Bhakti and Vibhakti are two separate things

 

In Vedas, the language used is Sanskrit.. There is no doubt.

However many expressions and usages may not be in sync with the definitions of later experts like Panini and Pathanjali..and so on..

There was Prakrita before Sanskrit some say and others think that Prakrita and Samskrutam went hand in hand..

With utmost reverence, I have to state that in the study of a language including Sanskrit I would follow the great academic traditions alone.

Bhakti and Vibhakti are two separate things.

Even today we learn of ten verbal forms in Sanskrit.

लट् वर्तमाने लेट् वेदे* भूते लङ् लुङ् लिटस्तथा ।

विध्याशिषोस्तु लिङ्लोटौ लृङ्लृटौ लृट् च भविष्यति ।।

There was a Lakaram or verbal form Let लेट् which was used in Vedas alone and nowhere else ..

I would prefer not to mix bhakti with rules of grammar and lexicology. lat is the present tense. let is in vedas, lang lung and lit for past tense..ling, vidhi ling and asheerling for directions and teaching, lot for benediction, lrung and lrut for future tense.. लट्, लिट्, लुट्, लृट्, लेट्, लोट्, लङ्, लिङ् (विधिलिङ्, आशीर्लिङ्), लुङ्, लृङ् च ..

slokams, chatuslokams and subhasitams

I posted a story essentially to drive home the point that a few words of praise can get a lot of benefits in return.. In fact, as a serious student of Sanskrit language and literature, just like most other students and scholars, I have found that the authors and poets left little for us to learn about their identity, location and time in history..The scholars and researchers have not succeeded much in fixing the identity of Kalidasa.. and even his place of origin.. whether it was in India or whether he came from outside. And although he pays respects to vedas, brahmins, and gods identified with higher castes, some feel that the name, his tilt towards Shakti or Kali and even his name Dasa would indicate that he did not belong to the high caste.. Dandi of course was a brahmin, as per the lore.. But apart from some later eulogies conveniently penned to enhance the glory of some poet or writer at the cost of someone else, there is hardly any evidence to show that Kalidasa and Dandi were contemporaries.. and that Bhoja was contemporary with them.. Dandi was essentially a prose writer more than a poet..his magnum opus is Dashakumaracharitam.. a semi historic narrative of the lives of a prince and nine of his friends.. Kaavyaadarha is his other great work..

Some eulogies flock together Dandi, Bharavi, Kalidasa and Magha.. but scholars assign them to various stages of development and maturity in literary style.. Though simple, pleasant and romantic, the puritans often hold the view that Kalidasa has his own limitations in grammar, craft and vocabulary, and that he was the earliest one.. Dandi, of a more refined and puritanic style must have come later,, and then Bharavi and then alone Magha.. and still later the Sriharsha, . and so on.. as judged by the pundits in development and refinement of the language.

We just mention some free slokas.. called Chaatu slokas.. for occasions to drive home certain points in Shastras and lifestyle.. the ideas are appealing but can never say for sure that the source is authentic.. The fruit is sweet but we do not know from which tree it is plucked, but we tend to name the tree according to our limited data or even our convenience..

There is a sloka in circulation comparing the greatness of Dandi and Kalidasa.. that too umpired by Bhoja.. nice to read but without any authenticity..

Once the matter as to who was great as a poet between Dandi and Kalidasa was taken to the doors of Devi Kali.. king Bhoja was also a witness to the proceedings. The three were assembled before the doors of the Devi which was just getting opened in the morning..

Seeing Dandi, Kali is reported to have said,

kavir dandiH kavir dandiH kavir Dandirna SashayaH

meaning three times I say, Dandi is the greatest poet.

Kalidasa was very sad.. but looking at his sad face, Mother Kali said.

Twamevaaham Twamevaaham Twamevaahama na samshayaH

meaning I declare thrice without any room for doubt that you are myself

who is greater?

So many such stories are there, with so many local variations in description and content..

So each can say things in the way he has learnt it..

Like perhaps the ten blind men who visited an elephant and described its form and qualities according to their perception..

For a lover of Sanskrit, in India, what would count is not the money

Sadly I have realized that only if one makes a lot of publicity that he is propagating Sanskrit there will be people to sing his praise, and the partial or inadequate scholars of Sanskrit get a lot of fanfare,

while great scholars, even in Facebook etc, who have the vision and capacity but are like huge oceans which would not go in search of others to teach but would expect the seekers approaching them, never are valued ..

Kalidasa said..in Kumarasamhavam .

'न रत्नं अन्विष्यति मृग्यते हि तत्

na ratnam anvishyati mrugyate hi tat..

the valuable gems do not go canvassing and marketing themselves ,

but connoisseurs come in search...

Nothing like that ever happens in this matter ...

For a lover of Sanskrit, in India, what would count is not the money..

but the respect for the language

and the person having that knowledge

And no one ever cares for those..

I have seen this business pursued by hundreds and thousands..

watched it with a lot of despair..

I say this not to hurt anyone,,

but I write this out of my love for Sanskrit.

I have never stopped learning Sanskrit

 

A learner may be merely a learner. However,that does not confer on him or her any birthright to mutilate and murder the language-any language. I am really distressed about the present tendency of people to use social media in skewed ways  just to gain popularity. If a person is committing errors and claiming indulgence under the pretext that he or she is just learning and trying to improve the linguistic talents and at the same time is ready to accept open corrections and criticisms, it is nice. However, most of us here are having very little knowledge and possess huge doses of ego and self-righteousness. I can only say, if I am living in a house of glass, I should not try to throw stones at others.. Sadly,that golden rule is never followed. The post we discuss about, was first made in Sanskrit Leanring group but no one ever cared to read it.

I know I am a student of Sanskrit from 1963 onwards,and at least I know that I know very little of Sanskrit.

I trust in just expressing my frank views.-and I believe that I am earnest in living up to such views..

---------------------------------------------------------

To know how capable I am, the more significant thing I should know is how incapable I am.

_______________________________-

I studied Sanskrit as second language in my Degree Course, and was blessed by my professors of Sanskrit, when I was the only one who got marks qualifying for distinction in the entire university under which I studied,.. That was year ago.. forty two years ago.. and my teacher, who was a great orator, scholar and exponent of Vedanta, just told me.. " You are stopping your Sanskrit and pursuing science.. will you continue to learn. How sad ?"

Of course I pursued a post graduate degree in Science, chose a career in taxation and law; but I was touched by the sadness of my guru. Therefore I have never stopped learning Sanskrit. My learning is just for my love for the language.

evolution of Sanskrit

 

The rules of grammar and usage in Sanskrit have varied over ages.The language in Vedas, Upanishads, Epics, Puranas, Technical Texts, Kavyams, and modern usage have all variations. The style of Kalidasa, Bharavi, Valmiki, and Vyasa, for example differ substantially. I do not want to argue on this issue. If you are saying that Sankrit was straitjacketed and immutable in language and grammar thorughout its existence and did not undergo any change, and you are a student of Sanskrit in anyway, I strongly disagree with you. Sanskrit is not just what a Vadhyar or a head of a Mutt says. Then again, social media is not the the right forum where we can dicuss and debate threadbare the evolution of the language its academic thoroughness. It is a fact that the variations in that language are not as pronounced and visible as in other spoken languages over time and region. Then Sanskrit has also been dynamic in its own way. All earnest learners know that. This statement requires no fortification. The Sanskrit news read by Baladevananda Sagara and company is not exactly what we see in agnimeele purohitam or asthyutharasyaam disi. In addition, the language used by a Malayalee or a Tamilian or one from Hindi belt vary not only in pronunciation, but in narrative details too. Moreover, they have coined many technical terms in Sanskrit Language too even in the twenty-first century.

On some new and unique words found in the local versions of a language

 

On some new and unique words showing their faces in the local versions of a language put to use by varied ethnic or social groups..

-------------------------------------------------

In a language used for daily transactions by varied sets of people who handle other languages too in their day-to-day lives, such local modifications are sure to creep in.

Surprisingly, we see that even in a very classical language like Sanskrit. We can trace some newly coined words and usages according to the vernacular script or tongue of the region. The presentation in Sanskrit by a scholar in Kerala may have distinctive features if we attempt to compare notes with the presentations in the same language originating from Kashmir, Nepal, Uttarpradesh or even Tamilnadu.

In addition, we can ciit as examples some words in English coined in India that have become relevant universally too. Pundit, Cheetah, and hundreds of such words are examples.

Moreover, the Information Technology of modern epoch, has succeeded in introducing many new and cryptic words to English and, yes, to almost all other languages too.

𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐭 𝐝𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐚𝐧 𝐞𝐥𝐞𝐩𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐭

 

को खादते भूमिगतान् मनुष्यान्

कं हन्ति सिंहः प्रकटप्रभावः।

किं करोति पूर्णगतश्च गर्भः

पिपीलिका दन्तिवरं प्रसूते॥

𝐤𝐨 𝐤𝐡𝐚̄𝐝𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐛𝐡𝐮̄𝐦𝐢𝐠𝐚𝐭𝐚̄𝐧 𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐮𝐬̣𝐲𝐚̄𝐧

𝐤𝐚𝐦̇ 𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐢 𝐬𝐢𝐦̇𝐡𝐚𝐡̣ 𝐩𝐫𝐚𝐤𝐚𝐭̣𝐚𝐩𝐫𝐚𝐛𝐡𝐚̄𝐯𝐚𝐡̣|

𝐤𝐢𝐦̇ 𝐤𝐚𝐫𝐨𝐭𝐢 𝐩𝐮̄𝐫𝐧̣𝐚𝐠𝐚𝐭𝐚𝐬́𝐜𝐚 𝐠𝐚𝐫𝐛𝐡𝐚𝐡̣

𝐩𝐢𝐩𝐢̄𝐥𝐢𝐤𝐚̄ 𝐝𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐦̇ 𝐩𝐫𝐚𝐬𝐮̄𝐭𝐞||

𝐇𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐡𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐝 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬.. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐭𝐡 𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐥𝐨𝐤𝐚𝐦 𝐰𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐠𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐚 𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠.. 𝐚𝐧 𝐚𝐧𝐭 𝐝𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐝 𝐚 𝐛𝐢𝐠 𝐞𝐥𝐞𝐩𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐭.

𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐚 𝐬𝐚𝐦𝐚𝐬𝐲𝐚, 𝐚 𝐬𝐨𝐫𝐭 𝐨𝐟 𝐪𝐮𝐢𝐳 𝐢𝐧 𝐬𝐚𝐧𝐬𝐤𝐫𝐢𝐭. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐥𝐚𝐬𝐭 𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐞, 𝐚𝐩𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐥𝐲 𝐚𝐛𝐬𝐮𝐫𝐝 𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐥𝐭 𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐜𝐡𝐨𝐥𝐚𝐫𝐬 𝐰𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐞𝐱𝐩𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐦𝐚𝐤𝐞 𝐚 𝐦𝐞𝐚𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐟𝐮𝐥 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐳𝐚 𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐨𝐟 𝐢𝐭. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐮𝐥𝐭 𝐰𝐚𝐬

𝐤𝐨 𝐤𝐡𝐚̄𝐝𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐛𝐡𝐮̄𝐦𝐢𝐠𝐚𝐭𝐚̄𝐧 𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐮𝐬̣𝐲𝐚̄𝐧.. 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐛𝐢𝐭𝐞𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐦𝐞𝐧 𝐰𝐡𝐨 𝐰𝐚𝐥𝐤 𝐨𝐧 𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐡..? 𝐏𝐢𝐩𝐞𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐤𝐚𝐚 𝐨𝐫 𝐚𝐧𝐭

𝐤𝐚𝐦̇ 𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐢 𝐬𝐢𝐦̇𝐡𝐚𝐡̣ 𝐩𝐫𝐚𝐤𝐚𝐭̣𝐚𝐩𝐫𝐚𝐛𝐡𝐚̄𝐯𝐚𝐡̣| 𝐰𝐡𝐨𝐦 𝐝𝐨𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐧 𝐞𝐧𝐫𝐚𝐠𝐞𝐝 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐨𝐧𝐠 𝐥𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐤𝐢𝐥𝐥 ..? . 𝐝𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐦... 𝐚𝐧 𝐞𝐥𝐞𝐩𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐭

𝐤𝐢𝐦̇ 𝐤𝐚𝐫𝐨𝐭𝐢 𝐩𝐮̄𝐫𝐧̣𝐚𝐠𝐚𝐭𝐚𝐬́𝐜𝐚 𝐠𝐚𝐫𝐛𝐡𝐚𝐡̣.. 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐡𝐚𝐩𝐩𝐞𝐧𝐬 𝐭𝐨 𝐚 𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐠𝐧𝐚𝐜𝐲 𝐰𝐡𝐢𝐜𝐡 𝐡𝐚𝐬 𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐠𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐢𝐭𝐬 𝐟𝐮𝐥𝐥 𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐬𝐞.?. 𝐩𝐫𝐚𝐬𝐨𝐨𝐭𝐞... 𝐢𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐝𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐝 𝐨𝐫 𝐝𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬

𝐇𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞

𝐩𝐢𝐩𝐢̄𝐥𝐢𝐤𝐚̄ 𝐝𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐦̇ 𝐩𝐫𝐚𝐬𝐮̄𝐭𝐞|| പിപീലികാ ദന്തിവരം പ്രസൂതെ 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐛𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐝 𝐚𝐧𝐬𝐰𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐫𝐞𝐞 𝐪𝐮𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐬,, 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐞𝐥𝐞𝐩𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐭 𝐝𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬..

𝐢𝐧 𝐈𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐚𝐧 𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐮𝐚𝐠𝐞𝐬, 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐮𝐛𝐣𝐞𝐜𝐭, 𝐨𝐛𝐣𝐞𝐜𝐭 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐛 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐚𝐫𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐞𝐝 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐞𝐫..

𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐬𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐨 𝐄𝐧𝐠𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐡 𝐢𝐭 𝐰𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐦𝐞𝐚𝐧...

𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐭 𝐝𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐚𝐧 𝐞𝐥𝐞𝐩𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐭.

Who is the Shankara, Vyasa or Kalidasa.?

 

Who is the Shankara, Vyasa or Kalidasa.?

We hear and revere these celebrated names.

They mean a lot to our culture.

To our secular culture, to our scholastic culture and to our religious culture too.

The output of literature-- Vedas, Itihasams, Puranas, some smritis, Brahmasutras.- all are traditionally believed to be the creations of Vyasa..

Some believe that this Vyasa was the incarnation of Lord Narayana Himself-the great grandson of Vasishta, the grandson of Sage Shakti, the Son of Parashara and the happy father of Shukabrahmam.

However, many scholars and doyens in the field of study of language and literature reasonably believe that one single person could not have ever produced so much of literature.

Maybe the name represented a position, sort of a chair in an academy or University

Maybe he was just an editor or compiler.

We really do not have much to get by way of evidence from the literary products themselves to infer the identity of Vyasa.

But we know that name is great and inspiring..

We revere the name of Krishna Dvaipayana the Vyasa.

We honour him as one of the ultimate gurus and celebrate Vyasa Purnima.

It is welcome

His works are his identity.

One or many Vyasas are sublime.

This logic applies to Shankara too

The primary position in our Guru Parampara belongs to this Personage.

We trust this Shankara is one who was born in Kaladi to Shivaguru and Aryaambha, and who undertook Sannyasam at the age of seven to escape the samsara nakram, ran away from home, learned did penance, and thought and thought and created the advaita philosophy.

We also believe that he protected the Shanmathams.

We also believe that he learned everything under the sun and became sarvajna

We believe that he did all this before the age of thirty-two years when he ascended heaven.

We believe that He established Madams and directed his prime disciples to preside over the orders as a Parampara to continue the Aamnaaya. We have many such Paramparas guiding us even today.. And the Acharyas there bless us now too.

Moreover, there are thousands of stotras attributable to the same Shankara.

But there is hardly any evidence which would conform to the present standards to prove that the person we call Shankara did all these things.

Again, we have to wonder whether Shankara was a mixture or facts and myths, a position, or an overlap of many historical and mythical personages.

But nothing worthwhile is gained by debating and pulling at each other’s tuft about the historicity of Shankara.

Shankara is great-Shankara is sublime-Shankara is our guide.

That is good enough.

Literary style and history are for researchers and students who struggle for academic degrees and doctorates. Moreover, all that such debates can do is to provide salary for some professors.

Or fuel for futile debate and fight for inter se importance among mutts.

In what way we are concerned...?

This applies to Kalidasa too.

We are completely in the dark about his identity.

The styles of KumaraSambhavam, Raghuvamsham, Shakuntalam, Malavikaagnimitram, Vikramorvasheeyam, and Meghadootham more or less tally and we have ascribed the authorship of all these to one name and that name is Kalidasa.

When it comes to Shyamala Dandaka or Ritusamharam, we are not sure about it.

Then the name Kalidasa, whoever he was, is an icon. Is a pride for any Indian, any lover of Indian Culture, and any lover of Sanskrit.

Why do not we accept Kalidasa that way rather that fighting over style and caste?

Scholars are famous for to be intolerant. No one can accept what another one says.

Some person or group will oppose any nice creation, any cogent view by some squeak or noise by someone else, pointing out some irrelevant point as if the whole world revolved entirely around that particular interjection.

Long live sceptics and critics.

𝗦𝗮𝗻𝘀𝗸𝗿𝗶𝘁 𝗶𝘀 𝗺𝗮𝗻𝘆 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗴𝘀 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗺𝗮𝗻𝘆.. 𝗧𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗶𝘀 𝗦𝗮𝗻𝘀𝗸𝗿𝗶𝘁 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗺𝗲..

𝗧𝗮𝗺𝗶𝗹, 𝗠𝗮𝗹𝗮𝘆𝗮𝗹𝗮𝗺, 𝗘𝗻𝗴𝗹𝗶𝘀𝗵... 𝗮𝗹𝗹 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘀𝗲 𝗹𝗮𝗻𝗴𝘂𝗮𝗴𝗲𝘀 𝗲𝗻𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗲 𝗺𝗲 𝘁𝗼 𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗽𝗿𝗲𝘁 𝗱𝗮𝘁𝗮 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗵𝗲𝗹𝗽 𝗺𝗲 𝘁𝗼𝗼 𝗶𝗻 𝗽𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘄𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗜 𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿𝘀𝘁𝗼𝗼𝗱 𝗶𝗻 𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗱𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗹𝗲𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿𝘀..

𝗕𝘂𝘁 𝘀𝗼𝗺𝗲𝘄𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗰𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝗺𝘆 𝗼𝘄𝗻 𝘀𝗲𝗹𝗳, 𝗜 𝗱𝗼 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗸𝗻𝗼𝘄 𝘄𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘁𝗼 𝗰𝗮𝗹𝗹 𝗶𝘁, 𝘄𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲 𝗼𝗻𝗲 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗺𝘂𝗻𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗲𝘀 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗠𝗮𝗸𝗲𝗿, 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗺𝗲 𝗶𝘁 𝗶𝘀 𝗦𝗮𝗻𝘀𝗸𝗿𝗶𝘁 𝗼𝗻𝗹𝘆.. 𝗢𝗻𝗹𝘆 𝗦𝗮𝗻𝘀𝗸𝗿𝗶𝘁..

𝗠𝗮𝘆𝗯𝗲 𝗶𝘁 𝗶𝘀 𝗷𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝗮 𝗵𝗮𝗯𝗶𝘁 𝗯𝘆 𝗯𝗶𝗿𝘁𝗵.. 𝗯𝘆 𝗯𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘂𝗽.. 𝗯𝘂𝘁 𝗶𝘁 𝗺𝗲𝗮𝗻𝘀 𝗮 𝗹𝗼𝘁 𝘁𝗼 𝗺𝗲..

𝗦𝗼𝗺𝗲𝗵𝗼𝘄 𝗜 𝗰𝗮𝗻𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘃𝗶𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗺𝘆𝘀𝗲𝗹𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗚𝗼𝗱 𝘄𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝗮𝗻𝘀𝘄𝗲𝗿 𝗮𝗻𝘆 𝗾𝘂𝗲𝗿𝘆 𝗶𝗳 𝗶𝘁 𝗶𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗳𝗿𝗮𝗺𝗲𝗱 𝗶𝗻 𝗦𝗮𝗻𝘀𝗸𝗿𝗶𝘁..

𝗠𝗮𝘆𝗯𝗲 𝗶𝘁 𝗶𝘀 𝗮𝗻 𝘂𝗻𝗳𝗼𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗱 𝗳𝗲𝗲𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗯𝘂𝘁 𝗜 𝗰𝗮𝗻 𝘃𝗶𝘀𝘂𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘇𝗲 𝗦𝗵𝗶𝘃𝗮, 𝗣𝗮𝗿𝘃𝗮𝘁𝗵𝘆, 𝗚𝗮𝗻𝗲𝘀𝗵𝗮, 𝗦𝗸𝗮𝗻𝗱𝗮, 𝗟𝗮𝗸𝘀𝗺𝘆 𝗡𝗮𝗿𝗮𝘆𝗮𝗻𝗮, 𝗚𝗮𝗿𝘂𝗱𝗮, 𝗛𝗮𝗻𝘂𝗺𝗮𝗻 𝗮𝗹𝗹 𝘀𝗽𝗲𝗮𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗶𝗻 𝗦𝗮𝗻𝘀𝗸𝗿𝗶𝘁 𝗼𝗻𝗹𝘆..

𝗦𝗮𝗻𝘀𝗸𝗿𝗶𝘁 𝗶𝘀 𝗺𝗮𝗻𝘆 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗴𝘀 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗺𝗮𝗻𝘆..

𝗧𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗶𝘀 𝗦𝗮𝗻𝘀𝗸𝗿𝗶𝘁 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗺𝗲..

Banabatta

About the greatest Prose Fiction in Sanskrit literature and its author Banabatta,

The sayings in the literary circles, in praise of them

Kaadaambaree rasajnaannam aahaaropi na rochate..

कादम्बरी रसज्ञानां आहारोपि न रोचते

for the connoisseurs who have read Kadambari, or alteranately for those who have partaken the heady beverage named Kaadambari, they will have not relish for any other food..

The literary gem carries readers to such heady heights.

And

Baanocchistam jagat sarvam.. बाणोच्छिष्टं जगत् सर्वं everything in the universe is tasted and left behing by Bana..the poet

Bana was endowed with an encycopaedic intellect, which covered all the realms of knowledge..

The style and aesthetics of English and Oriental Languages are at great variance

 

My translation from Sanskrit to English may not be word to word. I know the limitations of other modern languages Vis a Vis Sanskrit. If we come across too sacred mantrams like some parts of Vedas, and some secrets of Tantric worship etc., we should never venture to translate such parts. Some preceptors even give strict instructions that when a very learned guru prepares written text or notes to a devoted sishya during training such notes the student must destroy them by immersing them in water or by burning them after use.

Anyway, I take care to ensure that the materials I usually translate would never come under such secret category.  The style and aesthetics of English and Oriental Languages are at great variance, and if a grammatically and etymologically puritan translation from Sanskrit to English is attempted, the results could be very bad or even disastrous. It is relatively easier to take each and every word piece by piece, and translate it according to tense, gender, number, case, etc.. anta-linga-vibhakti-vachanam. However, the results are more likely to be funny. Moreover, no sane reader could really understand and derive any benefit from such translation.

If a devotee wants to have a plain meaning of what he recites in Sanskrit, my commentary may be of some use, at least in a limited way. I do not claim perfection, and if I attempt to explain some of the terms with grammatical nuances and also the stories and fables behind them, even explaining four or five lines can consume many days. It is beyond my level of endurance or intellectual capacity. I confess I am not that much erudite.

why should we act stingy in giving good words?

a story.. maybe not authentic.. but which has done the rounds among the scholastic circle many times--. a story underlining the effectiveness of just giving out a few nice words..

Kalidasa and Bhartruhari happened to reside incognito in one place on one day, and one fine morning they were sitting together under a peepul tree panning to have a fine chew of pan..

Suddenly it was found that choornam or chunnaambu (powdered lime) was missing. So their chewing session was stumped.

They saw a young girl walking along carrying a pan box, as Bharthurhari, the king, forgetting that he was moving incognito, told the lady.. choornamaanay me sheeghram..चूर्णमानाय मे शीघ्रं 'you get me some choornam immediately' and this call evoked little response..

but Kalidasa quickly added.. poorna chandra nibhaananey..पूर्णचन्द्र निभानने " oh Girl with a face resembling full moon"

and the girl was very happy to give them what they wanted..

So, a little or praise, in place, or out of context, always help..Why should one be stingy in words?

प्रियवाक्यप्रदानेन

सर्वे तुष्यन्ति जन्तवः ।

तस्मात् तदेव वक्तव्यं

वचने किं दरिद्रता॥

Priyavaakyapradaanene sarve thushyanti jantavaH

tasmaat tadeva vakthavyam vachane kim daridrataa

Meaning

all beings would be happy to receive nice words.. so we should always speak such words alone.. why should we act stingy in giving good words?

Bhoja and Kalidass

I posted an anecdote connecting Kalidasa and Bharthruhari here, and someone asked whether Bhoja was the person who was with Kalidasa..

My answer..

"the Bhoja Kalidas combine we see in Sanskrit literature is just fictional and not authenticated, as good or as bad as any other story.

..I have tried read almost everything available on the books and materials available on the date of Kalidasa and no two Scholars are in agreement about the identity or the time of Kalidasa..

Many say it was third century BC and others say it was fourth or fifth century AD.. or anywhere in between..

There is a celebrated stanza which says that Kalidasa was one of the nine gems in the court of Vikrama,, the other gems being Dhanvantari, Kshapanaka, Amarasimha, Shanku, VetalaBhatta, Ghatakarpara, and Varaahamihira and Vararuchi..

And who was this King Vikrama?

It is again a matter of guesswork..

Some say Vikrama is the famous Vikramaaditya of Vikramaarka Charita.. Vetalapanchavimshati etc..

In that story Vikramaaditya has two brothers Bhatti and Bharthruhari.. and that story is too long and beside the point here to discuss..

Anyway, the anecdote connecting Kalidasa and Bhartru Hari(the prince or yuvaraja) has been recounted consciously and deliberately..

and it is possible that Barthruhari was in the company of Kalidasa, and it need not be Bhoja who was in the company of Kalidasa..

I think I have answered the parenthesis

Aashee, Namaskriya and Vastunirdesham.

 मेघैर्मेदुरमंबरं वनभुवः श्यामाः तमालद्रुमैःनक्तं भीरुरयं तदेव तमिमं राधे गृहं प्रापयइत्थं नन्दनिदेषतः स्थलितयोः प्रत्यग्रकुञ्जद्रुमंराधामाधवयोः जयन्ति यमुनाकूले रहः केळयः

meghair medhuram ambaram vanabhuvaH shyaamaaH tamaaldrumaiH naktam bheerurayam tadeva tamimam raadhe griham praapaya ittham nand nidesathasthalithayoh pratyagrakunjadrumam raadhamaadhavayoh jayanti yamunaakooley rahah kelayaH..
(follow this link for meaning   https://kanfusion.blogspot.com/2014/05/beauty-of-black.html )

 In fact, given above is  is the first Stanza of Gita Govindam of Jayadeva...

In 

Sanskrit Kavyas, there are three methods of starting a work.. Aashee, Namaskriya and Vastunirdesham...

Shakuntalam starts with aashis or ben ediction.. May lord Ashtamurthi the Shiva bless us..

Raghuvamsam starts with the pranam or Namaskriya to Shiva and Parvathi.. we offer pranams to the parents of the world Paravathi and parameswara..

Vastunirdesham is where the subject is stated in the first stanza.. In kumarasambhavam we start with.. there stands the King of Mountain, in the Northern direction, forming himself like a measuring scale for the earth..

Here in Gitagovindam  the narration of the Secret rendezvous between Radha and Madhava is the startinng stanza as Vastunirdesham.

May be I am being too partial and personally loyal to Sanskrit..

I find that views are expressed by many that Sanskrit was never a language used for day to day transactions in a worldly way at any point of time but is just an elegant language used for Vedas and Kavyas... I am somehow not able to agree.. May be I am being too partial and personally loyal to Sanskrit.. But I am just sharing my views on the issue as I posted elsewhere.

" There are theories that some sort of language or sanskrit itself has been a day to day language too. And the elementary influence of sanskrit are prominently perceptible in most of the indian languages to various degrees. Malayalam and telugu abound in sanskrit words and usages. True, the language developed classy feature and so its poorer cousins became more of egalitrian use. And like any language sanskrit too had its own transitions. The rigvedic language was not the same as kalidasas or even of the itihasas. The works penned in various geographical areas too vary in content. Texts found in trivandrum kumbhakonam pune kashmir lahore dacca calcutta etc exhibit the local variations. Jaydevas style in gitagovindam and that of bhasaa in pratimanatakam or swapnavasvadattam are so different. The problem with sanskrit is that it is like gold or platinum here at an intellectual plane..difficult to be afforded by all."

" If the conversations in Sanskrit Drama are read, the male important characters talk Sanskrit and the lady characters, the menials like kanchuki, talk in a Prakrit language, which is Sanskrit for all particular purposes with many simplifications in grammar and pronunciation.. Of course, some great characters like Arundathi, though female talk chase Sanskrit it Uttararamacharitam of Bhavabhooti..

The practice in Kerala among Nambudiris was that once a boy was initiated into Brahmacharyam.. that is right from the day he starts to wear Krishnajinam.. the deer skin, he should converse in Sanskrit only.. In fact the hilarious situation arising because of that in the case of Tholan.. who was also a great poet is a household story in Kerala.. Panasi Dashaayam Paasi... for Chakki is entering the granary (to steal paddy) ( Chakka is panasam ... so chakki is Panasi, granary is Pathaayam.. Pathu is Dasam.. so Pathaayam is Dashaayam... Kayaru means rope and climb too.. and Kayari is therefor inerpreted as Paashi..)

Sanskrit was a conversational language till a few decades ago that way.. Even now the Karikas in poojas and many sentences for upachaaram are just conversation in Sanskrit.. Sankalpams we perform too are conversations.. All religious activities we see all over in India using Sanskrit are not just incantations on Mantra.. Many parts are just conversational prose... withe perhaps some mix of poetry in some cases..

I have read about Greek and Latin too, but the social impact on use of those languages is not known to me.. But I have studied Indian Society in the light of Sanskrit, and I cannot entirely agree, in the light of the above decisions that Sanskrit of not in use as a conversational language..

I can myself converse fairly well in Sanskrit... and for a brahmin.. I still do not really know whether the local language like Tamil or Malayalam is the Mother tongue or Sanskrit is a mother tongue too.. From the moment a child is born when the Jatakarmam is performed, to the last moment of his life when Karnamantram is chanted in his ear, Sanskrit is used.. How can such a language called as a non conversational language.. I just cannot agree..

Of course Greek and Latin are either cousins or grand nieces of Sanskrit.. but their behaviour need not affect our evaluation of Sanskrit.."

മാത പനസി ദശായം പാശി ( panasi dashaayam paashi).. मात! पनसि दशायं पाशि

Most of the scholars are unanimous in their view that Sanskrit was always an official and formal language.

.Every householder must have used different languages or dialects for garden use...

If we see the dramas in Sanskrit like Shakuntalam, the dialogues rendered by the Vidhushaka, menials and Lady characters are in Prakrita..( with Sanskrit Transliteration for the bookish persons)..

The adoption of Sanskrit as a completely spoken language in Mathur is to be praised as a pioneering move to further the greatness of that classic language.. but I doubt very much whether they would have used the grammatical Sanskrit at any time to make a statement that one is going to the loo..

I am in love with Sanskrit all my life..The full sixty years or more.

And I would love to be born as a person who can be in unconditional romance with Sanskrit even in every life to come.

This gap between the scholarly and layman's version may apply to other classical languages also. Be it Greek or Latin.

The funny situation that can arise over misplaced use of Sanskrit languageis described by Kottarathil Shankunni in Aithihyamala, (Aitihyamala is a comprehensive compendium of legends and folklore in Kerala..it is a classic on its own rights) while recording the biography of the poet Tholan.. or Tholakavi

Tholan is indeed a great poet in Sanskrit and Manipravalam in Kerala.

He is the Pioneer in penning many chaste Sanskrit dramas and prose works too..And his works have been used in many Aatta kathas on dance dramas and in paadakam, chakyaar koothu etc. He is held in high esteem in Kerala for his literary accomplishment . He must have flourished after Kalidasa and many major classical poets but earlier to Thujathu ezhuthassan and Melpathur Bhattathiri.

Tholan was a Nambuthiri youth... and a great scholar of all times for that matter.....

It was the aacharam among Nambuthiris that after Samavarthanam, the men should only use Sanskrit for conversation.

For tholan, Samavarthanam was over, but he had not picked up much sanskrit...

There was a maid-servant Chakki(ചക്കി) in their illam, and the boy Tholan happened to see that this woman was climbing atop the great granary (പത്തായം) and stealing paddy .

He could not use Malayalm to report this to his mother because he was prohibited from using any other language other than Sanskrit.

So he said, മാത പനസി ദശായം പാശി ( panasi dashaayam paashi).. मात! पनसि दशायं पाशि .His logic is... Matha.... mother ചക്ക chakka or jackfruit is പനസം in malayalam.. so he called chakki as Pansai.. Granarya Pathaayam ,,,പത്തു ആയം ദശ is the sanskrit for ten.. so pathayam is dashaayam.. കയറ് kayaru is paasham in sankrit... Kayari..കയറി kayar is paasham in sanskrit, and kayari means climbed in malayalam so paashi is climed in Sanskrit so Paash for kayarii. So to inform his mother that Chakki had climbed atop the Pathayam.. he had to use the abracadabra..." Panasi Dasaayam Paashi".

Sure it is not necessary to extend our addiction to puritan Sanskrit to this extent.

Kavyam.. mantra.. sootram

Kavyam.. mantra.. sootram
A good friend asked
could you enlighten a layman like me on the difference between a mantra, shloka, kavya and sutra
I gave an answer as a layman.. My answer is repeated here ..
"The field of definition of the above items is too vast.. and with very many varied rules and conflicts too..
That is definitely beyond the scope of this post.. It is too vast.. But the general ideas from a layman's angle would be as given below..
A Slokam will be a collection of meaningful words, and the collection would have a combined meaning, and would be bound by metrical rules .. Vrittam and Chandas...
There are many types of Vrittams and Chandas..
There will be structural symmetry and the recitation would be pleasant to the ears.. with some regular repetition of pattern.. A simple sentence in Sanskrit need not have such qualities..(of course some write attractive prose resonating like poetry)
The first Slokam of poetic value is famed to be the metrical creation of Valmiki..
Maanishaada pratishataam tvam agamaH sashvatee samaam, etc..मा निषाद प्रतिष्ठांत्वं अगम शाश्वती समा .. This composition led to the creation of the epic and aadikaayam, Ramayana
Kavyam. is defined by too many masters ..
Any poetic work in Sanskrit, written in Oranamental and catchy language can be a Kavyam.. though purists assign so many conditions for a work to be called a Kavyam..
Primarily we have Kavyam in Verse.. Raghuvamsam etc..
But we have Kavyam in Prose too like Kadambari of BaanaBhatta.
.We have historical Kavyams like Rajatharangini of Kalhana.. Lyrical Kavyam like Geetagovindam of Jayadeva and so on Natakam or drama too comes under the umbrella of Kavyam in Sanskrit( Kaavyeshu Naatakam Ramyam..काव्येषु नाटकं रम्यं)
Mantram is usually an invocation to a deity,, with praise, prayer, request, command etc..
Sometimes it can be an inspirational call too..
Mananaat Thraayate iti MantraH.. something which would protect us if we just think over the invocation repeatedly.. and thinking with making oral delivery is chanting..
Mantram can be just a sentence with meaning, a string of letters with meaning or which may contain just letters called beejaaksharam etc.. Spell, litany .. all can come under mantram..
According to the standard rules of mantras, we will have a devata or deity, a chandas, and a rishi for each mantram.. but there can be mantrms without these..
Mantrams can be slokams or mere sentence, with meaning or without articulate meanings too..
Many secret mantrams have no intelligible meanings at all
..
And Sootram.. is a String
We have the famous Sootrams of Panini.. on Grammar.. Of Patanjali on Yoga, There are many Sulabha sootrams.. Then Badarayanas Brahmasootram
The sootrams are just strings of meaningful words or strings of letters or character packed into complex words again combined to terse sentences..
Somethng like a zipped record.. Every letter or syllable which can be struck off from a word or group of words and still if it could convey the core import or subject matter, and the truncated word or group of words would be used in the Sootram..
It is rather an educational tool for memorization in toto.. and when reproduced, with some analysis could reconstruct the whole and vast ideas conveyed so briefly..
Sootras as explained by the authors themselves or other scholars, through Vaarthikaas, Bhashyams and even Teekas to the Bhashyams..
I have answered the question as a layman..
To delve deep into the definitions and the controversies germane in such discussions, is beyond me.."
regards
k v ananthanarayanan

sanskrit

Sanskrit is so sweet and great that

every syllable

every letter

every word

is defined with glorious precision in great texts 

and

we are blessed with many standard texts.

Our work is just to locate the definitions and references.

Even that is a tall order

The path of Sanskrit is decorated by legends and titans.

We can only watch and gasp.standing on some remote corner

magha and bharavi

Reminded of Maagha and Bharavi...

the great master poets of Sanskrit..

authors of Shishupalavadham and Kirataarjuneeyam respectively.

These two works are included in the list of the five greatest works of Sanskrit literatue, (Panchamahaakavyamm) .

The other works are Kumarasambhavam and Raghuvamsam of Kalidasa and Naishhadeeyacharitam of Sreeharsha..

In a stanza comparing the greatness of the two poets,

तावद्भा भार्वेरभाति यावद् माघस्य नोदयः उदिते तु पुनर्माघे भारवेर्भा रवेरिव

taavad bhaa bhaaraverbhaati yaavanmaaghasya nodayaH,

udite tu punarmaaghe bhaaraver bhaa raveriva

The glory of Bharavi shines only till Magha the poet became famous..

Once Magha rose in the firmament of poesy, the shine of Bharavi also became powerless like that of the sun

Maagha has another meaning, the month Magha.. corresponding almost the period Markazhi...Dhanu, the season of snow and dew..

Bhaaravi.. would also mean Bhha Ravi.. or the shine of the Sun

So when Maagha meaning the poet as also the month of Markazhi came, then Bharavi the poet or the very strong Shine of the sun became totally ineffective..

Of course, Scholars and aficionados may not agree entirely that Poet Maagha was indeed superior to Bharavi.

. But the fact remains that when Margazhi comes the sun loses its vigour..

Radha teasing Hari...

कोऽयं द्वारि हरिः प्रयाह्युपवनं शाखामृगस्यात्र किं

कृष्णोहं दयिते बिभेमि सुतरां कृष्णादहं वानरात्।

राधेऽहं मधुसूधनो व्रज लतां तामेव पुष्पान्वितां

इत्थं निर्वचनीकृतो दयितया ह्रीणो हरिः पातु वः॥

ko'yaṁ dvāri hariḥ prayāhyupavanaṁ śākhāmṛgasyātra kiṁ

kṛṣṇohaṁ dayite bibhemi sutarāṁ kṛṣṇādahaṁ vānarāt|

rādhe'haṁ madhusūdhano vraja latāṁ tāmeva puṣpānvitāṁ

itthaṁ nirvacanīkṛto dayitayā hrīṇo hariḥ pātu vaḥ||

കോഽയം ദ്വാരി ഹരിഃ പ്രയാഹ്യുപവനം ശാഖാമൃഗസ്യാത്ര കിം

കൃഷ്ണോഹം ദയിതേ ബിഭേമി സുതരാം കൃഷ്ണാദഹം വാനരാത്।

രാധേഽഹം മധുസൂദനോ വ്രജ ലതാം താമേവ പുഷ്പാന്വിതാം

ഇത്ഥം നിര്‍വചനീകൃതോ ദയിതയാ ഹ്രീണോ ഹരിഃ പാതു വഃ॥

This slokam gives funny details of a conversation between Krishna and his love Radha

Krishna is knocking at the door of Radhas residence..

Radha Asks

को अयं द्वारि who is at my doorsteps?

Krishna Replies

हरिः I am Hari here

Hari means Krishna , and hari means monkey too

So Radha says

शाखामृग्स्य अत्र किं ? उपवनं प्रयाहि (if you are a monkey) go to the jungle*and do not come here. A monkey is not welcome at my home

Krishna Replies

दयिते कृष्णः अहं My darling, I am Krishna 

Krishna means Dark. 

So Radha replies

अहं कृष्णात् वानरातः सुतरां बिभेमि I am terribly afraid of the black monkey

For this Krishn replies 

राधे अहं मधुसूदन: Radha, I am Madhusoodhana 

Madhusoodhana would also mean the one who hunts for honey..

So Radha replies

तां एव पुष्पान्वितां लतां व्रज then you go to the bower where there are many creepers laden with flowers (bearing honey)

इत्थं दयितया निर्वचनीकृत: ह्रीणः हरिः वः पातु May that Hari, who was rendered incapable of giving replies and was shamed by His darling Radha, protect you..

It is not that Radha is unaware that Krishna is knocking at her doors.. She just wants to tease Him..

What a lovely exchange!