Send sanskrit mailing list submissions to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
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
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can reach the person managing the list at
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of sanskrit digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Sanskrit Institute: Sanskrit as a living language (Jay Vaidya)
2. udyogaparvam - sarga 15 - 5 (Sai Susarla)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2004 14:29:13 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jay Vaidya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [Sanskrit] Sanskrit Institute: Sanskrit as a living language
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
I am very glad that a Sanskrit Research Institute has
opened in Bangalore. In fact, I believe that Sanskrit
scholarship today is possible in any serious way only
in the setting of a research institute, or personal
research-like study. As someone who took Sanskrit in
high school/college I am properly ashamed to admit to
having scored excellent marks on all tests in the face
of my utter inability to fluently understand and
express original and complex thoughts in that
language.
For this reason, I am mystified by Governor
Chaturvedi's calling Sanskrit a "living" language, and
his being happy that "many youngsters could speak
Sanskrit at ease".
Except for a couple of agrahAras, it is doubtful that
Sanskrit is anywhere in everyday non-ritual use. A
hallmark of living languages is that there are some
regular folks (usually, many such people) to whom it
is a language of easy command. These people, usually
unremarkable persons-on-the-street, can make confident
and accurate judgments about what "sounds right/not
right" without explicit reference to complicated
grammatical rules.
When I re-read some of my past mailings to this list,
I am pained to see the errors in my Sanskrit usage --
not typographical errors, but errors in construction
and word-forms. Other contributors to and readers of
the list are doubtless aware of the same in their own
efforts, and have my admiration for their diligence.
The distinction of "living" from "not-living"
classical languages has immediate relevance to
learning methods. When I learn a living modern
language (say Kannada) there is sense in my learning
to say something that means "which way to the bus
station?" It would be laughable for me to attempt to
analyze the rhyme scheme of Kannada movie lyrics if I
cannot speak well enough to buy theatre tickets.
Secondly, for usage, style, and meanings of words that
have changed in time, "living" languages have a strict
hierarchy: current educated usage takes precedence
over ancient modes (unless you are reading an ancient
document). When I write in English, I am well advised
not to use "natural" to mean "illegitimate" or
"foolish", even though Jane Austen and Shakespeare did
so.
Not so for "dead" classical languages. In the first
place, I think we are perfectly justified in enjoying
and critiquing complicated yamakas while we would not
have the ability to ask our way to a kavisabhA in a
Sanskrit speaking town of the past.
Secondly, we are at a decided disadvantage when
composing in Sanskrit, if we want to be unambiguous in
meaning. Or you could say that we are at a decided
advantage if we want to create an ambiguous text with
multiple shleshhas. I understand that the word "hari"
has multiple meanings (there is a shloka that lists
them) including "lion" and "the god vishhNu". I cannot
use this word to save my life if someone shouts to me
"dhAva re hariraiti !" ("Hey! Run, here comes [a] hari
!"). Am I to stop the sinful thing I am doing and run
TOWARDS hari for forgiveness? Or am I to stop the
carefree thing I am doing and run AWAY from the hari
to save my skin? On the other hand, think of the
humorous-spiritual couplets I can write... In Sanskrit
there is no obvious hierarchy of privileged "current"
meaning. Words are historical-context-sensitive. If we
hold kAlidAsa to vaidika usages, we destroy his
poetry. Later saMskR^ita poets may play with the word
mAdhava=mA-dhava as "dhava"=husband of "mA"=lakshhmI.
We need to accept that meaning to get their sense.
When reading earlier works, the only acceptable
meaning is "descended from or related to madhu", and
mA does NOT mean lakshhmI, neither does "dhava" mean
"husband".
To summarize, I believe that thinking of Sanskrit as a
"living" language is a needless overestimation of our
(and our youngsters') abilities. It also seriously
hampers our learning and enjoyment of the rich and
temporally changing saMskR^ita literature.
dhanaMjayaH
>QUOTED
> Sanskrit research institute opened
> BANGALORE, JUNE 2. The Governor, T.N. Chaturvedi
> ... distributed prizes to students who had performed
> well in Sanskrit examinations.
> Describing Sanskrit as a "living and classical"
> language, he sought the formation of a directorate
> to spread its use.
> ... He was happy that many youngsters could
> speak Sanskrit at ease...
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 07:30:01 -0700 (PDT)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Sai Susarla)
Subject: [Sanskrit] udyogaparvam - sarga 15 - 5
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Dr. sarasvati mohan mahodayAyAH paryavekShaNe SrI vikrama santurkarasya anuvAdaH
shlokaH 5
ityuktA devarAjena patnI sA kamalekShaNA .
evamastvityathoktvA tu jagAma nahuShaM prati .. 5..\
padavibhaagaH
iti uktA devarAjena patnI sA kamalekShaNA .
evam astu iti atha uktvA tu jagAma nahuShaM prati ..
anvayaH
iti devarAjena sA kamalekShaNA patnI uktA.
evam astu iti. atha uktvA tu nahuShaM prati jagAma.
pratipadaarthaH
devarAjena=By Indra;
sA=that;
kamalekShaNA=The lotus eyed lady;
patnI=wife;
iti=thus;
uktA=being said;
evam=thus;
astu=may it be;
iti=thus;
atha=then;
uktvA=having said;
tu=indeed;
nahuShaM=Nahusha;
prati=toward;
jagAma=went;
anuvAdaH
Having been instructed thus by Indra, the lotus eyed wife said "May it
be so". Then having said so indeed she went toward Nahusha.
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
sanskrit mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mailman.cs.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/sanskrit
End of sanskrit Digest, Vol 15, Issue 3
***************************************
