वाल्मीकिरामायणे क्वचित् छन्दोदोषः

[विश्वासो वासुकेयः (Vishvas Vasuki)]

अनेन रूपेण मया न शक्या रक्षसां पुरी |
प्रवेष्टुं राक्षसैर्गुप्ता क्रूरैर्बलसमन्वितैः || ५-२-३३

आदिपादे छन्दोदोषः

लघुगुर्वपस्थानिनः।

प्रकीर्तितः किमार्षेति

हि पश्चाद्योजितेत्युत  ?

उपप्रश्नः १ - आर्षः +‌ इति = आर्ष +‌इति = आर्षेति इति संहितारचनायाम् गुणसन्धिः भवितुमर्हति वा?

उपप्रश्नः २ - प्रयोगः +‌आर्षः = प्रयोगोर्षः इति न भवति ननु?

--
--
Vishvas /विश्वासः

[Nityanand Misra]

Too bad it is too late, else Valmiki would have changed it. The human race has definitely progressed as now we find faults with Valmiki, Vyasa, etc which are ancestors did not with all their knowledge :)

Jokes apart, the subject is highly misleading. Has Valmiki said that he is conforming to the conventional "Shloka" metre where the fifth is laghu, sixth is guru, seventh is laghu in second and fourth foot and guru in first and third? No! Then how can there be a fault? There are examples in Bhagavad Gita, Srimadbhagavatam, Valmiki Ramayama where the rule is not followed. There are several types of the "Anushtup metre" (the name is also used for family of metres of eight syllables, as in Sabdakalpadrumah - refer http://archive.org/stream/sabdakalpadrumah02devauoft#page/465/mode/1up), and this is one of them.

On Friday, March 8, 2013 12:06:06 PM UTC+8, विश्वासो वासुकेयः wrote:

अनेन रूपेण मया न शक्या रक्षसां पुरी |
प्रवेष्टुं राक्षसैर्गुप्ता क्रूरैर्बलसमन्वितैः || ५-२-३३

आदिपादे छन्दोदोषः

लघुगुर्वपस्थानिनः।

प्रकीर्तितः किमार्षेति

हि पश्चाद्योजितेत्युत  ?

उपप्रश्नः १ - आर्षः +‌ इति = आर्ष +‌इति = आर्षेति इति संहितारचनायाम् गुणसन्धिः भवितुमर्हति वा?

This is wrong as per Paninian system. The visarga lopa is caused by लोपः शाकल्यस्य (8-3-19) which is in त्रिपादी. The Guna is caused by आद्गुणः (6-1-87) which is सपादसप्ताध्यायी. The त्रिपादी operations are असिद्ध for rules in सपादसप्ताध्यायी (as if they never happened) by the aphorism पूर्वत्रासिद्धम् (8-2-1). So after the Visargalopa, Guna cannot take place in Paninian system. The two forms are

 

उपप्रश्नः २ - प्रयोगः +‌आर्षः = प्रयोगोर्षः इति न भवति ननु?

No. Same logic. अकः सवर्णे दीर्घः (6-1-101) is in सपादसप्ताध्यायी while the Visargalopa is from लोपः शाकल्यस्य (8-3-19) which is in त्रिपादी. Savarnadiirgha cannot take place as Visargalopa is असिद्ध in सपादसप्ताध्यायी (and also in rules from 8-2-1 to 8-3-18).
 
Try an online Sandhi tool like http://sanskrit.uohyd.ac.in/scl/sandhi/index.html before posting questions here.

[विश्वासो वासुकेयः (Vishvas Vasuki)]

2013/3/7 विश्वासो वासुकेयः (Vishvas Vasuki) <vishvas...@gmail.com>

आदिपादे छन्दोदोषः

आदिपादे स्थितो दोषः

[narayanan er]

आर्षः इति। आर्षइति। आर्षयिति। ससजुषो रुः (८.२.६६) इति विसर्गस्य रुत्वम्। भोभगोअघोअपूर्वस्य योऽशि (८.३.१७) इति रेफस्य यकारादेशः अश्परत्वात् । लोपः शाकल्यस्य (८.३.१९) विकल्पेन यकारलोपः। आर्षइति। यकारलोपपक्षे आर्षयिति। तथैव प्रयोगः आर्षः। प्रयोग आर्षः। प्रयोगयार्षः। प्रयोगोर्षः इति न श्रव्यः।
अनेन रूपेण मया न शक्या रक्षसां पुरी इत्यत्र तु पञ्चमं लघु सर्वत्र सप्तमं द्विचतुर्थयोः। गुरु षष्ठन्तु पादानां शेषेष्वनियमो मतः।। इति छन्दोमञ्जरीलक्षणेन रूपेण इत्यत्र पे इत्यत्र वर्णे न लघुत्वमिति, द्वितीये चतुर्थे चेति भवतः शङ्काविषयः। सा तु समार्द्धसमविषमवृत्तभेदेन त्रिधा भवतीत्यतः सर्वत्र पादेषु गुरुलघ्वोर्नियमस्यानियतत्वं वाल्मीकिव्यासग्रन्थेभ्यः स्पष्टम्। तथापि अष्टाक्षरपदमिदं छन्दः, तत्रैव निष्कर्षः। छन्दोमञ्जरी तु नूतना पुस्तिका। तत्र कृतो नियमो न सर्वत्र घटते। कुत एतत्? अनुष्टुभां विशेषबाहुल्यात्।

यथैवं-(ऽ=गुरु, ।=लघु )

ऽ  ऽ  ऽ  ।  ।  ऽ  ऽ ।
वि द्व त्वं च नृ प त्वं च

ऽ  ।  ऽ  ऽ  ।  ऽ  । ।
नै व तु ल्यं क दा च न।

।  ऽ  ऽ  ऽ  ।  ऽ  ऽ  ऽ
स्व दे शे पू ज्य ते रा जा

ऽ   ऽ  ऽ  ऽ  ।  ऽ  ।  ऽ
वि द्वान् स र्व त्र पू ज्य ते।।

इति नास्ति मात्राक्रमेषु साजात्यम्। श्लोकान्तरेष्वपि गुरुलघुक्रमाणां स्वातन्त्र्यं वाल्मीकिव्यासग्रन्थेभ्यो ज्ञेयम्।

---

From: विश्वासो वासुकेयः (Vishvas Vasuki) <vishvas...@gmail.com>
To: bhAratIya vidvat pariShad भारतीयविद्वत्परिषद् <bvpar...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Friday, 8 March 2013 9:36 AM
Subject: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} वाल्मीकिरामायणे क्वचित् छन्दोदोषः

--
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
 
---
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.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bvparishat?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

[narayanan er]

Exactly, Sh. Nityanand, and thanks for the comments. Now the Chandomanjari verse is not only making ativyapti and avyapti it hurts the rhythm of certain types of Anushtubh-s. Four feet and eight syllables each is the general criterion for it and one cannot make a beauty of it by following the samavrtta principle in anushtubh. It is ardhasama, the melodious one. I had given an instance in a previous reply to Sh. Vasukeya where no homogeneity in all four feet with regards to the weights of syllables. So, no sage like Valmiki, Vyasa etc. can go wrong.

Regards,

Narayanan

---

From: Nityanand Misra <nmi...@gmail.com>
To: bvpar...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Friday, 8 March 2013 10:44 AM
Subject: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} Re: वाल्मीकिरामायणे क्वचित् छन्दोदोषः

[narayanan er]

Usages of Valmiki and Vyasa are self explanatory and self justified within those. That is why the varieties of anushtubhs available right across their works. So, there is no ambiguity in them. Those who challenge such works is simply due to the ignorance, so please do not call them as mistakes in Valmiki Ramayana and such sages do not want the sympathy of the people in the modern era. Those self justified texts well enough to protect them, and later the scholars recognise as arshaprayoga which could be taken authentic in all sense.

---

From: sunil bhattacharjya <skbhatt...@gmail.com>
To: drerna...@yahoo.com
Cc: "vishvas...@gmail.com" <vishvas...@gmail.com>; bhAratIya vidvat pariShad भारतीयविद्वत्परिषद् <bvpar...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Friday, 8 March 2013 11:44 AM
Subject: Re: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} वाल्मीकिरामायणे क्वचित् छन्दोदोषः

Dear friends,

For any discussion on language one should not lose sight of the historical perspectives. Contrary to the claims of the scholars of the colonial times, there is evidence that original materials did survive till this day and one cannot say that all the ancient texts  were written after Panini. Valmiki Ramayana is a very ancient text and next to come were the Mahabharata and the puranas. Vedas were also old. Much after that came Lord Buddha and thus the Buddhist-hybrid Sanskrit appeared. It was only after that the genius of Panini took the steps to formalise the rules such that the liberties like the Arshaprayoga were restricted. Therefore we have to be tolerant to the so-called mistakes in texts like Valmiki Ramayana, though were really not mistakes and they should be considered only as  the styles prevailing in those times.

Regards,
Sunil KB

2013/3/7 narayanan er <drerna...@yahoo.com>

[Hnbhat B.R.]

चित्रं निरालम्बनमेव मन्ये प्रमेयसिद्धौ प्रथमावतारम् ।

सन्मार्गलाभे सति सेतुबन्धपुरप्रतिष्ठादि न विस्मयाय ॥ 

acknowledging his indebtedness to his earlier commentators and his attempt is to restore the original thing in their place properly.

​

Thanks to Vishvas for correcting Valmiki's metrical composition with the tools formed on the first introduced श्लोक-s without any guide to composition available for Valmiki. All the rhetoricians formed their guides to metrical compositions after Valmiki's composition and that is why he is called 

मधुमयभणितीनां 

प्रथमः कवीनां मार्गदर्शी महर्षिः।

 तमृषिम् मनुष्यलोकप्रवेशविश्रामशाखिनम् वाचाम्।

सुरलोकादवतारप्रान्तरखेदच्छिदम् वन्दे॥ १०॥

यतश्च,

काव्यस्यात्मा स एवार्थस्तथा चादिकवेः पुरा .

क्रौञ्चद्वन्द्ववियोगोत्थः शोकः श्लोकत्वमागतः .. ५..

विविधवाच्यवाचकरचनाप्रपञ्चचारुणः काव्यस्य स

एवार्थः सारभूतः . चादिकवेर्वाल्मीकेः निहतसहचरीविरहकातर- 

क्रौञ्चाक्रन्दजनितः शोक एव श्लोकतया परिणतः।

शोकतप्तस्य छन्दोनियमलक्षणस्यानुसरणमशक्यमेवेति प्रथमश्लोकनिर्मातुः किं वक्तव्यम्?

The above is the remark of आचार्य आनन्दवर्धन who accepted वाल्मीकीयरामायण as the model for his theory of ध्वनि postulated..

As suggested by Mishra, we have definitely progressed than our masters, teachers like 
Ananadavardhana, Abhinava etc.

[sunil bhattacharjya]

Dear friends,

For any discussion on language one should not lose sight of the historical perspectives. Contrary to the claims of the scholars of the colonial times, there is evidence that original materials did survive till this day and one cannot say that all the ancient texts  were written after Panini. Valmiki Ramayana is a very ancient text and next to come were the Mahabharata and the puranas. Vedas were also old. Much after that came Lord Buddha and thus the Buddhist-hybrid Sanskrit appeared. It was only after that the genius of Panini took the steps to formalise the rules such that the liberties like the Arshaprayoga were restricted. Therefore we have to be tolerant to the so-called mistakes in texts like Valmiki Ramayana, though were really not mistakes and they should be considered only as  the styles prevailing in those times.

Regards,
Sunil KB

2013/3/7 narayanan er <drerna...@yahoo.com>

आर्षः इति। आर्षइति। आर्षयिति। ससजुषो रुः (८.२.६६) इति विसर्गस्य रुत्वम्। भोभगोअघोअपूर्वस्य योऽशि (८.३.१७) इति रेफस्य यकारादेशः अश्परत्वात् । लोपः शाकल्यस्य (८.३.१९) विकल्पेन यकारलोपः। आर्षइति। यकारलोपपक्षे आर्षयिति। तथैव प्रयोगः आर्षः। प्रयोग आर्षः। प्रयोगयार्षः। प्रयोगोर्षः इति न श्रव्यः।

[विश्वासो वासुकेयः (Vishvas Vasuki)]

2013/3/7 विश्वासो वासुकेयः (Vishvas Vasuki) <vishvas...@gmail.com>

न स्यात्कर्ता स वाल्मिकिः।

न स्यात्कर्ता स तापसः।

[विश्वासो वासुकेयः (Vishvas Vasuki)]

+अम्बावर्या सन्धियन्त्रप्रकाशिका

[ मत्सन्देशप्रसारे धिक्    कालाधिको निरीक्षितः॥

प्राप्तावनुमतेस्तत्र   नियन्त्रकेष्टमत्वरम्॥ ]

धन्योऽस्मि नित्यानन्द,

नारायण गुरो तथा।

अम्बावर्यविकीर्णन्तत्
स्म्रियते यन्त्रजङ्गमम्॥

2013/3/7 narayanan er <drerna...@yahoo.com>

पञ्चमं लघु सर्वत्र सप्तमं द्विचतुर्थयोः। गुरु षष्ठन्तु पादानां शेषेष्वनियमो मतः।।

हे नारायणगुरो, लक्षणस्यास्य नास्ति खलु आग्रहः सर्वपादे पञ्चषष्षप्तवर्जिताक्षरेषु मात्रासमानता? 

तथा च-

अखिलस्यादिकाव्यस्य

न स्यात्कर्ता स वाल्मिकिः।

उत्तरकाण्डशंबूकः

न्वनर्थकहत्यां गतः ॥

उपप्रश्नः १ - आर्षः इति = आर्षेति इति समासः भवितुमर्हति वा?

उपप्रश्नः २ - अनुष्टुभः अनन्तरम् अभ्यासाय नूतनछन्दसम् अन्विषे। किम् अन्यत् सुलभम् स्यात्? अधोसूचितश्लोकस्य किं छन्दः, तन्नियमाश् च के?

योगेन चित्तस्य पदेन वाचां

मलं शरीरस्य च वैद्यकेन।

योऽपाकरोत्तं प्रवरं मुनीनाम्

पतञ्जलिं प्राञ्जलिरानतोऽस्मि॥

--
धन्यः।

[विश्वासो वासुकेयः (Vishvas Vasuki)]

2013/3/7 विश्वासो वासुकेयः (Vishvas Vasuki) <vishvas...@gmail.com>

अम्बावर्यविकीर्णन्तत्

अम्बावर्याविकीर्णन्तत्

--
--

[विश्वासो वासुकेयः (Vishvas Vasuki)]

2013/3/7 विश्वासो वासुकेयः (Vishvas Vasuki) <vishvas...@gmail.com>

न्वनर्थकहत्यां गतः ॥

न्वनर्थकवधं गतः॥

--
--

[Nityanand Misra]

On Friday, March 8, 2013 3:05:40 PM UTC+8, विश्वासो वासुकेयः wrote:

+अम्बावर्या सन्धियन्त्रप्रकाशिका

[ मत्सन्देशप्रसारे धिक्    कालाधिको निरीक्षितः॥

प्राप्तावनुमतेस्तत्र   नियन्त्रकेष्टमत्वरम्॥ ]

धन्योऽस्मि नित्यानन्द,

नारायण गुरो तथा।

अम्बावर्यविकीर्णन्तत्
स्म्रियते यन्त्रजङ्गमम्॥

2013/3/7 narayanan er <drerna...@yahoo.com>

पञ्चमं लघु सर्वत्र सप्तमं द्विचतुर्थयोः। गुरु षष्ठन्तु पादानां शेषेष्वनियमो मतः।।

हे नारायणगुरो, लक्षणस्यास्य नास्ति खलु आग्रहः सर्वपादे पञ्चषष्षप्तवर्जिताक्षरेषु मात्रासमानता? 

You probably want to use पञ्चम, षष्ठ, सप्तम instead of पञ्च, षष्, सप्त. Anyway षष् in nominative and in Samaasa becomes षट्.
 

तथा च-

अखिलस्यादिकाव्यस्य

न स्यात्कर्ता स वाल्मिकिः।

उत्तरकाण्डशंबूकः

न्वनर्थकहत्यां गतः ॥

??? Could you explain how this is relevant to the discussion?
 

उपप्रश्नः १ - आर्षः इति = आर्षेति इति समासः भवितुमर्हति वा?

No. Please refer

सुपां सुपा तिङा नाम्ना धातुनाऽथ तिङां तिङा।
सुबन्तेनेति विज्ञेयः समासः षड्विधो बुधैः॥ (सिद्धान्तकौमुद्यां सर्वसमासशेषप्रकरणे)

Usages like रामेति are not समास but राम (सम्बुद्धि or vocative case) + इति.

 

उपप्रश्नः २ - अनुष्टुभः अनन्तरम् अभ्यासाय नूतनछन्दसम् अन्विषे। किम् अन्यत् सुलभम् स्यात्? अधोसूचितश्लोकस्य किं छन्दः, तन्नियमाश् च के?

योगेन चित्तस्य पदेन वाचां

मलं शरीरस्य च वैद्यकेन।

योऽपाकरोत्तं प्रवरं मुनीनाम्

पतञ्जलिं प्राञ्जलिरानतोऽस्मि॥

Please Google before posting queries here. There are many online resources on prosody like

http://www.ms.uky.edu/~sohum/sanskrit/yogavasishtha/Sanskrit-Prosody.pdf
http://sanskrit.sai.uni-heidelberg.de/Chanda/HTML/list_classified.html 

which will answer your question. V S Apte's dictionary has a useful appendix on prosody. You will find many more useful works on Google, archive.org and DLI. If you do not find the name of the metre even in the references, then you may post here. This forum should not be used for questions for which you can easily find the answers on the Internet.

[Nityanand Misra]

2013/3/9 विश्वासो वासुकेयः <vishvas...@gmail.com>

On Friday, March 8, 2013 1:12:58 AM UTC-8, Nityanand Misra wrote:

नाम अन्यैर् अपि क्वचिदक्षराणि स्युः योजितानि इति यथा‌ सन्देहः स्थानेऽस्ति, सोऽत्रापि भवितुमर्हति वा?

 

Please cite why you think this particular verse 5-2-33 in Sundarakanda is not by Valmiki and is later interpolation. A doubt is worth answering if it is genuine and asked in the proper way. Your doubt has been more than answered by saying that अनुष्टुभ् is a metre with four quarters of eight letters each, and this verse is an अनुष्टुभ्. You do not bother to check any sources or dictionaries (Wikipedia, Monier Williams, Apte, Sabdakalpadruma, Pingala), persist with your so-called doubt even when it has been answered, and (maybe based on some दिव्यदृष्टि of yours) suspect that this is a verse not composed by Valmiki. Either you are a genius who is not understood in your time by us mortals, or it is a case of यस्य नास्ति स्वयं प्रज्ञा शास्त्रं तस्य करोति किम्. In either case, whether you are a महामानव ahead of our times or a दुराग्रही, भारतीयविद्वत्परिषद् cannot help you. Sorry. When you come up with your own bowdlerized critical edition of VR, feel free to remove all such verses which in your view are interpolations.
 

उपप्रश्नः १ - आर्षः इति = आर्षेति इति समासः भवितुमर्हति वा?

No. Please refer

सुपां सुपा तिङा नाम्ना धातुनाऽथ तिङां तिङा।  

सुबन्तेनेति विज्ञेयः समासः षड्विधो बुधैः॥ (सिद्धान्तकौमुद्यां सर्वसमासशेषप्रकरणे)

परन्तु, 'आर्षः' अपि सुबन्तः 'इति' अपि नु। 

 

Before concluding please read the entire समासप्रकरण after which the above verse is found in सिद्धान्तकौमुदी. समर्थानां सुपां समर्थेन सुपा समासो भवतीत्यर्थः. Please read समर्थः पदविधिः (२-१-१) and the concept of एकार्थीभाव सामर्थ्य, the necessary condition of समास. Then read अव्ययं विभक्तिसमीपसमृद्धिव्यृद्ध्यर्थाभावात्ययासम्प्रतिशब्दप्रादुर्भावपश्चाद्यथाऽऽनुपूर्व्ययौगपद्यसादृश्यसम्पत्तिसाकल्यान्तवचनेषु (२-१-६) to know under which conditions an अव्यय can be an उपसर्जन resulting in a पूर्वनिपात. And then you let us know how आर्षः इति can result in a समास.
 

विविधपुस्तिकानां ही दर्शनार्थं धन्यवादः। अयम् प्रश्नः अस्मिन् पत्त्रे प्रमुखः अभविष्यत् चेन् न अपृच्छिष्यम् - अन्यमित्रवृन्दम् अगमिष्यम्। उपप्रश्ने पृष्टे तत्र भवतः अवज्ञा भवितुमर्हति - कृपया भवान् तद्विषये अवधानम् न ददातु। प्रमुखप्रश्नस्य उत्तरदाने कस्यचित् विदुषः जिह्वाग्रे उत्तरमस्ति चेत् सः उत्तरिष्यति।

What is the प्रमुखप्रश्न and what is the उपप्रश्न? I am sorry I cannot read your mind, not do I understand your message. Your first question on VR 5-2-33 has been answered now it is up to you to do your homework by reading up references. Your second question should not be answered by anybody as I have given you references where you can look up the name of the metre yourself easily. Do not expect scholars to spoon-feed you. Rather, you should go through the sources, find out the name of the metre yourself, share it with us and ask people not to bother about your question. If you cannot help yourself, nobody will.

--
Nityānanda Miśra
Vice President, Equity Markets, Citigroup, Hong Kong SAR
Member, Advisory Council, JRHU, Chitrakoot, Uttar Pradesh, India
http://nmisra.googlepages.com

[Nityanand Misra]

Dear Dr. Bhattacharjya

2013/3/8 sunil bhattacharjya <skbhatt...@gmail.com>

Dear friends,

For any discussion on language one should not lose sight of the historical perspectives. Contrary to the claims of the scholars of the colonial times, there is evidence that original materials did survive till this day and one cannot say that all the ancient texts  were written after Panini. Valmiki Ramayana is a very ancient text and next to come were the Mahabharata and the puranas. Vedas were also old. Much after that came Lord Buddha and thus the Buddhist-hybrid Sanskrit appeared. It was only after that the genius of Panini took the steps to formalise the rules such that the liberties like the Arshaprayoga were restricted. Therefore we have to be tolerant to the so-called mistakes in texts like Valmiki Ramayana, though were really not mistakes and they should be considered only as  the styles prevailing in those times.

Regards,
Sunil KB

 

It is true that Panini's grammar came much after Valmiki and Vyas. Even then, many a time it is our inability to comprehend the depth and intricacies of Panini's grammar that leads us to conclude that a form used by Valmiki and Vyas is non-Paninian. Even forms of some Sutras appear non-Paninian. E.g. इको यणचि does not follow ङमो ह्रस्वादचि ङमुण्नित्यम्. But the doubt vanishes when explained by a competent authority like महाभाष्य which explains नित्यं as प्रायिकम्, as one says नित्यं प्रहसति (=literally "always laughs", but actually meaning "usually laughs"). भाष्याब्धिः क्वातिगम्भीरः says कैयट, and when the commentary itself is called as अतिगम्भीर, what to say of the Sutras themselves.

In this context one may refer अध्यात्मरामायणेऽपाणिनीयप्रयोगानां विमर्शः, the 1981 विद्यावारिधि शोधप्रबन्ध by आचार्य गिरिधरलाल मिश्र (प्रज्ञाचक्षु), who in his current आश्रम adorns the seat of जगद्गुरु रामानन्दाचार्य as स्वामी रामभद्राचार्य. Out of around 700 so-called non-Paninian usages in the अध्यात्मरामायण (ब्रह्माण्डपुराण), the work discusses more than 350 instances of सन्धि, कारक, समास, कृदन्त, तद्धितान्त, तिङन्त usages which appear to be non-Paninian. All the usages are established to be Paninian using various rules and परिभाषाs, expounding on विवक्षा, using अध्याहार्य terms, and so on. By the time one finishes the work, one is convinced that the title of the work is अध्यात्मरामायणे पाणिनीयप्रयोगानां विमर्शः with no अकारप्रश्लेष.

A paragraph from the thesis reads

यद्यप्येका सूक्तिर्यत्

यान्युज्जहार माहेशाद्व्यासो व्याकरणार्णत्वात्।

तानि किं पदरत्नानि भान्ति पाणिनिगोष्पदे॥

अर्थाच्छाङ्करव्याकरणसमुद्रस्य सम्पूर्णोऽपि विषयः पाणिनीये व्याकरणे कथं समाहर्तुं शक्यः। किन्त्वेतत्कथनं केवलं बौद्धिकविचारतः पलायनवादमात्रम्। शिव एव पाणिनिहृदयस्थ इदं व्याकरणमस्मदर्थं व्याचकार। अतः सर्वमपि वाल्मीकिव्यासतुलसीदासप्रमुखशिष्टप्रयुक्तं पाणिनिव्याकरणसम्मतं कर्तुं शक्यमिति गुरुसेवालब्धबुद्धिबलो गिरिधरो घोषयति।

[narayanan er]

अपि चापाणिनीयप्रामाण्यसाधनेपि नारायणभट्ट आह-

अपशब्दास्त्रयो माघे भारवेरेकविंशतिः।

असंख्याः कालिदासस्य व्यासस्तन्मयतां गतः। इति।

अत्रापशब्द इत्यस्यापाणिनीयो विवक्षितः।

यान्युज्जहार माहेशाद् व्यासो व्याकरणार्णवात्।

तानि किं पदरत्नानि भान्ति पाणिनिगोष्पदे॥

इति चाचार्यवर्यैरुद्धृतां सूक्तिमप्यपाणिनीयप्रामाण्यसाधनादिति स्मरामि।

व्याकरणार्णत्वादिति नित्यानन्दवर्यकृतः टङ्कणदोषः केवलम्।

[विश्वासो वासुकेयः (Vishvas Vasuki)]

-अंबावर्या। +bcc वाल्मीकिवर्गस्य सहपाठिनः, अजितो नियामकः

2013/3/7 विश्वासो वासुकेयः (Vishvas Vasuki) <vishvas...@gmail.com>

अनेन रूपेण मया न शक्या रक्षसां पुरी |
प्रवेष्टुं राक्षसैर्गुप्ता क्रूरैर्बलसमन्वितैः || ५-२-३३

एवमेव अद्य अन्यदेकं तत्सदृशानुष्टुभ् दृष्टा शिबिविषयके पद्ये-

ततः शरीरं सकलं तुलां राजाध्यरोपयत् ।

साधु साधु समं त्वेतत् दिव्या वागुदभूत् ततः ॥

[अत्र छन्दसः नाम भविपुला इति ज्ञातम् विकिपीडिया पठनात्।]

धन्योक्तिरुक्त्वा हि तत्
ज्ञातनामोच्यतेऽत्र वै।

भविपुलेति तन्नाम

धन्या सा विकिपीडिया॥

[Shankarji Jha]

Shankarji Jha,
Professor of Sanskrit,
Deptt of Sanskrit,
Panjab University,
Chandigarh-160014, INDIA

---

From: shanka...@hotmail.com
To: vishvas...@gmail.com
Subject: RE: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} वाल्मीकिरामायणे क्वचित् छन्दोदोषः
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2013 07:23:16 +0000

 In which work, the Lakshana and Udaaharana of the metre''Bhavipulaa'' can be found? As we are told, Anushtup has several kinds. These types and the reference book may be listed on the BVP discussion screen for the good of the researchers. Regards, 

Shankarji Jha, 

Professor of Sanskrit,
Deptt of Sanskrit,
Panjab University,
Chandigarh-160014, INDIA

---

From: vishvas...@gmail.com
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2013 22:24:13 -0700
Subject: Re: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} वाल्मीकिरामायणे क्वचित् छन्दोदोषः
To: nmi...@gmail.com
CC: bvpar...@googlegroups.com; drerna...@yahoo.com

[Shankarji Jha]

Shankarji Jha,
Professor of Sanskrit,
Deptt of Sanskrit,
Panjab University,
Chandigarh-160014, INDIA

---

From: shanka...@hotmail.com
To: bvpar...@googlegroups.com
Subject: FW: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} वाल्मीकिरामायणे क्वचित् छन्दोदोषः
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2013 07:27:26 +0000

[Nityanand Misra]

On Wednesday, March 13, 2013 3:27:26 PM UTC+8, Shankarji Jha wrote:

 In which work, the Lakshana and Udaaharana of the metre''Bhavipulaa'' can be found? As we are told, Anushtup has several kinds. These types and the reference book may be listed on the BVP discussion screen for the good of the researchers. Regards, 

Second chapter of वृत्तरत्नाकरम् of श्रीभट्टकेदार discusses विपुला भविपुला रविपुला नविपुला तविपुला as subtypes of Anushtup

[narayanan er]

Respected scholars,
I thank Sh. Nityanand for directing into the Vrttaratnakara for searching the sub-divisions of Anushtubh. I thank Professor Jha too for good suggestion. It is not that easy to examine these criteria on the millions of verses of the Ramayana and the Mahabharata.
Till now I never tried with my sense on these divisions although these varients are seen in the Gita etc. I hope Sh. Nityanand may modify the metre index to the Sribhargavaraghaviyamahakavya of Sriramabhadracharya with the variants of Anushtubh, as currently they are listed as अनुष्टुप्-विविध, it will be a laborious effort to examine each feet of all Anushtubh verses. Now we turn on to the context of the Vrttaratnakara:
वक्त्रं नाद्यान्नसौ स्यातामब्धेर्योऽनुष्टुभि ख्यातम्।।२.२१।। Vaktra is a metre of having hetergenous (but homogeneous in the first two) feet. Here नगण and सगण are prohibited after the first syllables of all feet. In the first feet the alignment is: (नवधाराम्बुसंसिक्तं) लघु, यगण, यगण and गुरु. The second feet same as the first (वसुधागन्धिनिश्वासम्). In the third: (किञ्चिदुन्नतघोणाग्रं) गुरु, जगण, यगण and गुरु. Final: (मही कामयते वक्त्रम्) लघु, तगण, यगण and गुरु.
युजोर्जेन सरिद्भर्तुः पथ्यावक्त्रं प्रकीर्तितम्।।२.२२।। Pathyāvaktra is heterogenous. First: (नित्यं नीतिनिषण्णस्य) गुरु, तगण, यगण and लघु. Second: (राज्ञो राष्ट्रं न सीदति) गुरु, मगण, जगण and लघु. Third: (न हि पथ्याशिनः काये) लघु, यगण, यगण and गुरु. Final: (जायन्ते व्याधिवेदना) गुरु, मगण, जगण and गुरु.
ओजयोर्जेन वारिधेस्तदेव विपरीतादि।।२.२३।। Viparītavaktra is half homogeneous among 1st and 3rd feet. First: (भर्तृराज्ञानुवर्तिनी) गुरु, यगण, जगण and गुरु. Second: (या स्त्री स्यात्सा स्थिरा लक्ष्मीः) गुरु, मगण, यगण and गुरु. Third: (स्वप्रभुत्वाभिमानिनी) गुरु, यगण, जगण and गुरु. Final: (विपरीता परित्याज्या) लघु, यगण, यगण and गुरु.
चपलावक्त्रमयुजोर्नकारश्चेत्पयोराशेः।।२.२४।। Capalāvaktra is half homogeneous among 1st and 3rd feet. First: (क्षीयमाणाग्रदशना) गुरु, यगण, नगण and गुरु. Second: (वक्त्रा निर्मांसनासाग्रा) गुरु, मगण, यगण and गुरु. Third: (कन्यका वक्त्रचपला) गुरु, यगण, नगण and गुरु. Final: (लभते धूर्तसौभाग्यम्) लघु, यगण, यगण and गुरु.
यस्या लः सप्तमो युग्मे सा युग्मविपुला मता।।२.२५।। Yugmavipulā is when all the seventh syllables in second and fourth feet is लघु then.
सैतवस्याऽखिलेष्वपि।।२.२६।। Sage Saitava opines that Yugmavipulā is when all the seventh syllables in all the feet is लघु then.
भेनाऽब्धितो भाद्विपुला।।२.२७।। Bhavipulā is when first and third feet having a bhagana after the first four syllables, then.
इत्थमन्या रश्चतुर्थात्।।२.२८।। Ravipulā is when first and third feet having a ragana after the first four syllables, then.
नोऽम्बुधेश्चेन्नविपुला।।२.२९।। Navipulā is when first foot having a nagana after the first four syllables, then.
तोऽब्धेस्तत्पूर्वान्या भवेत्।।२.३०।। Tavipulā is when first and third feet having a tagana after the first four syllables, then.

It is interesting to notice that the Anushtubh-hood to all these is only on the basis of eight syllables each in four feet.
The uniformity in pattern among these sub-divisions are of the first four:
1. Vaktra -After four syllables in each feet: यगण in each feet.
2. Pathyāvaktra- After four syllables in each feet in order: यगण जगण यगण जगण
3. Viparītavaktra-After four syllables in each feet in order: जगण यगण जगण यगण the reverse of Pathyāvaktra
4. Capalāvaktra-After four syllables in each feet: नगण यगण नगण यगण
Regards,
Narayanan

---

From: Nityanand Misra <nmi...@gmail.com>
To: bvpar...@googlegroups.com

Cc: shanka...@hotmail.com
Sent: Wednesday, 13 March 2013 1:09 PM
Subject: Re: FW: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} वाल्मीकिरामायणे क्वचित् छन्दोदोषः

On Wednesday, March 13, 2013 3:27:26 PM UTC+8, Shankarji Jha wrote:

 In which work, the Lakshana and Udaaharana of the metre''Bhavipulaa'' can be found? As we are told, Anushtup has several kinds. These types and the reference book may be listed on the BVP discussion screen for the good of the researchers. Regards, 

Second chapter of वृत्तरत्नाकरम् of श्रीभट्टकेदार discusses विपुला भविपुला रविपुला नविपुला तविपुला as subtypes of Anushtup

[Nityanand Misra]

On Thursday, March 14, 2013 12:19:05 AM UTC+8, Narayanan E R wrote:

Respected scholars,

I hope Sh. Nityanand may modify the metre index to the Sribhargavaraghaviyamahakavya of Sriramabhadracharya with the variants of Anushtubh, as currently they are listed as अनुष्टुप्-विविध, it will be a laborious effort to examine each feet of all Anushtubh verses.

Thanks for the valuable suggestion, though as you have mentioned it would be laborious effort indeed. Labeling all the subtypes of अनुष्टुप्s and उपजातिs (14 types of combinations of इन्द्रवज्रा and उपेन्द्रवज्रा) requires a lot of patience since these are the most common metres used in epic poems. Śrībhārgavarāghavīyam has 194 अनुष्टुप्s and around 480 उपजातिs.

I remember when I first compiled the index of metres for Śrībhārgavarāghavīyam (available here) four years ago, 14 verses were labelled as औपच्छन्दसिकs (odd feet - six instants + ra ya, even feet - eight instants + ra ya as). Finding the subtype of each verse was not easy. While I found the name of the subtype पुष्पिताग्रा (odd feet na-na-ra-ya, even feet na-ja-la-ra-ya) easily, tracing the the name उपोद्गता/मालभारिणी/वसन्तमालिका (odd feet sa-la-la-ra-ya, even feet sa-bha-ra-ya) required quite some effort. The name of the औपच्छन्दसिक subtype for verse 7-55 (odd feet sa-la-la-ra-ya, even feet na-ja-la-ra-ya) was elusive even after all my efforts.

पतिदैवतिकां स चानसूयां परशुधरोऽर्चितवांश्च पूज्यभावात्।
कुपितामिव तां स शङ्कमानः प्रियसुतशिष्यविनाशतोऽनुनेष्यन्॥ ७-५५ ॥

This verse has the odd feet as the उपोद्गता/मालभारिणी/वसन्तमालिका and even feet as the पुष्पिताग्रा, and so I had even thought of labeling it as औपच्छन्दसिक उपजाति. I had to finally ask Gurudeva who told me this subtype is called सुरभि.