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. The third definition of Mithyaa. (Phillip Hill)
2. Sanskrit alphabet confusion (kleeblatt_999)
3. Sanskrit Wikisource (Yann Forget)
4. Re: Sanskrit alphabet confusion (Sai)
5. pANini 1.2.34 (Jay Vaidya)
6. other Rmn-s - adoptations (Desiraju Hanumanta Rao)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 10:07:56 -0500
From: "Phillip Hill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [Sanskrit] The third definition of Mithyaa.
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
The Third Definition of Mithyaa
The third
definition of Mithyaatva is THAT WHICH IS OPEN TO BE SET ASIDE ONLY BY
KNOWLEDGE AS SUCH (jJNatvena jJNAnanivartyatvam).This applied to the
phenomenal world, which the Adviata considers to be a product of
beginningless nescience.
The Nyaayaamrta finds this definition to be open to the flaws of
over-pervasion, underpervasion and so on, of the probans, in the inference
of Mithyaatva.The destruction of a jar in the past by natural causes is NOT
due to knowledge (jJNAnanivartya).The misapprehension of the white
conch-shell as yellow thro' jaundice eyes is NOT removed by knowledge, as
such, but by knowledge free from all visual disease.Out experience does NOT
bear out that the illusory silver is actually DESTROYED by the knowledge of
the shell, it substratum.It attests that there was a REAL IGNORANCE of the
shell, that we were under an error, which shows that both the ignorance and
the illusion were as real, as the substratum (the shell) itself.Hence, the
definition of jJNAnatvena jJNAnanivartyatvam is overpervasive as it includes
cases of desctruction of the shell and its misapprehension.
The reality of the svaruupa of
illusory cognition as such, notwithstanding the sublatability of the object
(vishhaya) is not, inadmissable.For, it is conceded in the Advaita school
that tho' pain and the sufferings of life are unreal, they are cognised by
the Saakshhi, which is real, as it shares in the nature of Brahman the
transcendentral reality and consciousness.
Even if the definition is modified so as to
include under the general term 'kmowledge' all forms or types PERVADED by
knolwedge as such and falling within the category of 'knowledge'
(jJNAnatva-vyApyadharma) there would still be overpervasion of the probans
in the case of earlier impressions (samskaaras) stored up in the mind
(obliterated from memory and now recalled).Further, it is admitted in the
Advaita school that in the state of jiivanmukti even after ajnaana, the root
cause of samsaara, is liquidated by knowledge of the truth (tattvajnaana)
the residual impressions of Avidyaa continue to exist, for the time being,
till the body falls off finally.These impressions (samskaaras) are said to
be destroyed by the samskaaras of the true knowledge and NOT be the true
knowledge itself.This gives rise to avyaapti (underpervasion) of the
probans.It cannot also be argued that these samskaaras get destroyed by the
destruction of the material cause of ajnaana itself, in as much as the
superimposition of ajnaana (the cause of world appearance) is conceived as
anaadi (without a beginning) and as such the ajnaana cannot have a material
cause(upaadaana).
To get over these difficulties, the Advaitasiddhi explains the
definition of Mithyaatva viz.jJNAna-nivartyatvam given by the ancients, in a
different way - as jJNanaprayukta-avasthiti-sAmAnyavirahapratiyogitvam.It
consists in being the counter-positive of a generic absence of existence
(avasthiti-sAmAnya) of the product of nescience, caused by true
knowledge.Such existence is of two kinds - existence in one's own form
(svaruupena) as an effect and another in its causal form.This distinction
helps it to side-step the difficulty of inconclusiveness of the probans
raised in respect of the destruction of the jar by natural causes.Tho the
jar as such, is destroyed by a blow, it subsists in its causal state till
the dawn of Monistic consciousness which liquidates the causal state root
and branch, along with avidyaa, the parent of all phenomenal appearances.
In his
discussion of the third definition of Mithyaatva as jJNAnatvena
jJNAnanivartyatvam, further modified by the author of the Advaitasiddhi as
jJNAnaprayukta-avasthitisAmAnyavirahapratiyogitvam, the author of the
Taranginii adverts to the position taken by Madhusudaana Sarasvatii,
earlier, that the nishhedha accepted by him is in terms of
svaruupenanishhedha and observes that in the light of this plain speaking
Advaitasiddhi, the negation of the tuchchha and the prAtibhAsika would be
indistinguishable from each other - so much so that it would be meaningless
to sigle out one of them as jJNAnaprayukta for jJNAnanivartyatvam would
naturally presuppose the existence of some svaruupa of the thing to be
negated.If such a svaruupa of the thing to be negated is conceded, its
negation can only result in nullity:
shuktirajatAdeshcha (aparoxapratItyanyathAnupapattyA
pratibhAsakAle) avAsthityaN^gIkAre, svarUpeNaiva nishhedha iti
tvadabhyugatapaxe, rUpyAderatyantAsatvasyApAditatvena, rUpyAdyabhAve.api
shashavishhANAdyabhAva iva jJNANprayukta iti dR^IshhTAntasya
sAdhyavikalatvameva paxe bAdhashcha
Dr. Narain has NOT attempted to reply to this
moot-point of criticism in the Taranginii against the third definition of
Mithyaatva.
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 02:19:52 +0200 (CEST)
From: kleeblatt_999 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [Sanskrit] Sanskrit alphabet confusion
To: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Hi,
I am trying to learn Sanskrit at home.
First of course I have to learn the alphabet.
On web I found two .pdf files, one gives the Sansrit alphabet the second the
ponounciation guide (http://sanskrit.gde.to/learning_tools/chart.pdf;
http://sanskrit.gde.to/learning_tools/pronounce.pdf).
On the pronounciation chart the last two rows of page 1 show two syllables that
do not appear in the alphabet chart: a.c and aa.c.
I am confused about this.
Can someone help me with some explanation?
Greetings,
Karin
---------------------------------
Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail - Jetzt mit 250MB kostenlosem Speicher
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://mailman.cs.utah.edu/mailman/private/sanskrit/attachments/20050410/5e911e2b/attachment-0001.htm
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 23:25:22 +0200
From: Yann Forget <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [Sanskrit] Sanskrit Wikisource
To: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Hi,
Do you know that there is a Sanskrit section in Wikisource now ?
See http://wikisource.org/wiki/मुखपृष्ठं:संस्कृत
http://wikisource.org/wiki/%E0%A4%AE%E0%A5%81%E0%A4%96%E0%A4%AA%E0%A5%83%E0%A4%B7%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%A0%E0%A4%82:
%E0%A4%B8%E0%A4%82%E0%A4%B8%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%95%E0%A5%83%E0%A4%A4
http://tinyurl.com/3pybf
Best wishes,
Yann
--
http://www.non-violence.org/ | Site collaboratif sur la non-violence
http://www.forget-me.net/ | Alternatives sur le Net
http://fr.wikipedia.org/ | Encyclopédie libre
http://www.forget-me.net/pro/ | Formations et services Linux
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 12:31:17 -0600
From: Sai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [Sanskrit] Sanskrit alphabet confusion
To: kleeblatt_999 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
a.c as in bat
aa.c as in corn
Those two syllables do not exist in the sanskrit language. Hence they
are not shown.
- Sai.
kleeblatt_999 uvaacha:
> Hi,
>
> I am trying to learn Sanskrit at home.
> First of course I have to learn the alphabet.
> On web I found two .pdf files, one gives the Sansrit alphabet the second the
> ponounciation guide (http://sanskrit.gde.to/learning_tools/chart.pdf;
> http://sanskrit.gde.to/learning_tools/pronounce.pdf).
> On the pronounciation chart the last two rows of page 1 show two syllables
> that do not appear in the alphabet chart: a.c and aa.c.
> I am confused about this.
> Can someone help me with some explanation?
>
> Greetings,
> Karin
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail - Jetzt mit 250MB kostenlosem Speicher
> _______________________________________________
> sanskrit mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mailman.cs.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/sanskrit
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 12:12:15 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jay Vaidya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [Sanskrit] pANini 1.2.34
To: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
avochat hilamahodayaH:
> pANini at 1.2.34
> ...
> Neither kAtyAyana or pataJNjali comment on the
> sUtra.Is any one aware on
> commentaries on this sUtra wherein the savitR^i -
> gAyatrI mantra - japa is
> described
kAtyAyana and pata.njali do not give vArtikas and
commentary in places where there is no doubt nor is
there need to state exceptions. The vR^itti quoted by
you is clear, and you seem to have understood it
correctly. The vR^itti of jayAditya, along with the
commentaries nyAsa and padama.njarI give the same
meaning.
Hence, it is clear that there should NOT be monotony
while performing "japa" of the gAyatrI mantra. Why
then are you looking for specific discussion of
monotony in the gAyatrI?
---
yatra sthAne saMshayo na vidyate, apavAdakaraNaM tu
neshhyate, pata.njali-kAtyAyanau vArtika-bhAshhyau na
chakratuH | bhavatA uddhR^itA vR^ittiH spashhTA,
bhavatA samyag eva abhiGYAtA iti dR^ishyate |
jayAdityasya vR^ittiH, padama.njarI-nyAsau cha tathA
eva tat-sUtrasya arthaM vadanti |
ataH gAyatrI-matrasya jape ekashrutir na hi kartavyA
iti spashhTam eva | kiM tat gAyatryAm eva ekashrutyA
vivaxitAM charchAM pashyatum ichchhati bhavAn?
dhana.njayaH
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Make Yahoo! your home page
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 04:48:51 -0700 (PDT)
From: Desiraju Hanumanta Rao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [Sanskrit] other Rmn-s - adoptations
To: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
All the other Rmn-s are not carbon copies of the original. We may better call
them as 'adoptations', 'Rmn retold' rather than makki-ki-makki tanslations. In
these adoptations there said to be three Sanskrit adoptations, too. And
Jaabaali episode may/may not be there in other Rmn-s, as those works are at the
free will of the poets concerned.
"There are three different, very old and celebrated versions in Sanskrit alone,
which Kamban mentions in the 'pAyiram' of his Ramayanam, as 'dhEva pAdayin ik
kadhai seydhavar mUvar aanavar'. 'There were three,' he says, meaning Valmiki,
Vasistha and Bodhayana, 'who wrote this epic in Sanskrit.' so says Hari
Krishnan recently at >>
http://www.chennaionline.com/festivalsnreligion/religion/2005/religion831.asp
[Note: Observe the wording 'his' - ie exclusively Kamban's Rmn]
There are over 300 traditional versions and I�ve read (in English translation)
more than 200, not counting the hundreds of oral narratives. - so says smt.
Paula Richman of Many Versions of Rmn.
Though we have no business with all of the other Rmn-s what happend to other
famous works? Why only two remained in the main stay 1] Tulasi Das', and that
of 2] Kamban? Because their rendering is heart touching they have become
paaraayaNa grantha-s. What happend to other Rmn-s like Ramayana of Thunchath
Ramanuja Ezhuthachan, 17th century, in Malayalam;
Torave Ramayana' of Narahari or 'Kumara Valmiki' 1500 A.D, or that of Narahari
- in Kannada;
Krittivasa's Rmn, 14th cent. in Bengal
Balaramadas' work in Oriya, 16th cent.
Sridhara's work in Maratha, 18th cent.
Premanad's work in Gujarati, 17thy cent.
or the work of Ranganatha, Bhaskara, lady Molla, or that of Vishvanatha
Satyabarayana - of recent times.
or, a few quoted by Gira Press in their forward - - are they surviving, or at
least fated to be seen now? Do we say they are true translations? What if they
contain, or do not contain jaabali episode or not, lakshmana rekha is there or
not, or, whether Ravana touched Seetha or not. We may perhaps go by the one
that is attributed to Valmiki, which for our good fortune is still available in
some form or the other.
>> It is not found in adhyaatma raamaayaNa. <<
aadhyaatma Rmn is but the 61 ch. of brahmaanDa puraaNa, and it is not be
labelled as a version of VR, nor brought into discussions when VR is discussed
- it is a puraaNa. However, a lot of its matter has taken inroads into Rmn in
general sense, like - lakshmana rekhaa, Ravana not touching Seetha etc.
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://mailman.cs.utah.edu/mailman/private/sanskrit/attachments/20050412/197c054d/attachment.htm
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
sanskrit mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.cs.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/sanskrit
End of sanskrit Digest, Vol 25, Issue 13
****************************************
