Linguistics

[Guest guest]

Dear Satish,

 

Linguistics is purely based on Vyakarana Sastra, Siksha and Nirukta. Even

Panini Ashtadhyayi is based on Linguistics. Westerners have taken a cue from

this developed their own methodology. But, nevertheless, their methodology is

also based on valid evidences and cannot be brushed aside as a-sastric.

 

For example, the word “Pankaja†denotes Lotus. Going by Vyutpatti, that

which is born out of dirt is Pankaja. Why not Keetaka / Insects (that are born

out of dirt) is not implied and only Padma (lotus) which is the Rudha Artha.

 

As I have mentioned regarding the words and its origin, Yougika Artha and

Rudha Artha do not match together. The Yougika Artha cannot be taken as sastra

pramana. Because, there are certain words in tantra that have its origin in

other languages and can only be derived from Rudha Artha.

 

The word “Heramba†finds its Yougika artha as “He La(Ra)mbate iti

Herambahâ€. Here He is Chidakasa and Lambate is that which takes the

dependence or origin. La is replaced with Ra. And Lambate becomes Rambate. So,

the principle that finds its origin and dependence in Chidakasa is known as

Heramba.

 

Whereas, linguistically, the word is derived from the prakrita bhasha of

Marati. (hero+oba=heroba> heramba; Oba is pujya in Marati; hero is Great;

“the Great and Revered One in Marati)These prakrita forms existed prior to the

coinage of Yougika Artha to certain padas. I would not say all the words but

some of the words that are prevalent in tantra sastra.

 

Linguistically some of the words have changed during the course of time. For

dictionary, we say “Nighantu†but as per Yaskacharya, it is “Ni-gantuâ€.

H is not there. The word “smasaana†is derived from “sava-sayana†as per

Katyayana Vararuchi.

 

The word Bhairava in the sloka “bhairavavapuh mahadevi taabhyaam…†is

interpreted as Mahadeva. Now, this may appear quite a simple poetic approach of

the poet for common people. But for Student of Linguistics, this is a food for

thought. When the acharya used “taabhyaamâ€, he addressed the couple as a

pair as siva-saktyatmaka. When siva is addressed as Bhairava then Sakti should

have been addressed as Bhairavi. But he addressed as Mahadevi. So, by the time

the acharya composed this hymn, the word Bhairava was already present and was

understood to be Mahadeva. This implies that Bhairava is Mahadeva. Now, going

back to the linguistics and if one finds the origin of Bhairava, it has been

found that the word “bhairava†has its dravidian roots. Though, as per

vyutpatti, Bhairava implies one who makes terrific sound (rava). And as per

tantra, this is denoted by the vahana “dogâ€.

 

So, some of the words are already formed linguistically before giving

traditional etymological interpretation and it is beyond the reach of Yougika

Artha. Though, attempts have been made in interpreting the padas using dhatu

prakriya, there is no sastra pramana to it. One cannot expect all the words

that have linguistical origin in Amarakosa.

 

Anyway, these aspects are not useful for our upasana. Hence, is of not of

much interest to us.

 

With regards,

Sriram

 

 

 

 

Forgot the famous last words? Access your message archive online.