Doubt in Samskrit Grammar in MD kriti

[srinidhi]

Namaste

Kriti in question : Sri Mahaganapatiravatumam (Gowlai)

Lyrics in Samskrit here https://web.archive.org/web/20140327123 ... _sansk.pdf

My doubt pertains to the grammar of the sahitya.

At the end of the anupallavi line, Kaamajanakavidhindra.........tatanivaso why does the visarga (nivasaha) become nivaso? Because the next line begins with Ka Komalatara . In this case no sandhi can take place which can transform the visarga

Similarly the line in the charana Goura varna vasana dharo Again why dharo? Not dharaha? Because the next word begins with a Ph Phalachandra


Any Samskrita experts here, request them to resolve my doubt.

[Rsachi]

Deleted

[RaviSri]

In the Saneeta Sampradaya Pradarshini the sahitya is given as under:

pallavi
srI mahA gaNapatiravatumAm˙
siddhivinAyakO mAtangamukah

anupallavi
kAmajanaka vidhIndrasannuta kamalAlayataTa nivAasah
kOmalatarapallavapadakara guruguhAgrajha shivAtmajah

caranam
suvarNa karShaNa vighnarAjah
pAdAmbujO
gauravarNa vasanadhara phAlachandrO
narAdivinuta lambOdarah
kuvalayasvaviShANa pAshAnkusha mOdaka
prakAshakarO bhavajaladhinAvO
mUlaprakrti svabhAva sukhatarO

ravisahasrasannibhadehah
kavijananutamUshikavAhO
avanatadevatAsamUhO
avinAsha kaivalyagEhah

I have highlighted the difference in colour.

I have consulted two scholars in Sanskrit and they have averred that the above is correct grammatically and the way it is being sung now by everyone is grammatically wrong. I sing it the way it is given above. Another thing connected to this: I learnt this song from T.Muktha of the Dhanammal family who sang it this way. Also unlike the present durita kAla misra chApu version, we sing it in tripuTa tALA, in viLamba kAlam. That is how the notation is given in the SSP also, as tripuTa tALA.

[CRama]

I remember Chembai used to sing like the above patam only.

[srinidhi]

RaviSri ji,

Thank you very much for the clarification. The version you have typed out is indeed grammatically correct.

In the versions that I have heard, everyone - without exception- sings....vighna rajo/ gaura varna vasana dharo / lambodaro/ etc/. It is obviously grammatically incorrect since, in these places,there is no scope for a sandhi which will transform the visarga into a ukaara.
I didn't check out the SSP. I thought the version uploaded by guruguha.org would be an authentic one but it isn't.

I have always believed that one can practically learn Samskritam through Dikshitar kritis and it was sort of unsettling to hear a grammatically incorrect version of his kriti. Many thanks.

[varsha]

https://archive.org/details/SrIMahAGaNa ... tarChembai

I remember Chembai used to sing like the above patam only

[varsha]

deleted .
In order not to distract from the seriousness of the subject being discussed .

[Sivaramakrishnan]

srinidhi,
Such usage of words occur frequently in stotras and slokas.

[sukumar]

A very timely eye opener

[srinidhi]

srinidhi,
Such usage of words occur frequently in stotras and slokas.

Yes indeed Sir, I am aware of such prayogas. They come into existence because of certain grammatical rules. (visarga sandhi)

But in this kriti (Sri Mahaganapatiravatumam), the way it is popularly rendered, violates those rules. Now it is inconceivable that Sri MD could compose in faulty Sanskrit. Hence my doubt- which RaviSri ji was good enough to clarify.

[srinidhi]

Knock Knock.
Someone from inside the Pearly gates asked :Who is it ?
The person replied: It is I , Mr Hobson

Oh! groaned the Angel , opening the door
One more English teacher today !!!!

How Mr Hobson (was he a teacher residing in England, hence English teacher or was he a teacher of English ?) reached heaven is anybody's guess (since the study of English language per se does not guarantee a place in heaven) but in my defence I would like to quote from Patanjali's Mahabhashyam "एकः शब्दः सुज्ञातः सुप्रयुक्तः स्वर्गे लोके कामधुग्भवति" a single word well understood & well used becomes wish fulfilling on earth/in heaven

[Sivaramakrishnan]

srinidhi ji,
Vishu sahasranamam is full of sandhis of Akaaraantha pullinga words similar to 'Prakasakaro bhavajaladhinaavo' . The sandhi usage depends on whether you want to pronounce the words separately or continuously.

[srinidhi]

srinidhi ji,
Vishu sahasranamam is full of sandhis of Akaaraantha pullinga words similar to 'Prakasakaro bhavajaladhinaavo' . The sandhi usage depends on whether you want to pronounce the words separately or continuously.

Sivaramkrishnan ji

Thank you for your reply.

Prakashakaro bhavajaladhi navo is correct. I didn't raise any objection with it.

But to pronounce suvarnakarshanavighna rajO is wrong. Simply because the next letter which follows it Pa (Padambujo) doesn't warrant the change of visarga to ukaara. The transformation of visarga will take place only under some conditions and not willy nilly. Similarly, to pronounce narAdivinuta lambodaraO is again wrong because no sandhi can take place which will transform the visarga.

Sandhi gets created based on the proximity of letters (it is a huge topic in itself and not possible to explain in detail here). Even if you wanted to pronounce continuously sandhi may not exist always. For instance- Sridhara Shreesha Srinivasa Shrinidhi... etc. No sandhi here.

Anyway.. Ravisri ji has written the correct version. The doubt arose in my mind due because of the faulty renditions and hence wanted to check the original sahitya.

Also, it is not my intention to get into the age old debate of faulty pronunciations by singers, rather I wanted the correct version only for my swadhayaya

[Rsachi]

Srinidhi,
Thank you.
I pored over visarga sandhi rules in a few places after your post. I also checked in the online archived English PDF version of SSP. They seem to have recorded the sahitya wrongly. Maybe that is the source of the singers' mistakes. Obviously BM and Chembai seem to follow an earlier and correct version.

Sivaramakrishnan, you're right!
Vishnusahasranama is a great place to learn Visarga Sandhi.

My understanding right now of the relevant portion of visarga sandhi rule is that the visarga (preceded a or A) changes to o only when the next word begins with a or a soft consonant.
Ka kha, ta tha, Ta Tha, ca Cha, pa Pha, sha Sha sa are hard consonants. So the visarga stays and is pronounced "jihvamUlIya"...

A great illustration of the rule is here:
eko naikah savah kah kim yat tat padam-anuttamam lokabandhur lokanatho madhavo bhakta-vastalah

[srinidhi]

Srinidhi,
My understanding right now of the relevant portion of visarga sandhi rule is that the visarga (preceded a or A) changes to o only when the next word begins with a or a soft consonant.
Ka kha, ta tha, Ta Tha, ca Cha, pa Pha, sha Sha sa are hard consonants. So the visarga stays and is pronounced "jihvamUlIya"...

You have understood it correctly. Just a small point- the visarga changes to उ and then a further गुण सन्धिः changes it to ओ

[sureshvv]

Thanks Rsachi for digging the rule out.

What make Pha a "hard" consonant but not "bha"?

[kvchellappa]

If you say it, it may be clear.

[srinidhi]

Thanks Rsachi for digging the rule out.

What make Pha a "hard" consonant but not "bha"?

sureshvv sir,

"hard" / "soft" are artificial terminologies which serve more to confuse than clarify.

Lets throw them out and approach in the traditional manner.

Explanation is given below

[srinidhi]

The samskrita varnamala looks something like this

क ख ग घ ङ

च छ ज झ ञ

ट ठ ड ढ ण

त थ द ध न

प फ ब भ म

Of these the first two letters of every line, that is, क ख च छ ट ठ त थ प फ and श ष स are considered as one group- the खर् letters.

Colloquially they are known as कठोर vyanjanas ,hence maybe the English translation "hard consonant". It is not named so because of the effort in pronunciation.

The other letters are termed as the हश् letters.The colloquial term is mriduvyanjana and the English translation "soft consonant". Again the term does not denote the effort taken in pronunciation

खर् and हश् are technical names used in Vyakarana and they have been derived from the maheshwara sutrani.

So, to come to your question, फ and भ have been grouped differently by Panini. For instance when it comes to sandhis the two groups behave differently.

[srinidhi]

Let us take the sandhi in question. The visarga. The visarga which is at the end of a word will behave differently depending on the letter that follows it. The following example will make it clear.

When a visarga is followed by a हश् letter, the visarga will change into a उ. Otherwise it will remain as visarga

ओम् नमः शिवाय . The मः (in नमः ) is followed by the letter शि. शि is a खर् letter and hence the visarga will remain as it is

But in case of ओम् नमो नारायणाय
it is actually ओम् नम​ः नारायणाय
But the मः (in नमः ) is followed by the letter न which is a हश् letter. hence the visarga will change into उ and a further sandhi makes it ओ
Hence we get नमो.

I hope the above explanation is clear. I have tried to keep it simple. Do let me know if it is not clear

[sureshvv]

Thank you Srinidhi ji. Somewhat clearer.

I can see that the classification is based neither on the ease of pronunciation or the organs used in it. I don't think the grouping is arbitrary. Any conjecture or pointers to the basis of this grouping?

.

[sureshvv]

Srinidhi ji...

Just on the off chance that you missed the joke:

When Mr. Hobson said "It is I" rather than the
Incorrect but more common "It is me", it was a dead giveaway that he was an English teacher

[kvchellappa]

I thought the order of the vowels and consonants has something to do with the place of origin (labial, etc.) and the stress in pronunciation. It looks unlikely that the description katora and mrudu have been used casually rather than causally. I am raising these impressions to get more info.

[RaviSri]

I wanted to write this in my earlier post but missed.

The correct version is available in the Tamil printed version of SSP published by Music Academy (1959 or thereabouts). But I don't know why the English transliterators of the SSP (online version) published the grammatically wrong version. Probably because it is the popular one and followed by all singers.

[shankarank]

The visarga as provided in Sri mahagaNapati if sung will create an extra effusion of breath if pronounced continually with next line. afpa, ahka.. etc. So a new rule can be added to grammar for musical usages to resolve the matter.

Vedic grammar is different as in catvAri(gum)sashcamE vs catvArimsashcamE. My teacher will avoid vEdic sandhi rules even in viShnu sahasranAma recitation itself.

As regards continuity of palatal movement - some palatal continuity can be seen in pustakAni vs pushpANi in the plural formation.

[Sivaramakrishnan]

Excellent and informative discussion.
Thanks srinidhi, Rsachi and others!

[MaheshS]

Vedic grammar is different as in catvAri(gum)sashcamE vs catvArimsashcamE. My teacher will avoid vEdic sandhi rules even in viShnu sahasranAma recitation itself.

I remember reading the speeches of Mahaperiyava where he says the same, that Sanskrit is different from Vedic (sanskrit) language [he uses a specific term but I cannot remember].

I was under the impression that MD composed in Sanskrit which heavily [if needs be that is] borrows "words" from Vedic Sanskrit.

I managed to find a rendetion of Chembai and it makes it more confusing :/ For example, he sings prakAshakarA bhavajaladhinAvA

Chembai Vaidyanatha Bhagavathar Concert 1964 - First is Kambodhi varnam of ST.

:: Edited to add :: The Yadukula Kambodi alapana is fantastic, just after Mahaganpathi in Gowla.

[Sivaramakrishnan]

Vedic grammar. That's another great arena!

We are wonder struck by usages in Chamakam, not to say of specialities in Jata / Ghana paaraayanam.

Most scientific granthas have been written invariably in verses with strict adherence to grammar!

One doesn't get words to describe the greatness of grammar in samskrth. "Yato vaacho nivarthante apraapya manasa saha!"

The mantras of Aavani avittam (today) incidentally kindled lot of thinking on the greatness of the devabhasha.

[shankarank]

I managed to find a rendetion of Chembai and it makes it more confusing :/ For example, he sings prakAshakarA bhavajaladhinAvA

May be he is using viLi vEtrumai - calling out - a mix of his local tongue and Sanskrit - Since Malayalam is mix of Old Tamil and Sanskrit plus local adds.

He used his Bhava to resolve the Sandhi issue

As regards dEva Bhasha - all Bhashas are indeed that. None of the ethos of any Indian language/region contradict with Sanskriti in spite of differences. The meta physics does not conflict either.

The first kuraL is in sync with Siksha valli where letters are symbolized (Alambana) as divine. Siksha valli goes further and adds swaras, time intervals , also as divine.

[shankarank]

Diskshitar is his first kriti Sri nAthadi guruguhO mentions mAtmaka kAdi matAnushThAnO - the letters ma, ka for Skanda in Shanmata. Incidentally muruga starts with a variation of ma and ends with ka - in different order than what the kriti implies for the upasana - but still same letters!

In this kriti which is the first vibhakti - all the sandhi seems correct - since mostly all lines start with ma - two lines as na.

<<Edited>>
>>Sundaram Iyers book explains this as referring to Shanmukha as a Sri Vidya upAsaka ( kAdi vidya) - but I remember reading a different explanation in
>>Ranga Ramanuja Iyengar's book as related to Skanda upAsana in Shanmata. Don't have access to a copy immediately.

[MaheshS]

MDR Concert with TNK and ??

Second song is Sri Mahaganapathi in Gowla. He again varies from the lyrics posted. And most sing "gowla" rather than "goura" as in the lyrics.

[shankarank]

Goura -> GauLa - Another instance of pANiNi substitution? - like kannala - kannata -> kannada in Sri mAtRbhUtam?

[srkris]

Gaura & Gaula are equally correct (as are Gauḍa and Gaul̥a). It is like saying kōvil vs kōyil in Tamil, both are considered acceptable.

For example agnimīḍe in the first mantra of the r̥gveda is pronounced as agnimīl̥e

[vgovindan]

Though I am not conversant with Sanskrit Grammar, I know this much 'ba' and 'va' are interchangeable. There are some instances of interchangeability of 'ra' and 'la' - one is in the rAga mudra of MD kRti 'kRshNAnanda mukunda ' gauli pantu'. MD gives (sUcika) rAga mudra as 'gaurIpAntaranga'.

[RaviSri]

gauripAntaranga is gaurIpa antaranga, gaurIpa referring to Lord Siva.

[srinidhi]

Gaura & Gaula are equally correct (as are Gauḍa and Gaul̥a). It is like saying kōvil vs kōyil in Tamil, both are considered acceptable.

For example agnimīḍe in the first mantra of the r̥gveda is pronounced as agnimīl̥e

skrisji

I would like to add a point here.

While you are correct that agnimide is pronounced as agnimile, that doesnt mean that such a substitution can take place everywhere, in non-vaidika samskrit.

As per Sayana Bhashya, in case of Agnimile, the substitution of D with L takes place because the D comes in between two vowels. Hence ide become ile while reciting. Again this is applicable only to Vaidika samskritam and not to non vaidika samskrita.

Panini's shiksha sutras acknowledge the interchangability of R/L, V/B vabayor abheda is a popular sutra quoted in this context, because the pratishakhyas support such interchanges. However they cannot be applied universally.

BAlakrishna cannot become VAlakrishna, RAma is different from LAma....

[sankark]

Again this is applicable only to Vaidika samskritam and not to non vaidika samskrita.

Is vEdam in samskritam?

[MaheshS]

Again this is applicable only to Vaidika samskritam and not to non vaidika samskrita.

Is vEdam in samskritam?

No, according to Kanchi Paramacharya, Vedam is in a different language, akin to Samskritham.

[bhakthim dehi]

I think he calls it as Chandas.

[Pratyaksham Bala]

I think he calls it as Chandas.

Yes. Kanchi Paramacharya :-
"The Vedic language is not Sanskrit but “Chandas”. Chandas means not only metre but also the Vedas which are metrically composed as well as the language of the Vedas. The language used in ordinary speech, poetry, the Puranas, the epics, other writings is Sanskrit. The Vedic language alone is Chandas. When Panini makes a reference to the Vedas he says , “Iti Chandasi” and when he refers to any question relating to Sanskrit he says, “Iti Loke”."

[srkris]

I would like to add a point here.

While you are correct that agnimide is pronounced as agnimile, that doesnt mean that such a substitution can take place everywhere, in non-vaidika samskrit.

As per Sayana Bhashya, in case of Agnimile, the substitution of D with L takes place because the D comes in between two vowels. Hence ide become ile while reciting. Again this is applicable only to Vaidika samskritam and not to non vaidika samskrita.

Panini's shiksha sutras acknowledge the interchangability of R/L, V/B vabayor abheda is a popular sutra quoted in this context, because the pratishakhyas support such interchanges. However they cannot be applied universally.

BAlakrishna cannot become VAlakrishna, RAma is different from LAma....

Yes, you are absolutely right that ḍ only becomes ḷ between vowels, and that it is more common in Chandasi than in (laukīka) bhāṣā. But I was simply trying to explain why Gauḍā is called Gauḷā (as in the name of the rāga) using this same (vedic) rule.

Raghu and Laghu are the same word (where r becomes l) even in classical sanskrit. Rājā was sometimes written as Lājā, for example in Aśokan edicts (in other edicts he uses Rājā instead of Lājā). So this kind of thing has happened in the bhāṣā as well though it is less common than in times before Pāṇini. Laukīka Bhāṣā is not a new language, it is simply a later stage of Chandasi, and in actual spoken usage there are thousands of allowed variations like interchangeable r & l, which a single grammarian cannot cover. Some of the matters not covered by Pāṇini are touched on by Patañjali, but even the Mahābhāṣya is not exhaustive. That being the case, one should not think Sanskrit is only what is in Pāṇinian grammar, just as Hindi is not what is spoken in Delhi-Mathurā-Āgrā alone. Pāṇinian grammar gives a good idea of the common features of the language (as it was spoken in his time), but it does not limit the entire language to just that grammar.

In most literature written after Pāṇini's time, you can find words and expressions used that may appear to violate Pāṇinian grammar, but are not actually violations but preferential and/or customary usages which are unavoidable in any natural spoken language. Such customary usages are more numerous in Chandasi and in Pāṇini's time (for example in the epics). We even find many people named as Bishnu (rather than Vishnu which is more common). Magadha is called Vangadha in one of the Āraṇyakas (I forget which). Bangāla (Bengal) was Vangāla - as you know. We cannot say using Bangāla is wrong usage in Sanskrit (and that only 'Vangāla' is correct). Sanskrit as spoken in bengāl might have converted v to b. Similarly Vijay is called Bijoy... Vraja (the vṛji janapada) is called Braja, there are any number of similar customary usages (some of which were also customary in sanskrit) at some point in time before the language became Bengali or Kashmiri or Gujarati etc.

Usually the prātiśākhyas do not consider vowel ṛ and vowel ḷ, or consonant r and l, to be separate akṣaras, even though they note the difference in pronunciation between them (and their comments only apply to their respective śākhā’s saṃhitā). Again you mentioned the pāṇinīya śikṣā, which is popular but there are maybe a 100 other śikṣās that apply to sanskrit which indicates a great level of diversity in sanskrit pronunciation by native speakers of the language 2000 years ago.

As one popular maxim goes:
yogād rūḍhir balīyasī - Actual (customary) usage overrides rules (theory) i.e. theory is only useful to learn standard usage, it cannot be used to beat people who knowingly choose to differ from it.

[shankarank]

That is an informative and excellent write up.

Recently heard a lecture on Chandogya Upanishad by a RK Mission Swamy at IIT Kharagpur where he mentions an Asva prayOga that does not conform to rules of grammar in that Upanishad - roughly translated as poetic license.

To further add to what I mentioned earlier:

Vedic grammar is different as in catvAri(gum)sashcamE vs catvArimsashcamE. My teacher will avoid vEdic sandhi rules even in viShnu sahasranAma recitation itself.

I clarified with an informed source that the above (anuswara sandhi) is true only in taitriya aranyaka in Krishna Yajur Veda and found a link that seem to confirm that here : http://www.advaita-vedanta.org/archives ... 09652.html

The person also mentioned that he had heard that since the students (of taitriya) became birds gained knowledge and then gave it to us - these special sandhi rules came into force - as enhancing the musicality of the recitation.

If they can get that special status - the musicians who are holding their breath deserve their own special set of rules

[srkris]

That's not Asva prayOga (by which I guess you mean aśva 'horse') but rather Ārṣa (aarsha) prayoga.

Ārṣa is a vṛddhi form of the word Ṛṣi (Rishi), so this means 'usage of the Rishis' (as the authors of the vedic hymns were recognized as rishis). In Pāṇini's time and later, the Veda saṃhitās had already reached completion i.e. there were no new mantras being composed unlike in earlier times, so Ārṣa prayoga generally means ancient/archaic usage (relative to Pāṇini's time) i.e. those peculiar to the saṃhitā's archaic dialect(s).

In terms of pronunciation Ārṣa prayoga involves the use of upadhmānīya and jihvāmūlīya (which were alternative forms of the simple visargaḥ); the use of the ḷ and ḷh (as allophones of ḍ of ḍh) mentioned in the previous post - for example īḍe > īḷe, mīḍhuṣe > mīḷhuṣe etc; the use of āi and āu (instead of classical sanskrit ai and au) and ai & au (instead of classical sanskrit e and o) corresponding to the ar & ār guṇa/vṛddhi forms of ṛ; the sparse use of vowel-sandhi and sandhi in general; apart from the pitch accent common in Vedic speech (such as in the Brāhmaṇa texts) but not in later laukika bhāṣā (3rd century BCE and later usage). In terms of grammar, this included some some verb tenses/moods that had become relatively rare, and some noun declensions that were similarly no longer used, among hundreds of other archaisms.

By the way the identification of the authors of the taittirīya saṃhita as being birds is more or less folk-etymology (in my understanding). The śākhā saṃhitā of the taittirīyas (a śākhā/branch of the kṛṣṇa-yajurvedins) was most probably compiled by a śrauta redactor called tittiri (it just happens to be coincidental that tittiri means a partridge), and arising due to the dispute between vaiśampāyana and yājñavalkya which (as per tradition) gave rise to the competing śukra/śukla yajus tradition, as represented today by the vājasaneyi mādhyandina and kāṇva śākhās, distinguishing it from the earlier kṛṣṇa yajus, represented today by the taittirīya, maitrāyaṇi, and the two kaṭhā saṃhitās -- the caraka-kaṭhā (or kāṭhaka) and kapiṣṭhala-kaṭhā (or kapiṣṭhala).

[shankarank]

Many thanks again. I meant to write it as ASva (long A, and capital S) prayOga based on what I heard - and it is indeed a hearing defect on my part when I listened and he must have meant ARSa prayOga.

[shankarank]

By the way the identification of the authors of the taittirīya saṃhita as being birds is more or less folk-etymology (in my understanding)

Still the imprint of the bhava as a bird (and possible musical consequences!) cannot be denied (yat bhAvam tat bhavati) - whether they physically became birds or not - may be it is some virtual reality