Learning together Sanskrit and GeetA (Chapter 1 verses 7, 8) - Post # 7

[S. L. Abhyankar]

नमो नमः !
सहर्षं निवेदयामि यत् "Learning Sanskrit and GeetA together" इति शीर्षकेण आरब्धस्य उपक्रमस्य सप्तमः (७) सोपानः अधुना एव http://study1geetaa2sanskrit.wordpress.com एतस्मिन् जालपुटे उपरीकृतः अस्ति ।

Learning together Sanskrit and GeetA (Chapter 1 verses 7, 8) - Post # 7
संस्कृतभाषायाः तथा श्रीमद्भगवद्गीतायाः (अध्यायः १ श्लोकाः ७, ८) अध्ययनस्य सप्तमः (७) सोपानः ।

 

टीका-टिप्पणीः सविनयं प्रार्थयामि ।

सस्नेहम् ,
अभ्यंकरकुलोत्पन्नः श्रीपादः |
"श्रीपतेः पदयुगं स्मरणीयम् ।"
http://slabhyankar.wordpress.com
http://study1geetaa2sanskrit.wordpress.com
http://slezall.blogspot.com
स्थापित-दूरभाष-क्रमाङ्कः +91 22 2849 5365
चलितभाष-क्रमाङ्कः +91 98330 72044

[elcico2001 एल्चिको]

Namaste!
Could you help me solve a little doubt?
How do you say, in sanskrit, namaste, when referring to (greeting) more
than one person?
Is it the same word or different?
Thanks :)

--
cico
----
Icq/Licq/Gaim #175451007
Debian Powered Linux Registered User #310800 at http://counter.li.org
No retreat baby no surrender
www.retenergie.it - coop di produttori e utilizzatori di energia da fonti rinnovabili
tad evaarthamaatra-nirbhaasaM svaruupa-shuunyam iva samaadhiH
Sanskrit - Realize it's the common language ;-)

[Vimala Sarma]

I think it would be namo yuSmabhyam; but maybe one would need several
salutations so it be namAH yuSmabhyam.
Vimala

--
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.

[Arvind_Kolhatkar]

Namaste,

The Rudrasuukta has several instances of salutations directed towards
pluralities. For example see:

इषुमद्भ्यो धन्वाविभ्यश्च वो नमो नम
आतन्वानेभ्यः प्रतिदधानेभ्यश्च वो नमो नम
आयच्छद्भ्यो विसृजद्भ्यश्च वो नमो नमो
ऽस्यद्भ्यो विद्ध्यद्भ्यश्च वो नमो नम
आसीनेभ्यः शयानेभ्यश्च वो नमो नमः
स्वपद्भ्यो जाग्रद्भ्यश्च वो नमो नम
स्तिष्ठद्भ्यो धावद्भ्यश्च वो नमो नमः
सभाभ्यः सभापतिभ्यश्च वो नमो नमो
अश्वेभ्योऽश्वपतिभ्यश्च वो नमः॥ ३.२॥

Arvind Kolhatkar. Toronto, January 29, 2011.

[Arvind_Kolhatkar]

Vimalaji,

Isn't नमस् a neuter-gender noun with a consonant-ending and, in that
case, wouldn't its nominative plural be नमांसि?

Though I have never come across this usage...

Arvind Kolhatkar, Toronto, January 29, 2011.

On Jan 29, 4:32 pm, "Vimala Sarma" <vsa...@bigpond.com> wrote:
> I think it would be namo yuSmabhyam; but maybe one would need several
> salutations so it be namAH yuSmabhyam.
> Vimala
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: sams...@googlegroups.com [mailto:sams...@googlegroups.com] On
>
> Behalf Of elcico2001 ???????
> Sent: Sunday, 30 January 2011 7:10 AM
> To: sams...@googlegroups.com
> Subject: [Samskrita] Curiosity - Namaste all
>
> Namaste!
> Could you help me solve a little doubt?
> How do you say, in sanskrit, namaste, when referring to (greeting) more
> than one person?
> Is it the same word or different?
> Thanks :)
>
> --
> cico
> ----
> Icq/Licq/Gaim #175451007

> Debian Powered Linux Registered User #310800 athttp://counter.li.org
> No retreat baby no surrenderwww.retenergie.it- coop di produttori e utilizzatori di energia da fonti

[Adolf von Württemberg]

May I attempt to answer your प्रश्नः
The singular person number of 'Greetings (honor) to you' can be either नमस्ते or नमस्तुभ्यम् । The latter is what I greet my Indian wife of 32 years.
The dual (i.e. the number that addresses two people only!) can be either be नमो युवाभ्याम् or नमो वाम् । Note: If I have only TWO students in a class, then this is how I would greet them.
The plural number (i.e. more than two people) would be नमो युष्मभ्यम् or वः ।
Scholarly members: please correct any दोषाः that I may have made.
अहम् अनुगृहीतोऽस्मि


सर्वद्रव्येषु विद्यैव द्रव्यमाहुरनुत्तमम् ।
अहार्यत्‍वादनर्ध्यत्‍वादक्षयत्‍वाच्च सर्वदा ॥४॥
Hitopadesha I.4
"Learning of all things, (the wise) declare to be without a superior (the best of them all), because of its incapability of being taken away, or valued or exhausted."

-----Original Message-----
From: sams...@googlegroups.com [mailto:sams...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of elcico2001 ???????
Sent: Saturday, January 29, 2011 15:10
To: sams...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [Samskrita] Curiosity - Namaste all

Namaste!
Could you help me solve a little doubt?

How do you say, in Sanskrit, namaste, when referring to (greeting) more than one person?

Is it the same word or different?
Thanks :)

--
cico
----
Icq/Licq/Gaim #175451007
Debian Powered Linux Registered User #310800 at http://counter.li.org No retreat baby no surrender www.retenergie.it - coop di produttori e utilizzatori di energia da fonti rinnovabili tad evaarthamaatra-nirbhaasaM svaruupa-shuunyam iva samaadhiH Sanskrit - Realize it's the common language ;-)

[hnbhat B.R.]

On Sun, Jan 30, 2011 at 3:39 AM, Arvind_Kolhatkar <kolhat...@gmail.com> wrote:

Vimalaji,

Isn't नमस् a neuter-gender noun with a consonant-ending and, in that
case, wouldn't its nominative plural be नमांसि?

Though I have never come across this usage...

Arvind Kolhatkar, Toronto, January 29, 2011.

विद्वत्परिषदे नमांसि! 

शिवाय गुरवे हं नमांसि करवाणि 

नमांसि कुर्मो हे कूर्म शिरांसि नत्वा धृतधर्म चरणं

सन्तु नमांसि सहस्रं श्रीमद्भ्यश्चन्द्रशेखरगुरुभ्यः । येषां हृदये वदने नामनि पूते च भारती लसति ॥

These are the usages in the neuter gender plural. My teacher also used to write me in this plural sense too. There seems to be no objection to such usage. Bhagavata:

BhāgavPur, 3, 13, 43.2

vidhema cāsyai namasā saha tvayā yasyāṃ svatejo 'gnim ivāraṇāv adhāḥ // 

KūPur, 1, 31, 38.1
sahasrapādākṣiśiro'bhiyuktaṃ sahasrabāhuṃ namasaḥ parastāt / 

क्षण्द्वीराय, नमसा,विधेम and

वधीर्हविष्मन्तो नमसा विधेम ते ।।  in Srirudra too.

Though it is included in the  स्वरादि list of अव्यय-s. The above may be taken as archaic usages or could be taken or a different word too ending with s. In either case, it would take dative to whom salutation is intended.

-- 

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

[hnbhat B.R.]

2011/1/30 Adolf von Württemberg <wolf...@bellsouth.net>

May I attempt to answer your प्रश्नः
The singular person number of 'Greetings (honor) to you' can be either नमस्ते or नमस्तुभ्यम् । The latter is what I greet my Indian wife of 32 years.
The dual (i.e. the number that addresses two people only!) can be either be नमो युवाभ्याम् or नमो वाम् । Note: If I have only TWO students in a class, then this is how I would greet them.
The plural number (i.e. more than two people) would be नमो युष्मभ्यम् or वः ।
Scholarly members: please correct any दोषाः that I may have made.
अहम् अनुगृहीतोऽस्मि


सर्वद्रव्येषु विद्यैव द्रव्यमाहुरनुत्तमम् ।
अहार्यत्‍वादनर्ध्यत्‍वादक्षयत्‍वाच्च सर्वदा ॥४॥
Hitopadesha I.4
"Learning of all things, (the wise) declare to be without a superior (the best of them all), because of its incapability of being taken away, or valued or exhausted."

-----Original Message-----
From: sams...@googlegroups.com [mailto:sams...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of elcico2001 ???????

Sent: Saturday, January 29, 2011 15:10
To: sams...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [Samskrita] Curiosity - Namaste all

Namaste!
Could you help me solve a little doubt?
How do you say, in Sanskrit, namaste, when referring to (greeting) more than one person?
Is it the same word or different?
Thanks :)

The only condition governing the proximity of the word नमस् is the word associated with denoting the person/deity/thing should be declined in the dative case ending. And it is a general rule, that Sanskrit words are declined according to the numbers with they correspond, singular, duel or plural. So it is not any special case if it is a word in the association with नमस्. (which to  can take duel or plural forms). Only the agreement with the numbers it represents is a must (if it is an inflected noun.).

So if you intend many salutations you can use नमांसि, (to show only higher degree of respect) which doesn't differ in meaning and also use the plural if you intend it to be conveyed to more than one persons. But use युबाभ्यां/वां नमः or युष्मभ्यं/वो नमः। तुभ्यं नमः, भवते नमः, भवद्भ्यां नमः, भवद्भ्यो नमः all these could be used to greet another person. = meaning only I salute you. 

 

[Vimala Sarma]

Arvind Mahodaya

You are correct – I had thought the s before te was because of sandhi, but it is  namas neuter, nom sing – and I also have not heard the usage नमांसि

I guess we should stick to the duplication to suggest plurality – namo namsH.

Vimala

--

[Vimala Sarma]

Bhat Mahodaya

Thank you for those examples.

Vimala

[Kiran Paranjape]

नमः is an indeclinable and is used with the Dative case of whom the salutation is offered.
E.g. ॐ नमः शिवाय / ॐ गं गणपतये नमः
--------------------------------------
Webmaster-Translations:
http://freetranslationblog.blogspot.com

[Arvind_Kolhatkar]

Kiranji,

Why do you say नमस् is indeclinable? MW shows it to be a neuter-
gender noun. Though rarely encountered in any situation other than
the nominative singular, Dr Bhat has cited instances where its other
declensions are seen.

Of course, we are most familiar with ॐ नमः शिवाय , ॐ गं गणपतये नमः,
नमस्ते रुद्र मन्यव उतोत इषवे नमः, केशवाय नमः, नारायणाय नमः etc.

Arvind Kolhatkar, Toronto, January 30, 2011.

[Vimala Sarma]

Kiran – Ji

These cases you cited the noun is declined  ie nom (1^st vibhakti), mas, sing form of namas.

And the compound form of the noun is namo-  eg namo, namovAka (an uttering of salutation).

 

Nam is also a verb root Class 1, Parasmai, to bow – namati, eg sirasA namAmi, and so you can get the absolutive praNamya, and all other conjugations etc.

Vimala

[Ram Kumar Krishnan ராம குமரன்]

Thanks Vimala ji,

I too had that doubt Nam is a verb too, then is it fair to call pranam to everyone as namanthe

2011/1/30 Vimala Sarma <vsa...@bigpond.com>

--
Thanks and Regards,
Ramkumar

[hnbhat B.R.]

I too had that doubt Nam is a verb too, then is it fair to call pranam to everyone as namanthe

Dear Ramji,

Ram Ram. There is no doubt about नम् (णम प्रह्वीभावे = to bow) being a verb. But the issue was whether the word नमस् is a neuter gender or  indeclinable अव्यय. And too there are many ways of expressing salutations in Sanskrit than one in question.

नमस्यामो देवान्, नमामि त्वाम्, प्रणमामि त्वाम्, नमस्ते, नम उक्तिं विधेम, नमो ऽस्तु ते व्यास विशालबुद्धे, नमोवाकं प्रशास्महे all derived from the root नम् = to salute to convey salutation.

According to Monier Williams only it is considered as Neuter Gender. But according to Indian Grammarians and lexicographers it is considered as indeclinable. That was the point in question raised by Sri Aravindji. 

I had already answered it in clear terms and could not find any source from Indian Grammar to defend it being a noun neuter gender in lexicons and grammar. You are right in your assertion as it is a popular thing for anybody knowing Sanskrit Grammar. It is considered so by Paninian system of Grammar as अव्यय by including it in the list of them provided in the rule 1-1-37 स्वरादिनिपातमव्ययम्॥ and none of the commentators ever remarked as it being noun too.

Only case government is discussed and its derivates too. 2-3-16 नमःस्वस्तिस्वाहास्वधालंवषड्योगाच्च । governs dative case with the word to whom salutation is intended to be conveyed. नमस्कुर्मो नृसिंहाय, नमस्कृत्य मुनित्रयम्, etc.  usages are there with the same word. स्वयंभुवे नमस्कृत्य is also available attested. The following words are derived from the same word: namas_

नमस्यति = worships, नमस्या = worship.  

All the lexicographers consider it as अव्यय. One commentator on Amarakosha had remarked: अनव्ययमस्ति नमश्शब्दः। and supports his statement by citing examples:

"यत्तन्नमः किमपि शुश्रुम देवताभ्यः" "त्वामन्तरेण नमसामवसानभूमिम्।" (Source not known).

(अमरकोशपारिजातः)।

Either the rarely occurring forms may be considered as exceptional and archaic accepting the authority of Indian tradition, or accept them as regular usages ignoring the Paninian tradition following western opinion. Choice is yours. 

This is my reflection on seeing the messages in this thread from different angles. 

[Rajeev]

what about "सर्वेभ्यो नमो नमः",  "सर्वेभ्यो नमस्कारः", "भवद्भ्यो नमस्कारः", "भवद्भ्यो नमः" ?

I have come

Rajeev

[elcico2001 एल्चिको]

Rajeev ha scritto:

> what about "सर्वेभ्यो नमो नमः", "सर्वेभ्यो नमस्कारः", "भवद्भ्यो नमस्कारः",
> "भवद्भ्यो नमः" ?
>
> I have come
>
> Rajeev
>

Thanks all those who replied.
Really interesting.
Namastè! :)

--
cico
----
Icq/Licq/Gaim #175451007

Debian Powered Linux Registered User #310800 at http://counter.li.org

No retreat baby no surrender

www.retenergie.it - coop di produttori e utilizzatori di energia da fonti rinnovabili

[Kiran Paranjape]

Sanskrit English Dictionary by V. S. Apte refers to this word as follows:

"This word has a sense of a noun, but is treated as an indeclinable.'
--------------------------------------
Webmaster-Translations:
http://freetranslationblog.blogspot.com