वेदविकृतिपठनस्य विनियोग:?

[Madhav M. Deshpande]

नमो नम: ।

अथर्ववेदीयशौनकीयचतुराध्यायिकायाम् "पदाध्ययनं संहितादार्ढ्यार्थम् ,
क्रमाध्ययनं संहितापददार्ढ्यार्थम्" इित पदपाठक्रमपाठयो: पठनस्य
प्रयोजनमुक्तम् । किन्तु न क्वापि विकृतिपठनस्य गृह्यश्रौतादिकर्मसु
विनियोग उक्त: । गतसंवत्सरे डेट्रॉइटनगरे कश्चित् पुरोहित: आशीर्वाद-
प्रदानसमये भद्रं कर्णेभिरिति मन्त्रस्य घनपाठं पठितवान् । ततोऽहं
ज्ञातुमिच्छामि अस्ति वा क्वचिद् विकृतिपाठानां गृह्यादिकर्मसु
विनियोगनिर्देश:? यदि केनचिदीदृशो विनियोगो ग्रन्थेषु पुरोहितव्यवहारे
वा दृष्टपूर्वस्तर्हि तन्नामादिनिर्देशेन अनुग्राह्योऽहं भवद्भिरिति
प्रार्थये ।

भवदीय:

माधव: देशपांडे इत्युपनामा

[hnbhat B.R.]

2011/3/12 Madhav M. Deshpande <mmd...@umich.edu>

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

सम्यगेवोक्तं शौनकेन। यदाह प्रातिशाख्यं च - 

संहिता पदप्रकृतिः पदान्तान्पदादिभिः संदधदेति यत्सा ।
कालाव्यवायेन स्वरान्तरं तु विवृत्तिः (विकृतिः?) सा वा स्वरभक्तिकाला॥१॥

इत्यादि।

पदान्तादिष्वेव विकारशास्त्रं पदे दृष्टेषु वचनात्प्रतीयात् ।
पदं पदान्तादिवदेकवर्णं प्रश्लिष्टमप्यानुपूर्व्येण संधीन्॥२॥

 

परमत्र विकृतिशब्देन संहितायां स्वरव्यञ्जनादीनां विकारभाव एव गृह्यत इत्याभाति। विकृतिपाठविषये अन्या काचिद् व्यवस्था स्त्यात्।

विदुषां मुखप्रेक्षी चाहमत्र विषये ---

भवदीयः

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

[VKG]

प्रणामाः।
विकृति पाठस्य प्रधानार्थस्तु संहिताध्ययनस्य रक्षणमिति
तावन्निश्चप्रचम्। संहिताया मन्त्र बाहुल्यात्, तेषामेव मन्त्राणां
(ऋचां, यजुषाञ्च) रक्षणीयार्थत्वाच्च, विकृतिपाठः तेषामेव प्रपञ्चितो
वैदिकलोकेन।
यद्यपि आनुषङ्गिकं फलमुक्तं, ब्रह्मलोकप्राप्त्यादिकं - तत्सर्वं
परम्परया तादक्फल मवापयतीति बोध्यं भवति। (कौण्डिन्य शिक्षायान्तु,
घनपाठादिकस्य शिवलोक प्राप्तिः - प्रकृति पाठापेक्षया
दशगुणाधिकफलप्रापकत्वं यद्यपि विहितं, तत् रात्रिसत्रन्याय मनुसृत्य,
अर्थवादः इति भाव्यते विद्वद्भिः।)

अथ गृह्य कर्मसु, विकृतीनां प्रयोगे औचित्यं वा वैचित्री वा
द्वितीयाशङ्का त्ववशिष्टैव। विधेयत्वेन तेषां साक्षान्नास्ति निवेशः।
वैचित्र्यार्थं वा, अर्थवादानुमित - अपूर्व प्राप्तिमूलको वा तासां
विकृतीनां पाठ इति निश्चप्रचमेव।

(अन्योपि विषयः - मन्त्राणां रक्षणाय कर्तव्यो विकृति पाठः, तैत्तिरीय
शाखायान्तु (सारस्वत पाठ हेतोः) संसृष्ट मन्त्र ब्राह्मणवाक्यानां संहिता
ब्राह्मणग्रन्थेषु वर्तमानत्वात्, ब्राह्मण ग्रन्थस्थ मन्त्राणामपि
विकृतिपाठयोग्यतासद्भावेपि, बह्वृचसम्प्रदायानुसारिणी वैदिकी परम्परा,
ब्राह्मणाम्नात मन्त्राणां, वाक्यानां विकृतिपाठं न ब्रवीति। पदपाठस्य
प्राचुर्याभाव एव हेतुरत्रेति मन्यामहे।)

अतः, यदि तत्रत्यः पुरोहितः भद्रं कर्णेभिः इत्यस्य घनपाठं ब्रूते,तस्य
मूलं मृग्यमेव। अथवा (विप्राः पश्चिमबुद्धयः इति) पाशात्यमतीनां
वैचित्र्यमिति समाधेयम्। यदि सः, ऋग्वेदी चेत्, तदा तस्य पाठ स्समर्थनीय
एव, तस्य संहितान्तर्भूतत्वात्। (ऋङ्मन्त्राणां सम्प्रदायो वर्तत
इत्युक्तपूर्वमेव।)
इत्यलं विस्तरेण।
वंशीकृष्ण घनपाठी
मैसूरु।

[subrahmanyam korada]

namo vidvadbhyah

Vik.rtipA.thasya  upayoga.h

MahAbhA.syam , AnandarAmAya.nam , AdityapurA.nam , Kau.n.dinyas'ik.sA , TaittirIyaprAtis'AkhyA

Under the SUtra- 'etistus'Asv.rd.rju.sa.h kyap' (PA.n 3-1-109) -Patan~jali , while disussing Kyp - pratyaya on 'an~j' for 'Ajyam' , remarks --

'na lak.s.nena padakArA anuvartyA.h, padakArairnAma lak.s.nam anuvartyam , yathAlak.sa.nam padam kartavyam'
(in the case of PadapA.tha , PadakAras have to follow  VyAkara.nam and not the otherway round .Pada has to be done as per the S'Astram ) . NAma = nis'capracam .

Kaiya.ta's Pradeepa -- samhitAyA eva nityatvam , padavicchedasya tu pauru.seyatvam , tathA ca yatra
arthanis'cayAbhAva.h  tatra avagraho (=pada) na kriyate .

NAges'a's Udyota -- arthanis'cayAbhAva iti , Ajyas'abdasya rU.dhatvAt An'artho'sti vA na veti nis'cayAbhAva ityrtha.h .

Under 'As'ita.h kartA' (PA.n 6-1-207) also Patan~jali offers the same comment (and it is discussed in Man~jU.sA etc ). There Kaiya.ta comments -

samhitaiva apauru.seyI , padAni tu pauru.seyA.ni iti bhAva.h .

The word 'As'ita.h' takes AdyudAtta replacing / checking 'thAthAdisvara'  and it is Katrari  kta.h - is the SUtrArtha .

Pada , Krama etc are not 'apauru.seya' and therefore they cannot be used in G.rhya and S'rauta Karmas for the expected results .

For  teaching SamhitA one requires to be a Padaka and Kramaka (PA.n- kramAdibhyo vun, 4-2-61) .
(last week I got my son , JayAdityasa'rma,25,joined with a Vedic scholar as I did not learn Pada or Krama) .

AnandarAmAya.nam --

samhitA pA.thata.h proktaA dvigu.nam padapA.thata.h I
 trigu.nam kramapA.the syAt ja.tApA.the tu .sa.dgu.nam II

AdityapurA.nam (the same verse is quoted in Kau.n.dinyas'ik.sA ) -

ja.tAdivik.rtInAm ye pArAya.naparAya.nA.h I
mahAtmAno dvijas're.s.thA.h te jn~eyA.h pan'tipAvanA.h II

TaittirIyaprAtis'AkhyA  (24-6) --

padakramavis'e.sajn~a.h var.nakramavicak.sa.na.h II
svaramAtrAvibhAgajn~a.h gacchedAcAryasamsadam II

AcAryasamsadam = brahmalokam (MAhi.seyabhA.syam and TribhA.syaratnam )

Kau.n.dinyas'ik.sA --

adhItya samhitAm pUrvam padakramaja.tAghanAn I
s'ik.sAdis'AstrAdhyayanam kuryAtkaumArasamyutam II

kAumAra = TaittirIyaprAtis'Akhyam (also called KumAravyAkara.nam) .

AdityapurA.nam --

ja.tA mAlA s'ikhA rekhA dhvajo da.n.do ratho ghana.h I
a.s.tau vik.rtaya.h proktA kramapUrvA mahar.sibhi.h II

Since Pada and Krama are popular as Vik.rti they are not taken here . As such there is no contradiction with Kau.n.dinyas'ik.sA .

The definitions etc can be had from VyAsas'ik.sA and Kau.n.dinyas'ik.sA .

dhanyo'smi




 

2011/3/13 VKG <vkghan...@gmail.com>

--
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)

[Madhav M. Deshpande]

यैर्विद्वद्भिर्मम पृच्छाया उत्तराणि प्रदत्तानि तेभ्य: सर्वेभ्यो
धन्यवादान् वितरामि ।

माधव: देशपांडे इत्युपनामा

Professor of Sanskrit and Linguistics
Department of Asian Languages and Cultures
The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

On 13 Mar, 05:38, subrahmanyam korada <korad...@gmail.com> wrote:
> namo vidvadbhyah
>
> Vik.rtipA.thasya  upayoga.h
>
> *MahAbhA.syam , AnandarAmAya.nam , AdityapurA.nam , Kau.n.dinyas'ik.sA ,
> TaittirIyaprAtis'AkhyA
> *
> Under the SUtra- *'etistus'Asv.rd.rju.sa.h kyap' (PA.n 3-1-109) -Patan~jali
> , while disussing Kyp - pratyaya on 'an~j' for 'Ajyam' , remarks --*
> *

> 'na lak.s.nena padakArA anuvartyA.h, padakArairnAma lak.s.nam anuvartyam ,

> yathAlak.sa.nam padam kartavyam*'
> (in the case of PadapA.tha , PadakAras have to follow * VyAkara.nam* and not
> the otherway round .Pada has to be done as per the S'Astram ) . *NAma =
> nis'capracam *.
>
> *Kaiya.ta's Pradeepa* -- samhitAyA eva nityatvam ,* padavicchedasya tu
> pauru.seyatvam* , tathA ca yatra

> arthanis'cayAbhAva.h  tatra avagraho (=pada) na kriyate .
>

> *NAges'a's Udyota* -- arthanis'cayAbhAva iti ,* Ajyas'abdasya rU.dhatvAt
> An'artho'sti vA na veti* nis'cayAbhAva ityrtha.h .
>
> Under '*As'ita.h kartA' (PA.n 6-1-207) also Patan~j*ali offers the same
> comment (and it is discussed in *Man~jU.sA* etc ). There *Kaiya.ta* comments
> -
>
> *samhitaiva apauru.seyI , padAni tu pauru.seyA.ni iti bhAva.h .
> *

> The word 'As'ita.h' takes AdyudAtta replacing / checking 'thAthAdisvara'
> and it is Katrari  kta.h - is the SUtrArtha .
>

> *Pada , Krama etc are not 'apauru.seya' and therefore they cannot be used in

> G.rhya and S'rauta Karmas for the expected results .

> *
> For  teaching *SamhitA one requires to be a Padaka and Kramaka (PA.n-
> kramAdibhyo vun, 4-2-61) *.

> (last week I got my son , JayAdityasa'rma,25,joined with a Vedic scholar as
> I did not learn Pada or Krama) .
>

> *AnandarAmAya.nam* --

>
> samhitA pA.thata.h proktaA dvigu.nam padapA.thata.h I
>  trigu.nam kramapA.the syAt ja.tApA.the tu .sa.dgu.nam II
>

> *AdityapurA.nam* (the same verse is quoted in* Kau.n.dinyas'ik.sA* ) -
>
> *ja.tAdivik.rtInAm ye pArAya.naparAya.nA.h I

> mahAtmAno dvijas're.s.thA.h te jn~eyA.h pan'tipAvanA.h II

> *
> *TaittirIyaprAtis'AkhyA*  (24-6) --
>
> padakramavis'e.sajn~a.h var.nakramavicak.sa.na.h II
> svaramAtrAvibhAgajn~a.h *gacchedAcAryasamsadam II
> *
> *AcAryasamsadam = brahmalokam* (*MAhi.seyabhA.syam and TribhA.syaratnam* )
>
> *Kau.n.dinyas'ik.sA* --

>
> adhItya samhitAm pUrvam padakramaja.tAghanAn I
> s'ik.sAdis'AstrAdhyayanam kuryAtkaumArasamyutam II
>

> *kAumAra = TaittirIyaprAtis'Akhyam (also called KumAravyAkara.nam) *.
>
> *AdityapurA.nam* --
>
> *ja.tA mAlA s'ikhA rekhA dhvajo da.n.do ratho ghana.h I

> a.s.tau vik.rtaya.h proktA kramapUrvA mahar.sibhi.h II

> *

> Since Pada and Krama are popular as Vik.rti they are not taken here . As

> such there is no contradiction with *Kau.n.dinyas'ik.sA* .
>
> The definitions etc can be had from *VyAsas'ik.sA and Kau.n.dinyas'ik.sA *.
>
> dhanyo'smi
>
> 2011/3/13 VKG <vkghanapa...@gmail.com>

[Dipak Bhattacharya]

18 5 11

Dear Professor Deshpande,

I noted a discussion on your enquiry about Vedavkṛtipāṭha made about two months ago in this forum. I regret that I missed it. I could give you the following information without any claim that they might be of help.

Long ago, Pt. Mangipūḍi Venkaṭśāstrī of Andhra had presented me his very learned and laborious work Vyāsaśikṣāvimarśaḥ (Vijayawada 1992) where he made some interesting discussions. Perhaps you have yourself read the book. In that case reading this letter is unnecessary. Otherwise, I bring to your notice the fact that Panditji begins his work emphasizing that the eight vikṛtis beginning from jaṭā belong exclusively to the Ṛgveda. Their utility lies in remembering the Ṛgvedic mantras only. Panditji regrets that the intention of Vyāḍi is not fulfilled by present day reciters and ritualists.

Again, historically speaking the primary employment of Ṛgvedic mantras is in the Śrauta ritual.  I do not see how they could be meant for Gṛhya ritual at the time of their origin. Another point, though Āśvalāyana’s ता एकश्रुति सन्ततमनुब्रूयात् is understood by ritualists in their own way, one thing becomes certain from this. Non-śastra, non-stotra mantras should be devoid of any embellishment during ritual employment. Taking recourse to vikṛti while employing them is prohibited then.

I myself am no ritualist and spoke just from common sense and whatever little I know of the literature concerned. I do not know if anybody has already said this. But I should like to know your opinion on this.

Regards and best wishes

Dipak Bhattacharya

---

From: Madhav M. Deshpande <mmd...@umich.edu>
To: भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत् <bvpar...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, 13 March 2011 7:45 PM
Subject: Re: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} Re: वेदविकृतिपठनस्य विनियोग:?

[Madhav M. Deshpande]

Dear Professor Bhattacharya,

No, I have not seen this work. I have some other edition of the
Vyāsaśikṣā, but not this work titled Vyāsaśikṣāvimarśaḥ. I checked
the catalogue of the University of Michigan library and the Worldcat,
but cannot find any copy of this work. Looks like an important
work.

Madhav Deshpande

On 18 May, 04:10, Dipak Bhattacharya <dbhattacharya200...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

> ...
>
> read more »

[Jagannatha s]

Respected scholars,

I do not know  anything about the topic raised in these postings. But here is an information  from my side:

Sri  Parameswara Aital  has produced  an   excellent  as  well  as  informative  catalogue   namely  Vedalakshana, Vedic  Ancillary Literature : A descriptive Bibliography.(Pub by 1.Franz Steiner Verlag, Stuttgart 1991). After reading the same, it will  appear that so many works regarding Vedalakshana are still in manuscripts. The attractive part of this huge work is, apart from giving physical description of the manuscripts available on the subject, it gives gist of  the contents of the works.

2011/5/18 Madhav M. Deshpande <mmd...@umich.edu>

--

[Madhav M. Deshpande]

I do have a copy of Sri Aithal's work, but I have not seen any works
on the ritual viniyoga of the Vikṛtipāṭhas listed there.

Madhav Deshpande

On 19 May, 13:00, Jagannatha s <jgran...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Respected scholars,
>
> I do not know  anything about the topic raised in these postings. But here
> is an information  from my side:
> Sri  Parameswara Aital  has produced  an   excellent  as  well  as

> informative  catalogue   namely  *Vedalakshana*,* Vedic  Ancillary
> Literature *: *A descriptive Bibliography.*(Pub by 1.Franz Steiner Verlag,

> ...
>
> read more »

[Dipak Bhattacharya]

20 5 11

<I have not seen any works on the ritual viniyoga of the Vikṛtipāṭhas listed there.>

My dear Madhavji,

Does it not appear likely that ritual viniyoga of vikṛtipāṭha is not an authentic Vedic practice? Perhaps one will never get that in any ancient manual. What you saw in the vikṛtipāṭha of bhadraṃ karṇebhir etc looks, from the literature available, like an unauthorized extension of a Ṛgvedic abhyāsa rule to gṛhya viniyoga.

Absurd things do happen with ritual practice. I shall mention one local custom here in Bengal. In certain areas here the priest utters his mantras aloud in ordinary smārta pūjās or saṃskāra karmans. As far as I know the upāṃśu utterance is the norm, perhaps after Āśvalāyana. But here, unless one utters aloud, people begin to suspect that the priest is not doing anything or that he does not know the mantras by heart!

Any Vedic sanction?

Best

DB

---

From: Madhav M. Deshpande <mmd...@umich.edu>
To: भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत् <bvpar...@googlegroups.com>

Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 11:41 PM

[Madhav M. Deshpande]

Dear Prof. Bhattacharya,

I agree with you as far as authorization for the recitation of
the Vikṛtis in ritual performance is concerned. It was the instance
of this recitation that I cited that prompted my curiosity. I don't
exactly remember where I read/heard it, but there is some publication
containing the Jaṭāpāṭha version of a classical verse: something like
"kṛṣṇāya tubhyam namaḥ." I will provide the bibliographic reference
if I can locate it. So it looks like at least for some practitioners
of Vedic recitation, the art was occasionally extended to the domain
of rituals and occasionally to post-Vedic verses, though there is no
official authorization for such practice. I suppose one reason for
this must be an effort to demonstrate the ability of the reciter to
his audience. The other possible reason could be that for a reciter
who is not specifically well-read in the prescriptive literature of
the Śrauta/Gṛhya literature, the lines between various domains of
performance get blurred, and so do the boundaries between what is and
is not Vedic. I remember a story of a wedding told in my family. At
this wedding, the father-in-law to be was a learned Shastri, and as
the wedding ceremony began, the father-in-law began to recognize the
mistakes made by the priests, and each time they would make a mistake,
he would stop them and correct them. Around the time I got married in
Philadelphia in 1970, there was only one Hindu priest in that area,
and I did observe him recite "śāntākāraṃ bhujagaSDṚŚAM." A priest
here in the Detroit area even today randomly adds "am" or "aḥ" to
Sanskrit words of the pothi he reads. So "śubhaṃ bhavatuḤ." Best,

Madhav Deshpande

Professor of Sanskrit and Linguistics

University of Michigan
Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

On 20 May, 02:28, Dipak Bhattacharya <dbhattacharya200...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

> ...
>
> read more »

[Dipak Bhattacharya]

20 05 11

Thanks, Professor Deshpande,

I recall one incident in this connection. Śrī Āñjaneya Ghanapāṭhī of East Godavarī personally arranged for  a recitation of the TS by his sons in the  Jaṭāpāṭha mode!  

Not only that, himself an Āpastambin, he had learned and trained his sons in AVŚ recitation.  

And to add to it each AV-hymn recitation with a sāman!

He was trained in Varanasi. But he had not learnt at the Raṭāṭes.

I always thought, but found it beyond good taste, to ask the great Vaidika that the first and the third practice had no Vedic or ancient traditional sanction.

Since many views have been expressed please forgive the small observation below:

 Things changed through the ages.  You yourself greatly argued against Sūrya Kānta that ms traditions and readings underwent heavy changes imperceptibly . Will it be unreasonable to think that so did our recitation and śākhā affiliation tradition on which we had a discussion in this forum?

Best

D. Bhattacharya

 

---

From: Madhav M. Deshpande <mmd...@umich.edu>
To: भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत् <bvpar...@googlegroups.com>

Sent: Friday, 20 May 2011 4:36 PM

[Ashok Aklujkar]

On 2011-05-19, at 11:28 PM, Dipak Bhattacharya wrote:

>the upāṃśu utterance is the norm, perhaps after Āśvalāyana.<

You probably intended some qualification here (such as in the Vaidika's daily personal ritual practice, his review sessions to ensure that what he had memorized was not forgotten, etc.) but did not express it. In my (limited) experience, it is quite common to recite mantras in such a way that others can hear them. Is there good textual evidence to hold that this is a later phenomenon?

Manu 2.85 (vidhi-yaj;naaj japa-yaj;no vi;si.s.to da;sabhir gu.nai.h / upaa.m;su syaac.chata-gu.na.h  saahasro maanasa.h sm.rta.h) clearly presupposes that an un-upaa.m;su recitation was possible (although, probably to avoid showy performance of religiosity, it recommends upaa.;su and maanasa recitation).

ashok aklujkar

[L N Gowtham Sarma Mahamkali]

    Vikruthi patas are ment for purpose of strengthening the samhitha pada etc as said by scholars earlier. I came across a shloka like

this is from the end of asta vikruthi examples in rig veda samhita of satvalekar ji. can any one trace this shloka and relate this meaning to this topic?

thank you

L N Gowtham Sarma Mahamkali

[Ganesh K]

Namaste,

The printed edition of sri varaha mahapurana from varanasi sarvabharateya kashi rajanyasa edition doesnt have this sloka traceable.

regards,

Ganesh K.

[Santosh Kumar Shukla]

The first Shloka is from  Taittiriya  pratishakhya- adhyaya24/6. 

With regards, 

Santosh Kumar Shukla 

--
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+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.