Bṛhaddevatā

[narayanan er]

Respected Scholars,

One research scholar working for Ph.D under the guidance of Professor N. K. Sundareswaran of the University of Calicut wants to know about whether any research or studies had been done on the Bṛhaddevatā-as a prominent source for Sāyaṇa’s commentary on the Ṛgveda.

Here I would like to share a bit whatever I come across through the internet. The Bṛhaddevatā is a metrical Sanskrit work, traditionally ascribed to Śaunaka. It is an enlarged catalogue of the Ṛgvedic deities worshipped in the individual sūktas (hymns) of the Ṛgveda. It also contains the myths and legends related to the composition of these suktas.The extant manuscripts of this text are found in two recensions, the shorter and the longer. The shorter recension contains 1091 verses, of which 18 verses are not found in the longer one. Similarly, the longer recension has 1206 verses, of which 133 verses are not found in the shorter recension. The first printed edition of this text was edited by Rajendralala Mitra. It was published by the Asiatic Society, Calcutta as a part of their Bibliotheca Indica series in 1892. According to A. A. Macdonell, this edition had a large number of misprints. It also consisted many impossible readings taken from incorrect manuscripts, omissions of lines, repetitions of lines and insertions of undoubtedly spurious lines. It was based on seven manuscripts. A. A. Macdonell produced a critical edition with an exhaustive introduction in English, seven appendices and a translation into English in two parts, published in 1904. This edition is based on nine manuscripts, as well as Rajendralala Mitra's edition. A new critical edition, by Muneo Tokunaga, of the text was published in 1997. The work consists eight adhyāyas (chapters), mostly written in Anuṣṭubh meter, though a number of verses are in Triṣṭubh meter also. Each adhyāya comprises about 30 vargas, each consisting of five verses. The text begins with a long introduction embracing the complete first adhyaya, and twenty-five vargas of the second. The main body of the text beginning from the twenty-sixth varga of the second adhyāya, for the most part, is concerned with stating the deities, in their successive order, for the hymns and stanzas of the Ṛgveda. It also comprises nearly forty legends, described to explain the circumstances under which the hymns they are concerned with were composed. These legends cover almost a quarter of the whole text. A number of these legends are historically connected to the Mahābhārata.

The bibliographic information: Śaunakīya Bṛhaddevatā: volume 164 of Kāśī Saṃskr̥ta granthamālā, Editor:  Rāmakumāra Rāya, Publisher: Chaukhambha Sanskrit Series Office, Varanasi, 1963.

So, I request the honourable scholars having versatile reading of this forum to help him if possible at their leisure through this forum. He is curious to know that whether anybody have worked on this topic earlier.

Regards,

Narayanan

[S.S]

नारायण-महोदय,

   कृपया अत्र गवेषणं कुर्वताम्  ।   अमेरिक-यूरोप-खण्डयोः ग्रन्थालयेषु  कानि पुस्तकानि सन्ति इति अत्र ज्ञातुम् शक्यते ।
   http://www.worldcat.org/

भवदीयः

[narayanan er]

सुब्रह्मण्यवर्य,
धन्योऽस्मि। परं न किञ्चिदिदानीं गवेषेऽप्रातिभात्। पूर्वे वयसि वर्त्तन्ते केचिद्बालाः संस्कृताध्यापकपदवीमारोढुकामाः संस्कृतानि कानिचन शास्त्राणि गवेषन्ते, तत्तत्प्रतिभाबलात्। अधीतिबोधाचारणप्रचारणात् परं तत्त्वान्तरं किं सायुज्यं वा संस्कृतेनेति चेद्, यद्यज्ज्ञानशकलं संस्कृतेनोपार्जितं तत्तत्संस्कृतिपरिरक्षणपरम्, तावती तावच्छास्त्रेषु श्रद्धा, यदीषामहे तदीषणं दर्शनं वा शास्त्रम्। बह्वीषु गोषु सङ्गतास्वप्यसङ्गतां गोपा ईषन्ते गामेकां वेति गवेषन्त इति गवेषका गोपाः। अकृत्वा परसन्तापमगत्वा खलनम्रताम्। अनुत्सृज्य सतां मार्गं यत् स्वल्पमपि तद् बहु।। इति विचिन्वानाः कालं यापयामः। विश्वविद्यालयेषु ससुफलगवेषसंस्कृताध्यापकपदवीमारूढानां वेतनभागस्य चत्वारि विवर्धनानि, आरूढपदवीनामनन्तरसफलगवेषणेनापि द्वे एव विवर्धनइति नियमः। अनेन प्रथमं गवेषणम्, ततोऽध्यापकतेति केचित्, कृच्छ्रेण लभ्या पदवी, सैव प्रथमोपार्जनीया ततो गवेषिकेत्यन्ये। तत्रापि बहवो विकल्पा भवेयुः- यदधीतं तत् तावताऽपि मनसि परिरक्षणीयमिति प्रथमे। विरला अपि केचनाजीवं विद्यामुपासते। सुनिश्चयेन प्राप्तायामाजीविकायां वेतनरूपायामलमलमतिमतिक्लेशादिना गुरुशुश्रूषापुस्तकादिविलोकनेनेति केचित्। सर्वज्ञा वयमित्यन्ये ये शिष्येभ्यः क्रुध्यन्ति। स्थितेष्वमीष्वपि विकल्पेषु, संस्कृतग्रन्थान् पर्यरक्षन् यथाकालं जना बहुत्र देशेषु, तन्निदर्शनभूता भवन्निर्देशिकेयम्। विद्युद्यन्त्रैर्वार्त्ताविनोदभूयिष्ठेऽस्मिन् काले संस्कृतप्रचारोऽपि वर्धमानः श्रेयानित्यामोदामहे, वस्तुतस्तु भारतीयविद्वत्परिषदाद्यङ्गतया परस्परं संवदेमहि, श्रेयश्च परमवाप्स्यामः। ॐ तत् सत्। नारायणः।

---

From: S.S <snmp...@gmail.com>
To: bvpar...@googlegroups.com
Cc: narayanan er <drerna...@yahoo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, 9 October 2012 9:11 AM
Subject: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} Re: Bṛhaddevatā

--
निराशीर्निर्ममो भूत्वा युध्यस्व विगतज्वरः।। (भ.गी.)
to subscribe go to the link below and put a request
https://groups.google.com/group/bvparishat/subscribe
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com

[rniyengar]

Dear Dr.Narayanan,
Your note about BD is informative,crisp and precise. The Mysore Palace
brought out RV and related texts in 36 volumes c 1955. Vol.28 contains
BD consisting of 1208 verses. They have not mentioned from where they
took the text. Perhaps it is the longer version which you have
mentioned. There seems to be 60 legends; at least that is what is
listed. There may be more. The text is in Kannada script with Kannada
and English translation, which I find wanting in many places.

BD is extremely important to appreciate Vedic tradition (from my
personal point of view) as it highlights the mistakes of Yaska; or at
least S'aunaka's different interpretations.
About the legends you write some are "...historically connected to the
Mahābhārata". Could you please elaborate on this.

Kind regards

RN Iyengar

[narayanan er]

Respected Professor Iyengar,

Thanks for the details. There is work available for reading through googlebooks: Myth as Argument: The Bṛhaddevatā as Canonical Commentary, Volume 41 by Laurie L. Patton through the following link:

http://books.google.co.in/books/about/Myth_as_Argument.html?id=10a0lfJypoYC&redir_esc=y

The information about the legends historically connected to the Mahabharata will only be available once we have that MacDonnel's critical edition. Pururavas, Kaksivan, Kanva, Dirghatamas, Sushena, Manu, Bhrgu, Indra, Asvins, Bharadvaja and Vaikhsnasa are found in the Mahabharata and in some Puranas like Vayupurana and Bhagavatapurana too. This information is from Laurie L. Patton. 

There are 11 works attributed to Shaunaka according to Vettom Mani, whose Puranic Encyclopaedia says that they are:

(1) Rkpratisakhya (2) RgvedacchandanukramanI (3) Rgvedarsyanukramam (4) Rgveda Anuvakanukramani (5) Rgvedasuktanukramam (6) Rgvedakathanukramani (7) Rgvedapadavidhana (8) Brhaddevata (9) Saunakasmrti (10) Caranavyuha and (11) Rgvidhana.

Then regarding "mistakes to Yaska"??? Is it possible, Sir, that Shaunaka,Yaska etc. commit mistakes? As the meanings always follow what the sages preach!!!!

Regards,

Narayanan

---

From: rniyengar <narayana...@gmail.com>
To: भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत् <bvpar...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, 9 October 2012 1:12 PM

Subject: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} Re: Bṛhaddevatā

--
निराशीर्निर्ममो भूत्वा युध्यस्व विगतज्वरः।। (भ.गी.)
to subscribe go to the link below and put a request
https://groups.google.com/group/bvparishat/subscribe
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

bvparishat+unsub...@googlegroups.com

[Navaratna Rajaram]

    There is another work I think, the important Rk-Praatishakhya.

N.S. Rajaram

bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com

[R. Narayana iyengar]

Dear Dr.Narayanan, Namaste,

You asked  "Is it possible, Sir, that Shaunaka,Yaska etc. commit mistakes? As the meanings always follow what the sages preach!!" You are far better qualified to answer this question than me. I only like to quote S'aunaka-BD Ch 2.111-112
पदमेकं समादाय द्विधाक्र्त्वा निरुक्तवान् | पुरूषाद:पदं यास्को वृक्षे वृक्ष इति त्वृचि ||
अनेकं सत्तथा चान्यदेकमेव निरुक्तवान् | अरुणो मा सकृन्मन्त्रे मासकृद्विग्रहेणतु ||
 I am attaching two pages from Mysore Palace Edition which was brought out by a group of 10-12 traditional learned Vedic scholars of great repute. They have titled the subsection 23 in both Kannada and English clearly as Yaska's wrong explanation.
 Please advise me how to interpret this further.

with kind regards

RN Iyengar

On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 4:54 PM, R. Narayana iyengar <narayana...@gmail.com> wrote:

 नमो नारायणाय

Macdonel.s edition in two parts can be downloaded at

http://archive.org/details/brhaddevataattri01saunuoft

http://archive.org/details/brhaddevataattr02saunuoft

I have Vettom Mani's magnum opus. Thanks for the details.

About other issues I will write again.

Thanks

RNI

> bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com

>

>

 

 

[narayanan er]

Thank you very much, Sir, for those two pages. I am not an expert in reading Kannada script, still may I repeat:

ಪದಮೇಕಂ ಸಮಾದಾಯ ದ್ವಿಧಾ ಕೃತ್ವಾ  ನಿರುಕ್ತವಾನ್.

ಪುರುಷಾದಃ ಪದಂ ಯಾಸ್ಕೋ ವೃಕ್ಷೇ ವೃಕ್ಷ ಇತಿ ತ್ವೃಚಿ. ೧೧೧.

पदमेकं समादाय द्विधा कृत्वा निरुक्तवान्।

पुरुषादः पदं यास्को वृक्षे वृक्ष इति त्वृचि।।१११।।

The English note given: Yaska has in the stanza "to every tree" explained the word "man eating" by taking one word (and) dividing (it) into two. (This English note is not satisfactory)

ಅನೇಕಂ ಸತ್ತಥಾ ತಾನ್ಯದೇಕಮೇವ ನಿರುಕ್ತವಾನ್.

ಅರುಣೋ ಮಾ ಸಕೃನ್ಮನ್ತ್ರೇ ಮಾಸಕೃದ್ವಿಗ್ರಹೇಣ ತು. ೧೧೨.

अनेकं सत्तथा चान्यदेकमेव निरुक्तवान्।

अरुणो मा सकृन्मन्त्रे मासकृद्विग्रहेण तु।।११२।।

The English note given: Similarly, another (expression) which is not one (word) he has explained as one only by (his) analysis as month-maker in the formula "the ruddy one me once".

In both cases, it is right that Shaunaka differs with Yaska and there could be more examples too. Here the question is: when the sentences in accented form convey the meanings, there could not be any harm while you divide any word to explore the individual meanings, whereas in the mantras the accented unit in the form of the sentence convey the meaning. When the words convey their meanings individually, those Yaska etymologies do not harm, but those ingredients of words work together to have the coordinated unit as the sentence the role will be one aim of each ingredients to have a sentence meaning or the mantra meaning like: अग्निमीऴे पुरोहितम् etc. From a grammarian point of view, the division into the ingredients is no harm. Whether any word is derived, and its syntactical elements are dismantled to expose its etymological structure, its up to that word only. But when that word becomes a team member of any mantra specifically accented it is only one of the members of the sentence for the conveyance of the whole mantra meaning.   

Regards,

Narayanan

[Dipak Bhattacharya]

Dear Colleagues,

It is not clear to me why it has been maintained that Yāska was wrong in his interpretation of

पदमेकं समादाय द्विधा कृत्वा निरुक्तवान्।

पुरुषादः पदं यास्को वृक्षे वृक्ष इति त्वृचि।।१११।।

He had to clarify the meaning of puruṣādaḥ  in the verse. Literally it means man-eating. Yāska states the meaning in clear terms puruṣān adanāya. The Sanskrit is wrong but the import is clear ‘to kill puruṣas’. For correct Sanskrit Yāska could have told puruṣāṇām adanāya. Yāska wrongly employs kdyogadvitīya  where ṣaṣṭhī was expected. Otherwise he is not wrong in explaining the meaning.

It seems that Śaunaka implies that for a single word a single word should have been used. But in our commentarial literature no such rule exists. It is expected that one should make the meaning clear. But there is no rule as to whether for a every word that will be accomplished through a sentence or a single word. So one should not find fault with Yāska here.

Best

DB

---

From: narayanan er <drerna...@yahoo.com>
To: "narayana...@gmail.com" <narayana...@gmail.com>; "bvpar...@googlegroups.com" <bvpar...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, 10 October 2012 5:54 PM
Subject: Re: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} Re: Bṛhaddevatā

[Dipak Bhattacharya]

In continuation

I am sorry that the quotation had an error. Please read पूरुषादःपदं for पुरुषादः पदं in the second half.

Best DB

[narayanan er]

Respected Professor Bhattacharya Sir,

Thanks a lot for the explanation and it suits to what I thought, as our ancient sages can hardly be wrong in any interpretation. The Jainadharmamrta or the Angara (Chapter 4, Verse.62) of Ashadhara say: यद्व्यद्घुं घुणवद् वज्रमीष्टे न विषयव्रजः। मुनीनामपि दुष्प्रापं तन्मनस्तत्तमुत्सृज।। ४-६२।। and somebody also say: मुनीनामपि मतिभ्रमः etc. are limited to the rhetoric exaggeration only. If the usage of tumunnanta, then puruṣān attum could be justified, here we realize that puruṣān adanāya is used by Yaska in the sense of puruṣān attum or puruṣāṇām adanāya. Śaunaka might have been happy if Yaska would have derived it as: puruṣādo narabhojī in an undivided way, with change of terms, as the complaint of Śaunaka is on the division of a compound term. Yes, Sir, it should be पुरुषादःपदं together instead of पुरुषादः पदं, otherwise, Yaska will become a पुरुषादः as an attribute which Śaunaka might have hardly thought of. 

Regards,

Narayanan

---

From: Dipak Bhattacharya <dbhattach...@yahoo.com>
To: "drerna...@yahoo.com" <drerna...@yahoo.com>; "narayana...@gmail.com" <narayana...@gmail.com>; "bvpar...@googlegroups.com" <bvpar...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, 10 October 2012 8:56 PM

[Dipak Bhattacharya]

11.10.12

Thank you dear Narayanan! I admire your accuracy and desire to penetrate into the minds of the Śāstrakāras. But please read पूरुषादःपदं with a long पू which is Śaunaka’s (BD 2.111) reading. RV 10.27.22 has पूरु॒षादः॑। The long ū is metrical (the end of triṣṭubh is _˅_˅). In my edition Yāska (N. 2.6) has पुरुषानदनाय। He could, of course, avoid the metrical lengthening in deference to grammar. But I have no good edition with me to verify his actual reading. There would have been nothing wrong if he kept the svādhyāya reading.

Best

DB

To: "dbhattach...@yahoo.com" <dbhattach...@yahoo.com>; "narayana...@gmail.com" <narayana...@gmail.com>; "bvpar...@googlegroups.com" <bvpar...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, 11 October 2012 12:56 PM

[narayanan er]

Respected Sir,

You were mentioning the following, what Yaska tells in his Nirukta:

वृक्षे वृक्षे नियता मीमयत् गौः ततः वयः प्र पतान् पूरुषादः । उत अदः परुषे गवि । सर्वे अपि रश्मयः गावः उच्यन्ते । तत् उपरिष्टात् व्याख्यास्यामः । इति । अत्र अह गोः अमन्वत । सः अपि गौः उच्यते । इति अपि निगमः भवति । सुषुम्णः सूर्यरश्मिः चन्द्रमा गन्धर्वः । आदित्यतः अस्य दीप्तिः भवति । विः इति शकुनिनाम । पर्ववति भास्वति इति औपमन्यवः । वृक्षे वृक्षे धनुषि धनुषि । आदित्यः अपि गौः उच्यते । अथ अपि इषुनाम इह भवति एतस्मात् एव । वेतेः गतिकर्मणः । पुरुषान् अदनाय । ततः वयः प्रपतन्ति । मीमयतिः शब्दकर्मा । निवासकर्मणः। नियता मीमयत् गौः शब्दं करोति । क्षा क्षियतेः । अथ अपि अस्य एकः रश्मिः चन्द्रमसं प्रति दीप्यते तत् एतेन उपेक्षितव्यम् । वृक्षः व्रश्चनात्। वृत्वा क्षां तिष्ठति इति वा । । २.६ ।

The first Paṭala of the Ṛgvedaprātiśākhya says:

अध्वानयद्रीरिषत्प्रावणेभी रथायन्तीवादमायः ससाहे सासाह यूयुधिरिवाश्रथायः पुरुषघ्नं रीरिषः पूरुषादः (१. २८)

One internet version of the Ṛgveda reads in the following way, not appears to be correct:

वर्क्षे-वर्क्षे नियता मीमयद् गौस्ततो वयः प्र पतान्पुरुषादः।
अथेदं विश्वं भुवनं भयादिद्रायसुन्वदृषये च शिक्षत।। (RV 10.27.22)

I would like to have this hymn in correct form.

Thanks and regards,

Narayanan

---

From: Dipak Bhattacharya <dbhattach...@yahoo.com>
To: "drerna...@yahoo.com" <drerna...@yahoo.com>

Cc: ""bvpar...@googlegroups.com"" <bvpar...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, 11 October 2012 3:48 PM

[Dipak Bhattacharya]

११.१०.२०१२

श्रीमन्नारायण!

सोन्टक्केसम्पादिते वैदिकसंशोधनमण्डलप्रकाशिते ऋग्वेदग्रन्थे भवता जिज्ञासितः पाठः एवं लभ्यते

वृ॒क्षेवृ॑क्षे॒ निय॑ता मीमय॒द् गौस्  ततो॒ वयः॒ प्र प॑तान्पूरु॒षादः॑।
अथे॒दं विश्वं॒ भुव॑नं भयात॒     इन्द्रा॑य सु॒न्वदृष॑ये च॒ शिक्ष॑त्।। (ऋ.‍१०.२७.२२)

इति विद्वत्सेविनः दीपकभट्टाचार्य़स्य।

---

From: narayanan er <drerna...@yahoo.com>

To: Dipak Bhattacharya <dbhattach...@yahoo.com>
Cc: ""bvpar...@googlegroups.com"" <bvpar...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, 11 October 2012 4:20 PM

[narayanan er]

दृष्ट्वा सूक्तगणान् स्वराभिवलितान् मन्त्रान्मुनीन्द्राः पुरा

वेदं सर्वमुपादिशन् खलु जनक्षेमाय तेऽकल्पयन्।
यास्को निर्वचमारचय्य रुचिरं नैरुक्तकर्मा मुनि-
र्वन्द्यो नैव यदि ब्रुवन्त्वतितरां कस्मै नमस्कुर्महे।।

---

From: Dipak Bhattacharya <dbhattach...@yahoo.com>
To: "drerna...@yahoo.com" <drerna...@yahoo.com>
Cc: ""bvpar...@googlegroups.com"" <bvpar...@googlegroups.com>

Sent: Thursday, 11 October 2012 8:45 PM