[Advaita-l] Re: Questions on Isavasya

[Siva Senani Nori]

Duly noting that "dukri~n karaNe" (incidentally this is a part of the dhatu pATha meaning that the root kri is used in the sense of doing - karoti, kAryam, kartA etc. The head (du) and tail (~n), called 'it's, are traditionally attached to the roots) does not protect when the moment of reckoning occurs, here is my 2 cents.
   
  The case endings for the nominal case (prathamA vibhakti) are su-au-jas. For the singular, when we take the prAtipadika veda and add the case termination, we get 'vedas' ( in 'su', s remains with 'u' the 'it' being dropped). As Sri Shyam Subrahmanian noted, when the singular of the nominal case, 'vedas' stands alone, the 's' is omitted and this omission - visarjana - is indicated by the 'visarga' aH. That is the technical flow.
   
  While it is true that in practice, as Sri Aniruddhan indicated, 'vedas' and 'vedaH' are treated as interchangeable, in the specific context of the literalism of Sri Shyam Subrahmanian, such interchanging is out of place.
   
  Having said that, it is interesting to note two more points - though the base symbol set of pANini does not include the visarga, a) there is an entire class of sandhis called visarga sandhis and taught as such, and b) am and aH are taught in almost all Indian languages (I am not sure about Punjabi which is sometimes taught beginning with aira, oora etc. and not a, aa, i, I...). It is so, because visarga is such an integral part of our language. 
   
  Such being the case, though Sri Shyam Subrahmanian may be technically correct, it represents extreme nitpicking.
   
  Senani
  
Sankaran Aniruddhan <sankaran_aniruddhan at yahoo.com> wrote:
  namaste,

> Simply because the transformation process resulting in
> vedo (vedas -> vedar -> vedo when followed by specific
> consonants or "a" ) does not involve the generation 
> of "vedaH" at any stage. As I understand it (and
> as I am sure you know), a visarga is generated (r -> H)
> only when either a pause follows or a "khar" (kh, ph, 
> ch, Th, th, c, T, t, k, p, S, sh, s).

As I have studied it, "-as" and "-aH" are interchangeable,
and either can be considered as the original root ending
(i.e. either ending is independent, not derived). For
example, "rAmah" and "rAmas" are identical, whereas "rAmo-"
or "rAmar-" are products of sandhi rules. I think some
people consider "rAmas" to be the original form, maybe
because of similar cognate forms in other Indo-European
languages (latin for example). However, in sam.skRtam,
either is ok.

Aniruddhan

Sruti smRti purANAnAm Alayam karuNAlayam
namAmi bhagavatpAda Sam.karam lokaSam.karam

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
_______________________________________________
Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/

To unsubscribe or change your options:
http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l

For assistance, contact:
listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org


 			
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
 Everyone is raving about the  all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta.