[Y-Indology] laghu eighth syllable in Vasantatilaka

[Guest guest]

I wonder if a third alternative may not be possible.Can't nata be a scribal

error for aanata or even a slip of the commentator himself? I am afraid the

lakhu here does not make sense in the Vasantatilaka

Rajendran

 

 

Dr.C.Rajendran

Professor of Sanskrit

University of Calicut

Calicut University P.O

Kerala 673 635 Phone: 0494-2401144

Residential address:28/1097,Rajadhani Kumaran Nair Road,

Chevayur, Calicut Kerala 673 017 Phone: 0495-2354 624

 

 

 

Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Enter now.

 

 

[Guest guest]

piinonnatastanabharaanatagaatrayaSTyaH.

 

This has to be split like this -

 

piinonnatastanabhara + aanatagaatrayaSTyaH.

 

After joining (sandhi) the ra becomes raa which is a guru.

 

So we have the 7th and 8th syllable as bharaa in which the 8th syllable is

guru or long.

 

The commentator you have quoted has wrongly split it as nata instead of aanata.

That has created the problem. You may consult the dictionary and satisfy

yourself. Even if one takes the word as nata, what happened to bharaa. The

commentator has "glossed" over. He has used bhareNa. Does it become bharaa in

declension. Then it becomes bharaa natagaatrayaSTyaH.

 

In vasanthatilaka there should be a yati (pause) after the 8th. This rule is

also not violated since aa in aanata is an upasargam and does not amount to

splitting a word.

 

This is my view and I am open to discussion.

 

P.K.Ramakrishnan

Phillip Ernest <phillip.ernest wrote:

 

Hiya cats.

 

In verse 15 of the Hemantavarnanam of the Rtusamharam, I find that the third

quarter verse, piinonnatastanabharaanatagaatrayaSTyaH, is again glossed by

Manirama in such a way as to make the eighth syllable laghu instead of guru,

thus: piinaaH puSTaa unnataazca ye stanaaH kucaasteSaaM bhareNa bhaareNa nataa

namraa gaatrayaSTyaH zariiralataa yaasaaM taastathoktaaH/

 

I wonder if this means that there was an opinion that this syllable could be

allowed to be laghu in Vasantatilaka, or that there was a class of commentators

that did not much care about the metre of the poems they glossed.

 

Phillip

 

 

INDOLOGY/

 

INDOLOGY

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Enter now.

 

 

[Guest guest]

Quoting Rajendran C <crajenin:

 

> I wonder if a third alternative may not be possible.Can't nata be a scribal

> error for aanata or even a slip of the commentator himself? I am afraid the

> lakhu here does not make sense in the Vasantatilaka

 

Yes, I think it must be that both tanvii and nataaH in this Manirama must be,

as you say, scribal errors omitting the negative prefix a and the prefix aa.

That or, as Prof. Deshpande says, Manirama may just have been careless of the

metre in these instances.

 

Phillip