Send sanskrit mailing list submissions to
sanskrit@cs.utah.edu
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mailman.cs.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/sanskrit
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
sanskrit-requ...@cs.utah.edu
You can reach the person managing the list at
sanskrit-ow...@cs.utah.edu
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of sanskrit digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Number 18 (Jay Vaidya)
2. Re: Request for 'Easier Texts' (Resources) (prasanna)
3. Re: Number 18 (Vasuvaj .)
4. Re: Request for 'Easier Texts' (Resources) (prasanna)
5. Re: Number 18 (P.K.Ramakrishnan)
6. Re: Request for 'Easier Texts' (Resources) (prasanna)
7. Re: Number 18 (Vis Tekumalla)
8. Re: Request for 'Easier Texts' (Resources) (Naresh Cuntoor)
9. Re: Request for 'Easier Texts' (Resources) (Gargeshwari Ajit)
10. Re: Interesting verse about dressing appropriately
(Vasu Srinivasan)
11. Re: Request for 'Easier Texts' (Resources) (prasanna)
12. Re: Number 18 (Cohen, Arthur R. (MD))
13. Re: Request for 'Easier Texts' (Resources) (Sudarshan Rao)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 07:19:16 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jay Vaidya <deejayvai...@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] Number 18
To: sanskrit@cs.utah.edu
Message-ID: <111813.93834...@web56604.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Question regarding "jaya"
If I remember rightly, in the kaTapayAdi code (below)
ja=8 and ya=1
jaya = 81 (not 18)
Interesting observations regarding the number 18 though - I have also
previously heard that this number was important for the author(s) of the
mahAbhArata.
Regards and thanks for all of the fine puzzle-shlokas,
Dhananjay
- - -
kaTapayAdi code (a many-to-one mapping many letters may point to one and only
one digit) :
k-1, kh-2, g-3, gh-4, N^-5
c-6, chh-7, j-8, jh-9
alternately
T-1, Th-2, D-3, Dh-4, N-5
t-6, th-7, d-8, dh-9, (n-0, according to some)
alternatively:
p-1, ph-2, b-3, bh-4, m-5
alternatively:
y-1, r-2, l-3, v-4, sh-5, shh-6, s-7, h-8
kSha-0
- - -
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://mailman.cs.utah.edu/pipermail/sanskrit/attachments/20091021/cf350b5b/attachment-0001.html
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 19:52:22 +0530
From: prasanna <prasanna....@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] Request for 'Easier Texts' (Resources)
To: Sanskrit Mailing List <sanskrit@cs.utah.edu>
Message-ID:
<a3d653590910210722k4f43e48fl779d4e2061e9f...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 5:39 PM, Naresh Cuntoor <nares...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > PS: I don't know Sanskrit a lot to read and interpret scriptures but I do
> > strongly believe that we need to get out of reading those interpreted for
> us
> > by the friendly german and his coterie. Though it might seem like
> > reinventing the wheel, but atleast we'd get to know what the real
> > interpretations are.
>
> And this is exactly the problem. Instead of railing against evil
> designs of Mueller or the Brahmins, we should be learning to read for
> ourselves. For every ten people who rant like this, I wish at least
> one would actually make an attempt at learning the language.
>
Actually, I am learning the language, so it's not an empty rant. I had
learnt it in school, forgotten it and am starting again
My point is : for people like me who start out, it 'd be better if we can
refer to Indians who have actually translated the works.
BTW, not that it is very important, I am a brahmin myself and do know how
pliable we are.
For example, if you do go to the ShriRangam temple or the Pazhani temple
(Lord Murugan's) and throw money at the priests and they'd probably write
the temple for you. These are the temples which I avoid going to, even if
paid money to do so.
You'd have surely heard about the pledging of the jewels of the Lord by a
priest at Tirumala (the so called guard keeper) and the fact that many other
priests agree (on the conditions of anonymity) that it is an open secret
happening in many other _big_ temples?
>
> Now as far as more advanced scriptures etc., which certainly demands
> gurus, one can find several sources. Besides the main maThas, Chinmaya
> mission, Ramakrishna ashram, Swami Krishnananda's ashram (I forget the
> name), etc. are all doing great work in that regard.
>
Thank you and I truely appreciate that.
The starting point was somebody being pointed to learn/read the Hitopadesha
written by mueller and/or his stooges.
Shringeri, Shri Chitrapur , Kanchi maths and besides many others are doing
yeoman service in propagating Samskritam.
It's just that when somebody (like me) begins to learn the language, it
shouldn't have to happen that the reference works of the language to which
Iam pointed out are those written by crooks
> _______________________________________________
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or customize your subscription or topics of interest, visit
> http://mailman.cs.utah.edu/mailman/options/sanskrit
> and follow instructions.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://mailman.cs.utah.edu/pipermail/sanskrit/attachments/20091021/e688011c/attachment-0001.html
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 14:26:35 +0000
From: "Vasuvaj ." <vasu...@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] Number 18
To: <sanskrit@cs.utah.edu>
Message-ID: <snt115-w392a2004f98869bc645cd9a3...@phx.gbl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Namaste.
Jaya is 18
It depends on how you use the kaTapayAdi code.
The traditional way is to tell the numbers from right to left
Hence Ja= 8 and ya = 1 , should be read as "18"
I know for sure that the traditional scholars of Kerala read the kaTapayAdi
code from right to left.This might be so in other areas too.
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 07:19:16 -0700
From: deejayvai...@yahoo.com
To: sanskrit@cs.utah.edu
Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] Number 18
Question regarding "jaya"
If I remember rightly, in the kaTapayAdi code (below)
ja=8 and ya=1
jaya = 81 (not 18)
Interesting observations regarding the number 18 though - I have also
previously heard that this number was important for the author(s) of the
mahAbhArata.
Regards and thanks for all of the fine puzzle-shlokas,
Dhananjay
- - -
kaTapayAdi code (a many-to-one mapping many letters may point to one and only
one digit) :
k-1, kh-2, g-3, gh-4, N^-5
c-6, chh-7, j-8, jh-9
alternately
T-1, Th-2, D-3, Dh-4, N-5
t-6, th-7, d-8, dh-9, (n-0, according to some)
alternatively:
p-1, ph-2, b-3, bh-4, m-5
alternatively:
y-1, r-2, l-3, v-4, sh-5, shh-6, s-7, h-8
kSha-0
- - -
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/177141665/direct/01/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://mailman.cs.utah.edu/pipermail/sanskrit/attachments/20091021/08310b70/attachment-0001.html
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 20:00:07 +0530
From: prasanna <prasanna....@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] Request for 'Easier Texts' (Resources)
To: Sanskrit Mailing List <sanskrit@cs.utah.edu>
Message-ID:
<a3d653590910210730i2b03bc1eue3c98ab3988b5...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Dear Shri Ajit
I consider myself as a layman who is actually interested in reading what the
original writings were (of course under a Guru's patronage and tutelage).
However the stuff which i want to read from shouldn't have been tainted by
mueller and his stooges. If you call this jingoistic, or unwarranted, suit
yourself.
prasanna
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 6:04 PM, Gargeshwari Ajit <ajitga_...@yahoo.co.in>wrote:
> Dear Shri Naresh
> There are three set of readers
> 1. We have one who is scholar who has read Max Muller and makes comments
> on translations and interpretations he wrote as per the needs of colonial
> "British Masters" ( he never visited India but wrote so much about India
> what he thought India needs to be ). One should also understand at that time
> time and even now we have pundits who have read and mastered a few branch of
> Sanskrit Shasta's but always denies access to their views either because one
> is not from their gurukula or they don't like to speak in regional languages
> or they are unaware of any modern developments across the world in terms of
> modern research and and its methodologies. Max Muller wrote his translations
> more than a hundred years ago and since then hundreds of new books have been
> written and manuscripts have been unearthed.
>
> 2. The second reader is one who has studied sanskrit in modern university
> under experts who has access to better books, scholars and resources and is
> also aware of comparative methods of interpretations and who write keeping
> only the truth in mind and not their pet theories
>
> 3. The third type of reader who is layman who reads a para here and there
> read always secondary sources cheap translations and jumps to many a times
> to unwarranted conclusions.
>
> But always one has to read and understand sanskrit books by always reading
> the originals, secondary literature more than one translation if available
> and then make judgements.
>
> Regards
> Ajit Gargeshwari
> --- On *Wed, 21/10/09, Naresh Cuntoor <nares...@gmail.com>* wrote:
>
>
> From: Naresh Cuntoor <nares...@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] Request for 'Easier Texts' (Resources)
> To: "Sanskrit Mailing List" <sanskrit@cs.utah.edu>
> Date: Wednesday, 21 October, 2009, 5:39 PM
>
>
> >
> > PS: I don't know Sanskrit a lot to read and interpret scriptures but I do
> > strongly believe that we need to get out of reading those interpreted for
> us
> > by the friendly german and his coterie. Though it might seem like
> > reinventing the wheel, but atleast we'd get to know what the real
> > interpretations are.
>
> And this is exactly the problem. Instead of railing against evil
> designs of Mueller or the Brahmins, we should be learning to read for
> ourselves. For every ten people who rant like this, I wish at least
> one would actually make an attempt at learning the language.
>
> Now as far as more advanced scriptures etc., which certainly demands
> gurus, one can find several sources. Besides the main maThas, Chinmaya
> mission, Ramakrishna ashram, Swami Krishnananda's ashram (I forget the
> name), etc. are all doing great work in that regard.
> _______________________________________________
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or customize your subscription or topics of interest, visit
> http://mailman.cs.utah.edu/mailman/options/sanskrit
> and follow instructions.
>
>
> ------------------------------
> Add whatever you love to the Yahoo! India homepage. Try
> now!<http://in.rd.yahoo.com/tagline_metro_3/*http://in.yahoo.com/trynew>
>
> _______________________________________________
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or customize your subscription or topics of interest, visit
> http://mailman.cs.utah.edu/mailman/options/sanskrit
> and follow instructions.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://mailman.cs.utah.edu/pipermail/sanskrit/attachments/20091021/1dfe4691/attachment-0001.html
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 20:26:22 +0530 (IST)
From: "P.K.Ramakrishnan" <peeka...@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] Number 18
To: Sanskrit Mailing List <sanskrit@cs.utah.edu>
Message-ID: <235942.48656...@web95307.mail.in2.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
In the katapayaadi method, ja 8 is in the unit position and ya 1 is in the tenth
position.? So the number should be read from left to right which becomes 18.
Otherwise after decoding into digits the number should be read from left to
right.
I hope the explanation is clear.
In your explanation you have omitted some 0 and vowels.
1???? KA????????????? TA????????????? PA???????????? YA?????????? All vowels
---- 0
2???? KHA??????????? TTA?????????? PHA?????????? RA
3???? GA????????????? DA???????????? BA????????????? LA
4???? GHA??????????? DHA????????? BHA?????????? VA
5???? NGA??????????? NA???????????? MA???????????? sa
6???? CHA???????????? tA??????????????????????????????? Sha
7???? CCHA????????? tha?????????????????????????????? SA
8???? JA??????????????? da??????????????????????????????? HA
9???? JHA???????????? dha
0???? NJA???????????? na
I hope I am right.
-----------------------------------
P.K. Ramakrishnan
http://peekayar.blogspot.com
--- On Wed, 21/10/09, Jay Vaidya <deejayvai...@yahoo.com> wrote:
From: Jay Vaidya <deejayvai...@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] Number 18
To: sanskrit@cs.utah.edu
Date: Wednesday, 21 October, 2009, 7:49 PM
Question regarding "jaya"
If I remember rightly, in the kaTapayAdi code (below)
ja=8 and ya=1
jaya = 81 (not 18)
Interesting observations regarding the number 18 though - I have also
previously heard that this number was important for the author(s) of the
mahAbhArata.
Regards and thanks for all of the fine puzzle-shlokas,
Dhananjay
- - -
kaTapayAdi code (a many-to-one mapping many letters may point to one and only
one digit) :
k-1, kh-2, g-3, gh-4, N^-5
c-6, chh-7, j-8, jh-9
alternately
T-1, Th-2, D-3, Dh-4, N-5
t-6, th-7, d-8, dh-9, (n-0, according to some)
alternatively:
p-1, ph-2, b-3, bh-4, m-5
alternatively:
y-1, r-2, l-3, v-4, sh-5, shh-6, s-7, h-8
kSha-0
- - -
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________
To UNSUBSCRIBE or customize your subscription or topics of interest, visit
http://mailman.cs.utah.edu/mailman/options/sanskrit
and follow instructions.
Yahoo! India has a new look. Take a sneak peek http://in.yahoo.com/trynew
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://mailman.cs.utah.edu/pipermail/sanskrit/attachments/20091021/027db267/attachment-0001.html
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 20:27:16 +0530
From: prasanna <prasanna....@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] Request for 'Easier Texts' (Resources)
To: Sanskrit Mailing List <sanskrit@cs.utah.edu>
Message-ID:
<a3d653590910210757i74325d8cq955d0274f93df...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 5:32 PM, Vasuvaj . <vasu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Namaste.
>
> I do share your concern and endorse your views that
> "we need to get out of reading those interpreted for us by the friendly
> german and his coterie".
>
> However it is not right to dub an entire community of Hindu samaj as people
> who :
> " kept the scriptures close to their heart (for their gain)"
> and
> "who were (and are) very pliable".
>
> For a person who does not " know Sanskrit a lot to read and interpret
> scriptures", I feel Sri Aurobindo Ghosh's "Secret of Vedas" can be a good
> start The English translations / interpretations done by Swami Vivekananda,
> revered swamijis / scholars from various organisations like Ramakrishna
> Mission, Divine Life Society, Chinmaya Mission etc. can also be a good
> resource to understand our ancient scriptures.
>
Namaste, Thank you for pointing out the way.
Sorry if I have (inadvertently) hurt you. I didn't mean to club the entire
community of Hindu samaj as pliable. Only the brahmins. They were the one
with the power in the days of yore, selectively interpreted scriptures so as
to discriminate against people. If that's not treachery, I don't know what
else is. They were called in TN villages and to some extent are being called
Swamy, i.e. people used to equate them with God (respectfully address them)
and look how they behaved.
Brahmins think that they are privileged people because of their birth but
they refuse to come to terms with the fact that as like every privilege,
this one is to be earned by deign of hard work and not just by birth.
FYI: I am a brahmin (note the lower case) by birth.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://mailman.cs.utah.edu/pipermail/sanskrit/attachments/20091021/51f1fc40/attachment-0001.html
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 08:22:58 -0700 (PDT)
From: Vis Tekumalla <vistekuma...@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] Number 18
To: Sanskrit Mailing List <sanskrit@cs.utah.edu>
Message-ID: <12376.32901...@web33404.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Mr. Ramakrishnan's explanation of katapayaadi appears correct. For example, the
Carnatic melakarta ragas (72 in all) are arranged based on katapayaadi
paddhati. In that system, ShaNnmukhapriya (Sha-6 and Na-5) appears as # 56
whereas MechakalyaaNi (Ma-5 and cha-6) as # 65.??
...Vis Tekumalla
vistekuma...@yahoo.com
--- On Wed, 10/21/09, P.K.Ramakrishnan <peeka...@yahoo.com> wrote:
From: P.K.Ramakrishnan <peeka...@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] Number 18
To: "Sanskrit Mailing List" <sanskrit@cs.utah.edu>
Date: Wednesday, October 21, 2009, 10:56 AM
In the katapayaadi method, ja 8 is in the unit position and ya 1 is in the tenth
position.? So the number should be read from left to right which becomes 18.
Otherwise after decoding into digits the number should be read from left to
right.
I hope the explanation is clear.
In your explanation you have omitted some 0 and vowels.
1???? KA????????????? TA????????????? PA???????????? YA?????????? All vowels
---- 0
2???? KHA??????????? TTA?????????? PHA?????????? RA
3???? GA????????????? DA???????????? BA????????????? LA
4???? GHA??????????? DHA????????? BHA?????????? VA
5???? NGA??????????? NA???????????? MA???????????? sa
6???? CHA???????????? tA??????????????????????????????? Sha
7???? CCHA????????? tha?????????????????????????????? SA
8???? JA??????????????? da??????????????????????????????? HA
9???? JHA???????????? dha
0???? NJA???????????? na
I hope I am right.
-----------------------------------
P.K. Ramakrishnan
http://peekayar.blogspot.com
--- On Wed, 21/10/09, Jay Vaidya <deejayvai...@yahoo.com> wrote:
From: Jay Vaidya <deejayvai...@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] Number 18
To: sanskrit@cs.utah.edu
Date: Wednesday, 21 October, 2009, 7:49 PM
Question regarding "jaya"
If I remember rightly, in the kaTapayAdi code (below)
ja=8 and ya=1
jaya = 81 (not 18)
Interesting observations regarding the number 18 though - I have also
previously heard that this number was important for the author(s) of the
mahAbhArata.
Regards and thanks for all of the fine puzzle-shlokas,
Dhananjay
- - -
kaTapayAdi code (a many-to-one mapping many letters may point to one and only
one digit) :
k-1, kh-2, g-3, gh-4, N^-5
c-6, chh-7, j-8, jh-9
alternately
T-1, Th-2, D-3, Dh-4, N-5
t-6, th-7, d-8, dh-9, (n-0, according to some)
alternatively:
p-1, ph-2, b-3, bh-4, m-5
alternatively:
y-1, r-2, l-3, v-4, sh-5, shh-6, s-7, h-8
kSha-0
- - -
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________
To UNSUBSCRIBE or customize your subscription or topics of interest, visit
http://mailman.cs.utah.edu/mailman/options/sanskrit
and follow instructions.
>From cricket scores to your friends. Try the Yahoo! India Homepage!
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________
To UNSUBSCRIBE or customize your subscription or topics of interest, visit
http://mailman.cs.utah.edu/mailman/options/sanskrit
and follow instructions.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://mailman.cs.utah.edu/pipermail/sanskrit/attachments/20091021/cb729b3a/attachment-0001.html
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 12:21:32 -0400
From: Naresh Cuntoor <nares...@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] Request for 'Easier Texts' (Resources)
To: Sanskrit Mailing List <sanskrit@cs.utah.edu>
Message-ID:
<f4ce5f9f0910210921h4f8430aam606ddffbf0e05...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> My point is : for people like me who start out, it 'd be better if we can
> refer to Indians who have actually translated the works.
But why do you want translations in the first place? If one is
learning the language, shouldn't one seek resources in that language?
Somehow this notion seems to be radical when it comes to Sanskrit.
By the way, Indians can produce really bad translations as well -- out
of sheer incompetence, ignorance or malice, I do not know.
And there *are* scholars in the west who know their Sanskrit. Painting
(western) folks with broad strokes is not correct either.
>
> BTW, not that it is very important,
As far as this list is concerned, it is not important.
So let us please set aside remarks about temples and priests. There
are various other mailing lists to beat up on various sections of the
society or particular individuals.
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 22:17:38 +0530 (IST)
From: Gargeshwari Ajit <ajitga_...@yahoo.co.in>
Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] Request for 'Easier Texts' (Resources)
To: Sanskrit Mailing List <sanskrit@cs.utah.edu>
Message-ID: <659354.91922...@web7601.mail.in.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
What a pyramid we build?I donot remember who said this free science from
religion; religion from bigotry and induce the spirit of science in religion.
Please blow the husk away by winnowing so that we cook the rice well and eat
?
Ajit Gargeshwari
--- On Wed, 21/10/09, Naresh Cuntoor <nares...@gmail.com> wrote:
From: Naresh Cuntoor <nares...@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] Request for 'Easier Texts' (Resources)
To: "Sanskrit Mailing List" <sanskrit@cs.utah.edu>
Date: Wednesday, 21 October, 2009, 9:51 PM
> My point is : for people like me who start out, it 'd be better if we can
> refer to Indians who have actually translated the works.
But why do you want translations in the first place? If one is
learning the language, shouldn't one seek resources in that language?
Somehow this notion seems to be radical when it comes to Sanskrit.
By the way, Indians can produce really bad translations as well -- out
of sheer incompetence, ignorance or malice, I do not know.
And there *are* scholars in the west who know their Sanskrit. Painting
(western) folks with broad strokes is not correct either.
>
> BTW, not that it is very important,
As far as this list is concerned, it is not important.
So let us please set aside remarks about temples and priests. There
are various other mailing lists to beat up on various sections of the
society or particular individuals.
_______________________________________________
To UNSUBSCRIBE or customize your subscription or topics of interest, visit
http://mailman.cs.utah.edu/mailman/options/sanskrit
and follow instructions.
Try the new Yahoo! India Homepage. Click here. http://in.yahoo.com/trynew
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://mailman.cs.utah.edu/pipermail/sanskrit/attachments/20091021/aa9ff6bd/attachment-0001.html
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 14:51:40 -0500
From: Vasu Srinivasan <vasy...@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] Interesting verse about dressing appropriately
To: sanskrit@cs.utah.edu
Message-ID:
<42b4bd800910211251t1bb924e7q1b727c27d9c02...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Dear Sri Narayanan,
Thanks for your comments.
--- "But the name of your blog"vAgartham - ???: ??????" is really disturbing
(vAgarthaM tava bAdhate) as arthaSabda should be in masculine and it should
have been "vAgartha: - ???: ????:" unless it is used to mean "for the
purpose of artha" or is taken from Rgveda. Any reason to substantiate?"
My ignorance.
I am only a beginner and being a pseudo-Tamilian, the suffix -am (like -an)
kinda felt very natural.
The only other (lousy) explanation I can come up with is --
vAcha: arthaM avagantum yat blog gamyate, tat vAgarthaM.blogspot.com
--
Regards,
Vasu Srinivasan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://mailman.cs.utah.edu/pipermail/sanskrit/attachments/20091021/15924f19/attachment-0001.html
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 02:52:30 +0530
From: prasanna <prasanna....@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] Request for 'Easier Texts' (Resources)
To: Sanskrit Mailing List <sanskrit@cs.utah.edu>
Message-ID:
<a3d653590910211422o4f2ac05s52884c8145469...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 9:51 PM, Naresh Cuntoor <nares...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > My point is : for people like me who start out, it 'd be better if we can
> > refer to Indians who have actually translated the works.
>
> But why do you want translations in the first place? If one is
> learning the language, shouldn't one seek resources in that language?
> Somehow this notion seems to be radical when it comes to Sanskrit.
>
Well, if you start learning something, go through the fundamentals and want
to try out and use that to solve a difficult problem. Wouldn't you try
to look for the answer, to know if the thinking behind approaching the
problem is correct or not?
The difficult problem is the Scriptures. The answer to the problem is the
meaning of the verse or verses (in the language you understand). Of course
as one progresses along the learning curve and becomes scholarly like the
folks in this list, then probably one would be able to understand the answer
even if it is quoted in Sanskrit.
It's a way of cross checking/ getting feedback as to whether beginner's
(like me) approach for learning the language is correct or not. If not,
where are the deficiencies and how do I go about correcting them?
>
> By the way, Indians can produce really bad translations as well -- out
> of sheer incompetence, ignorance or malice, I do not know.
>
Let a quality check of the translated works which Indians have produced be
done and let the chaff be separated from the grain ( as somebody else
eloquently put it).
Of course the quality check would have to be done by true lovers of the
language and who would probably work for no profit (like the scholars in
this mailing list) and not by beginners' like me who are just getting their
feet wet.
>
> And there *are* scholars in the west who know their Sanskrit. Painting
> (western) folks with broad strokes is not correct either.
>
I am interested in knowing *my* Sanskrit and not *theirs*
I am only painting max mueller and crooks of his calibre.
>
> >
> > BTW, not that it is very important,
>
> As far as this list is concerned, it is not important.
> So let us please set aside remarks about temples and priests. There
> are various other mailing lists to beat up on various sections of the
> society or particular individuals.
>
IMO, this is one of the important reasons as to the poor reach
of Sanskrit amongst all the sections of the HIndus and that is because it
seen as an usurper's language.
The greedy priests have caused irreparable harm to this beautiful language.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://mailman.cs.utah.edu/pipermail/sanskrit/attachments/20091022/4cf81f8c/attachment-0001.html
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 17:22:05 -0400
From: "Cohen, Arthur R. \(MD\)" <arco...@novanthealth.org>
Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] Number 18
To: "Sanskrit Mailing List" <sanskrit@cs.utah.edu>
Message-ID:
<5252db48c4fedc4b9551162872b62cb4038a7...@exchange30.nh.novant.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Interestly, the Hebrew word for life, chai, also adds up to 18.
art
Arthur R. Cohen, MD
Department of Pathology
200 Hawthorne Lane
Charlotte, NC 28204
704-384-5764 (W)
704-953-2468 (C)
arco...@novanthealth.org
________________________________
From: sanskrit-boun...@cs.utah.edu [mailto:sanskrit-boun...@cs.utah.edu]
On Behalf Of Vasuvaj .
Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 10:27 AM
To: sanskrit@cs.utah.edu
Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] Number 18
Namaste.
Jaya is 18
It depends on how you use the kaTapayAdi code.
The traditional way is to tell the numbers from right to left
Hence Ja= 8 and ya = 1 , should be read as "18"
I know for sure that the traditional scholars of Kerala read the
kaTapayAdi code from right to left.This might be so in other areas too.
________________________________
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 07:19:16 -0700
From: deejayvai...@yahoo.com
To: sanskrit@cs.utah.edu
Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] Number 18
Question regarding "jaya"
If I remember rightly, in the kaTapayAdi code (below)
ja=8 and ya=1
jaya = 81 (not 18)
Interesting observations regarding the number 18 though - I have also
previously heard that this number was important for the author(s) of the
mahAbhArata.
Regards and thanks for all of the fine puzzle-shlokas,
Dhananjay
- - -
kaTapayAdi code (a many-to-one mapping many letters may point to one and
only one digit) :
k-1, kh-2, g-3, gh-4, N^-5
c-6, chh-7, j-8, jh-9
alternately
T-1, Th-2, D-3, Dh-4, N-5
t-6, th-7, d-8, dh-9, (n-0, according to some)
alternatively:
p-1, ph-2, b-3, bh-4, m-5
alternatively:
y-1, r-2, l-3, v-4, sh-5, shh-6, s-7, h-8
kSha-0
- - -
________________________________
Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection. Sign up now.
<http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/177141665/direct/01/>
-----------------------------------------
This message and any included attachments are from NOVANT HEALTH
INC. and are intended only for the addressee(s). The information
contained herein may include trade secrets or privileged or
otherwise confidential information. Unauthorized review,
forwarding, printing, copying, distributing, or using such
information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you
received this message in error, or have reason to believe you are
not authorized to receive it, please promptly delete this message
and notify the sender by e-mail. If you believe that any
information contained in this message is disparaging or harassing
or if you find it objectionable please contact Novant Health, Inc.
at 1-800-350-0094 or forward the e-mail to
repo...@novanthealth.org. Thank you.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://mailman.cs.utah.edu/pipermail/sanskrit/attachments/20091021/46b9ba96/attachment-0001.html
------------------------------
Message: 13
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 09:10:42 +0530
From: Sudarshan Rao <drsrsudars...@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] Request for 'Easier Texts' (Resources)
To: Sanskrit Mailing List <sanskrit@cs.utah.edu>
Message-ID:
<e3e770d90910212040l6deef827te43393ea3d01d...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
It is well known that Max Mueller, Monier Williams and some other
german and british scholars began learning sanskrit primarily to
discredit hinduism and to make it easier for priests to convert
Indians to christianity. But as one trying to brush up his sanskrit, I
find that no hindu writer has given the grammatical analysis of every
word in a text as Monier Williams has done in Nalopakhyana and Max
Meuller has done in his Hitopadesha, and Lanman has done in his
reader. I have read texts which have been edited and translated by
stalwarts like Kale, Telang and many others, and find that for a
person interested in really learning sanskrit, Monier Williams, Max
Meuller and Lanman are the best!
Sudarshan
On 22/10/2009, prasanna <prasanna....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 9:51 PM, Naresh Cuntoor <nares...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > My point is : for people like me who start out, it 'd be better if we
> can
> > > refer to Indians who have actually translated the works.
> >
> > But why do you want translations in the first place? If one is
> > learning the language, shouldn't one seek resources in that language?
> > Somehow this notion seems to be radical when it comes to Sanskrit.
> >
>
> Well, if you start learning something, go through the fundamentals and want
> to try out and use that to solve a difficult problem. Wouldn't you try to
> look for the answer, to know if the thinking behind approaching the problem
> is correct or not?
>
> The difficult problem is the Scriptures. The answer to the problem is the
> meaning of the verse or verses (in the language you understand). Of course
> as one progresses along the learning curve and becomes scholarly like the
> folks in this list, then probably one would be able to understand the answer
> even if it is quoted in Sanskrit.
>
> It's a way of cross checking/ getting feedback as to whether beginner's
> (like me) approach for learning the language is correct or not. If not,
> where are the deficiencies and how do I go about correcting them?
>
>
> >
> > By the way, Indians can produce really bad translations as well -- out
> > of sheer incompetence, ignorance or malice, I do not know.
> >
>
> Let a quality check of the translated works which Indians have produced be
> done and let the chaff be separated from the grain ( as somebody else
> eloquently put it).
>
> Of course the quality check would have to be done by true lovers of the
> language and who would probably work for no profit (like the scholars in
> this mailing list) and not by beginners' like me who are just getting their
> feet wet.
>
> >
> > And there *are* scholars in the west who know their Sanskrit. Painting
> > (western) folks with broad strokes is not correct either.
> >
>
> I am interested in knowing *my* Sanskrit and not *theirs*
>
> I am only painting max mueller and crooks of his calibre.
>
>
> >
> >
> > >
> > > BTW, not that it is very important,
> >
> > As far as this list is concerned, it is not important.
> > So let us please set aside remarks about temples and priests. There
> > are various other mailing lists to beat up on various sections of the
> > society or particular individuals.
> >
>
>
> IMO, this is one of the important reasons as to the poor reach of Sanskrit
> amongst all the sections of the HIndus and that is because it seen as an
> usurper's language.
>
> The greedy priests have caused irreparable harm to this beautiful language.
>
> _______________________________________________
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or customize your subscription or topics of interest, visit
> http://mailman.cs.utah.edu/mailman/options/sanskrit
> and follow instructions.
>
>
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
To UNSUBSCRIBE or customize your subscription and email delivery, visit
http://mailman.cs.utah.edu/mailman/options/sanskrit
and follow instructions.
End of sanskrit Digest, Vol 54, Issue 15
****************************************
