Jananii janmabhuumishcha - query

[Tirumala Kulakarni]

Dears,

It is heard that Vibhiishana offered Rama the throne of Lanka after
the killing of Ravana.

This was the popular reply of Rama -
api svarNamayI lankA na me lakshmaNa rocate |
jananI janmabhUmishca svargAdapi garIyasI ||

This shloka is not found in Valmiki Ramayana.

Could some one give the source?

TK

[hn bhat]

Here is a link to an earlier inquiry, but without success by one Pradeep Bhattacharya I found on search:

http://www.boloji.com/hinduism/069.htm

This is only for your information.In one page it is said to be quoted in Anandamuth of Bankim Chatarji. But from the page it is clear that it could not be traced to any versions of Ramayana as the inquiry revealed. 

But only some other source has to be looked for.

With regards

2009/12/4 Tirumala Kulakarni <tkula...@gmail.com>

--
Dr. Hari Narayana Bhat B.R.
EFEO,
PONDICHERRY

[Meera Tadipatri]

On Thursday, December 03, 2009 tkula...@gmail.com wrote:

Namaste.

I think this quote is not there in the mUla and it appears
to be that of Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya.

Pls. see this URL:

http://www.boloji. com/hinduism/ 069.htm

Regards,

Meera Tadipatri

> TK

[Tirumala Kulakarni]

Dears,

Thanks for the replies.

अन्ते इदं निश्चितं यत् अस्य श्लोकस्य मूलं न निश्चेतुं शक्यमिति!

The link sent by H N Bhat and Meera Tadipatri is very useful. The
story of the search is both interesting and informative.

Meanwhile when I discussed this issue with one of our senior scholar
Sri Venkatesha Deshapande, in Poornaprajna Vidyapeetha, Bangalore,
where I am working, he quoted an interesting समाख्या (similar saying)
from Shukasaptati. The shloka is -

उक्तं च -
सर्वस्वर्णमयी लङ्का न मे लक्ष्मण रोचते ।
पितृक्रमागताsयोध्या निर्धनाsपि सुखायते ।।

By the words उक्तं च it could be concluded that it is quoted.
In the preface of Shukasaptati, published by Choukhamba, it is said
that the work belongs to 11th to 14th century and the author is not
known.

TK

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Narasimhachary M <drmn...@hotmail.com>
Date: 2009/12/4
Subject: RE: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} Jananii janmabhuumishcha - query
To: tkula...@gmail.com

This verse is  found in the critical edition brought out by the BORI,
as a footnote (Yuddha Kanda)

________________________________
New Windows 7: Find the right PC for you. Learn more.

[Tirumala Kulakarni]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Narasimhachary M <drmn...@hotmail.com>
Date: 2009/12/7
Subject: RE: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} Jananii janmabhuumishcha - query
To: tkula...@gmail.com

Dear friends: The sloka api svarnamayi lanka must be from Ramayana
itself. There are several slokas like this which have been dumped in
foot notes in our printed texts with  the brand,  Prakshipta or
interpolations. How can then one jump to the conclusion that the
source cannot be determined? For instance, a number of  slokas quoted
by ancient  writers like Yamunacharya and Vedanta Desika, with the
introductory words such as  yatha Indraratre, yatha Santiparvani, etc.
cannot be traced to the extant editions of the Pancharatra and
Mahabharata texts. Does it mean that they did not form part of those
texts? The printed texts available to us do not have  these verses.
That is all. It  does not mean that they do not form part of the
original corpus.  One has to patiently reconstruct the original texts
with the help of such quotations of ancient  writers.

Regards,

Prof. M.Narasimhachary

________________________________
New Windows 7: Simplify what you do everyday. Find the right PC for you.

[Dipak Bhattacharya]

यदुद्धरणानां मूलाननुगत्वं प्रायशः अनुभूयते तत्र सावधानमेव अपक्षपातेनैव विचारः प्रयोजनीयः। किं तत्र कर्तव्यं यत्र ग्रन्थकर्तॄभिरेकमेव वाक्यमिष्टम्, उद्धृतं तु बहुधा? यथा अष्टाध्यायी ७.१.३९ सुपां सुलुक्पूर्वसवर्णाच्छेयाडाड्यायाजालः सूत्रव्याख्याने काशिकाकारैर्वामनपादैः "न ताद् ब्राह्मणाद् निन्दामि न तान् ब्राह्मणानिति प्राप्ते" इति वेदवाक्यमुद्धृतम्। दीक्षितपादैस्तु नतादिति एक एव शब्दः पठित इति जयकृष्णमतम् -- "नतः नतशब्दादम् तस्य आदादेशः"। मूलं तु पैप्पलादसंहिता १७.३५.१ न ताद् ब्राह्ममणं निन्दानि इति लेटि निन्द् धातुः। न ताद् इति द्वौ शब्दौ च। तेन काशिकाकाराश्च भट्टोजिपादाश्च प्रमादेनैव उद्धृतवन्तः इति प्रतीयते। एवं प्रमादेनोद्धरणस्य उदाहरणानि  बहुशः प्रदर्शयितुं शक्यम्। क्वचित् मूलम् अपि सम्प्रदाय लोपात् विकृतिं गतम् इत्यपि अनुभूयते। तस्यापि बहूनि उदाहरणानि सन्ति। दी.भ. --- On Mon, 7/12/09, Tirumala Kulakarni <tkula...@gmail.com> wrote:

The INTERNET now has a personality. YOURS! See your Yahoo! Homepage.

[JSRA Prasad]

विद्वांसः, रमणीयमुदारहणं प्रपञ्चितम् । कुतश्चिन्मया श्रुतमेवं -
धनमार्जय काकुत्स्थ धनमूलमिदं जगत् ।
अन्तरं नैव जानामि निर्धनस्य मृतस्य च ।।
इति सीतामाता उत कौसल्यामाता वा धर्मस्वरूपिणं श्रीरामं प्रति कथयतीति ।
अत्र जिज्ञासा, यद्येतादृशश्लोकाः प्रक्षिप्ता एव न स्युः तर्हि रामो विग्रहवान् धर्म इति वाक्यादीनामेव आपत्तिर्भवेत् ननु ।
Prasad

2009/12/7 Dipak Bhattacharya <dbhattac...@yahoo.co.in>

--
Assistant Professor,
Dept. of Sanskrit Studies
University of Hyderabad,
Gachibowli, Hyderabad - 500 046

[Dipak Bhattacharya]

७ १२ ०९ मान्यवराः, साधूक्तं भवद्भिरिति स्वीकॄतवताप्येतज्जनेन किञ्चिन्मात्रं वक्तुमिष्यत इति क्षन्तव्योयम्। भवद्भिस्तु पाठ उपादेयत्वं तदभावो वेति विचाराश्रयणेनैव पाठनिर्णयकार्ये प्रवर्तितव्यमिति निश्चयः कृत इति प्रतीयते। तद्युक्तमयुक्तं वेति शङ्का तु नैवापास्तम्। तदैतरेयब्राह्मणे शुनःशेपोपाख्याने युजेर्लिटि निनियोजेति पठ्यते। व्याकरणदृष्ट्या तु नियुयोजेतीष्टम् । ऋग्वेदे पुनः हृदंसनिरिति पठ्यते, हृच्छब्दस्य नपुंसकलिङ्गत्वात् हृत्सनिरेवेष्टं स्यात्। कालिदासेनापि तथा विश्रामशब्दप्रयोगः, प्रभ्रंशयां यो नहुषं चकारेति कृञः व्यवहितः अनुप्रयोगः, विस्मापयन्निति पुका प्रयोगः कृतः। अनुपादेयत्वेपि न केना्प्येतान् पाठानन्यथा कर्तुं साहसं कृतम्। तदयुक्तमप्यभविष्यत्। तेन मातृकासु ये पाठाः दृश्यन्ते त एव ग्राह्याः उपादेयत्वमस्तु नवेतिसिद्धान्त एव युज्यते इति अस्मत्पूर्वपुरुषैर्विचारितमिति त्वनस्वीकार्यमिति प्रतीयते। आधुनिकानामपि तदेव मतमिति दिक्। दी.भ. --- On Mon, 7/12/09, JSRA Prasad <jsrap...@gmail.com> wrote:

The INTERNET now has a personality. YOURS! See your Yahoo! Homepage.