[Advaita-l] (no subject)

[Srikanta Narayanaswami]

I have no idea what you mean by the above. Every noun in the Sanskrit language
is puMlinga or strIlinga or napuMsaka. The word paramparA is grammatically
strIlinga (feminine). It is the object of the verb vande, therefore it takes the 
dvitIyA
vibhakti and becomes paramparAM. FYI, in English grammar, dvitIyA vibhakti =
accusative case. There is nothing *unnecessary* about the strIlinga here, nor is
there any negative meaning associated with the word "accusative." All of this is
very, very basic grammar of the Sanskrit language, as I mentioned in my posting.

If it is your contention that we should form some highly unique and personal 
views
about Sanskrit verses with absolutely no regard for basic grammar at all, then I 

can only say, good luck to you! If on the other hand, you agree that language 
usage
has an element of grammar to it, please re-read my posting with an open mind.
Nothing further to add...

Thank you,
Vidyasankar
                                            
__________________________

Exactly,The issue is not on basic grammar but the use of the 
word"madhyamam"or"madhyagam"I have also seen in most of the cases the 
word"madhyagam"is used.Here the word  "madhyamam'is used as a noun,but the 
word"madhyagam"is used as a verb.There is nothing wrong in using this way 
considering the context in which it is used.I donot have any personal preference 
as you say,but,the meaning and the context is more clear with "madhyagam",both 
grammatically as well as the context point of view.In sanskrit grammar, many a 
time a "nipatha"is used in the context,without any meaning.That is all.

N.Srikanta.