Guest guest Posted May 16, 2001 Report Share Posted May 16, 2001 >From the tragic to the trivial. How much more satisfying to the Romantic imagination is the derivation from shubha. The trials of 'scientific objectivity' in philology! P On Wed, 16 May 2001, S.Kalyanaraman wrote: > INDOLOGY, shrinivast@h... wrote: > > Srisa Chandra Vidyarnava in "A Catechism of Hindu Dharma" (AMS > > Press, New York 1974 [1919] remarks that the Chandogya Upanishad > > derives the term shudra from shubha=grief; i.e. one who having heard > > of grief melts; one who is affected by small things and is ruffled > by > trifles (p. 39). > He also points out that in later grammars > and lexicographies > shudra is derived from the root shuc=to purify, > ca being changed to > da and the vowel emphasized (p.39). I would like > to know the > reference in Panini for this kind of operation. > > According to Kaut.ilya's Arthas'a_stra, s'u_dra may be derived from > ks.udraka, one engaged in making miniature beads. > > > > indology > > > > Your use of is subject to > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 16, 2001 Report Share Posted May 16, 2001 >Yes, of course Vidyasankar is correct. The Ch. Up. offers no such etymology. The etymology mentioned by Vidyarnava is actually the first of three rather interesting explanations of Raikva's use of the term proposed by ZankarAcArya in an effort to explain why the enigmatic sage should address a king (as we may suppose JAnaZruti to have been) with the term "zUdra." According to Zankara, J. was both grieved at hearing his greatness demeaned by a passing haMsa and softened by that grief ( zucA.. Adravati). According to this interpretation Raikva then addresses J. by the term zUdra (>zug + dru) not to demean him but merely to demonstrate to him his own esoteric knowledge ( ie. of J's inner feelings.) This is of course not offered as a scientific etymology of the term, but merely a somewhat esoteric explanation of a seemingly jarring note in the zruti. Incidentally Z's other two explanations of the epithet are less obscure but more demeaning to J. in that they (1) argue that J. although not a zUdra by birth is acting like one in attempting to secure esoteric knowledge through the offering of wealth alone as opposed to appropriate service to a guru and (2) [ascribed by Zankara to "others"] that he has simply not offered R. a large enough gift! All of this is in Z's bhASya on Ch. Up. 4.2.3. > INDOLOGY, shrinivast@h... wrote: > > Srisa Chandra Vidyarnava in "A Catechism of Hindu Dharma" (AMS >> Press, New York 1974 [1919] remarks that the Chandogya Upanishad >> derives the term shudra from shubha=grief; i.e. one who having > >zubha = grief?? Anyway, chAndogya upanishad hasno such etymology. >The king, jAnazruti pautrAyana, goes to learn from one raikva. >The latter calls the king "zUdra". Later commentators try to find >an explanation for why someone who is obviously a kshatriya is >called a zUdra here. > >It is in brahmasUtra 1.3.34 (not in the upanishad itself) that >one finds an explanation based on the root zuc = to grieve (not >to purify). As for Paninian sanction for changing the terminal >-c to a -dr, I leave it to experts, but I suspect there is none >for zuc. Note that the brahmasUtra derives it from zuc + dravaNa, >deriving from root dru = to become fluid. > >Vidyasankar > > > >indology > > > >Your use of is subject to -- Dr. R. P. Goldman Professor of Sanskrit Department of South and Southeast Asian Studies 7303 Dwinelle Hall MC #2540 University of California at Berkeley Berkeley, CA 94720-2540 email: sseas Phone: (510) 642-4089 Fax: (510) 643-2959 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 17, 2001 Report Share Posted May 17, 2001 - S.Kalyanaraman <kalyan97 <INDOLOGY> Wednesday, May 16, 2001 6:25 PM [Y-Indology] Re: Etymology of shudra > According to Kaut.ilya's Arthas'a_stra, s'u_dra may be derived from > ks.udraka, one engaged in making miniature beads. If you refer to KA II.13.37, 40 - ks.udraka cannot be interpreted as "one engaged", its meaning here - "minor work". Similar meaning you can see in III.3.30, 17.06, 19.23, IV.10.6 - "small articles", "trifling articles". Only in one place, VIII.4.09 - ks.udraka has the meaning "common" people, which opposed to chiefs, mukhyas. And in this context there are no reasons to interprete them as shudras only. Best regards Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.