pleasure to Lord Jagannatha and his devotees.
sādhu-caraṇa-rajo 'bhilāṣī,
hari pārṣada dāsa.
Nityanand Misra
On Tuesday, July 14, 2015 at 9:22:32 AM UTC+5:30, Shrivathsa B wrote:
हरिः ॐ,
ननु णिजा सह विरामयेदिति भवितव्यम् ।
विरामयेत् is incorrect. It should be विरमयेत्. रम् being अमन्त by जनीजृष्क्नसुरञ्जोऽमन्ताश्च (धा.पा. ८१७), मितां ह्रस्वः (पा.सू. ६.४.९२) applies here which blocks the उपधादीर्घ by अत उपधायाः (७.२.११६). Hence संतापं विरमयति स्म मातरिश्वा (किरातार्जुनीयम् ७.१०).
In addition, णिजा is incorrect. It should be णिचा. यचि भम् (पा.सू. १.४.१८) applies here which blocks the पदत्व (and hence blocks the जश्त्व).
‘इति भवितव्यम्’ is rather odd usage, ‘इत्यनेन भवितव्यम्’ is better.
Shrivathsa B
antarbhaavitaNyartha is seen in many places in ArSha literature, don't know if this is allowed in laukika literature.
Corrections to my first post by NM are gratefully acknowledged.
also one can see the kāśikāvṛtti on upāc ca — (Pāṇini 1.3.84)
where the term 'uparamati' is understood by Kāśikākāra as 'uparamayati' and the kāśikāvṛtti says — "antarbhāvitanyartho 'tra ramiḥ"
A similar sense is implied in viramed.
sādhu-caraṇa-rajo 'bhilāṣī,
hari pārṣada dāsa.
------------------------------------------------
--
Shrivathsa B
Richer for this. Thanks.
the following examples given in the Kāśikāvṛtti on Pāṇini 1/3/84 are laukika examples and not from any śruti/smṛti/purāṇa/itihāsa:
devadattam uparamati. yajñadattam uparamati.
There is also an example in the Śrīkṛṣṇakarṇāmṛtam of Sri Bilvamangala. I have attached the verse to this message.
The term 'svādatām' there actually implies 'svādyatām'. The Sāraṅga-raṅgadā commentary by Sri Krishnadas Kaviraja says — "antar ṇij-artho jñeyaḥ"
sādhu-caraṇa-rajo 'bhilāṣī,
hari pārṣada dāsa.
----------------------------------------
Nityanand Misra
On Tuesday, July 14, 2015 at 11:09:07 AM UTC+5:30, Hari Parshad Das wrote:
यदि मुझे यह कहना होता की "वह चक्र स्वयं रुके" तो आत्मनेपद में 'रमु' धातु का प्रयोग करना पड़ता।
यह कथन साधु प्रतीत नहीं होता। ‘व्याङ्परिभ्यो रमः’ (१.३.८३) सूत्र में ‘स्वरितञितः कर्त्रभिप्राये क्रियाफले’ (१.३.७२) से ‘कर्त्रभिप्राये क्रियाफले’ की अनुवृत्ति नहीं है। क्रियाफल अन्याभिप्राय हो या कर्त्रभिप्राय, वि आ परि पूर्वक रम् धातु से आत्मनेपद ही होता है। अतः ‘वह चक्र स्वयं रुके’ का पाणिनीय दृष्टि से साधु अनुवाद है – ‘तच्चक्रं [स्वयं] विरमेत्’।
किन्तु 'रमु' धातु से सिद्ध क्रिया का फल 'भवचक्र' को लगना चाहिए इसलिए परस्मैपद प्रयोग "विरमेद्" किया है। तब "रोके" यह अर्थ होगा।
मेरे मत में णिजन्त नहीं होगा क्योंकि इस प्रार्थना का आशय यह नहीं है की वह चक्र मेरे भवचक्र को किसी और को प्रेरणा देकर रुकवाए।
Nityanand Misra
On Tuesday, July 14, 2015 at 4:54:14 PM UTC+5:30, Hari Parshad Das wrote:
जी मेरा कथन यह नहीं था की 'वि,आ,उप' उपसर्गपूर्वक रमु धातु से आत्मनेपद होगा। मेरा कथन यह था की यदि मुझे यह कहना होता की वह चक्र स्वयं रुके तो "वि,आ,उप" के अतिरिक्त किसी भी अन्य उपयुक्त उपसर्ग से रमु धातु से यह संभव था क्योंकि उस दशा में आत्मनेपद ही होता ।
प्रभुजी अन्तर्भावित णिच् का प्रयोग कब करना चाहिये कब नही इस विषय में मतभेद सर्वदा बना रहेगा । मैंने उदहारण देकर बताया है की काशिकावृत्ति में उपरमति का अर्थ उपरमयति है । जब वैयाकरण स्वयं हमें स्वाधीनता दें तब और क्या कहना? अस्तु इतना ही कहूँगा की इसमें कोई स्थिरनियम नहीं है (अपारे काव्यसंसारे कविरेव प्रजापतिः) । विरमेद् के विरमयेद् मानने में कोई विशेष बाधा नहीं है ।
Nityanand Misra
Firstly, is there any prefix apart from 'vi', 'ā', 'upa' which when used with 'ram' has the meaning to cease or stop? I doubt. At least as per Apte Sanskrit-Hindi dictionary (snapshot attached), the meaning 'to cease' or 'stop' does not occur with other prefixes.
Nityanand Misra
On Wednesday, July 15, 2015 at 9:14:29 AM UTC+5:30, Hari Parshad Das wrote:
However, I wanted the bhava-cakra to be the receiver of the action of "stopping". Therefore a parasmaipada is needed, and it is only possible through 'vi, ā, upa and pari'.
Still, I have also attached three translations of a single verse from bhartṛhari where the term 'viramanti' has been translated by the translators in the sense of 'viramayanti'. I am sure there are more translators who translated it like this. Beyond this, i think it will not be possible for me to offer a better solution.
Hnbhat B.R.
I had been following the ensuing the discussion silently.
The translation of वि+रम् is too general without without without t without any twisting it to suit the context considering the following Vartika simpler than trying to make it Causative to adjust its meaning to the familiar meaning of the Hindi root रोकना which is far more twisting
जुगुप्साविरामप्रमादार्थानामुपस्ंख्यानम् (वा) जुगुप्सा – विराम- प्रमादार्थकधातुभिः योगे, जुगुप्साविषयस्य, विरामविषयस्य, प्रमादविषयस्य च अपादानसंज्ञा भवति । पापात् जुगुप्सते ।
There is no such usages
अधर्मात् विरमति । अत्र विरामस्य विषयोऽधर्मः । तस्य अपादानसंज्ञा भवति । अपादानभूतात् अधर्मात् पञ्चमी अपादाने पञ्चमी’ इति सूत्रेण । अधर्माद्विरमति =अधर्मविषये न प्रवर्तते इत्यर्थः ।
It cannot be said अधर्मं विरमति and trying interpret अधर्मं विरमयति and I mean it comes the meaning in translation It makes adharma to stop by resorting to अन्तर्भावितण्यर्थ usage of the verb रम् found rarely.
First of all the verb is naturally Intransitive and with the predication it be completely अकर्मक and strict translation would He ceases fro doing Adharma and not himself stops adharma. The exposition of Kashika as उपाच्च is because of the restriction to the अधिकार अकर्मकात् to justify the usage देवदत्तो यज्ञदत्तमुपरमति and the reason for such explanation is well explained in Nyasa.
Each language has its own idiomatic usages and trying to transfer to another language itself problematic. This is the real position. The true shade of meaning is given in the above example in Sanskrit for the verb than the English translation to stop or the Hindi verbs रुकना रोकना both different first intransitive and the next transitive.
This what I understand and question raised by Srivatsa was based on this difference of shades of meaning due to usages in each language. To stop is both transitive and intransitive in English unlike Hindi where there are two verbs used for transitive meaning. In Sanskrit it may need two verbs or simple verbs simple तिष्ठति स्थापयति, or स्थगयति.