further questions on the Guru Stotra

[venetia ansell]

NamaH sarvebhyaH

I have some further questions to add to the discussion on differing versions of the Guru Stotram. 

The version I has consists of seven verses, of which five I am able to find in the long version of the Guru Gita.  Two further verses I cannot locate and as the version I have has several printing mistakes I am not sure of the correct versions of these two shlokas.  The text I have reads:

 

mantra satyaM pUjA satyaM satyameva niranjanam

gurur vAkyaM sadA satyaM satyameva paraM padam

 

pitR mAtR suhRd bandhu vidyA tIrthAni devatA

na tulyaM gurunAm shIghraM sparshameva paraM padam

 

My questions here are:

- surely 'mantra' should be 'mantram' or possibly 'mantraH' but not 'mantra' unless it is a samasa and if so then I would assume pUjA-satyaM is also a samasa?

- in the second shloka, the first four words look like sambodhanas, is this then addressing the guru as 'father', 'mother' etc?

- should 'gurunAm' be 'gurunAma'

- I cannot get the sense of 'shIghraM sparshameva paraM padam'

 

I also have a further question on one verse which is included in the Guru Gita but appears in several different versions in different places - the differences seem to mainly be centred on the word 'guru' which can be 'gurau' (saptami), guroH (shasti), guruH (prathama) or even possibly guru (as a samasa) as below:

 

dhyAnamUlaM gur* mUrti pujAmUlaM gur* padam

mantramUlaM gur* vAkyaM mokSamUlaM gur* kRpA

 

My questions here are:

- Would any of the four options above work in this context - gurau, guroH, guruH or guru?  Is any to be preferred and if so for what reasons?

- My version has mUrti (as above) but surely it should be mUrtiH?

 

Thank you very much again for your help with this.  I wanted to recite the guru stotram daily for the caturmasya period but realised when I started that the text I had was faulty and so am keen to rectify this as soon as possible.

 

Best,

Venetia

[hnbhat B.R.]

Why don't you try the Gurustotra as commented by Atmananda, which is the shortest and compact version than trying with irreparably damaged versions?

I think I had given it in my previous posting which has approximately 14 versions as I had learnt when I was beginning Sanskrit learning. Here is the link again:

http://www.chinmayatoronto.org/pdf/slokas/GuruStotram.pdf

Checked again and seems to be free from error and even if typo, they are repairable. If you want to recite daily you can use it.

No other comments on these corrupt readings.

With regards

--
Dr. Hari Narayana Bhat B.R. M.A., Ph.D.,
Research Scholar,

Ecole française d'Extrême-OrientCentre de Pondichéry

16 & 19, Rue Dumas

Pondichéry - 605 001

[Nityanand Misra]

My thoughts on the questions on ध्यानमूलं verse

1. It is certainly not guruH - that would not be grammatically correct. There has to be a samaasa or a vibhakti, and the samaasa will make it "guru" instead of "guruH", the vibhakti would inflect guru to a form in one of the singular cases.
2. Although grammatically "guru" makes sense, prosodically it is most likely not "guru" - the reason is usually the sixth syllable in a shloka is long - श्लोके षष्ठं गुरुं ज्ञेयं. The rule is not universal and there can be exceptions but it is almost universal and it is followed in other verses of the Guru Gita to my information.
3. Again, though gurau may make sense but guroH makes direct and unambiguous sense. I recite the verse everyday and I say guroH, (gurormUrtiH, etc) as I was taught in childhood.
4. Yes it is mUrtiH and not mUrti.

On the पितृमातृ verse, the first four words are not sambodhana but prAtipadika for samAsa. Sambodhana form of पितृ is पितः, मातृ is मातः et cetera. It is more likely guruNAM than gurunAma - the latter would violate the prosody of the verse and make nine syllables in the quarter.

Regards, Nityanand

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "samskrita" group.
To post to this group, send email to sams...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to samskrita+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/samskrita?hl=en.

--
Nityānanda Miśra
http://nmisra.googlepages.com

|| आत्मा तत्त्वमसि श्वेतकेतो ||
(Thou art from/for/of/in That Ātman, O Śvetaketu)
     - Ṛṣi Uddālaka to his son, Chāndogyopaniṣad 6.8.7, The Sāma Veda

[Naresh Cuntoor]

2. Although grammatically "guru" makes sense, prosodically it is most likely not "guru" - the reason is usually the sixth syllable in a shloka is long - श्लोके षष्ठं गुरुं ज्ञेयं. The rule is not universal and there can be exceptions but it is almost universal and it is followed in other verses of the Guru Gita to my information.

I believe it is श्लोके षष्ठं गुरु ज्ञेयं, i.e. गुरु and not गुरुं.
गुरु is in neutral gender. This does not violate anuShTup because the succeeding letter is a saMyukta-akShara whose stress makes the "ru" guru.


Naresh

[Nityanand Misra]

Naresh Ji

That is correct, it is indeed श्लोके षष्ठं गुरु ज्ञेयं, it was a typo from me.

Thanks, Nityanand

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "samskrita" group.
To post to this group, send email to sams...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to samskrita+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/samskrita?hl=en.

[Sunder Hattangadi]

It came as a surprise to me that this version has none of the verses in the long version of Guru Gita.

 

The short version of Guru Gita has only the following:

 

#1       corresponding to #67

 

#2                  "            #34

 

#3                  "             #32

 

#4                  "             #71

 

#9                  "             #73

 

#11                 "            #74

 

#12                 "            #75

 

#13                 "            #77                      

 

 

http://sanskritdocuments.org/doc_1_index.html

 

ITX | PS | PDF | XDVNG | - gurugItA   [182 verses]

 

ITX | PS | PDF | XDVNG | - gurugItA   [352 verses]

 

 

 

Regards,

 

sunder

 

 

 

 

 

[Sunder Hattangadi]

It came as a surprise to me that this version has none of the verses in the long version of Guru Gita.

 

The short version of Guru Gita has only the following:

 

#1       corresponding to #67

 

#2                  "            #34

 

#3                  "             #32

 

#4                  "             #71

 

#9                  "             #73

 

#11                 "            #74

 

#12                 "            #75

 

#13                 "            #77                      

 

 

http://sanskritdocuments.org/doc_1_index.html

 

ITX | PS | PDF | XDVNG | - gurugItA    [182 verses]

 

ITX | PS | PDF | XDVNG | - gurugItA    [352 verses]

 

 

 

Regards,

 

sunder

 

 

 

 

 

From: hnbhat B.R. <hnbh...@gmail.com>
To: sams...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Friday, August 12, 2011 7:55 AM
Subject: Re: [Samskrita] further questions on the Guru Stotra

Why don't you try the Gurustotra as commented by Atmananda, which is the shortest and compact version than trying with irreparably damaged versions?

I think I had given it in my previous posting which has approximately 14 versions as I had learnt when I was beginning Sanskrit learning. Here is the link again:

http://www.chinmayatoronto.org/pdf/slokas/GuruStotram.pdf

Checked again and seems to be free from error and even if typo, they are repairable. If you want to recite daily you can use it.

No other comments on these corrupt readings.

From: hnbhat B.R. <hnbh...@gmail.com>
To: sams...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Friday, August 12, 2011 7:55 AM
Subject: Re: [Samskrita] further questions on the Guru Stotra

[venetia ansell]

Namaste Nityanand-mahodaya,

Thank you very much for your comments on the dhyanamulam verse.  As you say, it looks like 'guroH' works the best from all perspectives - sense, metre and grammar - so I will stick with that. 

The other verse continues to confound me. Thank you for noting that pitR etc cannot be sambodhana, but must instead be pratipadika in composition (samasa).  Are we then to take 'pitR-mAtR-suhRd-bandhU-vidyA-tirthAni' as one compound?  That would leave devatA on its own which seems odd.  When you say guruNAM, do you mean the shasthi bahuvacana - would that not require a dIrgha-ukAra = gurUNAM. 

It looks like you, and others on this group, are not familiar with the pitRmAtR...verse which makes it even more intriguing. I wonder where this has come from. 

Thank you again and I shall continue to investigate.

Best,

Venetia

[venetia ansell]

Namaste Bhat-mahodaya,

Thank you for re-sending this link.  I am keen to recite this version as it is the one that my husband's family have given me - and which they use -  so will continue to try and correct the readings.  If all else fails though I can always use the Chinmaya one as you advise.

THank you

Venetia