Sutra literature & sanskrit

[Guest guest]

OM Guruve Namah

 

 

 

//If we replace Adarsh with Darsh, the sutras become senseless. Then, first

sutra would refer to one topic and next sutra to another, which is ruled out

by the syntax. Such problems can be solved by consulting Sanskrit scholars,

not by deriding them. It is foolish to waste one's time in shaastraarthas

over internet which has no regulating authority. Why these people do not

visit Sanskrit universities and take the opinions of various scholars??

Internet is not a reliable source of authentic academic opinion.//

 

The above quote from one of the mails on list speaks volumes in it. Please

look at tone and meaning.

 

To understand the context new students need awareness of a few

fundamentals, before we carry forward meaningful discussion.

 

Introduction:

 

After crystilasition of knowledge preceding Upanishadic period it took

centuries to develop philosophic thought .Then arose to systematization of

each school of thought. Jyotish was not different. From 18 Rsi great volume

of knowledge arose and here also Sutra Literature were created.

 

So Systematic treatises were written in short aphorism called Sutras,

meaning clues, and were

 

Intended to memory aids to long discussion on any topic which the student

has learned with his guru. The main thought used to be highly condensed and

much was taken for granted.

 

See

 

ALpa]rmsiNdGx sarviÖñtaemuom

 

AStaeÉmnvx c suÇ! suÇivdae ivÊ>

 

alpäkñaramasandigdha säravadviçvatomukhama

 

astobhamanavadha ca sutr sutravido viduù

 

( Note there is slight mistake in reproduction of sloka for technical error

Please read it duly corrected)

 

People learned in Sutra literature , say, that a Sutra should be oncise and

UNAMBIGUOUS, give the essenceof the arguments on the topic but at the same

time deal with all aspect of the question , be free from repetetion and

faultless.

 

However the definition is too strict and desire for brevity was carried to

such heights that in practice that most part of sutra literatre is now

unintelligible.

 

Jaimini does not appears to be founder of any system, and evidently it is

possible that

 

System of knowledge may embrace more than one system propunded by rsis among

18 whose works are no more avaiable.

 

Because of larger interests in sutra literary writings evolved in form of

Vakyas, Vrittis. Karika and Bhashyas, Each of them giving more and more

elaborate then previous type of writing.

 

I will quote just one Sutra and move ahead.

 

Sutra 1.1.35 states

 

haerady> isÏa>

 

horädayaù siddhäù

 

ShB.S.Rao has translated it From General literature Of astrology learn all

The details about HORA Drekkana Saptamsa, Navamsa Etc.

 

Now Neelkanth has` also taken from AADI to mean as above.

 

Hora and other division should be prepared from other texts.

 

One who is not initiated can also read between the lines.

 

Hora is formed by dropping of Aaa in beginning and Tra in end from

Ahoraaatra.

 

In common parlance Hora menas whole Jyotish shastra.

 

So One an think Sutra says Jaimini sutra are for those who have mastered

Hora shastra

 

So Sutra literature has different Dimension than expertise in grammar rules

of Language

 

 

 

 

 

se-man-tics (si man'tiks) n. (used with a sing. v.)

 

1. a. a branch of linguistics dealing with the study

of meaning, including the

 

ways meaning is structured in language and

changes in meaning and

 

form over time.

 

2. the branch of semiotics or logic dealing with the

relationship between signs or

 

symbols and what they denote.

 

3. the meaning, or an interpretation of the meaning, of a

word, sign, sentence,

 

etc.: Let's not argue about semantics.

 

4. GENERAL SEMANTICS.

 

****************************************************************************

********************************************1. Then, first sutra would refer

to one topic and next sutra to another, which is ruled out by the syntax

 

Context has been Sutra 2.3.1 and 2.3.2.

 

When The ascendant is an odd sign the Navamsa dasa begins from it.

 

When Ascendant is an even sign the Navamsa dasa begins from the Adarsa Sign.

 

Simply stating Adarsa sign is the other sign owned by the lord of ascendant

excepting

 

Lumaniries and Saturn.

 

Another group of astrologers use principle of Abhimukh, but this does not

guarantee

 

initiation of dasa from Odd sign.

 

Another set of astrologers interpret adarsa to mean the fourth.

 

Actual discussion centered about these view points.

 

Now one can blissfully assume that what grammar says , but these are the

views of great Sanskrit scholars whose knowledge of Sanskrit was not

supposed to be less.

 

Prof P.S.Shastri has stated in his notes adarsa literally means a mirror.

The mirror image faces the observer directly, and hence it is called

abhimukha. Then He Goes on narrating what should be correct meaning.

 

Therefore Dear Knowledge of Sanskrit Grammar is needed but is not everything

,in interpreting Para vidhya, That every scholar knows well.

 

2.* consulting Sanskrit scholars, not by deriding them

 

Sanskrit scholars are crown of knowledge But if , Like a Brahmin who learned

all the sashtra

 

And asked boatman to help crossing the river which was in spate. Brahman was

intoxicated by knowledge. So he start humiliating boatman by asking

question have you read Vyakaran Have you read arthshastra etc Boatman said

NO sir

 

Then as luck would have it, Boat trapped in bhawar.Boatman Asked Brahma

Have you learned swimming. Reply was NO.

 

Boatman saved his life saying , Look you are going to lose life . What’s the

use, If you knew swimming Could be You might have saved your life.

 

So is the case of People who show off their knowledge by shastrath. Times

have changed. one should Make correct prediction to help people if

possible. There is hardly any need to show knowledge.

 

 

 

3. shaastraarthas over internet which has no regulating authority

 

We are not living in age of adi sankaracharya. Much water has` flown in

Ganges.

 

We could be flexible.

 

 

 

4. reliable source of authentic academic opinion.

 

APp dIpae Év>

 

appa dépo bhavaù

 

 

 

5. My students are teaching Jyotisha in PG departments of recognized

Sanskrit universities ; they know only a master of Sanskrit grammar is

allowed to give his/her own opinion on grammatical aspects, others can only

quote the masters.

 

 

 

Well Does this apply to Vedas , vedanga and Sutra literature. My dear friend

just contemplates.

 

There are six layers of meaning of Vedas and several of vedanga and sutra.

Here grammar is helpful but real help is from other sources , That is

fundamental to creation .

 

 

 

With best regard.

 

 

 

RC

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6. The difference between Adarsh and Darsh is simply due to wrong

sandhi-vichchheda by modern commentators. Those who are recognized experts

of this field should be consulted. Anything published on paper or on

internet is not gold.

 

 

 

Suresh Ji is also right in questioning who has tested how many yogas work

well or not. No one will be able to answer this question with assurance. But

I agree with Rohiniranjan Ji's guess that many yogas do not work properly

(either due to faults in Ganita or due to faults in manuscripts). The only

thing I do not like is the idea of PARKING. If I have no time for

researching a particular thing, I will certainly park it off temporarily,

but I will never ask others to do the same, because that would lead to

permanent parking off of that topic without proper investigation

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

OM TAT SAT

 

R. C. SRIVASTAVA