Fwd: Vyakaranam

[subrahmanyam korada]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: subrahmanyam korada <kora...@gmail.com>
Date: Mar 15, 2010 12:08 PM
Subject: Vyakaranam
To: v.ram...@gmail.com

namo vidvadbhyah

 

I am really thankful to all the  Members of the Parisat for the affection  and encouragement, specially to

Prof NR Joshi , who makes me revisit the Vedas, Vedangas, Darsanas etc. so that the things I learnt

are green in my mind.

 

Before venturing upon  the discussion on Sanskrit Language one has to bear in mind the following facts --

 

1. Just like in the case of six Anadis in Vedantadarsana, there is no othergo but to accept that the Sanskrit

Language is Anaadi.

 

2.In Gopathabrahmana. Aitareyabrahmana, Maitrayaniyasamhita, Katantravyakarana etc. the  System  of

Vyakarana is discussed using the Terminology ( naamarupe vyaakaravaani, ko dhaatuh, kim pratipadikam etc.).

 

3. In Rktantra, Katantravyakarana etc. the  Birtha / Pracaara / Prasaara of Vyakarana was described --

Brahma - Brhaspati - Indra - bharadvaja - Rsis - Brahmanas ( so not from scratch and one has to depend

upon these words -- Sanskrit has come like this, where Brahmins have come is to be discussed separately).

 

4.The language was created by Devatas as per the uninterrupted tradition -- deviim vaacamajanayanta devaah.

 

   No doubt ,  there will always be problem with the form of language ( deterioration). Bhartrhari asserts -

 

daivy vaak vyavakiirneyam asaktaih abhidhaatrbhih (Vakyapadiyam 1-155) and also both Sabdas and

Apasabdas are there continuosly in the tradition --

 

ubhayesaam avicchedaat (Vakya 1-156).

Rather, although there is no difference as far as the  transformation of meaning is concerned, Sabdas

would fetch Dharma ( see Paspasa ) --

 

sistebhya aagamaatsiddhaa saadhavo dharmasaadhanam

arthapratyaayanaabhede vipariitaastvasaadhavah ( Vakya 1-27)

 

What about the Vyavasthaa --

 

nityatve krtakatve vaa tesaam aadirna vidyate , praaninaamiva sa caisaa vyavasthaanityatocyate (Vakya1-28)

 

Vaiyaakaranas believe in Kuutasthanityata ( in Vedaanta it is Brahma) of Sabdas, i.e. the form is immutable,

whereas for others , like Naiyaayikas, it is Pravaahanityataa or Vyavahaaranityataa . Then also in order to save

the Svara etc. Vyakarana is required , not a futile exercise (Vakya 1-29) --

 

naanarthikaam imaam kascid vyavasthaam kartumarhati , tasmaat nibadhyate sistaih saadhutvavisayaa smrtih
 

Such task can be fulfilled only by  Yogis (Vakya 1-37 & 38) --

 

aavirbhuutaprakaasaanaam anupaplutacetasaam, atiitaanaagatajnaanam pratyaksaanna visisyate

 atiindriyaanasamvedyaan pasyantyaarsena caksusaa, ye bhaavaan vacanam tesaam naanumaanena baadhyate

 

If one does not believe in this he should not believe in Yoga and Ayurveda also . Aksapada also says (Nyayasu.

2-1-68)-

mantraayurvedapraamaanyavacca tatpraamaanyam aaptapraamaanyaat ( here tat = Vedavaakyaani)

 

 

5. The Prakriyaa can be defferent but the end-product should be the same --

 

Raamah =  Panini - raama + su ; Sakatayana - raama + ru ; Sakalya - raama + ri

 

Bhavati = bhuu + a + ti ; bhuu + ati ; bhava + ti .

 

yadekam prakriyaabhedaih bahudhaa pravibhajyate, tad vyaakaranamaagamya param brahmaadhigamyate.

 

So it is again due to the fear of  Adharma that at least the Brahmanas of Aryavarta  were protecting the Form

of Sanskrit ( in families such as ours standard language , i.e. Telugu , only is allowed ) - see prsodaraadini

yathopadistam ( Panini 6-3-109).

 

The point of Primitive societies , cattle grazing people etc is not the subject matter of Vyakarana. Even today

we have such people in Andaman etc.

The Theory of Infomation is not applicable to such works of Yogis who possess 'Divyadrsti'(clairvoyance).

The Form of  Sabdas naturally changes , that'swhy Vyakaranam is required - raksohaagamalaghvasamdehaah

prayojanam (Paspasa).

 

There are, no doubt, other Vyakaranas but none of them can surpass Panini . Please chek the corresponding

Sutra for Panini's - maaturutsamkhyaasambhadrapuurvaayaah (4-1-115).

 

6. Certainly, Paninian Vyakarana is on a very firm  platform rather than on a slippery slope.

 

7. Padaprakrtih samhitaa - is Rkpratisakhya . Samhitaa means Vakyam , and Sasthiisamaasa, i.e. first it is

Vakyam and Padas are carved out of it ( see Vakyapadiyam 2- 58)--

 

padaprakrtibhaavasca vrttibhedena varnyate, padaanaam samhitaa yonih samhitaa vaa padaasrayaa.

 

Please refer to Laghumanjusa, Saktivicarah -- since Vakyas (and Mahavakyas) are innumerable Vaiyakaranas

had come down to Padas (Avantaravakyas) since they are also infinite in number (naantam jagaama - Paspasa)

they came down to Prakrti and Pratyaya thru Apoddhaara (Vakya 1-24,25,26) . So an impartite sentence only is

acceptable . Naiyayikas took Prakrti and Pratyaya as the real candidates and it it not the Siddhata

 

On 3/11/10, gira...@juno.com <gira...@juno.com> wrote:

March 10, 2010

First Yugadi New Year (March 16) Shubhechaa to all!


Respected Scholars, Namaskar!

Can phonemic symbolism be extended to Sanskrit grammatical endings?

We all are grateful to Dr. S. Korad for taking time out through his busy teaching and research schedule to participate in discussions on this list. I certainly benefit from his comprehensive writings. It is difficult for me to paraphrase the long article by Dr. S. Mohan Mishra. He emphasizes the fact that ancient Indian traditions in Sanskrit grammar, linguistics are not closed books. There is room for questions and bring out new features of the existing systems.

Let us assume that words and meanings relationships are Anādi as described by Dr. S. Korad. Dr. S. D. Joshi in his book (on Aşţādhyāyī) says, “We do not know where Sanskrit came from and where Brahmins came from”? This raises many interesting questions.

The approximate picture long before Panini is this in my opinian-
People or at least Brahmins from the ancient India were speaking Sanskrit. It is also clear from the concept of “Apoddhāra padārtha” (meaning gotten through extraction), that syntactic units (pada) are extracted from an impartite spoken utterance and which in turn were analyzed into smaller units such as bases (prak®ti) and affixes (pratyaya) for the sake of grammatical description. The same is true for a meaning of the utterance, which is equally impartite, analyzed into words meanings, from which are abstracted further the meanings of the smaller units, using the reasoning of Anvaya (logical connection) and Vyatireka (logical discontinuance) for the sake of grammatical description. Here padaartha means the meaning (artha) of the pada (syntactic unit). So we assume here that language was there first and grammar arrived later on.

There is less than ten percent difference in Language of Vedas and Bhāşā of Pāņini. Both of these versions have inflections, that is, elaborate grammatical endings. Some scholars are of the opinion that ancient Asian societies including Indian of the Vedic era were living in the primitive stage of civilization.

First question-
Why do the cattle grazing primitive societies need such highly inflected language like Sanskrit? Today in order to write scientific papers we use English without inflections (words next to words). If you have answer, please let me know.

Second question-
Let us assume that Vedas with their highly inflected language were known from the very ancient time, and were revealed to sages. In that case also why does the nature (or divine) need such highly inflected language to reveal verses of Vedas? One cannot create such language from the scratch.

One obvious use of elaborate grammatical endings is that it makes meaning relatively free of word order. The second reason of having grammatical endings could be to establish the semantic continuity.

Third question-
Can semantic continuity be achieved if we substitute new grammatical endings tomorrow in place of old ones?
The answer is yes if grammatical endings were chosen randomly to look different from each other. But if they indicate meanings based on the meanings of individual phonemes present in them, then the answer is no.
The third reason could be that nature does not like redundancy. In other words nature would like to communicate maximum amount of meaning with minimum number of sounds. This is possible if the individual phonemes present in lexemes and in grammatical endings of syntactic units (Padas) carry semantic significance. In this case the language becomes the most efficient code for communication.

So far I did not touch grammatical endings with my phonemic symbolism. Dr, Shrivara wanted me to extend it to the past passive participles (like Naşţa. Kŗşţa etc). Development of languages of India (like Marathi, Hindi) shows that grammatical endings undergo changes faster than the phonemes in the lexemes.

Fourth question-
How do we know that Sanskrit grammatical endings did not undergo changes of phonemes?
If we take archaeological evidence of Mitanni (1350 BC) into consideration, then Sanskrit has history of at least 900 years before Panini. In such a long period of history, what is guaranty that Sanskrit grammatical endings did not undergo changes? According to Information theory, information which is certain in the beginning tends to become uncertain with passage of time.

Those who believe that Sanskrit was developed in ancient India by interaction with outsiders (Aryans), for them grammatical endings also went through developments. Since they believe in evolution of language features, phonemic symbolism cannot fit in their random selection scheme.

There are different systems of Sanskrit grammar. Please see the books.
(1) Bengal’s contribution to Sanskrit grammar in the Paninian and Cāndra Systems by Kali Charana Shastri.
He says in the preface of the book that technical terms of Sanskrit grammar became meaningless after a time. Technical terms of grammar in one system become meaningless in another system. Examples are given.
(2) The Aindra school of Sanskrit Grammar by A, C, Burnell
(3)Technical Terms and Techniques of Sanskrit Grammar by Kshitish Chandra Chatterji.
(4) Katantra grammar
(5) Jainendra grammar

Fifth question
Is Sanskrit grammar resting a slippery slope?

If you answer my questions, then I will venture into explaining grammatical forms using my phonemic symbolism. Thanks. N. R. Joshi



____________________________________________________________
Weight Loss Program
Best Weight Loss Program - Click Here!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/c?cp=pNXxRwGdBHG0mI6HiYTKHQAAJ1DzphoupZ8w6IeWaVuMIhzHAAYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAEUgAAAAA=

--
अथ चेत्त्वमिमं धर्म्यं संग्रामं न करिष्यसि।
ततः स्वधर्मं कीर्तिं च हित्वा पापमवाप्स्यसि।।
तस्मादुत्तिष्ठ कौन्तेय युद्धाय कृतनिश्चयः।
निराशीर्निर्ममो भूत्वा युध्यस्व विगतज्वरः।। (भ.गी.)

--
Prof.Korada Subrahmanyam
Professor of Sanskrit,
CALTS,
University of Hyderabad 500046
Ph:09866110741(R),91-40-23010741,040-23133660(O)

--
Prof.Korada Subrahmanyam
Professor of Sanskrit,
CALTS,
University of Hyderabad 500046
Ph:09866110741(R),91-40-23010741,040-23133660(O)