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. Re: vedic question (Ambujam Raman)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 11:22:13 -0400
From: "Ambujam Raman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] vedic question
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: sanskrit digest <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Message-ID:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
dhanyavaad raomahaashayaaH!
You have clarified a number of issues. But there are lingering doubts
especially due to my ignorance of vedic grammar and vedic accents.
First this passage is a powerful mantra as part of repetition (abhyaaroha)
by the yajamaana when the priest (prastot.R) recites the pavamaana saaman.
Since this is part of the brahmaNa (not main vedic text) no special
intonations are used. My text (RamakrishnaamaT publication) shows no
'anudatta' accent:
asato maa sadgamaya..... etc.,
_ _ ( _ =anudatta accent)
The prohibitive 'maa' being accented is not always correct. See for example
rudram:
_
(_ = udatta)
tryambakam yajaamahe ........ maa'm.Rtaat
I know prohibitive maa is udatta in a number places but there is no
consistency.
In classical sanskrit prohibitive maa is used with imperative (or
unaugmented aorist). The question of injunctive does not arise very often.
Kindly clarify whether such use was not prevalent in vedic times.
Finally I wish to add that some priests from where I hail (Tinnevely side)
do use 'maam' in their chants without any explanations. Is it possibly a
variation of draavida paaThaM?
Raman
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nath Rao" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Ambujam Raman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, August 21, 2004 11:45 PM
Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] vedic question
> Ambujam Raman wrote:
>
> > The most quoted piece in the upanishad is:
> >
> > asato maa sad gamaya
> > tamaso maa jyotirgamaya
> > mrityormaa'm.Rtam gamaya
> > (brihadaaraNyaopanishad 1.3.28)
> >
> > Of course in all these maa stands for maaM (ekavachanam dvitiiya).
> > On the other hand if 'maa' is interpreted as the proscriptive particle
> > then the meaning is diametrically opposite. There is no particular
> > reason (based on chandas) not to use 'maaM' here. There is no
anvaadesa.
> > Why did the ancients use such an ambiguous invocation?
>
> The ancients had >no< ambiguity.
>
> First, the prohibitive maa was used only with the injunctive: It would
> have to be maa jiigamaH, not maa gamaya.
>
> Second, this maa is anudaatta, the prohibitive maa is udaatta.
>
> Finally, in Vedic texts, maa is used when there is some emphasis on that
> word. So there is good reason not to use maam here.
>
> Nath Rao
>
>
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
sanskrit mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mailman.cs.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/sanskrit
End of sanskrit Digest, Vol 17, Issue 22
****************************************
