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: agajAnana padmArkam Sloka chhandas (Sai)
2. anusvAra and laghu (Jay Vaidya)
3. Re: anusvAra and laghu (Sai)
4. Erratum: anusvAra and guru (Jay Vaidya)
5. Re: agajAnana padmArkam Sloka chhandas (Ambujam Raman)
6. Re: agajAnana padmArkam Sloka chhandas (Ambujam Raman)
7. Re: agajAnana padmArkam Sloka chhandas (Sai)
8. Re: agajAnana padmArkam Sloka chhandas (Ambujam Raman)
9. Re: agajAnana padmArkam Sloka chhandas (Ambujam Raman)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 12:11:20 -0600
From: Sai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] agajAnana padmArkam Sloka chhandas
To: Ambujam Raman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
How does Valmiki's Sloka violate the rules?
mA niShAda pratiShTAMtva-magamaH SASvatIH samAH
X X X X 1 2 2 X X X X X 1 2 1 X
yatkrauncha-mithunAdeka-mavadhIH kAma-mohitam
X X X X 1 2 2 X X X X X 1 2 1 X
At the fifth akShara position,
122 121
122 121
To me it fits the bill perfectly.
- Sai.
Ambujam Raman uvaacha:
> anuShTobhanAt anuShTup
> (From praising it is 'anuShTubh')
> This is derived from the root 'stu' (to praise). It is a generic name for
> metrical systems of eight syllables. The book definition of laghupanchamam
> and guruShaShThaM are most often violated. Consider the very first shloka
> ever written, by Valmiki:
> mA niShAda pratiShThAM .....
> ^^
>
> rAmaH
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 13:00:31 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jay Vaidya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [Sanskrit] anusvAra and laghu
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
likhitavAn sAyI:
> anekadam tam bhaktAnAM ekadantamupAsmahe ||
^^^
>...
> gurostu maunaM vyAkhyAnaM SiShyAScchinna samSayAH
||
> ^^^
> doesn't seem to conform to the anuShTubh rules
> quoted long ago. A guru comes in the 5th position
> of 3rd pAdam.
I thought that a hrasva-anusvAra combination at the
end of a pada ("word") was optionally laghu or guru --
poet's choice. Please check.
Also laghu-guru are simple tests -- these are rhythmic
concepts for which we have a strong instinct.
Please say the shlokas aloud with the usual shloka
rhythm. They should not pose a recitation challenge.
(More so if you use the _true_ anusvAra sound, which
is a nose-only-no-mouth humming sound, rather than a
pa-varga 'm' conversion that is common among modern
students of sa.nskR^ita.)
If you are among the people to whom the recitation
does not seem difficult, you have demonstrated to
yourself that the final anusvAra-vowel can be laghu.
If it does seem difficult, you may need to work on the
anusvAra sound if only to recite works by earlier
poets.
Also Saigaaru, there are some typographical errors in
the quoted shlokas,
vata -> vaTA
vR^iddhASSiShyAH gurur... -> vR^iddhAH SiShyA gurur...
SiShyAScchinna samSayAH -> is missing a syllable
All the same, I believe that the quoted shlokas are
originally anushhTubh, rather than in a new chhandas.
---
sa-anusvAraH pada-antaH svaraH kaver ichchhayA
vikalpena laghur-vA gurur-vA iti manye, tat punaH
sva-samAdhAna-arthaM parIxaNiyaM bhavadbhiH |
svarasya laghutvaM gurutvaM sulabhatayA parIxaNIyam --
ete tAla-AghAta-rUpake -- tad-vishhaye asmAkaM
svayaM-bhU-GYAnaM balishhTham |
kR^ipayA ete paMktI anyatra-vat shlokavR^ittyA
kaNTha-raveNa paTheyuH | na tasmin uchchAre kimapi
kAThinyam anubhavitavyam | vara-taram tu anusvArasya
sAdhu uchchAraNam Asya-vihInam nAsikA-matram, na tu
pa-varga-sthita-ma-kAra-vat, yathA kriyate bahubhir
AdhunikaiH sa.nskR^ita-vidyA-arthibhiH |
api bhavAn tasmin jane yasya etad uchchAraNam
dushhkaraM na , darshayitaM bhavatA svayam eva yat
padAnte sa-anusvAra-svaraH vikalpena laghuH | api
bhavAn tat dushhkaraM manyate, sAdhvIkriyatAM
anusvArasya uchchAraNam , kiM punaH pUrvANAm kavayaH
kR^itayaH paThana-mAtram eva |
sAyI, datteshhu shlokeshhu ekaikAni TaMkaskhalanAni
dR^ishyante |
vata -> vaTA
vR^iddhASSiShyAH gurur... -> vR^iddhAH SiShyA gurur...
SiShyAScchinna samSayAH -> ekAyAH mAtrAyAH truTiH
anubhUyate |
tathA-api anushhTubhi-eva manye ete rachane, na tu
anye chhandasi |
dhana.njayaH
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
http://vote.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 14:07:32 -0600
From: Sai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] anusvAra and laghu
To: Jay Vaidya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> end of a pada ("word") was optionally laghu or guru --
The places I have pointed out are not the ends of pAdas.
They are the fifth akSharas of the third pAda in each Sloka. So the
'choice' doesn't apply.
The last pAdam was missing a 'tu', I think:
SiShyAstu chhinna samSayAH
- Sai.
Jay Vaidya uvaacha:
> likhitavAn sAyI:
>
> > anekadam tam bhaktAnAM ekadantamupAsmahe ||
> ^^^
> >...
> > gurostu maunaM vyAkhyAnaM SiShyAScchinna samSayAH
> ||
> > ^^^
> > doesn't seem to conform to the anuShTubh rules
> > quoted long ago. A guru comes in the 5th position
> > of 3rd pAdam.
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 14:30:36 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jay Vaidya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [Sanskrit] Erratum: anusvAra and guru
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Erratum
I had said:
> I thought that a hrasva-anusvAra combination at the
> end of a pada ("word") was optionally laghu or guru
--
> poet's choice. Please check.
Sai-gaaru has checked and found that the hrasva
anusvAra combination only at the end of a pAda (not
pada) can be optionally laghu or guru.
So my previous explanation does not stand.
dhana.njayaH
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
http://vote.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 17:36:59 -0400
From: "Ambujam Raman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] agajAnana padmArkam Sloka chhandas
To: "Sai" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Saigaru
You are right! I went wrong in the counting and was thinking of the special
poetic rule relating to 'pra' as a conjunct consonant etc.;
rAmaH
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sai" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Ambujam Raman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, October 10, 2004 2:11 PM
Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] agajAnana padmArkam Sloka chhandas
> How does Valmiki's Sloka violate the rules?
> mA niShAda pratiShTAMtva-magamaH SASvatIH samAH
> X X X X 1 2 2 X X X X X 1 2 1 X
> yatkrauncha-mithunAdeka-mavadhIH kAma-mohitam
> X X X X 1 2 2 X X X X X 1 2 1 X
>
> At the fifth akShara position,
> 122 121
> 122 121
>
> To me it fits the bill perfectly.
> - Sai.
>
> Ambujam Raman uvaacha:
> > anuShTobhanAt anuShTup
> > (From praising it is 'anuShTubh')
> > This is derived from the root 'stu' (to praise). It is a generic name
for
> > metrical systems of eight syllables. The book definition of
laghupanchamam
> > and guruShaShThaM are most often violated. Consider the very first
shloka
> > ever written, by Valmiki:
> > mA niShAda pratiShThAM .....
> > ^^
> >
> > rAmaH
>
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 18:05:04 -0400
From: "Ambujam Raman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] agajAnana padmArkam Sloka chhandas
To: "Sai" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
I just casually checked Vishnu sahasranAmaM which is clearly anuShtubh
chandas.
stanza 71
mahAvarAho govindaH....
XXXX^
stanza 78
shrIdaH shrIshaH shrInivAsaH...
XXXX^
stanza 83
kAmadevaH kAmapAlAH...
XXXX^
There must be a lot here!
rAmaH
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ambujam Raman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Sai" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, October 10, 2004 5:36 PM
Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] agajAnana padmArkam Sloka chhandas
> Saigaru
> You are right! I went wrong in the counting and was thinking of the
special
> poetic rule relating to 'pra' as a conjunct consonant etc.;
>
> rAmaH
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sai" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Ambujam Raman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Sunday, October 10, 2004 2:11 PM
> Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] agajAnana padmArkam Sloka chhandas
>
>
> > How does Valmiki's Sloka violate the rules?
> > mA niShAda pratiShTAMtva-magamaH SASvatIH samAH
> > X X X X 1 2 2 X X X X X 1 2 1 X
> > yatkrauncha-mithunAdeka-mavadhIH kAma-mohitam
> > X X X X 1 2 2 X X X X X 1 2 1 X
> >
> > At the fifth akShara position,
> > 122 121
> > 122 121
> >
> > To me it fits the bill perfectly.
> > - Sai.
> >
> > Ambujam Raman uvaacha:
> > > anuShTobhanAt anuShTup
> > > (From praising it is 'anuShTubh')
> > > This is derived from the root 'stu' (to praise). It is a generic name
> for
> > > metrical systems of eight syllables. The book definition of
> laghupanchamam
> > > and guruShaShThaM are most often violated. Consider the very first
> shloka
> > > ever written, by Valmiki:
> > > mA niShAda pratiShThAM .....
> > > ^^
> > >
> > > rAmaH
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> sanskrit mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://mailman.cs.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/sanskrit
>
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 16:24:31 -0600
From: Sai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] agajAnana padmArkam Sloka chhandas
To: Ambujam Raman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
So, obviously, the definition of anuShTubh is broader than the one
posted a while ago on the list.
Or there are various flavors of anuShTubh, which was my question.
- Sai.
Ambujam Raman uvaacha:
> I just casually checked Vishnu sahasranAmaM which is clearly anuShtubh
> chandas.
>
> stanza 71
>
> mahAvarAho govindaH....
> XXXX^
> stanza 78
>
> shrIdaH shrIshaH shrInivAsaH...
> XXXX^
> stanza 83
>
> kAmadevaH kAmapAlAH...
> XXXX^
>
> There must be a lot here!
>
> rAmaH
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ambujam Raman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Sai" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Sunday, October 10, 2004 5:36 PM
> Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] agajAnana padmArkam Sloka chhandas
>
>
> > Saigaru
> > You are right! I went wrong in the counting and was thinking of the
> special
> > poetic rule relating to 'pra' as a conjunct consonant etc.;
> >
> > rAmaH
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Sai" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: "Ambujam Raman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Sunday, October 10, 2004 2:11 PM
> > Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] agajAnana padmArkam Sloka chhandas
> >
> >
> > > How does Valmiki's Sloka violate the rules?
> > > mA niShAda pratiShTAMtva-magamaH SASvatIH samAH
> > > X X X X 1 2 2 X X X X X 1 2 1 X
> > > yatkrauncha-mithunAdeka-mavadhIH kAma-mohitam
> > > X X X X 1 2 2 X X X X X 1 2 1 X
> > >
> > > At the fifth akShara position,
> > > 122 121
> > > 122 121
> > >
> > > To me it fits the bill perfectly.
> > > - Sai.
> > >
> > > Ambujam Raman uvaacha:
> > > > anuShTobhanAt anuShTup
> > > > (From praising it is 'anuShTubh')
> > > > This is derived from the root 'stu' (to praise). It is a generic name
> > for
> > > > metrical systems of eight syllables. The book definition of
> > laghupanchamam
> > > > and guruShaShThaM are most often violated. Consider the very first
> > shloka
> > > > ever written, by Valmiki:
> > > > mA niShAda pratiShThAM .....
> > > > ^^
> > > >
> > > > rAmaH
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > sanskrit mailing list
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > http://mailman.cs.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/sanskrit
> >
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 21:16:29 -0400
From: "Ambujam Raman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] agajAnana padmArkam Sloka chhandas
To: "Sai" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Ofcourse!
DHRao wrote:
<<<<
There are many varieties in the metres for shloka-s, also called
anuSTubh. What you have refered is commonest for ordinary shloka or
anuSTubh.
A variation verse for shoka lakshaNa is:
shloke SaSTam guru j~neyam sarvatra laghu pa~ncamam |
dvi catuH paadayoH hrasvam saptamam diirgham anyayoH ||
<<<<<<<<<
That is the definition of shloka which is also known as anuShtubh. Now here
is the confusion. All v^Rittams that have eight syllables in a quarter are
called anuShtubh. shloka is a special sub category which unfortunately has
also been designated as anuShtubh.
There can be 2^8 = 64 varieties of anuShtubh.
For example vidyunmaalaa (ma,ma,ga,ga) has also eight syllables and so is
anuShtubh but is not a shloka. Accordingly a number of common stotras are
anuShtubh but not shlokas.
rAmaH
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sai" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Ambujam Raman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, October 10, 2004 6:24 PM
Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] agajAnana padmArkam Sloka chhandas
> So, obviously, the definition of anuShTubh is broader than the one
> posted a while ago on the list.
> Or there are various flavors of anuShTubh, which was my question.
> - Sai.
>
> Ambujam Raman uvaacha:
> > I just casually checked Vishnu sahasranAmaM which is clearly anuShtubh
> > chandas.
> >
> > stanza 71
> >
> > mahAvarAho govindaH....
> > XXXX^
> > stanza 78
> >
> > shrIdaH shrIshaH shrInivAsaH...
> > XXXX^
> > stanza 83
> >
> > kAmadevaH kAmapAlAH...
> > XXXX^
> >
> > There must be a lot here!
> >
> > rAmaH
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Ambujam Raman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: "Sai" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Sunday, October 10, 2004 5:36 PM
> > Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] agajAnana padmArkam Sloka chhandas
> >
> >
> > > Saigaru
> > > You are right! I went wrong in the counting and was thinking of the
> > special
> > > poetic rule relating to 'pra' as a conjunct consonant etc.;
> > >
> > > rAmaH
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Sai" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > To: "Ambujam Raman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Sent: Sunday, October 10, 2004 2:11 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] agajAnana padmArkam Sloka chhandas
> > >
> > >
> > > > How does Valmiki's Sloka violate the rules?
> > > > mA niShAda pratiShTAMtva-magamaH SASvatIH samAH
> > > > X X X X 1 2 2 X X X X X 1 2 1 X
> > > > yatkrauncha-mithunAdeka-mavadhIH kAma-mohitam
> > > > X X X X 1 2 2 X X X X X 1 2 1 X
> > > >
> > > > At the fifth akShara position,
> > > > 122 121
> > > > 122 121
> > > >
> > > > To me it fits the bill perfectly.
> > > > - Sai.
> > > >
> > > > Ambujam Raman uvaacha:
> > > > > anuShTobhanAt anuShTup
> > > > > (From praising it is 'anuShTubh')
> > > > > This is derived from the root 'stu' (to praise). It is a generic
name
> > > for
> > > > > metrical systems of eight syllables. The book definition of
> > > laghupanchamam
> > > > > and guruShaShThaM are most often violated. Consider the very first
> > > shloka
> > > > > ever written, by Valmiki:
> > > > > mA niShAda pratiShThAM .....
> > > > > ^^
> > > > >
> > > > > rAmaH
> > > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > sanskrit mailing list
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > http://mailman.cs.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/sanskrit
> > >
>
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 21:26:22 -0400
From: "Ambujam Raman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] agajAnana padmArkam Sloka chhandas
To: "Sai" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Sorry!
2^8 = 256
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ambujam Raman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Sai" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, October 10, 2004 9:16 PM
Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] agajAnana padmArkam Sloka chhandas
> Ofcourse!
> DHRao wrote:
> <<<<
> There are many varieties in the metres for shloka-s, also called
> anuSTubh. What you have refered is commonest for ordinary shloka or
> anuSTubh.
>
> A variation verse for shoka lakshaNa is:
>
> shloke SaSTam guru j~neyam sarvatra laghu pa~ncamam |
> dvi catuH paadayoH hrasvam saptamam diirgham anyayoH ||
> <<<<<<<<<
>
> That is the definition of shloka which is also known as anuShtubh. Now
here
> is the confusion. All v^Rittams that have eight syllables in a quarter are
> called anuShtubh. shloka is a special sub category which unfortunately has
> also been designated as anuShtubh.
>
> There can be 2^8 = 64 varieties of anuShtubh.
>
> For example vidyunmaalaa (ma,ma,ga,ga) has also eight syllables and so is
> anuShtubh but is not a shloka. Accordingly a number of common stotras are
> anuShtubh but not shlokas.
>
> rAmaH
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sai" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Ambujam Raman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Sunday, October 10, 2004 6:24 PM
> Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] agajAnana padmArkam Sloka chhandas
>
>
> > So, obviously, the definition of anuShTubh is broader than the one
> > posted a while ago on the list.
> > Or there are various flavors of anuShTubh, which was my question.
> > - Sai.
> >
> > Ambujam Raman uvaacha:
> > > I just casually checked Vishnu sahasranAmaM which is clearly anuShtubh
> > > chandas.
> > >
> > > stanza 71
> > >
> > > mahAvarAho govindaH....
> > > XXXX^
> > > stanza 78
> > >
> > > shrIdaH shrIshaH shrInivAsaH...
> > > XXXX^
> > > stanza 83
> > >
> > > kAmadevaH kAmapAlAH...
> > > XXXX^
> > >
> > > There must be a lot here!
> > >
> > > rAmaH
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Ambujam Raman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > To: "Sai" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Sent: Sunday, October 10, 2004 5:36 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] agajAnana padmArkam Sloka chhandas
> > >
> > >
> > > > Saigaru
> > > > You are right! I went wrong in the counting and was thinking of the
> > > special
> > > > poetic rule relating to 'pra' as a conjunct consonant etc.;
> > > >
> > > > rAmaH
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Sai" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > To: "Ambujam Raman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > Sent: Sunday, October 10, 2004 2:11 PM
> > > > Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] agajAnana padmArkam Sloka chhandas
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > How does Valmiki's Sloka violate the rules?
> > > > > mA niShAda pratiShTAMtva-magamaH SASvatIH samAH
> > > > > X X X X 1 2 2 X X X X X 1 2 1 X
> > > > > yatkrauncha-mithunAdeka-mavadhIH kAma-mohitam
> > > > > X X X X 1 2 2 X X X X X 1 2 1 X
> > > > >
> > > > > At the fifth akShara position,
> > > > > 122 121
> > > > > 122 121
> > > > >
> > > > > To me it fits the bill perfectly.
> > > > > - Sai.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ambujam Raman uvaacha:
> > > > > > anuShTobhanAt anuShTup
> > > > > > (From praising it is 'anuShTubh')
> > > > > > This is derived from the root 'stu' (to praise). It is a generic
> name
> > > > for
> > > > > > metrical systems of eight syllables. The book definition of
> > > > laghupanchamam
> > > > > > and guruShaShThaM are most often violated. Consider the very
first
> > > > shloka
> > > > > > ever written, by Valmiki:
> > > > > > mA niShAda pratiShThAM .....
> > > > > > ^^
> > > > > >
> > > > > > rAmaH
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > sanskrit mailing list
> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > http://mailman.cs.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/sanskrit
> > > >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> sanskrit mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://mailman.cs.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/sanskrit
>
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
sanskrit mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mailman.cs.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/sanskrit
End of sanskrit Digest, Vol 19, Issue 23
****************************************
