Query about Samas

[Ghanu Vinu]

Hello,

I have a few doubts regarding Samas and it's Vigrahas

Without Vigrah of Samas how can we define the category of the Samas? As far as I know, category of the Samas depends upon it's Vigrah. So according to that, any one Samas can be put into two or three categories depending upon it's Vigraha.

E.g.-   Ekamas can be seen as both Karmadharya and Dwigu depending on how we break it. How can we explain this anomaly.

Also, can you help me with the Vigrahas of these words-

1. Sthitapragya

2. Prayojankritam

3. Snanartham

4. Sagaram

5. Svagriham

6. Haryashti

[Hnbhat B.R.]

On Sun, Dec 14, 2014 at 10:19 PM, Ghanu Vinu <srig...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hello,

I have a few doubts regarding Samas and it's Vigrahas

Without Vigrah of Samas how can we define the category of the Samas? As far as I know, category of the Samas depends upon it's Vigrah. So according to that, any one Samas can be put into two or three categories depending upon it's Vigraha.

All the compounds are depending on the context, how to split them so as to give the correct meaning, suitable to the context in one or more ways.

 

E.g.-   Ekamas can be seen as both Karmadharya and Dwigu depending on how we break it. How can we explain this anomaly.

There are rules for compound formation according to which समास and not samas. 

Please give in Devanagari, the correct words and not in English in with wrong spellings, and with the context in which the compounds are used.

 

Also, can you help me with the Vigrahas of these words-

1. Sthitapragya

स्थितप्रज्ञः  ---

प्रजहाति यदा कामान्सर्वान्पार्थ मनोगतान् । 

आत्मन्येवात्मना तुष्टः स्थितप्रज्ञस्तदोच्यते ॥२- ५५॥

The stable minded is the one, who has forsaken all desires and fluttering of the mind. Oh Arjuna, and becomes content and happy with his soul seeking pleasure only from the soul.

स्थिता प्रज्ञा यस्य सः - स्थितप्रज्ञः।

Please provide the context in Devanagari, like above, for all the words you have listed. The above is in the context of Bhagavadgita. It may differ in other contexts. So please provide the full sentence.

 

2. Prayojankritam

 

3. Snanartham

4. Sagaram

5. Svagriham

6. Haryashti

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "samskrita" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to samskrita+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sams...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/samskrita.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Arvind_Kolhatkar]

Here I am reminded of the story of त्वष्टा conducting a sacrificial rite for the birth of his son वृत्र, whom he wants to be the destroyer of इन्द्र.  In the sacrificial rite he makes the invocation इन्द्रशत्रो विवर्धस्व.  In saying so he misses the correct intonation and puts the accent on इन्द्र, instead of on शत्रु.  This converts the originally intended तत्पुरुष (इन्द्रस्य शत्रु: the killer of Indra) into बहुव्रीहि (इन्द्र: शत्रु: यस्य स: he whose killer is Indra).  The son वृत्र is later killed by Indra.

The समास इन्द्रशत्रु can thus be resolved in two ways, depending upon the intended meaning.

Arvind Kolhatkar, Toronto, December 17, 2014.

[Hnbhat B.R.]

स्वरतो वर्णतो वा मिथ्याप्रयुक्तो न तमर्थ्माह ।

स वाग् वज्रो यजमानं हिनस्ति यथेन्द्रशत्रुः स्वरतोऽपराधात् ॥

This is the original verse of story.  

[KN.Ramesh]

More about the story here:

http://www.knramesh.blogspot.in/search/label/Wrong%20intonation%20of%20mantras%20and%20consequences

[KN.Ramesh]

Just wanted to share this:

Devas once had a doubt about the samasa of Rameswara: whether it is tatpurusha or bahuvreehi

They went to Vishnu. He told, "No doubt! It is tatpurusha stating रामस्य ईश्वर; रामेश्वर: 

Devas thought since Vishnu is Gunapoorvanan he tells that way.

Then they went to shiva. He told it is bahuvreehi  stating - मम ईश्वर: राम:

Devas were now utterly confused. 

Then they went to Brahma for clarification.

he told - It is karmadharaya - रामश्च असौ ईश्वरश्च रामेश्वर:

Depicts both Shiva & Vishnu as one.

more here:

http://knramesh.blogspot.in/2014/12/rameshwar.html

On Wednesday, 17 December 2014 19:00:54 UTC+5:30, hnbhat wrote: