Guest guest Posted April 16, 2008 Report Share Posted April 16, 2008 Dear Bhaskar-ji, I am afraid I find it impossibly difficult trying to follow your posts when there is so much untranslated Sanskrit. I think by now I am familiar with quite a few of the terms so it would seem that the beginners on the list (and even some long-standing members) will have no chance at all. Would it not be possible for you to state your arguments in plain English (approximating the Sanskrit terms as best you can) before giving the quotations? The situation is not helped by the fact that I cannot follow your transliteration scheme. ITRANS does not capitalize the 'e' or 'o' for example. What is 'yEkaH'? I have searched in vain for this in Monier-Williams and it seems to feature significantly in your discussion. Best wishes, Dennis <<For example, when shruti without any ambiguity says sAkshi is yEkaH in sarva bhUta & when our paramAchArya too endorsing it by saying tatsAkshi is yEkaH, samaH, kUtashTha nityaH etc. what is the need for the VP author to use only dry logic (shushka tarka) without the aid of shruti & AchAryOpadEsha to propagate the theory of nAnAtva of sAkshi ?? Dont you think tarka should be based on shruti pramANa or shrutyanugrahIta?? I am really surprising to see your unwillingness to give shruti & AchArya pramANa vachana in support of VP's verdicts on epistemological issues... >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 16, 2008 Report Share Posted April 16, 2008 praNAms Sri Dennis Waite prabhuji Hare Krishna Kindly pardon me for the inconvenience caused to you and all prabhuji-s in this regard....I do agree that I have not been following any formal transliteration keys while typing Sanskrit words (infact I am not at all familiar with any of the cyber transliteration procedure) ...but as you know, whenever I am quoting shruti or shankara bhAshya, I would give the original reference. So that followers of these discussions can read the original text & translations of the same in their respective familiar language. The word yEkaH means ONE (like in yEkamEvAdvitIya..one without second)...If you check my previous mail I've given the complete original Sanskrit text of Shankara bhAshya & also the reference. It is in sUtra bhAshya 1-1-4..Shankara here says : na hi ahaMpratyaya vishaya kartru vyatirEkENa tat sAkshI sarvabhUtasThaH, samaH, yEkaH, kUtasTha nityaH, purushaH vidhi kAndE tarka samayE vA kEnachit adhigataH sarvasya AtmA...I am afraid, I dont have enough command over English language to translate all bhAshya sentences word by word...That is the reason why very often I ask for the help of our Sri Sunder Hattangadi prabhuji for translations. If you have the transliteration procedure in word or pdf format, kindly do send it to me....( I dont have internet access)..I shall try to follow it in future postings. Hari Hari Hari Bol!!! bhaskar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 16, 2008 Report Share Posted April 16, 2008 Dear Bhaskar-ji, I wasn't asking you to translate the scriptural quotations. What I was suggesting is that you first of all express the point that you want to make in English and *then* give the scriptural reference if you want (without translation). Giving the Brahmasutra references for Shankara's commentary does not help me, I'm afraid. I have two versions of the BS but one has no Sanskrit at all and the other only gives the Sanskrit for the sutras themselves, not for Shankara's commentary. The Sanskrit for 'one' is 'eka' (which is in my dictionary). I don't understand where 'yeka' comes from. I am attaching the ITRANS overview from my website below since I am sure many members would find it useful and perhaps do not have access to the Internet. Having done all the work to do this, I now realize that I cannot attach it since it contains Devanagari characters which will not appear. I could upload the document to the group files area but, if you cannot access the Internet, you will still not be able to download it. I will email it to you privately as a Word document. Best wishes, Dennis <<Kindly pardon me for the inconvenience caused to you and all prabhuji-s in this regard....I do agree that I have not been following any formal transliteration keys while typing Sanskrit words (infact I am not at all familiar with any of the cyber transliteration procedure) ...but as you know, whenever I am quoting shruti or shankara bhAshya, I would give the original reference. So that followers of these discussions can read the original text & translations of the same in their respective familiar language. The word yEkaH means ONE >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 16, 2008 Report Share Posted April 16, 2008 Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr schrieb: praNAms Sri Dennis Waite prabhuji Hare Krishna Kindly pardon me for the inconvenience caused to you and all prabhuji-s in this regard.... Bhaskar-ji Pranams may I join with Shri Dennis in his request that you use more English in your posts. I have given up trying to understand them and have stopped reading them. As you certainly have a lot of valuable things to say, I would love to understand your posts! I like Dennis-jis suggestion in his second post of today. It would help me too. Om Shanti, Shanti, Shanti! Sitara Gesendet von Mail. Der Mailbox mit unbegrenztem Speicher. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 16, 2008 Report Share Posted April 16, 2008 On 16/04/2008, Dennis Waite <dwaite wrote: > > The Sanskrit for 'one' is 'eka' (which is in my dictionary). I don't > understand where 'yeka' comes from. > Dennis-ji, these are region-specific variations (or irregularities) in pronunciation. For example, some people from southern India may pronounce the English word 'age' as 'yage', or 'old' as 'vold'. Similarly, the Skt 'eka' becomes 'yeka'. In Northern India, 'eka' becomes 'ek'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 16, 2008 Report Share Posted April 16, 2008 Dear Ramesh-ji, Ah - I understand. Unfortunately, Monier-Williams does not contain these regional variations so one is left very much in the dark. Could I ask that writers use the actual word rather than the pronounced version. Best wishes, Dennis <<Dennis-ji, these are region-specific variations (or irregularities) in pronunciation. For example, some people from southern India may pronounce the English word 'age' as 'yage', or 'old' as 'vold'. Similarly, the Skt 'eka' becomes 'yeka'. In Northern India, 'eka' becomes 'ek'.>> _ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 16, 2008 Report Share Posted April 16, 2008 advaitin , Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr wrote: >That is the reason why very often I > ask for the help of our Sri Sunder Hattangadi prabhuji for translations. > > If you have the transliteration procedure in word or pdf format, kindly do > send it to me....( I dont have internet access)..I shall try to follow it > in future postings. Namaste, I have provided only links to on-line translations! Regards, Sunder SUBJECT : TRANSLITERATION / ENCODING SCHEMES http://www.aczoom.com/itrans/ Message #s 31005-31009-31026 Apr. 24, 2006 http://www.advaita.org.uk/sanskrit/itrans.htm ITRANS encoding, for Devanagari. This is the basic encoding used for all Indic language scripts. Consult the individual language manuals in the ITRANS archive (ITRANS/doc/*.itx files, also available for online browsing) for exact details on every language supported by ITRANS. Vowels (dependent and independent): ------- a aa / A i ii / I u uu / U RRi / R^i RRI / R^I LLi / L^i LLI / L^I e ai o au aM aH Consonants: ----------- k kh g gh ~N ch Ch j jh ~n T Th D Dh N t th d dh n p ph b bh m y r l v / w sh Sh s h L x / kSh GY / j~n / dny shr R (for marathi half-RA) L / ld (marathi LLA) Y (bengali) Specials/Accents: ----------------- Anusvara: .n / M / .m (dot on top of previous consonant/vowel) Avagraha: .a (`S' like symbol basically to replace a after o) Ardhachandra: .c (for vowel sound as in english words `cat' or `talk') Chandra-Bindu: .N (chandra-bindu on top of previous letter) Halant: .h (to get half-form of the consonant - no vowel - virama) Visarga: H (visarga - looks like a colon character) Om: OM, AUM (Om symbol) [As shown, many codes have multiple choices, example " RRi / R^i " implies you can use either " RRi " or " R^i " ] =================================================================== Harvard-Kyoto (HK) convention: a A i I u U R RR lR lRR e ai o au M H k kh g gh G c ch j jh J T Th D Dh N t th d dh n p ph b bh m y r l v z S s h ================================================================== International diacritics: Not reproducible here. ============================================================ There are certain advantages and disadvantages to each of these methods. The Unicode format is still evolving. It becomes even more complex when Vedic accents are introduced! The Itrans has the major advantage that it can be processed/converted into all the major Indic scripts. 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.