[Advaita-l] About a sanskrit usage

[V Subrahmanian]

On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 6:02 PM, V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>wrote:

> Thank you Siva for the reply.  My question is: can 'visheShataH' give the
> meaning of 'visheShaH' which is what is intended in the verse? I am asking
> this because I have not come across the former word used to mean the latter.
>  For example 'ghaTaH paTayoH ko visheShaH/bhedaH'?


The above should read: घटपटयोः को विशेषः/भेदः? Can we substitute विशेषः with
विशेषतः?

Sunil ji, The usages you are suggesting are correct but they do not fit the
context of the subhashitam in question.

>
> Regards
> subrahmanian.v
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 2:34 PM, Siva Senani Nori <sivasenani at yahoo.com>wrote:
>
>> Sir
>>
>> The chandas of the Sloka is anushThup, which has many versions with minor
>> deviations also being common. Technically it must have eight letters in evey
>> paada. If you replace viSeshatah with viSeshah, you will have only 7 letters
>> in the second foot. So it is a fault.
>>
>> You are right in that taa is better than tah; but then tasil pratyaya
>> (which when added to viSesha gives viSeshatah) gives ries to a wide variety
>> of meanings; if you want you can still the required meaning into it. Then,
>> there is one more issue: chintaa should be written, as per
>> SishTaachaara, with the dental anunaasikaa 'na' and not the anusvaara or
>> bindu, 'm'.
>>
>> Regards
>> N. Siva Senani
>>
>> From: V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>
>> >To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta <
>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
>> >Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2011 10:52 PM
>> >Subject: [Advaita-l] About a sanskrit usage
>> >
>> >*Namaste.
>> >
>> >I have a question about this verse:
>> >*चिंतायास्तु चितायास्तु बिन्दुमात्रं विशेषतः||
>> >सजीवं दहते चिंता निर्जीवं दहते चिता ||
>> >
>> >The word 'विशेषतः' is not the same as 'विशेषः’ which alone would mean
>> >'difference/bheda'.  The former is used in the sense of 'especially'. I
>> >think it is an avyayaH.
>> >
>> >However, in the following verse, also giving the same meaning as the
>> earlier
>> >quoted verse, we have the word 'visheShatA':
>> >
>> >*चिता चिन्ता समा प्रोक्ता* बिन्दुमात्रं विशेषता |
>> >सजीवं दहते चिन्ता निर्जीवं दहते चिता ||
>> >
>> >Here the word is quite alright.
>> >
>> >Will member/s kindly explain? Will there be a 'chandobhanga' if the word
>> >'visheShaH' is used in the first verse?
>> >
>> >Regards,
>> >subrahmanian.v
>> >_______________________________________________
>> >Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>> >http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>> >
>> >To unsubscribe or change your options:
>> >http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>> >
>> >For assistance, contact:
>> >listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>>
>> To unsubscribe or change your options:
>> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>>
>> For assistance, contact:
>> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>>
>
>