[Advaita-l] tri-guNa-Atmaka

[anupam srivatsav]

Please read the line "Prerarka and ghAtaka are certainly diffe-atmaka
derivation.  Preraka"
 as "Prerarka and ghAtaka are certainly different from atmaka
derivation. Preraka"

Regards,
A.

On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 10:24 AM, anupam srivatsav
<anupam.srivatsav at gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Sri Srinivas,
> Namaste.
>
>> As you note ka suffix denotes "constructed by" or "made of".
>> However, sometimes it also means "maker of", "creator of",
>> "constructor of".
>>
>> And this is where I would like some help from list members.
>>
>> Example:
>> preraka - one who is cause of or catalyst of preraNA (inspiration)
>> ghAtaka - one who is cause of or catalyst of ghAta (disaster)
>
> Prerarka and ghAtaka are certainly diffe-atmaka derivation.  Preraka
> and ghAtaka are Nvul pratyayas.  They also based on dhatus (iira
> kshepe and hana himsagatyayoH).
>
> preraka = pra upasarga purvasya, iir dhatoH Nvul pratyayanta, prathama
> eka vachanam.
> ghAtaka = himsarthakasya hana dhatoH Nvul pratyayanta, prathama eka vachanam.
>
> But,
> tri-guNa-Atmaka = tri-guNaH AtmA yasya saH = tri-guNa-AtmA (shasti tatpurusha)
> tri-guNa-AtmA + Thanj = tri-guNa-Atmaka (See, AtmA becomes Atma+ka and
> also, AtmA is not a dhatu here)
>
>> On similar lines:
>> should we interpret sAtvika as (a) made of sattva guNa,
>> or (b) "maker" of sattva guNa,
>
> Therefore, we cannot interpret sAtvika as "maker" of sattva guNa, but
> only as "made of" sattva guNa.
>
>
>> and coming to the word Atmaka as in triguNAtmaka do we
>> interpret it as (a) made of self of three guNa-s or (b) "maker"
>> of self of three guNa-s.
>> Can someone confirm if we can take meaning (a) or (b) or both.
>
>
> Same applies here too.
>
>> In this context another word that is used is triguNamaya.
>> This certainly means "made of three guNa-s"
>
> You are right here.
>
>
> With regards,
> Anupam.
>