ब्रह्म pronunciation

[Daniel Tkach]

नमस्ते gentleman.
I am puzzled by the pronunciation of the word ब्रह्म (..the conjunt
doesn't show properly...) and its related words. I am confused because
I see that the conjuct consonant ह् + म् is pronounced म् + ह्
Does it happen in all the cases where that conjunct is used or only in
the word ब्रह्म?
Is this an exception to the fact that Sanskrit is pronounced as it is
written? Is it the only one?
Thank you very much.

धन्यवदः

[Vasu Srinivasan]

h + m is not the only one - There is also another instance h + n as in vahni , also pronounced as vanhi.

From my what I have heard, this (change in) pronunciation is well-defined in pratishaakhyaa-s, and is optional (May be in vedas not optional). 

2011/5/18 Daniel Tkach <hokan...@gmail.com>

--
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.

--
Regards,
Vasu Srinivasan
-----------------------------------
vagartham.blogspot.com
vasya10.wordpress.com

[श्रीमल्ललितालालितः]

श्रीमल्ललितालालितः
lalitAlAlitaH

2011/5/20 Vasu Srinivasan <vas...@gmail.com>

h + m is not the only one - There is also another instance h + n as in vahni , also pronounced as vanhi.

From my what I have heard, this (change in) pronunciation is well-defined in pratishaakhyaa-s, and is optional (May be in vedas not optional). 

Can you produce any rule from prAtishAkhya ?

[hnbhat B.R.]

The sequences h+m in ब्रह्मन् - is the etymologically proved sequence derived from the root बृहि   ब्रह्+मन् - ब्रह्मा, ब्राह्मणः, ब्रह्मिष्ठः, etc. almost all the sequences are derived from the same etymology.  The same with h+n sequence वह्नि  - वहति हव्यं देवार्थम् इति वह्+नि >> वह्नि. But with अह्ना, अह्नि पूर्व्चाह्ण, अपराह्ण etc. it is अहन् that taken on denclension अह्ना, अह्नि, अह्न etc.

The simplification for pronunciation has lead the metathesis change in the above words, by the influence of the Prakrit words via regional languages.

कृष्ण = कन्हय, कन्हा, कण्ण etc. As a rule, the conjunctions with h+ is generally inter-change their order in Prakrit dialects.  I don't know about Pratishakhya grammar. But Prakrit facilitates many conjunct letter epenthesis or loss of the initial consonants and in certain words, metathesis is applied like the clusters, h+n, h+l,h+m, etc.  

पूर्वाह्न - पुव्वण्ह, ब्रह्म - > बम्ह etc.

I don't know about Pratishakhya or Vedic recitation requiring this metathesis in the above words but only the influence of regional languages can explain such deviations.

With regards

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

[Arvind_Kolhatkar]

Dear Group,

We were taught to pronounce वह्नि as वह्नि and never as वन्हि or
ब्रह्म as ब्रह्म and never as ब्रम्ह.

As to pronunciation of Sanskrit words being affected through common
speech, an interesting example is that of the word व्रज. It changes
from the original व्रज to ब्रज and from there to बृज. The latter is
spelt in English as Brij and we find it in names like Brij Bhushan
Kabra, the famous Hindustani instrumentalist of the guitar.

Arvind Kolhatkar, Toronto, May 20, 2011.

[hnbhat B.R.]

I think the regional version of the Sanskrit व्रजभूषण a compound pointing our to the gem of गोकुल i.e.  कृष्ण. 

[P.K.Ramakrishnan]

I entirely disagree with this statement.  I got introduced to Sanskrit by my father

who was a Sanskrit scholar.  

The word for fire though written as वह्नि is to be pronounced as वन्हि.

Similarly the word ब्रह्म  is to be pronounced as ब्रम्ह.

P.K.Raamakrishnan

---

From: Arvind_Kolhatkar <kolhat...@gmail.com>
To: samskrita <sams...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Fri, 20 May, 2011 5:54:26 PM
Subject: [Samskrita] Re: ब्रह्म pronunciation

--
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+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

[hnbhat B.R.]

2011/5/20 P.K.Ramakrishnan <peek...@yahoo.com>

I entirely disagree with this statement.  I got introduced to Sanskrit by my father

who was a Sanskrit scholar.  

The word for fire though written as वह्नि is to be pronounced as वन्हि.

Similarly the word ब्रह्म  is to be pronounced as ब्रम्ह.

P.K.Raamakrishnan

There is no difference of opinion. The question was raise due to the writing and its pronunciation unlike the other consonants and vowels which is common for Sanskrit.

The question is why it is so and any justification with authority of ShikSha or any other reliable sources. I too know it is the pronunciation in South Indian regional languages which use these two words. Wanted to know the reason for the shift in pronunciation if it is justifies and if not justified with authority, it can be taken as North Indian and South Indian pronunciation of the word in two ways, whereas etymology offers only one sequence. brahma and vahni.

 

-- 

[श्रीमल्ललितालालितः]

2011/5/20 P.K.Ramakrishnan <peek...@yahoo.com>

I entirely disagree with this statement.  I got introduced to Sanskrit by my father

who was a Sanskrit scholar.  

The word for fire though written as वह्नि is to be pronounced as वन्हि.

Similarly the word ब्रह्म  is to be pronounced as ब्रम्ह.

Can you provide us any rule from शिक्षा or व्याकरणम् or प्रातिसाख्यम् for that.
Just quoting your father is not enough for those who are themselves scholars.
I was also taught somewhere to pronounce as you once. And once I was told to do opposite. Now, what could one do in this condition ? So, we need evidence. If you can't provide, .... then .... why should we accept you view at all or of your father's ?

[श्रीमल्ललितालालितः]

2011/5/20 श्रीमल्ललितालालितः <lalitaa...@gmail.com>

Can you provide us any rule from शिक्षा or व्याकरणम् or प्रातिसाख्यम् for that.

Please read प्रातिशाख्यम् .

--

[धनंजय वैद्य <deejayvaidya@yahoo.com>]

I too would like to know the basis of this assertion by PKR. That the
metathesis took place in prAkRta languages is probably documented in
one of the prAkRta grammars.
e.g. In the following google-book
http://books.google.com/books?id=UoV5Dz20oo4C&pg=PA97&lpg=PA97&dq=prakrita++mh+metathesis&source=bl&ots=vHWe9nqcTq&sig=fEoiFO6IVuUeM-jxNk1Hd9GpM7Y&hl=en&ei=-5vWTYOSF8Tu0gH67q3SBw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CBwQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q&f=false
please see section 5.2.3.7 on page 97

In my native language of modern Marathi, which is a post-prAkRta
language, I ALWAYS use the metathetic pronunciation bram-ha and vanhii
(note the long final vowel, as per Marathi sandhi rules). Just because
those happen to be the correct pronunciations in Marathi does not make
them the correct pronunciations in the spoken saMskRta of ~250 BC. Of
course, it is OK to pronounce bram-ha while reciting shlokas or
mantras for home use - that is the family's home-use dialect, and any
family or individual has every right to have their own dialect of
saMskRta. Though that is right, it does not make them the correct
pronunciations in the spoken saMskRta of ~250 BC.

The observations recorded by pANini are "he mapare vA (mo.anusvAraH)"
and "(he) napare (mo) naH". They show to me quite clearly that in his
time pANini heard the "h" sound before the "m" sound (or the "h"
before the "n" sound, respectively).

Since some of the prAtishAkhyas are prior to pANini, I would be glad
to have evidence from those too. pANini was most familiar with
saMskRta as spoken in the west of India, and pata~njali was from the
central parts. They may have missed specialties of the speech patterns
from the east or south.

Dhananjay

On May 20, 9:38 am, "hnbhat B.R." <hnbha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2011/5/20 P.K.Ramakrishnan <peeka...@yahoo.com>

[hnbhat B.R.]

I also knew from my grand father in the same way who used to correct my pronunciation. Vidwan Bannanje Govindacharya, does not support ब्रह्म and वह्नि the two words pronounced as bramha and vanhi in Kannada though it is written as ब्रह्म. 

Some member had long ago raised the question and some other member has bumped it with the reply of DJ Vaidya, another learned member of this forum.  I have added my comments too in that thread.

Once again recapitulate the discussion, it was solved by quoting the Paniniya Shikshta that the "h" in association with nasal consonants and antaHstha-s semi vowels y, v, l, v is to be pronounced as औरस्य.

आत्मा बुद्ध्या समेत्यार्थान् मनो युङ्क्ते विवक्षया ।
मनः कायाग्निमाहन्ति स प्रेरयति मारुतम् ॥६॥

मारुतस्तूरसि चरन्मन्द्रं जनयति स्वरम् ।
प्रातःसवनयोगं तं छन्दोगायत्रमाश्रितम् ॥७॥

कण्ठे माध्यन्दिनयुगं मध्यमं त्रैष्टुभानुगम् ।
तारं तार्तीयसवनं शीर्षण्यं जागतानुगम् ॥८॥

सोदीर्णो मूर्ध्न्यभिहतो वक्‍त्रमापद्य मारुतः ।
वर्णाञ्जनयते तेषां विभागः पञ्चधा स्मृतः ॥९॥

अष्टौ स्थानानि वर्णानामुरः कण्ठः शिरस्तथा ।
जिह्वामूलं च दन्ताश्च नासिकोष्ठौ च तालु च ॥१३॥

हकारं पञ्चमयैर्युक्तमन्तःस्थाभिश्च संयुतम् ।
औरस्यं तं विजानीयात्कण्ठ्यमाहुरसंयुतम् ॥१६॥

कण्ठ्यावहाविचुयशास्तालव्या ओष्ठजावुपू ।
स्युर्मूर्धन्या ऋटुरषा दन्त्या लृतुलसाः स्मृताः ॥१७॥

According the above highlighted portion of पाणिनीयशिक्षा, the ह् is pronounced as in the originating place of the voice i.e. उरस्. But in other cases, it is pronounced in the same place कण्ठ like others. There seems to be something wrong in the next line कण्ठ्यावहौ इचुयशाः 

probably should be read as कण्ठ्यौ कुहौ (as कवर्ग considered as gutteral is left out in the list and "h" is repeated in the previous and the next line).

Yet we have to take it granted that the pronunciation in uras+ may be practically impossible, as it is a common place of origin for vocables next to नाभि the air for articulation raises up for any vowel "स्वर" now to demonstrate it and a similar pronunciation to something like bramhma. will have to be posed as our respectable Ramakrishnnan has heard from his father and me too from my uncle who differed from me when I pronounced it as "hm" sequence like other conjuncts.

And also I am not sure about the answer to be given to Daniel's original question and let him infer the position. If we observe ourselves as we pronounce the sequence, the pronunciation of "h" is suppressed as the whole mouth is closed for pronouncing "m" "n" unlike when "h" is pronounced alone without any vowel or consonant following it. Thats why we may hear it like bramm or like that.

Our Dhananjaya Vaidya's reply is there before I post this. Yet I post it for further consultation.

With regards

[श्रीमल्ललितालालितः]

2011/5/20 hnbhat B.R. <hnbh...@gmail.com>

हकारं पञ्चमयैर्युक्तमन्तःस्थाभिश्च संयुतम् ।
औरस्यं तं विजानीयात्कण्ठ्यमाहुरसंयुतम् ॥१६॥

So, there is a special rule for h in said conditions and we don't know actually what does it mean. So, it can't be said to be supporting म्ह-view.
We should try to find some commentary for this part of shixA....

--

[hnbhat B.R.]

2011/5/20 श्रीमल्ललितालालितः <lalitaa...@gmail.com>

Commentaries won't help much in the pronunciation, I am afraid.    The can't record the "aurasya" pronunciation. Either we have to follow what is remnant of the pronunciation like "mhm" or the like as Ramakrishnan said. But may not be identical and never could be represented as hm.

[श्रीमल्ललितालालितः]

2011/5/20 श्रीमल्ललितालालितः <lalitaa...@gmail.com>

2011/5/20 hnbhat B.R. <hnbh...@gmail.com>

हकारं पञ्चमयैर्युक्तमन्तःस्थाभिश्च संयुतम् ।
औरस्यं तं विजानीयात्कण्ठ्यमाहुरसंयुतम् ॥१६

 

 shixA says that h should be aurasya, it doen't say that it has to be pronounced before m

 

[Vidya R]

"pANini was most familiar with saMskRta as spoken in the west of India, and pata~njali was from the central parts. They may have missed specialties of the speech patterns from the east or south."

What is the reasoning for absence of short 'e' and 'o' in Samskritam, vs. their presence (at-least) in South Indian languages?  (My question does not extend to other non-intersecting vowels / consonants.)

vidyA

---

From: "धनंजय वैद्य <deejay...@yahoo.com>" <deejay...@gmail.com>
To: samskrita <sams...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Fri, May 20, 2011 12:54:42 PM

Subject: [Samskrita] Re: ब्रह्म pronunciation

...

[hnbhat B.R.]

I remember there is the reference to long लृ, and short ए ओ in some Vedic शाखा-s but extinct before Panini's time, as recorded in महाभाष्य. Panini has recorded some regional variations of semi-consonants, like व्योर्लघुतरप्रयत्नः शाकटायनस्य, etc. There may be more, but have to be checked. His main concern was with morphology and to some extant semantics. Still no short pronunciation of these vowels are present in any regional Vedic recitations.

[Vasu Srinivasan]

Has Kaatyaayana or vararuchi, who is supposedly from South, mentioned anything about the short e o vowels in his vaarttikaa ? I heard he has "corrected/appended" several Panini's sutra-s, so he might have mentioned something about it?

--
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.

[ePandit | ई-पण्डित]

ब्रह्म is pronounced as it is written i.e. ब्र+ह्+म not ब्र+म्+ह

Someone told you wrong pronounciation.

2011/5/19 Daniel Tkach <hokan...@gmail.com>

--
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.

--
Shrish Benjwal Sharma (श्रीश बेंजवाल शर्मा)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If u can't beat them, join them.

ePandit: http://epandit.shrish.in/

[ePandit | ई-पण्डित]

I have always heard pronunciation of ब्रह्म as it is written. In chanting all mantras of Sanskrit it is pronounced as ब्रह्म. In IAST Sanskrit texts, it is transliterated as Brahma which is also correct pronunciation.

Even in Sir Monier Monier-Williams Sanskrit-English dictionary its transcriptions suggest the pronunciation ब्रह्म.

http://www.sanskrit-lexicon.uni-koeln.de/cgi-bin//monier/serveimg.pl?file=/scans/MWScan/MWScanjpg/mw0738-brahma.jpg

2011/5/20 श्रीमल्ललितालालितः <lalitaa...@gmail.com>

--
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.

[murthy]

I am told bajarang derives from Vajraang(वज्राङ्ग्)
Murthy

----- Original Message -----
From: "Arvind_Kolhatkar" <kolhat...@gmail.com>
To: "samskrita" <sams...@googlegroups.com>

Sent: Friday, May 20, 2011 5:54 PM
Subject: [Samskrita] Re: ब्रह्म pronunciation

Dear Group,

[murthy]

As it has been pointed out earlier by a member of the group, pronunciation of Sanskrit is quite affected by language through which it is learnt. I believe southerners, not withstanding their scholarship, pronounce वह्नि, ब्रह्म incorrectly. Similarly Great Sanskrit scholars from Tamilnad sometimes pronounce Sanskrit words wrongly as they would have learnt Sanskrit in Tamil script. विसर्ग is incorrectly pronounced in South. रामः becomes "raamaha" and गिरिः becomes "girihi", where as it should be pronounced "raamah" and "girih" . Similarly Northerners are prone to wrongly pronounce नाम as "naam" and not "naama", influenced by Hindi.

Regards

Murthy

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

[hnbhat B.R.]

2011/5/20 murthy <murt...@gmail.com>

As it has been pointed out earlier by a member of the group, pronunciation of Sanskrit is quite affected by language through which it is learnt. I believe southerners, not withstanding their scholarship, pronounce वह्नि, ब्रह्म incorrectly. Similarly Great Sanskrit scholars from Tamilnad sometimes pronounce Sanskrit words wrongly as they would have learnt Sanskrit in Tamil script. विसर्ग is incorrectly pronounced in South. रामः becomes "raamaha" and गिरिः becomes "girihi", where as it should be pronounced "raamah" and "girih" . Similarly Northerners are prone to wrongly pronounce नाम as "naam" and not "naama", influenced by Hindi.

Regards

Murthy

Dear Murthy,

How can you explain the line of पाणिनीयशिक्षा - 

अयोगवाहा विज्ञेया आश्रयस्थानभागिनः।

अयोगवाहौ अनुस्वारविसर्गौ - अत्र विसर्गः आश्रयस्थानभागी विसर्ग इति कोऽर्थः? 

विसर्गस्याश्रयः - अः, इः, उः etc. According to me they take the articulation position of the words they are carried/attached to. i.e. a, i. u etc. So considering this, the above pronunciation is correct. How can you judge by yourself, that the pronunciation by Southerners is wrong?

And for the North Indian pronunciation also is correct according to the Panini's rule; "अ अ इति" interpreted as substituting संवृत अकारः for the विवृत  अ-कार listed in the अक्षरसमाम्नाय like all other vowels. Here too पाणिनीयशिक्षा rules विवृत  for all the vowels:

स्वराणामूष्मणां चैव विवृतं करणं स्मृतम् ।
तेभ्योऽपि विवृतावेङौ ताभ्यामैचौ तथैव च ॥२१॥

The writer of पाणिनिय़शिक्षा was also aware of the regional variations in pronunciation, but Panini as a pedant considered in conformity to his scheme of description only. Hence none are to blamed as such. This is my humble opinion in the case of brahma also. 

We don't know how "aurasya" "h" is pronounced, and we are not ready to accept as it seems to be like interchanged "mha" sequence to our ears trained in the usual way. Likewise, the आश्रयस्थान makes the विसर्ग pronunciation similar to ह, हि, हु etc. depending on the place of articulation of the vowel on which it is imposed. My teacher of Grammar had told me that the pronunciation of short अ is correct pronunciation as required by Panini as संवृत अकार and what we consider as correct according to our experience in our regional languages, is wrong. 

 With regards

[Shambhu]

In “Hindu Dharma” published by Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan (from the
speeches of Sri Sri Sri Chandrasekharendra Saraswathi MahaSwamiji -
Kanchi Periyavar), http://www.kamakoti.org/hindudharma/part6/chap5.htm:

“It is only in Samskrit that the pronunciation is fully phonetic but
for two exceptions:

One is when there is a visarga before "pa". Visarga more or less has
the same sound as "ha" - not a full "ha", though. In Tamil Nadu it is
pronounced fully as "ha" and Northerners who slur over it are made fun
of. But their pronunciation is correct according to the rules of
Siksa. With the visarga occurring before it, "pa" becomes "fa".

The second exception: "subrahmanya", "brahma", "vahni" (fire) are
pronounced as "subramhanya", "bramha" and "vanhi". But all words with
"ha" coming as a conjunct consonant are not like this as, for example,
jahvara (deep, inaccessible), jihva (tongue), guhya (secret), and
Prahlada.”

Thus, as per Mahaswamigal, “prahlAda” pronunciation is phonetic: prah-
lAda (not “pral-hAda”). The entire book may be worth a careful study
for Samskrita beginners.

As far as I have heard, the traditional Veda practices in southern
India follow the above “rules.” I learnt that way and teach that way
too. Pronunciations we hear in the web or noted by M-W have little
authority in Veda recitations. Some online pronunciations not just of
“brahma” but also of numerous Samskrita words are horribly murderous.
We can't take them seriously.

This issue is different from vakaaara-bakaara regional variations of a
word itself, or the northerners chopping off (I think it is Persian/
Urdu/Hindi influence). As already noted in the thread, in Maharashtra,
the R-kaara is a clear Ru-kaara. The tongue rolls forward the same but
the lip movements differ. Two learned teachers in a summer school
there tried hard to change my pronunciation of “mAtR” as “mAtRU”. They
insisted that I was wrong, but I held on, and still do.

On May 20, 12:21 pm, "murthy" <murthy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> As it has been pointed out earlier by a member of the group, pronunciation of Sanskrit is quite affected by language through which it is learnt. I believe southerners, not withstanding their scholarship, pronounce वह्नि, ब्रह्म incorrectly. Similarly Great Sanskrit scholars from Tamilnad sometimes pronounce Sanskrit words wrongly as they would have learnt Sanskrit in Tamil script. विसर्ग is incorrectly pronounced in South. रामः becomes "raamaha" and गिरिः becomes "girihi", where as it should be pronounced "raamah" and "girih" . Similarly Northerners are prone to wrongly pronounce नाम as "naam" and not "naama", influenced by Hindi.
> Regards
> Murthy
>
>
>
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: P.K.Ramakrishnan
>   To: sams...@googlegroups.com
>   Sent: Friday, May 20, 2011 7:01 PM
>   Subject: Re: [Samskrita] Re: ब्रह्म pronunciation
>
>   I entirely disagree with this statement.  I got introduced to Sanskrit by my father
>   who was a Sanskrit scholar.  
>
>   The word for fire though written as वह्नि is to be pronounced as वन्हि.
>
>   Similarly the word ब्रह्म  is to be pronounced as ब्रम्ह.
>
>   P.K.Raamakrishnan
>

> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---
>   From: Arvind_Kolhatkar <kolhatkar2...@gmail.com>

>   To: samskrita <sams...@googlegroups.com>
>   Sent: Fri, 20 May, 2011 5:54:26 PM
>   Subject: [Samskrita] Re: ब्रह्म pronunciation
>
>   Dear Group,
>
>   We were taught to pronounce वह्नि as वह्नि and never as वन्हि or
>   ब्रह्म as ब्रह्म and never as ब्रम्ह.
>
>   As to pronunciation of Sanskrit words being affected through common
>   speech, an interesting example is that of the word व्रज.  It changes
>   from the original व्रज to ब्रज and from there to बृज.  The latter is
>   spelt in English as Brij and we find it in names like Brij Bhushan
>   Kabra, the famous Hindustani instrumentalist of the guitar.
>
>   Arvind Kolhatkar, Toronto, May 20, 2011.
>
>   --
>   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 athttp://groups.google.com/group/samskrita?hl=en.

[yajva]

namaste.

On the contrary, there is this pramANa from laghu madhyandina shiksha.
(http://is1.mum.edu/vedicreserve/shiksha/madhyandina_shiksha.pdf)

देवो वः सविता चात्र हकारसदृशो भवेत् ॥१८॥
देवीस्तिस्रो विसर्गस्तु हिकारसदृशो भवेत् ।
आखुस्ते पशुरित्यादौ हुकारसदृशो भवेत् ॥१९॥
विसर्गश्चाग्नेरित्यादौ हेकारसदृशो भवेत् ।
विसर्गो बाह्वोरित्यादौ होकारसदृशो भवेत् ॥२०॥
अथ स्वैर्दक्षैरित्यादौ हिकारसदृशो भवेत् ।
विसर्गो द्यौष्पितेत्यादौ हुकारसदृशो भवेत् ॥२१॥

Also, the siksha makes it clear that functionally, visarga is
*distinct* from ha kAra, implying that the instructions are meant for
* pronunciation* only.
Hope this serves to increase your reverence towards southerners (sic).

Dr. Ramamurthy Caturvedi in his वैदिकशिक्षास्वरूपविमर्शः (sampurnanad
samskrt vishvavidyalaya, varanasi, 2003, Rs 360, ISBN 81-7270-112-8)
notes that this siksha alone, among the many in his study, brings out
the aspect of pronunciation of visarga-dhvani very clearly & like no
other; implying the pramANa is a *rarity*. It's possible a similar
pramANa exists for pronunciation of brahma etc; only more research is
required.

A very imp. aspect to be remembered is, we are referencing
pronunciation Vedic scholars (as distinct from a janapada) who revered
vedic learning and preservation more than their lives. Hence the
numerous prAtishAkhya and siksha works. The acme of this immaculate
preservation could be seen in the varNakrama pAtha;
Quote from (http://www.parankusa.org/intro.html)
TTaittireeya varna krama patha, deals with the 26 parameters of each
Vedic syllable, eight for each vowel, eight for each consonant and ten
for each accent and is a magnificent record and ultimate guarantee for
DISTORTION-FREE propagation of Vedic texts in oral tradition. This is
also the highest level of Vedic scholarship achievable, in
recitational tradition.
UnQuote

Trying to explain such a tradition as influence of regional languages
would be sAhasa.

Regards
Venkat

On May 20, 9:21 pm, "murthy" <murthy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> As it has been pointed out earlier by a member of the group, pronunciation of Sanskrit is quite affected by language through which it is learnt. I believe southerners, not withstanding their scholarship, pronounce वह्नि, ब्रह्म incorrectly. Similarly Great Sanskrit scholars from Tamilnad sometimes pronounce Sanskrit words wrongly as they would have learnt Sanskrit in Tamil script. विसर्ग is incorrectly pronounced in South. रामः becomes "raamaha" and गिरिः becomes "girihi", where as it should be pronounced "raamah" and "girih" . Similarly Northerners are prone to wrongly pronounce नाम as "naam" and not "naama", influenced by Hindi.
> Regards
> Murthy
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: P.K.Ramakrishnan
>   To: sams...@googlegroups.com
>   Sent: Friday, May 20, 2011 7:01 PM
>   Subject: Re: [Samskrita] Re: ब्रह्म pronunciation
>
>   I entirely disagree with this statement.  I got introduced to Sanskrit by my father
>   who was a Sanskrit scholar.  
>
>   The word for fire though written as वह्नि is to be pronounced as वन्हि.
>
>   Similarly the word ब्रह्म  is to be pronounced as ब्रम्ह.
>
>   P.K.Raamakrishnan
>

> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---
>   From: Arvind_Kolhatkar <kolhatkar2...@gmail.com>

>   To: samskrita <sams...@googlegroups.com>
>   Sent: Fri, 20 May, 2011 5:54:26 PM
>   Subject: [Samskrita] Re: ब्रह्म pronunciation
>
>   Dear Group,
>
>   We were taught to pronounce वह्नि as वह्नि and never as वन्हि or
>   ब्रह्म as ब्रह्म and never as ब्रम्ह.
>
>   As to pronunciation of Sanskrit words being affected through common
>   speech, an interesting example is that of the word व्रज.  It changes
>   from the original व्रज to ब्रज and from there to बृज.  The latter is
>   spelt in English as Brij and we find it in names like Brij Bhushan
>   Kabra, the famous Hindustani instrumentalist of the guitar.
>
>   Arvind Kolhatkar, Toronto, May 20, 2011.
>
>   --
>   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 athttp://groups.google.com/group/samskrita?hl=en.

[Mohan K.V]

A related topic that did not come up here is the infamous jna - it is written 'j-ny-a' but pronounced by Kannadigas as 'gnya', Marathi people as 'dnya', some North Indians as 'jnya', most North Indians as 'gya' and most South Indians as 'gna'. 

2011/5/21 yajva <nsvnar...@gmail.com>

[Vimala Sarma]

I agree with Murthy Mahodaya.  Sanskrit should be pronounced exactly as it is written (no shortcuts or simplifications). 

Re; rAmaha – this is said only because the meter of chants requires the extra short ha.  Also for  word with  --At ending, (pracodayAt)  if at the end of a pada, the t  is pronounced with a slight vowel attached to it. But of course if you are reading the word, there will  not be these extra sounds.

Vimala

[hnbhat B.R.]

Thank you Sir for providing more example of the pronunciation of "visarga" as laid down in पाणिनीयशिक्षा posted in my reply, on the authority of conformity other शिक्षा-s too. 

If the same could be done with the pronunciation :

"हकारं पञ्चमैर्युक्तमौरस्यं तं विजानीयात्।" 

too. I could not reproduce औरस्य ha-kaara. hence it is the only articulatory organ used in the whole list of consonants. excepting the vowels that originate from नाभि for all the vocable according to it.

[hnbhat B.R.]

2011/5/21 Vimala Sarma <vsa...@bigpond.com>

I agree with Murthy Mahodaya.  Sanskrit should be pronounced exactly as it is written (no shortcuts or simplifications). 

Re; rAmaha – this is said only because the meter of chants requires the extra short ha.  Also for  word with  --At ending, (pracodayAt)  if at the end of a pada, the t  is pronounced with a slight vowel attached to it. But of course if you are reading the word, there will  not be these extra sounds.

Vimala

 

Dear Madam,

Panini is authority on Grammar only and not on articulation issues. He doesn't mention anything except few remarks. On the issue of pronunciation, the authority is शिक्षा that related to Panini, is called as such पाणिनीय-शिक्षा. Both are accessories to Vedic Literature, independently.

शिक्षा, व्याकरणम्, छन्दः , निरुक्तम्, ज्यौतिषम् and कल्पः. 

which legitimately govern the Vedic articulation and we are discussing within our own limited experiences and feelings within the Classical Sanskrit Literature and some partial knowledge of Paninian Grammar. 

 

I am afraid the discussion should not go on the lines of conservatives of tradition and liberalism in Sanskrit Literature, leading many times, in my past experience, off track of this group. Naresh often pointed out to it, but many do not even mind it.

Thanks for all the contributors to this thread and I feel it is time to close this thread.

[hnbhat B.R.]

2011/5/21 hnbhat B.R. <hnbh...@gmail.com>

Sorry for the incorrect quotation. It is exactly as:

हकारं पञ्चमैर्युक्तम् अन्तस्थाभिश्च संयुतम्।

औरस्यं तं विजानीयात् कण्ठ्यमाहुरसंयुतम्,॥पाणिनीयशिक्षा १६॥ 

Any more concordance with these lines with other  शिक्षा-s is most welcome. 

[kamalesh pathak]

i think each shaakhaa of VED has its own grammer and a grammerian so can we invove these to our topic?
regards.
kamalesh pathak

[kamalesh pathak]

i agree with sri Raamkrishanaji.
because in our system of study - as per traditional and typical manner what we are taught is also force us toa gree with ramkrishanji.
regards.
kamalesh pathak from Somnath - gujarat

2011/5/20 P.K.Ramakrishnan <peek...@yahoo.com>

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

[hnbhat B.R.]

Anyhow I have not hear each had शाखा has its own grammarian, पाणिनि-s व्याकरण is considered as वेदाङ्ग along with the other accessories. Each शाखा differs in its प्रातिशाख्य grammar, which is not applied to Classical Sanskrit Literature as such. 

If one is interested, a separate discussion can be started on the system and topic of प्रातिशाख्य texts which expects one familiar with all the शाखा-s at the very outset. There is no bar on topic to be discussed in this forum.

[Daniel]

नमस्ते

I'm surprised by your deep discussion on the topic, I thank you kindly
for such thorough analysis. I conclude that we are not certain as to
how ब्रह्म Himself pronunced His name. :-)
Kind regards.

Daniel

[श्रीमल्ललितालालितः]

श्रीमल्ललितालालितः
lalitAlAlitaH

No, actually we don't call elders by their names. So, we forgot. :)

[hnbhat B.R.]

Anyhow, not only Daniel himselrf, any of us, human beings cannot say how Brahma himself, even the kavi of Veda-s, would have pronounced his name as none of us were in the beginning of the creation by him. Perhaps, Jambavan, might have heard Narayana calling his name, as son.