Asthadhyaayi Index

[Sita Raama]

Namaste Everyone,

I started working on the attached document few weeks back. I used C.S.Vasu's eight volume works to create this document. 

It's still work in progress.

I was wondering if anyone from the group would like to give some of their time to do some sanity check and help me with categorization of sutras. Because in chapter 3 and 4 the distinction is not as clear as its in chapter 1.

Your suggestions would be apprecaited. 

Disclaimer - 

This work is not to make any sort of profit or advertisement. Just want to create a tool to appreciate sturcture of asthadhaayi and help flatten the learning curve. 

[Nityanand Misra]

Thanks for the great initiative. How do you indicate the type of sutra. For example 1.1.1 वृद्धिरादैच्, 1.1.2 अदेङ्गुणः and 1.1.44 न वेति विभाषा are संज्ञा सूत्रs to define the terms वृद्धि, गुण and विभाषा

--
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
Member, Advisory Council, Jagadguru Rambhadracharya Handicapped University
Chitrakoot, Uttar Pradesh, India
http://nmisra.googlepages.com
http://jagadgururambhadracharya.org/jrhu/donate

|| 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

[Sita Raama]

Namaste Nityanandaji,

I am attaching another image of the screen shots taken from C.S. Vasu's book-1. On top of each page Vasu defined a category. I managed to put all of them in a document. 

But there grey areas are like 

1.1.1 वृद्धिरादैच्, 1.1.2 अदेङ्गुणः and 1.1.44 न वेति विभाषा  1.1.21 etc

where I did not know what to write so I left them in one of the criteria he defined. 

More than anything else I wanted to know if this exercise is fruitful or not. Couple of people liked it in the group, no one discouraged me so far. 

I have to take great care in understanding the text to minimize the mistakes. I am reading C.S.Vasu's works and taking notes and these notes are reflected on the pdf I attached in the original mail. 

I used AsTAdhyAyi - Sutra Patha book published by Chaukhabha  SuraBharati publications. Written by Gopaaladatta pAdeyaH to create the actual document where words highlighted blue go the next sutra and the sutra number upto which they travel is shown on the right. 

The number in () shows sets of 20 sutras for memorization ease. 

regards

Raama

[Ajit Gargeshwari]

I don't understand the purpose of this concept. Nobody learns Sanskrit grammar in modern time using Astadhyayi or its translation The text of Grammar is meant for specialists who want to understand grammar completely at the highest level.  so in short for a specialist its a waste time and for others its just a passing thought. This is my opinion

Regards
Ajit Gargeshwari

--

[vishal jaiswal]

> I don't understand the purpose of this concept. Nobody learns Sanskrit
> grammar in modern time using Astadhyayi or its translation The text of
> Grammar is meant for specialists who want to understand grammar completely
>

Maybe this is why not many people learn Sanskrit in modern times because
they mug up word endings without even knowing the most basic concept
such as a pratayahaar.
Since the modern method removes the rationale and background, it is
quite suboptimal.
I am indeed learning via graded levels of the Astadhyayi - namely the
various levels in the Kaumudi group.
And having tried learning the modern way, it is my opinion that the
modern way is a waste of time.
~Vishal

[Hnbhat B.R.]

Maybe this is why not many people learn Sanskrit in modern times because they mug up word endings without even knowing the most basic concept such as a pratayahaar.
Since the modern method removes the rationale and background, it is quite suboptimal.
I am indeed learning via graded levels of the Astadhyayi - namely the various levels in the Kaumudi group.
And having tried learning the modern way, it is my opinion that the modern way is a waste of time.

There are many learning tools already available online and offline if one really wants to learn Sanskrit as a language. If one wants to try his talent and skill with Ashtadhyayi and finds time at his disposal to devote himself to it, why should others discourage anyone?  

 

--
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

[vishal jaiswal]

> There are many learning tools already available online and offline if one
> really wants to learn Sanskrit as a language. If one wants to try his
> talent and skill with Ashtadhyayi and finds time at his disposal to devote
> himself to it, why should others discourage anyone?
>

Thank you for the observation. I forgot to add one comment that even if
one wants to just know that much grammar which is necessary for bhasha
without specializing in grammar, as far as I know - one can cover the
laghusiddhantakaumudi for this purpose.
(I may be wrong, maybe there are further steps - the
madhyasiddhantakaumudi or the siddhantakaumudi)
So one need not go all the way up to the astadhayayi to cover the finer
aspects of grammar. My teacher says this as an example - we accept that
the value of pi is 3.14 or 22/7 . But we dont go beyond into discussing
why it is exactly that figure, etc. (maybe this is a poor analogy, but
serves to illustrate the point)
~Vishal

[murthy]

Ajitji has hit the nail on its head.

I am reminded of the well known quote:

अधीते तु महाभाष्ये व्यर्था सा पदमञ्जरी ।

अनधीते महाभाष्ये व्यर्था सा पदमञ्जरी॥

For the techies and geeks it has become a fashion to study Panini as he has utilized some basic principles of programming languages and as he is hailed as the originator of Computer programmimg. Backus-Naur form is often called Panini-Backus form.

As Ajitji put it Panini is only for those who have attained a certain standard in Sanskrit and who want to specialize in Sanskrit grammar.

Of course views differ in this matter.

Regards

Murthy

[vishal jaiswal]

> For the techies and geeks it has become a fashion to study Panini as he has utilized some basic principles of programming languages and as he is hailed as the originator of Computer programmimg. Backus-Naur form is often called Panini-Backus form.
> As Ajitji put it Panini is only for those who have attained a certain standard in Sanskrit and who want to specialize in Sanskrit grammar.
>

1. No "certain standard" is needed if one starts from the most basic
levels of the kaumudi padathi.
2. As written in another message, the lower levels of the kaumudi
suffice for the grammar needed for bhasha.
3. I repeat - the modern method even chooses to completely ignore the
utility of something as fundamental as pratayahaaras. That speaks volumes.
4. AFAIK, there is the kashi ka padathi & there is the modern "ramaha,
ramau, ramaha" method. Tools and techniques are built on either of these
paths (correct me if I am mistaken)

Anyway, I have put forth my observations with being frustrated by the
modern method (for 7 months). And I wanted to share, such that the
newbies know that the modern way of mugging up -- which is the norm in
the majority of schools, colleges and universities in India and across
the world -- is not the best way to learn grammar either for the sake of
bhasha or for grammar itself.
~vishal

[Ajit Gargeshwari]

The question is not about encouraging or discouraging the question is about relevance, technical competence, time and effort that one has.

An analogy i would be If one wants to understand how Universe originated one can watch a popular TV program or read a popular book one need not understand Quantum mechanics it equations or advanced theoretical physics.

Astadhyayi is equivalent to advanced post graduate mathematics thought at a Masters course and is definitely not meant for undergraduates unless one is well equipped to understand advanced grammar it will prove to be useless for non specialist. Who says Astadhyayi cannot be reinterpreted all the best if possible.This is my sincere opinion. History is the proof for this not individuals like me!!!!

Regards
Ajit

There are many learning tools already available online and offline if one really wants to learn Sanskrit as a language. If one wants to try his talent and skill with Ashtadhyayi and finds time at his disposal to devote himself to it, why should others discourage anyone?  

 

--
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

[srivalli anand]

Went through the first fifteen pages of the content.  As a student who is still trying to comprehend the structure and get the comprehensive picture of Ashtadhyayi, I should say, it did really help.  As against what a few learned members of this panel have opined, I do think that it would help beginners who have had a basic study of Sidhantakaumudi very much, like a primer or something, for fast referece. Just a suggestion.  Do you think it would be possible to give an example, of your own or by the sutrakara himself after the vritti, so that it would be of greater help to easily understand for anyone who picks up this work.  Just as an example, say you have definied टि , if you can give an example and indicate what the टि is there , and so on, in such places as would be possible. 

[Nityanand Misra]

Dear Śrīsītārāma

It is a great effort and I will look forward to its completion. Even if there are few takers among billions of people or even if there is no audience and it is completely Svāntaḥsukhāya (for your own pleasure), it is a commendable task, and I request you to complete it.

I am memorizing the Aṣṭādhyāyī, and I know for a fact I am far from being alone - in fact a person who is memorizing the text blogs under http://avagraha.wordpress.com/.  Your work is very helpful as a reference and learning aid/resource.

Some suggestions

1. For classifying Sūtras with missing classification, you can have a shared spreadsheet or something similar with the group members. I can help you with missing classes of Pāda 2.1.
2. Can you please use different colours to indicate different types of Sūtra as you did in a previous version (I remember seeing red and green). While doing an Āvṛtti from the text (as opposed to an Āvṛtti from memory), this would be very useful.
3. If you are manually typing the text (which I doubt), it might be easier to convert the Devnagari Sūtras and Vṛtti available online to Velthuis format for your LaTeX input.
   

Thanks, Nityānanda

[Nityanand Misra]

I meant, I can help you with missing classes till Pāda 2.1

[Sita Raama]

Srivalliji,

Thanks for your suggestion. 

Since I am at the beginning of the document, I would certainly try to add example as well. I myself,  wondered if it would be a good idea to do so but the document started to get bigger and bigger. 

As I am working on the second chapter, specially in Samasas, I saw myself that an example helps to understand the concept very clearly. 

regards

Raama

[Sita Raama]

Nityanandaji, 

Thanks for your encouragement. I am in the process of memorizing astadhyaayi too. If you have some time can you please tell me the methods you use to memorize? I repeat each sutra  2 times. 

Yes I am not typing the sutras and its simple sanskrit meaning but for coloring I have to manually insert the color. I did not pick any color code for each type of sutra yet. 

Initially I thought of creating different colors but than i realized that making everything blue would be a start and once I am done with the document then I can change the colors to make it appear nicely. 

I manage to learn enough latex to prepare these documents, I used XeTeX so I can directly work with devanagari text, no convertors are required. 

regards

Raama

[Shyam Subramanian]

Dear Ajit-ji,Murthy-ji,

> The question is not about encouraging or discouraging the question is about
> relevance, technical competence, time and effort that one has.
>

1. If there is a traditional pre-requisite for studying the sUtra-s
(ashTAdhyAyI/siddhAnta-kaumudI/laghu-siddhAnta-kaumudI)? Something
like the shama-damAdi pre-requisites for advaita-vedAnta. However, I think
you are not talking about that since you are referring to "modern methods".

2. Who is to decide on the technical competence ? Presumably, the person
trying to study the ashTAdhyAyI/siddhAnta-kaumudI/laghu-siddhAnta-kaumudI
or his guru, if he is studying them under a teacher. It is clearly not anybody
else's business, no? The ashTAdhyAyI is surely a valid point of discussion
in this list and can be ignored by those not interested in it.

> An analogy i would be If one wants to understand how Universe originated one
> can watch a popular TV program or read a popular book one need not
> understand Quantum mechanics it equations or advanced theoretical physics.
>

3. On the other hand, it is my personal opinion, based on personal experience,
that what can be got from a "popular TV program" can be used for
"showing off", at best.
Understanding comes only from studying it properly. What is required is not an
advanced degree in theoretical physics (though it certainly helps) but
the interest+ability+time to learn the
mathematical apparatus.

> Astadhyayi is equivalent to advanced post graduate mathematics thought at a
> Masters course and is definitely not meant for undergraduates unless one is
> well equipped to understand advanced grammar it will prove to be useless for
> non specialist. Who says Astadhyayi cannot be reinterpreted all the best if
> possible.This is my sincere opinion. History is the proof for this not
> individuals like me!!!!

> For the techies and geeks it has become a fashion to study Panini as he has
> utilized some basic principles of programming languages and as he is hailed
> as the originator of Computer programmimg. Backus-Naur form is often called
> Panini-Backus form.
> As Ajitji put it Panini is only for those who have attained a certain
> standard in Sanskrit and who want to specialize in Sanskrit grammar.

> Of course views differ in this matter.

4. A high-school student, who has been exposed to the concept of a
proof/derivation in mathematics will be able to appreciate and get
interested in deriving the vibhakti tables from the sUtra-s, if only
he is exposed to it properly. To clarify, I am not saying that any
high-school student will be able to learn the ashTAdhyAyI - he/she may
or may not. I am only saying that the process of derivation of results
from the sUtra-s is similar to that of deriving theorems from
axioms.It does not require one to read programming languages or
whatever forms to get interested in the ashTAdhyAyI.

5. I think, and I like to think many will agree, that after seeing the
derivation of different subanta-s (ramaH,ramau,ramAH..) from
"svau-jasam-auT..." (ashTAdhyAyI 4.1.2), there is no question of
comparison of memorizing tables to memorizing sUtra-s - I will just
not go back to memorizing tables. Yes, there are 4000 sUtra-s, but I
can choose what I want to learn using, for example, the kaumudIs. May
be I will be slow, based on the time I have, but that is my call to
take.

6. Thanks to both of you, I realized that I need to learn faster,
since learning the ashTAdhyAyI has become the fashion of the day and I
can possibly become "fashionable" in at-least some thing (maybe
Infosys-training will have samskRta-bhAratI type courses? :-)). But
more seriously, in modern India, anybody interested in samskRta is
probably already
branded a "geek", so why this antagonism to people interested in
ashTAdhyAyI only?

Regards,
Shyam

[murthy]

Just as we do not start summing up an infinite series to obtain the
logarithm of a number and we read through the log tables, we do not generate
an inflexion using Panini sutras and we invariably use tables learnt by
heart. I am not aware of any Samskrit scholar who derives every inflexion he
uses in his composition based on Panini. Just as knowledge that logarithms
can be obtained through summing a series helps in the understanding of
logarithms, knowing Panini helps in appreciating the grandeur of Panini's
artificial construct.

Regards
Murthy
----- Original Message -----
From: "Shyam Subramanian" <shya...@gmail.com>
To: <sams...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 11:14 AM
Subject: Re: [Samskrita] Asthadhyaayi Index

[Shyam Subramanian]

Dear Murthy-ji,

> Just as we do not start summing up an infinite series to obtain the
> logarithm of a number and we read through the log tables, we do not generate
> an inflexion using Panini sutras and we invariably use tables learnt by
> heart. I am not aware of any Samskrit scholar who derives every inflexion he
> uses in his composition based on Panini. Just as knowledge that logarithms

1. The saMskRta scholar, or a person extremely familiar with saMskRta
certainly does not derive every case-ending from the ashTAdhyAyI - but
neither does he refer to the case-ending tables nor does he conjure up the
table in his head. With practice, the usage has just become second-nature
to him. By the way, traditional scholars still (or at least till
recently) use the siddhAnta
-kaumudI ( http://www.kamakoti.org/hindudharma/part7/chap2.htm ).

2. This experience would be obvious to even a beginner who has gone through a
saMskRta-bhAratI-type shibira, for example; you would not pause while
speaking and count "rAmaH rAmau rAmAH..". If some person has learnt or
knows saMskRta like a mother tongue, my praNAms to him/her - my comments
do not apply to him/her. However, if one is in the process of memorizing tables,
I think there is a strong case for learning it through the sUtra-s.

3. Let us take some analogies for this: A graduate real analysis course
would use results from a undergraduate real analysis course
left-right-and centre;
you would not go about proving everything back to the axioms of real numbers.
However, the graduate student would certainly not say that the
undergraduate course is useless.
Just because you have joined college you would not say that the 10th
standard book is
useless *for everybody* !!! In advaita-vedAnta, the veda leads you to
brahma-j~nAna;
after that it is of no use to the brahma-j~nAnI; but that does not mean that
it is useless for the lay sAdhaka. If it is true of the veda, it is
certainly true, in this case,
for the "vedAnAM veda" i.e., vyAkaraNa.

> uses in his composition based on Panini. Just as knowledge that logarithms
> can be obtained through summing a series helps in the understanding of
> logarithms, knowing Panini helps in appreciating the grandeur of Panini's
> artificial construct.

4. Nobody is denying that pANini's construct is artificial and that
the final forms
in the language is what matters finally - not sure, but I believe
pata~njali says so
in the mahAbhAshyam. That does not mean that his construct is of no use to
the learner of saMskRta except for "appreciating pANini". Similarly
(anticipating
a question here), just because there are multiple vyAkaraNa varieties
(indram, chandram etc),
it does not mean that any or all of them are junk or that some variety
is the best.
Just because there are multiple roads to a destination, you would not
say that all the roads
are useless or that there is no "best" road.

5. Let us take some numbers. In the laghu-siddhAnta-kaumudI ajanta prakaraNams (
declensions of all the vowel-ending puMli~Nga,strIli~Nga, napuMsaka
li~Nga words)
, there are around 120-130 "prAtipadika"-s whose inflexions are being
derived (I am not
counting the cases where the case-endings are identical) using roughly the same
number of sUtras. So, in essence, you are deriving ~130*8*3
case-endings using 130
sUtra-s (I am including sambodhana). Even accounting for the fact that
there will be
significant common case-endings (the dvi-vacana, for example) and
accounting for
anuvRtti i.e., more sUtra-s to learn if you are using the ashTAdhyAyI
straight away,
this is a big advantage to be had in learning through sUtra-s.In
addition, you get to use your
"analytical side" - your left-brain more along the way.

Regards,
Shyam

[Sai Susarla]

eshaa charchaa yadi samskrita bhaaShaayaam anuvrittaa tarhi santuShTaaH bhavema |
- Sai.

[murthy]

As far as my knowledge goes, in the traditional method of learning Sanskrit,
a student first learns Sabda tables, dhaatu roopa and amarakosha and a few
sargas of clasical kavya. At the next stage he learns laghusiddhantakaumudi
and may be later, Siddhantakaumudi. Actually AShtadhyayi was given a go by
after Bhattojidikshita. It is comparatively recently mainly by Aryasamajists
that Ashtadhyayi learning was re-introduced.
All that I say is that one needs to learn by rote Sabda tables,dhatu tables
at the initial stage and later get a grasp of the derivational aspect
through LSK or SK. It is only in Sanskrit grammar that derivational aspect
is exhaustively dealt with. No other language has anything similar to
Panini, not taking into account possible Panini-clones in Indian languages.
I do not want to discourage anyone learning Panini. I wish them all the
best. If a learner of Sanskrit wants to learn through Panini I am afraid
there is a possibility of his learning neither Panini nor Sanskrit.

Regards
Murthy
----- Original Message -----
From: "Shyam Subramanian" <shya...@gmail.com>
To: <sams...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2012 7:54 AM
Subject: Re: [Samskrita] Asthadhyaayi Index

[Anand Ghurye]

Dear Friends,

I have found a very good discussion on subject matter at the following link . If you like , do have a look .

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/bvparishat/oB3e1yK3odE/jXeC8-Wfmk8J


Regards ,

Anand Ghurye

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to samskrita+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/samskrita?hl=en.

--
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+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/samskrita?hl=en.

--



Regards ,

Anand Ghúryé

*Training*Development*Synectics
Space Page : 9820489416

[Shyam Subramanian]

Namaste,

LSK: laghu-siddhAnta-kaumudI
SK : siddhAnta-kaumudI
AA: ashTAdhyAyI

On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 9:47 PM, murthy <murt...@gmail.com> wrote:

> As far as my knowledge goes, in the traditional method of learning Sanskrit,
> a student first learns Sabda tables, dhaatu roopa and amarakosha and a few
> sargas of clasical kavya. At the next stage he learns laghusiddhantakaumudi
> and may be later, Siddhantakaumudi.

I don't know for sure except for the comment by the kAnchI-paramAchAryAH.
Maybe somebody in the list who has learn saMskRta traditionally can comment
on it or on your thesis that pANini is useless for anybody but the expert.

Actually AShtadhyayi was given a go by
> after Bhattojidikshita. It is comparatively recently mainly by Aryasamajists
> that Ashtadhyayi learning was re-introduced.

1. I have read somewhere that bhattoji-dIkshita says that we should have the
AA ka~nThastha before going into the SK . Unfortunately, I am not
able to get the reference though (I agree it is not followed in practice).
Anyways, the SK still uses all the AA sUtra-s, excepting the order
is changed (This destroys the anuvRtti-s, hence the commentary is needed)

He salutes pANini in the beginning of the SK and also wrote a
commentary on the AA
- the shabda-kaustubha. All this seems like a overtly friendly way of
giving a "go by".

Even in the beginning of the LSK, varadarAja dIkshita writes:

natvA sarasvatIM devIM SuddhAM guNyAM karomyaham |
pANinIya praveSAya laghu-siddhAnta-kaumudIm ||

Note that he says "pANinIya praveSAya" - to enter into whatever
is pANini-kRta; the foremost of which is the AA. It is
interesting that he does not intend it as a passageway to the SK
directly.

In conclusion, I think that both bhattoji dIkshita (and varadarAja dIkshita)
did not intend the ashTAdhyAyI to be given up.

2. OK, the Arya-samAjists vigorously propagated the study of the AA
without reference to the SK, though there were others also who stressed this.
So what? If it is worth it, what is wrong in learning it, given that the AA
itself is pretty old.

> All that I say is that one needs to learn by rote Sabda tables,dhatu tables
> at the initial stage and later get a grasp of the derivational aspect
> through LSK or SK. It is only in Sanskrit grammar that derivational aspect
> is exhaustively dealt with. No other language has anything similar to
> Panini, not taking into account possible Panini-clones in Indian languages.

3. bhImasena SAstrI, the author of a 6-volume vyAkhyA on the LSK, says
that his bhaimI vyAkhyA will benefit all levels of students. SrI gopAla SAstrI
"darSanakeSarI" in his edition of the ashTAdhyAyI asks the students to
first memorize the AA or a smaller version 'RjupANinIyam' before understanding
the sUtrArtha (he describes in detail how to do it). However, I do
agree that different teachers require from nothing to basic spoken saMskRta
before teaching the sUtras (LSK/SK/AA) and is best left to the student+teacher.

> I do not want to discourage anyone learning Panini. I wish them all the
> best.

Thanks for not discouraging :-).

> If a learner of Sanskrit wants to learn through Panini I am afraid
> there is a possibility of his learning neither Panini nor Sanskrit.
>

No discouragement, right ? Your concern notwithstanding, I think
there are enough examples of people who have learnt vyAkaraNa
through pANini or the kaumudI-s.

In conclusion, my personal opinion is (I am no expert, but a
student of vyAkaraNA) that if a student has interest+ability+
time and a great assisting book, especially a good teacher - then he
should just go for learning through the LSK/SK/AA.

ityalam

Regards,
Shyam

[Hnbhat B.R.]

I had seen both the experts discussing each other superior to other, especially learning अष्टाध्यायी with commentaries is the means to acquire the theories of Grammar and the other method प्रक्रिया method is not so helpful as अष्टाध्यायी. I can see the commentary न्यास supplying the प्रक्रिया lost in between the सूत्र-s like the अनुवृत्ति-s lacking in प्रक्रिया method. 

Both methods have their own draw backs and merits. But only the thing is a constant practice will make a good grammarian following either of the methods. Otherwise, half way practice will end up as Murthy is afraid of. A proportionate combination of both the methods is desirable to achieve at least introduction to preliminary grammar.

I can quote the opinion of युधिष्ठिर मीमांसक I have read in his history of Sanskrit Grammar that the study of अष्टाध्यायी with/without its commentary was meant for a time, when the whole of अष्टाध्यायी could be learnt by heart and then while learning each in order, the relevant सूत्र for deriving at the examples is to be supplied from memory so that the examples are completely understood. It is in the 12th Century that रूपावतार of धर्मकीर्ति a Buddhist theoretician, paved the way for प्रक्रिया method as the Buddhist writers didn't need the सूत्र-s related to छन्दस् and the वैदिकस्वर-s which form a considerable part in the body of अष्टाध्यायी text and it continued up to प्रक्रियासर्वस्व of Melputtur Narayana Bhatta, contemporarily with सिद्धान्तकौमुदी and its commentaries and sub commentaries which fulfilled the need of वैदिकप्रक्रिया covering the whole of the सूत्र-s. This is the real state of things. रूपावतार was followed by प्रक्रियाकौमुदी of रामचन्द्र (११०० ई॰) almost contemporary with धर्मकीर्ति in India. So Bhattoji Dikshit was not only the inventor of प्रक्रिया method. Bhattoji Dikshit himself has written a वृत्ति on the अष्टाध्यायी which is studies who follow the प्रक्रिया method and not the अष्टाध्यायी alone. नागेशभट्ट who wrote commentaries on both महाभाष्य the popular commentary on अष्टाध्यायी and its commentary उद्योत, before काशिका and many other वृत्ति-s and also on the प्रक्रियाग्रन्थ सिद्धान्तकौमुदी and its commentary प्रौढमनोरमा by भट्टोजी himself and independent commentary on सिद्धान्तकौमुदी also. He is said to have learnt महाभाष्य 27 times before trying to write commentaries in both the methods. This shows deep study is needed in following either of the methods if the intention is to master व्याकरण of पाणिनि (note I have not used the word अष्टाध्यायी which is the only theory part of व्याकरण). 

And this method is followed better when one can learn by heart whole of अष्टाध्यायी from the beginning which was started early in 10th century in spite of the fact that न्यास (६५० AD) supplies प्रक्रिया to fully understand the examples in काशिका while हरदत्त does not do this, following the expositions in महाभाष्य. In both the methods, the target final goal is the study of महाभाष्य which only few of the great scholars are able to complete the study.

And, there is no question of overlapping each other methods and everybody is free to choose his own method which need not be discussed as of any public interest as they themselves enjoy the advantage/disadvantages of each method exclusively. 

[Dr P Narayanan]

Much has been discussed in this thread about the worthiness of learning aSTAdhyAyI for learning Sanskrit grammar. Let me present some salient points in this matter.

1. Though the pANinian method of derivation is said to be artificial, there is no doubt in that  pANinian grammar is accepted as the most authentic one in Sanskrit grammar.

2. The pANinian grammar is based on aSTAdhyAyi and is aided with vRttis, vArtikas, dhAtupATha, gaNapATha, uNAdisUtra, etc.

3.The texts vyAkaraNa mahAbhASya, siddhAntakaumudI, laghu  siddhAntakaumudI, etc. are also based on aSTAdhyAyI.

4. When a sUtra from aSTAdhyAyI is quoted, one needs to know the anuvrtis and adhikAra to get the actual meaning of the sUtra.

5. The knowledge of the order of the sUtras is also very important especially when apavAda, vipratiSeDha, asiddha , etc are concerned.

6' It always aids in better understanding of the subject if the original text or base of the source is well learnt.

7. Therefore, while it may not be essential to learn aSTAdhyAyI sUtras in their order for learning Sanskrit grammar, it surely helps in better and clearer understanding of the subject. This is also my personal experience.

8. Though the methods of learning Sanskrit grammar adopted by the persons differ, the statements like "If a learner of Sanskrit wants to learn through Panini I am afraid  there is a possibility of his learning neither Panini nor Sanskrit" do not seem to be tenable.

9' If at least some of the readers find the work to be useful, the criticism about the worthiness of the same is best avoided.

10. If there are any mistakes in the work, they should be pointed out. But it is better if we do not criticise any work based on the purely personal view of its usefulness.

Dr. P. Narayanan, B.A.M.S

Nagercoil

On 24 June 2012 19:21, Shyam Subramanian <shya...@gmail.com> wrote:

Namaste,ased on 

[Vimala Sarma]

Dear Narayanam Mahodaya

I can see you are feeling very strongly about this.  No-body will dispute anything you have said below. I hesitate to get into this topic but the issue is whether PANinI is suitable for the student who has no knowledge of Sanskrit grammar but wants to start learning -  i.e. the beginner.  Such a student needs something much more simple and much easier to understand.  PANinI, in my humble opinion, is for the student who already has some understanding of the basics.  It is a second order text.  It is like starting a child who want to learn maths with differential equations instead of simple arithmetic.  This is no criticism of pANinI - only the level at which a beginner starts learning.

My myself learnt the Western way and then only started to look at pANinI.  Even so I find pANini difficult.

I hope you understand that I am actually agreeing with you about the benefits of PANinI.

Vimala

 

Dr Vimala Sarma

My new e-mail is sarma...@gmail.com

+612 9699 4414

+61 409 690 220

 

From: sams...@googlegroups.com [mailto:sams...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Dr P Narayanan
Sent: Monday, 25 June 2012 2:43 AM
To: sams...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [Samskrita] Asthadhyaayi Index

 

Much has been discussed in this thread about the worthiness of learning aSTAdhyAyI for learning Sanskrit grammar. Let me present some salient points in this matter.