जननी जन्मभूमिश्च स्वर्गादपि गरीयसी

[Arvind_Kolhatkar]

Dear Group,

I believe that the verse

अपि स्वर्णमयी लङ्का न मे लक्ष्मण रोचते।
जननी जन्मभूमिश्च स्वर्गादपि गरीयसी॥

is in Ramayana, probably in YuddhakaaNDa. I went through it but could
not locate it. Can someone point out the exact citation thereof?

Thanks in advance for help...

Arvind Kolhatkar, Toronto, January 13, 2012.

[Hnbhat B.R.]

Please check these links:

http://groups.google.com/group/bvparishat/browse_thread/thread/4f5de03d6cf39ede/646a24822a827a44?lnk=gst&q=svarnamayi#646a24822a827a44

http://www.boloji.com/index.cfm?md=Content&sd=Articles&ArticleID=1695

for a search, but failed in to some extent, but ended up with no trace of origin of this verse,

--
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

[Hnbhat B.R.]

Also this one recent one which contain a quotation of the first half with a different second in Shukasaptati.

https://mail.google.com/mail/?shva=1#search/%E0%A4%9C%E0%A4%A8%E0%A4%A8%E0%A5%80+%E0%A4%9C%E0%A4%A8%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%AE%E0%A4%AD%E0%A5%82%E0%A4%AE%E0%A4%BF%E0%A4%B6%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%9A+%E0%A4%B8%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%B5%E0%A4%B0%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%97%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%A6%E0%A4%AA%E0%A4%BF+%E0%A4%97%E0%A4%B0%E0%A5%80%E0%A4%AF%E0%A4%B8%E0%A5%80%E0%A5%A5/132eb9f5d943a9c8

[Arvind_Kolhatkar]

Thanks to Dr Bhat, I came across a detailed discussion of the source
of this famous line in http://www.boloji.com/index.cfm?md=Content&sd=Articles&ArticleID=1695.

It appears that this line is of a recent creation, post-1850 and has
nothing to do with Ramayana. The identity of its creator is lost. It
has been variously ascribed to Bankimachandra Chatterjee, Pt. Madan
Mohan Malaviya and others.

What is remarkable is despite not having any 'sacred' connection, it
has found a place on the national emblem of Nepal! Its creators
(probably) did not carry out enough research to establish its
antiquity and lineage.

[ajit Gargeshwari]

It is believed that this is part of Valmiki’s Ramayana.  The critical edition and the online edition http://valmikiramayan.net/ doesnot mention this verse.

The National motto of Nepal is

It is-" जननी जन्मभूमिश्च स्वर्गादपि गरीयसी l

Regards

Ajit Gargeshwari

2012/1/14 Arvind_Kolhatkar <kolhat...@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.

[ajit Gargeshwari]

It is interesting to note  that

The Official Motto is "KAFAR BHANDA MARNU JATI"

 

the other versions are:

KAFAR BHANDA MARNU RAMRO/JATI

KAFAR HUNNU BHANDA MARNU RAMRO/JATI

KAYAR BHANDA MARNU RAMRO/JATI

KAYAR HUNNU BHANDA MARNU RAMRO/JATI

 

The "Ramro" can be  replaced with "Jati" which essentially means "traditional" or "befitting of ones caste" 

The national Motto in Sanskrit is जननी जन्मभूमिश्च स्वर्गादपि गरीयसी

It has also been discussed in an earlier thread http://www.mail-archive.com/sans...@cs.utah.edu/msg00849.html

Ajit Gargeshwari

 

2012/1/14 Arvind_Kolhatkar <kolhat...@gmail.com>

Thanks to Dr Bhat, I came across a detailed discussion of the source

[ajit Gargeshwari]

Dear Dr. Bhat
Before pasting a long URL it is better is you could shorten it using http://tinyurl.com/ or a similar tool
Regards
Ajit Gargeshwari

2012/1/14 Hnbhat B.R. <hnbh...@gmail.com>

[Aditya B.S.A]

नमो नमः 

<What is remarkable is despite not having any 'sacred' connection, it
has found a place on the national emblem of Nepal!  Its creators
(probably) did not carry out enough research to establish its
antiquity and lineage>

What is even more remarkable are the following assumptions: 

1. That the motto of a country must have 'sacred' connections.

2. That the motto of a country must have antiquity and lineage. 

If the line was not spoken by Rama, it still embodies a worthy sentiment. If the line was spoken by Rama according to the person who penned it, due consideration must be given to the fact that for the author, Rama was the speaker of that line. Upon Rama's return along with Sita, he asks her to pay her obeisances to to Ayodhya. Thus, the vyutpatti of the sentiment in this shloka, even if its origin is unknown, is vindicated on intent. Needless to say, there's no rule about having to agree to it. Of course, what would be nice is some tact, as pointed out on an occasion before ;)

आदित्य: 

2012/1/14 ajit Gargeshwari <ajit.gar...@gmail.com>

[Arvind_Kolhatkar]

Aditya,

I agree with all that you say and that is why I had put the word
'sacred' in inverted commas, because, despite what you and I think,
the common belief about mottoes is that they are somehow
'distinguished' from a thousand other, and equally pithy, sayings.

I, you, or anyone else can coin another phrase to express the same
meaning as in 'सत्यमेव जयते' but what chance does it have that India
would choose that creation to be placed below the three - in face
four, but the fourth is facing backwards and not seen - lions? Zero!
And why does 'सत्यमेव जयते' get chosen? Because it is at
MundakopaniShad 3.1.6 and is both 'ancient' and 'sacred'.

Arvind Kolhatkar, Toronto, January 15, 2012.

[Ramakrishna Upadrasta]

namaste,

I wonder if members have looked at this page:

http://www.valmikiramayan.net/yuddha/sarga124/yuddha_124_frame.htm

http://www.valmikiramayan.net/yuddha/sarga124/yuddhaitrans124.htm#VerseLocator

http://www.valmikiramayan.net/yuddha/sarga124/yuddhaitrans124.htm#Verse17

namaste
Ramakrishna

[श्रीमल्ललितालालितः]

I didn't find it here :

http://valmiki.iitk.ac.in/index.php

श्रीमल्ललितालालितः
lalitAlAlitaH

2012/1/15 Ramakrishna Upadrasta <uramak...@gmail.com>

[Ajit Gargeshwari]

Arvindji,

Probably a good place to look for the origin of Nepali motto would be to look into the origin and growth of Gorkha movement in Nepal. This regiment was known for it bravery and immense liking for their Motherland. As I have pointed earlier, the origin must lie in the Nepali language the Nepali version of Ramayana and its kindred Folk tales. As I am not an expert in Nepali language  I can not pin point its source in Nepali literature.

Looking for the particular verse is Vamiki Ramayana itself may not show the verse. As we all know Ramayana exists in various recessions and there are many versions of the basic Ramayana story with minor or major modification from different regions of South Asia such as in Java, Bhutan Nepal and within India itself.

Regards
Ajit Gargeshwari

2012/1/15 Arvind_Kolhatkar <kolhat...@gmail.com>

[Nityanand Misra]

The link by Ramkrishna Ji clearly says that the verse is found in a particular edition of the VR. So what's the point in saying it is not found at another source?

--
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

[Ajit Gargeshwari]

This sloka is seen in the edition published by Hindi Prachara Press, Madras in 1930 by T.R. Krishna chary, Editor and T. R. Vemkoba chary the publisher

I did not find the verse quoted in the edition of Ramayana edited by T R Krishnamacharya and published by NSP Mumbai
The book published is available at Digital Library of India and at http://www.ignca.nic.in/asp/searchBooks.asp. ( But the link says a edition by the same author published by a different publisher)

The learned editor of the Critcal edition of Ramayana published as a part of Gaekwad oriental series doesn't mention this verse.

Ramayana of Vamiki edited by K P Parab and published by NSP doesn't mention this verse

So may I request Ramkrishna Ji to provide the complete verse 6-124-17 in any printed version if it is easily available with him as i don't have access to the particular edition of Ramayana the link refers to.

The link gives

mitraaNi dhana dhaanyaani prajaanaaM sammataaniva |
jananii janma bhuumishcha svargaadapi gariiyasii ||

and the verse asked by Arvindji was

अपि स्वर्णमयी लङ्का न मे लक्ष्मण रोचते।
जननी जन्मभूमिश्च स्वर्गादपि गरीयसी॥

Regards
Ajit Gargeshwari

2012/1/15 Nityanand Misra <nmi...@gmail.com>

[Arvind_Kolhatkar]

Dear Group,

A friend has pointed out that the popular saying 'जननी जन्मभूमिश्च
स्वर्गादपि गरीयसी' is grammatically incorrect and that it should have
read 'जननी जन्मभूमिश्च स्वर्गादपि गरीयसौ'. This further underscores
what I have said earlier in this thread, viz. not only it is not
'ancient and sacred', it also appears to be grammatically
inappropriate. It looks more and more possible that Nepalese scholars
apparently have slipped in due diligence, when deciding to give a
place to it on their national emblem!

Arvind Kolhatkar, Toronto, January 18, 2012.

[Hnbhat B.R.]

2012/1/18 Arvind_Kolhatkar <kolhat...@gmail.com>

Dear Group,

A friend has pointed out that the popular saying 'जननी जन्मभूमिश्च
स्वर्गादपि गरीयसी' is grammatically incorrect and that it should have
read 'जननी जन्मभूमिश्च स्वर्गादपि गरीयसौ'.  

I am not sure whether the usage in the original verse is grammatically incorrect or not. But the correction suggested here is definitely incorrect. Even if it takes the freedom of correction, it should be "गरीयस्यौ"  as both are in the feminine gender, the adjective also should be in the same gender  and not गरीयसौ in the masculine gender.

For justifying the usage popular, it can be conveniently bye interpreted with relating it alternatively, जननी स्वर्गादपि गरीयसी, जन्मभूमिश्च (स्वर्गादपि गरीयसी) following the usage of the dramatic Sanskrit  ततः प्रविशति राजा, मातलिश्च in the metrical structure.  

 

[Vidya R]

"This further underscores what I have said earlier in this thread, viz. not only it is not 'ancient and sacred', it also appears to be grammatically inappropriate.  It looks more and more possible that Nepalese scholars apparently have slipped in due diligence, when deciding to give a place to it on their national emblem! "

namaste!

The following couplet comes in handy for just such a situation.  How many of us have our monikers distorted from original Sanskrit into regional / modern convenience!

vidyA

--------

satyaṃ brūyāt priyaṃ brūyān na brūyāt satyam apriyam / (138.1)
priyaṃ ca nānṛtaṃ brūyād eṣa dharmaḥ sanātanaḥ // (138.2)

सत्यं ब्रूयात् प्रियं ब्रूयान् न ब्रूयात् सत्यम् अप्रियम् / (१३८.१)

प्रियं च नानृतं ब्रूयाद् एष धर्मः सनातनः // (१३८.२)

---

From: Arvind_Kolhatkar <kolhat...@gmail.com>
To: samskrita <sams...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2012 10:33 AM
Subject: [Samskrita] Re: जननी जन्मभूमिश्च स्वर्गादपि गरीयसी

--
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.

[Nityanand Misra]

Now it seems it is Sri Kolhatkar who has slipped in due diligence in suggesting an incorrect correction and passing comments on the Nepalese Sanskrit scholars. Such comments on Nepalese Sanskrit scholars are unwarranted, I have had the opportunity to know several of them and their knowledge of Sanskrit, Mimansa, Tantra, and Vedas, among other things, is second to none.

Sent from my iPhone

--
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.

[Vidya R]

’गुरु’ इति प्रातिपदिकम् ।

ईयसुन् प्रत्ययान्तम् - गरीयस्

इष्ठन् प्रत्ययान्तम् - गरीष्ठ

’ईयसुन्-इष्ठन्’ प्रत्ययौ अपि ’तरप्-तमप्’ प्रत्ययौ इव अतिशयार्थं बोधयतः ।  द्वयोः एकस्मिन् अतिशयं बोधयितुं ’ईयसुन्’ प्रत्ययस्य प्रयोगः क्रियते ।

संस्कृतभारत्याः "गीताप्रवेशः - प्रथमभागः" (तरप्-तमप्-विषय-पाठः)

गरीयान्  गरीयांसौ  गरीयांसः (पुंलिङ्गे)

गरीयसी गरीयस्यौ  गरीयस्यः (स्त्रीलिङ्गे)

गरीयः  गरीयसी    गरीयांसि  (नपुंसकलिङ्गे)

As extracted below, between 'jananI' and 'svargaH', jananI compares better.  Between 'janmabhUmiH' and 'svargaH', janmabhUmiH compares better.

'garIyas' is 'Iyasun-pratyayaH', and is used when comparison is made between two objects.

"For justifying the usage popular, it can be conveniently bye interpreted with relating it alternatively, जननी स्वर्गादपि गरीयसी, जन्मभूमिश्च (स्वर्गादपि गरीयसी) following the usage of the dramatic Sanskrit  ततः प्रविशति राजा, मातलिश्च in the metrical structure."

Vidya

---

From: Hnbhat B.R. <hnbh...@gmail.com>
To: sams...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2012 10:54 AM
Subject: Re: [Samskrita] Re: जननी जन्मभूमिश्च स्वर्गादपि गरीयसी

[Hnbhat B.R.]

2012/1/19 Vidya R <imar...@yahoo.com>

’गुरु’ इति प्रातिपदिकम् ।

ईयसुन् प्रत्ययान्तम् - गरीयस्

इष्ठन् प्रत्ययान्तम् - गरीष्ठ

’ईयसुन्-इष्ठन्’ प्रत्ययौ अपि ’तरप्-तमप्’ प्रत्ययौ इव अतिशयार्थं बोधयतः ।  द्वयोः एकस्मिन् अतिशयं बोधयितुं ’ईयसुन्’ प्रत्ययस्य प्रयोगः क्रियते ।

संस्कृतभारत्याः "गीताप्रवेशः - प्रथमभागः" (तरप्-तमप्-विषय-पाठः)

गरीयान्  गरीयांसौ  गरीयांसः (पुंलिङ्गे)

गरीयसी गरीयस्यौ  गरीयस्यः (स्त्रीलिङ्गे)

गरीयः  गरीयसी    गरीयांसि  (नपुंसकलिङ्गे)

As extracted below, between 'jananI' and 'svargaH', jananI compares better.  Between 'janmabhUmiH' and 'svargaH', janmabhUmiH compares better.

'garIyas' is 'Iyasun-pratyayaH', and is used when comparison is made between two objects.

"For justifying the usage popular, it can be conveniently bye interpreted with relating it alternatively, जननी स्वर्गादपि गरीयसी, जन्मभूमिश्च (स्वर्गादपि गरीयसी) following the usage of the dramatic Sanskrit  ततः प्रविशति राजा, मातलिश्च in the metrical structure."

द्विवचनविभज्यौपपदे तरबीयसुनौ ५।३।५७

प्रियस्थिरस्फिरौरुबहुलगुरुवृद्धतृप्रदीर्घवृन्दारकाणां प्रस्थस्फवर्बंहिगर्वर्षित्रब्द्राघिवृन्दाः ६।४।१५७

गुरु - becomes गर before ईयसुन्, इष्ठन्, इमनिच् - as per the above rule. 

And as as it can be seen from this generalization, it is not strictly used to denote comparative degree, between the two:

– यावत् अर्थपदाम् वाचम् एवम् आदाय माधवः विरराम 

महीयांसः प्रकृत्या मितभाषिणः. 

The question was not the form of गरीयसी or meaning. It is obvious by the context itself स्वर्गादपि गरीयसी जननी, जन्मभूमिश्च। The point raised was the use of singular, when combined with the conjunction च, that warranted the use of duel for both. जननी जन्मभूमिश्च स्वर्गादपि गरीयस्यौ would have been better for the agreement. like रामः कृष्णश्च बालकौ. This was meant by the pointer of error and may  be due to wrong keying, it became गरीयसौ which is again incompatible with the agreement in gender with the nouns qualified. This is a little complicated question due to the  meanings of च, इतरेतरयोग, अन्वाचयः,  समुच्चयः and समाहार. It had been discussed in another group of scholars in this link:

https://groups.google.com/group/bvparishat/browse_thread/thread/323aa6207cdd8d59/b4a090b87319b956?hl=en&lnk=gst&q=two+%E0%A4%9A#b4a090b87319b956

--