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: buddha word - in Rmn (Sai)
2. Ramayana (Vijayaraghavan Bashyam)
3. Re: buddha word - in Rmn (Ambujam Raman)
4. Re: buddha word - in Rmn (P.K.Ramakrishnan)
5. Re: buddha word - in Rmn (P.K.Ramakrishnan)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 12:37:31 -0600
From: Sai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] buddha word - in Rmn
To: Ambujam Raman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Ambujam Raman uvaacha:
>
> The verse quoted by PKR:
>
> yathaa hi choraH sa tathaa hi budhaH
^^^^^^
> tathaagatam naastikamatra viddhi /
> tasmaadhi yaH shakyatamaH prajaanaam
> sa naastike naabimukho budhah syaat //
As I said before, this goes against upajAti vRtta, which must have 2
gurus at the end. So, budhah is definitely a wrong version. It must be
either buddhaH or something else with 2 gurus. Could it be from some
other rAmAyaNam? Umpteen people have written
ramayanam later in sanskrit as well as many other languages.
Not accepting this as part of ramayana because it is
upajAti doesn't seem to be right reasoning. There are other
vRttas than anuShTup in Ramayana (e.g., the last Sloka of Aditya
hR^idayam - atha raviravadan... is definitely not anuShTup).
The "Sakya" being used in the poem is not "Saakya" for us to coerce
it to refer to Saakya muni, isn't it?
Regarding arguing that jAbAli episode has been a later edition, it seems
highly unlikely. Although I couldn't find this particular Sloka,
I found two full sargas in anuShTup + upajAti devoted to this conversation
between jAbAli and Rama in Tokunaga's Ramayana.
Go to the following website:
http://sanskrit.gde.to/mirrors/ramayana/valmiki.htm
Click on ayodhya kanda. Go to sarga 100.
Sarga 100 has jAbAli persuading Rama to come back using atheistic
reasoning. Sarga 101 has Rama's reply. In Sarga 102, VasiShTha says to
Rama, "jAbAli also knows the truth. He said those words only out of
strong desire to see you back".
jAbAlestu vachaH shrutvA rAmaH satyAtmanA.n varaH .
uvAcha parayA yuktyA svabuddhyA chAvipannayA .. 1..\\
bhavAnme priyakAmArtha.n vachanaM yadihoktavAn .
akArya.n kAryasa~NkAshamapathyaM pathyasaMmitam .. 2..\\
I couldn't find the above upajAti Sloka anywhere in there.
This episode and its Slokas were quoted heavily and explained in telugu by
by a respectable panDita (Samavedam Shanmukha Sarma) in
his Ramayana pravachanam in telugu:
http://surasa.net/music/samavedam/#ramayana
Click on the "play" button next to part "10 of 20" and
seek to the 48.30th minute.
- Sai.
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 12:58:33 -0700 (PDT)
From: Vijayaraghavan Bashyam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [Sanskrit] Ramayana
To: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Namaste,
While the topic is on ramayana, I thought i could get
my query answered.
The website http://rsvpramayana.eth.net/home.html
seems to have a critical edition of the ramayana in
more than one scripts. However I have not seen any
link to download fonts for viewing the text. I wonder
if this is a problem from my side, or everyone else is
unable to read the text there. The source to the html
page shows that the font used for Devanagari is
ShreeDev002. Is this a copyrighted font ? Can I obtain
it anywhere ?
Appreciate any help.Thanks.
Vijayaraghavan Bashyam
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Personals - Better first dates. More second dates.
http://personals.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 18:53:38 -0400
From: "Ambujam Raman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] buddha word - in Rmn
To: "Sai" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Saiji:
The vrittam part can be easily fixed. Just change budhaH to buddhaH in PKR.
Also both budhaH and buddhaH have same meaning, learned or awakened. Hence
we can invoke an interpretation without dragging Buddha into the scene.
However that is patently not the motive of the interpolation.
rAmaH
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sai" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Ambujam Raman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2005 2:37 PM
Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] buddha word - in Rmn
> Ambujam Raman uvaacha:
> >
> > The verse quoted by PKR:
> >
> > yathaa hi choraH sa tathaa hi budhaH
> ^^^^^^
> > tathaagatam naastikamatra viddhi /
> > tasmaadhi yaH shakyatamaH prajaanaam
> > sa naastike naabimukho budhah syaat //
>
> As I said before, this goes against upajAti vRtta, which must have 2
> gurus at the end. So, budhah is definitely a wrong version. It must be
> either buddhaH or something else with 2 gurus. Could it be from some
> other rAmAyaNam? Umpteen people have written
> ramayanam later in sanskrit as well as many other languages.
>
> Not accepting this as part of ramayana because it is
> upajAti doesn't seem to be right reasoning. There are other
> vRttas than anuShTup in Ramayana (e.g., the last Sloka of Aditya
> hR^idayam - atha raviravadan... is definitely not anuShTup).
>
> The "Sakya" being used in the poem is not "Saakya" for us to coerce
> it to refer to Saakya muni, isn't it?
>
> Regarding arguing that jAbAli episode has been a later edition, it seems
> highly unlikely. Although I couldn't find this particular Sloka,
> I found two full sargas in anuShTup + upajAti devoted to this conversation
> between jAbAli and Rama in Tokunaga's Ramayana.
>
> Go to the following website:
> http://sanskrit.gde.to/mirrors/ramayana/valmiki.htm
> Click on ayodhya kanda. Go to sarga 100.
> Sarga 100 has jAbAli persuading Rama to come back using atheistic
> reasoning. Sarga 101 has Rama's reply. In Sarga 102, VasiShTha says to
> Rama, "jAbAli also knows the truth. He said those words only out of
> strong desire to see you back".
> jAbAlestu vachaH shrutvA rAmaH satyAtmanA.n varaH .
> uvAcha parayA yuktyA svabuddhyA chAvipannayA .. 1..\\
> bhavAnme priyakAmArtha.n vachanaM yadihoktavAn .
> akArya.n kAryasa~NkAshamapathyaM pathyasaMmitam .. 2..\\
> I couldn't find the above upajAti Sloka anywhere in there.
>
> This episode and its Slokas were quoted heavily and explained in telugu by
> by a respectable panDita (Samavedam Shanmukha Sarma) in
> his Ramayana pravachanam in telugu:
> http://surasa.net/music/samavedam/#ramayana
> Click on the "play" button next to part "10 of 20" and
> seek to the 48.30th minute.
>
> - Sai.
>
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 23:06:34 -0700 (PDT)
From: "P.K.Ramakrishnan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] buddha word - in Rmn
To: Ambujam Raman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, sanskrit digest
<[email protected]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I looked at the original again. I am sorry I had made a mistake in typing it
as bhudhaH instead of buddhaH.
The book I have is edited by Ramateja Pandey and published by
Panditapustakaalaya,
Benares.
In chapter 109 verses 30 to 39 are in upajaati as against anuSThu bh in the
earlier part.
In the latter part the word naastika is used several times and the language
itself is not as
easy flowing as in normal Valmiki shlokas.
In shloka 34 itself the words buddha, tathaagata, and shakya denote buddha
himself.
(may be shakyakule jaataH iti shaakyaH = buddhaH).
The original Rama could not have known buddha. Nor the original Valmiki (a
contemporary) of Rama). So it is highly probable that these verses are later
interpolations. One way to find out such interpolations would be to analyse the
gyatri ramamayanam where the 1, 1001st, 2001st
etc shlokas should have the first letters from gayatri.
Ambujam Raman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Saiji:
The vrittam part can be easily fixed. Just change budhaH to buddhaH in PKR.
Also both budhaH and buddhaH have same meaning, learned or awakened. Hence
we can invoke an interpretation without dragging Buddha into the scene.
However that is patently not the motive of the interpolation.
rAmaH
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sai"
To: "Ambujam Raman"
Cc:
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2005 2:37 PM
Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] buddha word - in Rmn
> Ambujam Raman uvaacha:
> >
> > The verse quoted by PKR:
> >
> > yathaa hi choraH sa tathaa hi budhaH
> ^^^^^^
> > tathaagatam naastikamatra viddhi /
> > tasmaadhi yaH shakyatamaH prajaanaam
> > sa naastike naabimukho budhah syaat //
>
> As I said before, this goes against upajAti vRtta, which must have 2
> gurus at the end. So, budhah is definitely a wrong version. It must be
> either buddhaH or something else with 2 gurus. Could it be from some
> other rAmAyaNam? Umpteen people have written
> ramayanam later in sanskrit as well as many other languages.
>
> Not accepting this as part of ramayana because it is
> upajAti doesn't seem to be right reasoning. There are other
> vRttas than anuShTup in Ramayana (e.g., the last Sloka of Aditya
> hR^idayam - atha raviravadan... is definitely not anuShTup).
>
> The "Sakya" being used in the poem is not "Saakya" for us to coerce
> it to refer to Saakya muni, isn't it?
>
> Regarding arguing that jAbAli episode has been a later edition, it seems
> highly unlikely. Although I couldn't find this particular Sloka,
> I found two full sargas in anuShTup + upajAti devoted to this conversation
> between jAbAli and Rama in Tokunaga's Ramayana.
>
> Go to the following website:
> http://sanskrit.gde.to/mirrors/ramayana/valmiki.htm
> Click on ayodhya kanda. Go to sarga 100.
> Sarga 100 has jAbAli persuading Rama to come back using atheistic
> reasoning. Sarga 101 has Rama's reply. In Sarga 102, VasiShTha says to
> Rama, "jAbAli also knows the truth. He said those words only out of
> strong desire to see you back".
> jAbAlestu vachaH shrutvA rAmaH satyAtmanA.n varaH .
> uvAcha parayA yuktyA svabuddhyA chAvipannayA .. 1..\\
> bhavAnme priyakAmArtha.n vachanaM yadihoktavAn .
> akArya.n kAryasa~NkAshamapathyaM pathyasaMmitam .. 2..\\
> I couldn't find the above upajAti Sloka anywhere in there.
>
> This episode and its Slokas were quoted heavily and explained in telugu by
> by a respectable panDita (Samavedam Shanmukha Sarma) in
> his Ramayana pravachanam in telugu:
> http://surasa.net/music/samavedam/#ramayana
> Click on the "play" button next to part "10 of 20" and
> seek to the 48.30th minute.
>
> - Sai.
>
_______________________________________________
sanskrit mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.cs.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/sanskrit
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger
Show us what our next emoticon should look like. Join the fun.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://mailman.cs.utah.edu/mailman/private/sanskrit/attachments/20050406/a1963d51/attachment-0001.htm
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 23:07:46 -0700 (PDT)
From: "P.K.Ramakrishnan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] buddha word - in Rmn
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [email protected]
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I looked at the original again. I am sorry I had made a mistake in typing it
as bhudhaH instead of buddhaH.
The book I have is edited by Ramateja Pandey and published by
Panditapustakaalaya,
Benares.
In chapter 109 verses 30 to 39 are in upajaati as against anuSThu bh in the
earlier part.
In the latter part the word naastika is used several times and the language
itself is not as
easy flowing as in normal Valmiki shlokas.
In shloka 34 itself the words buddha, tathaagata, and shakya denote buddha
himself.
(may be shakyakule jaataH iti shaakyaH = buddhaH).
The original Rama could not have known buddha. Nor the original Valmiki (a
contemporary) of Rama). So it is highly probable that these verses are later
interpolations. One way to find out such interpolations would be to analyse the
gyatri ramamayanam where the 1, 1001st, 2001st
etc shlokas should have the first letters from gayatri.
Ambujam Raman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Saiji:
The vrittam part can be easily fixed. Just change budhaH to buddhaH in PKR.
Also both budhaH and buddhaH have same meaning, learned or awakened. Hence
we can invoke an interpretation without dragging Buddha into the scene.
However that is patently not the motive of the interpolation.
rAmaH
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sai"
To: "Ambujam Raman"
Cc:
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2005 2:37 PM
Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] buddha word - in Rmn
> Ambujam Raman uvaacha:
> >
> > The verse quoted by PKR:
> >
> > yathaa hi choraH sa tathaa hi budhaH
> ^^^^^^
> > tathaagatam naastikamatra viddhi /
> > tasmaadhi yaH shakyatamaH prajaanaam
> > sa naastike naabimukho budhah syaat //
>
> As I said before, this goes against upajAti vRtta, which must have 2
> gurus at the end. So, budhah is definitely a wrong version. It must be
> either buddhaH or something else with 2 gurus. Could it be from some
> other rAmAyaNam? Umpteen people have written
> ramayanam later in sanskrit as well as many other languages.
>
> Not accepting this as part of ramayana because it is
> upajAti doesn't seem to be right reasoning. There are other
> vRttas than anuShTup in Ramayana (e.g., the last Sloka of Aditya
> hR^idayam - atha raviravadan... is definitely not anuShTup).
>
> The "Sakya" being used in the poem is not "Saakya" for us to coerce
> it to refer to Saakya muni, isn't it?
>
> Regarding arguing that jAbAli episode has been a later edition, it seems
> highly unlikely. Although I couldn't find this particular Sloka,
> I found two full sargas in anuShTup + upajAti devoted to this conversation
> between jAbAli and Rama in Tokunaga's Ramayana.
>
> Go to the following website:
> http://sanskrit.gde.to/mirrors/ramayana/valmiki.htm
> Click on ayodhya kanda. Go to sarga 100.
> Sarga 100 has jAbAli persuading Rama to come back using atheistic
> reasoning. Sarga 101 has Rama's reply. In Sarga 102, VasiShTha says to
> Rama, "jAbAli also knows the truth. He said those words only out of
> strong desire to see you back".
> jAbAlestu vachaH shrutvA rAmaH satyAtmanA.n varaH .
> uvAcha parayA yuktyA svabuddhyA chAvipannayA .. 1..\\
> bhavAnme priyakAmArtha.n vachanaM yadihoktavAn .
> akArya.n kAryasa~NkAshamapathyaM pathyasaMmitam .. 2..\\
> I couldn't find the above upajAti Sloka anywhere in there.
>
> This episode and its Slokas were quoted heavily and explained in telugu by
> by a respectable panDita (Samavedam Shanmukha Sarma) in
> his Ramayana pravachanam in telugu:
> http://surasa.net/music/samavedam/#ramayana
> Click on the "play" button next to part "10 of 20" and
> seek to the 48.30th minute.
>
> - Sai.
>
_______________________________________________
sanskrit mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.cs.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/sanskrit
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Better first dates. More second dates. Yahoo! Personals
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://mailman.cs.utah.edu/mailman/private/sanskrit/attachments/20050406/1d8c9ab5/attachment.htm
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
sanskrit mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.cs.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/sanskrit
End of sanskrit Digest, Vol 25, Issue 7
***************************************
