[Advaita-l] Grammatical question about Mundaka 2.1.1 bhashyam

[Venkatesh Murthy]

Namaste

ब्रह्मसूत्रभाष्यम् । तृतीयः अध्यायः । चतुर्थः पादः । पुरुषार्थाधिकरणम्
। सूत्रम् ९ - भाष्यम्
यत्तूक्तम् — आचारदर्शनात्कर्मशेषो विद्येति, अत्र ब्रूमः —
तुल्यमाचारदर्शनम् अकर्मशेषत्वेऽपि विद्यायाः । तथा हि श्रुतिर्भवति —
‘एतद्ध स्म वै तद्विद्वांस आहुऋषयः कावषेयाः किमर्था वयमध्येष्यामहे
किमर्था वयं यक्ष्यामहे’ ‘एतद्ध स्म वै तत्पूर्वे विद्वांसोऽग्निहोत्रं न
जुहवाञ्चक्रिरे’ ‘एतं वै तमात्मानं विदित्वा ब्राह्मणाः पुत्रैषणायाश्च
वित्तैषणायाश्च लोकैषणायाश्च व्युत्थायाथ भिक्षाचर्यं चरन्ति’ (बृ. उ.
३-५-१) इत्येवंजातीयका । याज्ञवल्क्यादीनामपि ब्रह्मविदाम्
अकर्मनिष्ठत्वं दृश्यते — ‘एतावदरे खल्वमृतत्वमिति होक्त्वा याज्ञवल्क्यः
‘प्रवव्राज’ (बृ. उ. ४-५-१५) इत्यादिश्रुतिभ्यः । अपि च ‘यक्ष्यमाणो वै
भगवन्तोऽहमस्मि’ (छा. उ. ५-११-५) इत्येतत् लिङ्गदर्शनं
वैश्वानरविद्याविषयम् ; सम्भवति च सोपाधिकायां ब्रह्मविद्यायां
कर्मसाहित्यदर्शनम् ; न तु अत्रापि कर्माङ्गत्वमस्ति, प्रकरणाद्यभावात् ॥
९ ॥

In this Sutra Bhashya the Bhashyakaara has said Ityetat Lingadarshanam
Vaishvanara Vidya Vishayam. This is Napumsaka Linga.

ब्रह्मसूत्रभाष्यम् । चतुर्थः अध्यायः । द्वितीयः पादः । तदोकोऽधिकरणम् ।
सूत्रम् १७ - भाष्यम्
समाप्ता प्रासङ्गिकी परविद्यागता चिन्ता ; सम्प्रति तु अपरविद्याविषयामेव
चिन्तामनुवर्तयति । समाना च आसृत्युपक्रमात् विद्वदविदुषोरुत्क्रान्तिः —

In this he is using Apara Vidyaa Vishayaam. It is Feminine Gender.
That Apara Vidyaa Vishayaa is about Cintaa. Cintaa is Feminine. So
AparaVidyaaVishayaa is also Feminine.

This is only because these words are Bahuvrihi Samasas. It is not
correct to say it is Tatpurusha Samasa.

On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 7:58 AM, Praveen R. Bhat via Advaita-l
<advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> Namaste Venkateshji,
>
> Thanks for your response. The possibility of bahuvrIhi is ruled out and
> hence the question. Had these been bahuvrIhi, the TikAkAra wouldn't have
> brought out a vyutpatti to justify the neuter gender. Moreover, bahuvrIhi
> is anyapadapradhAna, so that needs to be justified too. Here, what is being
> talked about by the samAsa is the viShaya, subject; uttarapada being
> pradhAna, it is tatpuruSha.
>
> PS: In both your vigrahas of rameshvara, tatpurusha or bahuvrIhi, only
> Shiva is represented. However, it can also be karmadhAraya; only then Rama
> is represented by the samAsa.
>
> Kind rgds,
> --Praveen R. Bhat
> /* Through what should one know That owing to which all this is known!
> [Br.Up. 4.5.15] */
>
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 11:16 PM, Venkatesh Murthy <vmurthy36 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Namaste
>>
>> It may be Bahuvrihi Samasa and not Tatpurusha Samasa. Interesting
>> story is Rameshwara. Is it Tatpurusha or Bahuvrihi?
>> If Tatpurusha it is Ramasya Ishwaraha. If BahuVrihi it is Ramaha
>> Ishwaraha Yasya Sah. It can be Rama or Siva. Because Rama is always
>> worshipping Siva and Siva is always meditating on Rama.
>>
>> Similarly Avidya Vishaya is Bahuvrihi. Avidyaa Vishayaha (Asti) Yasya
>> Tat. That has Avidya as Vishaya the subject matter.
>>
>> Bahuvrihi itself is Bahuvrihi. Bahuvrihi literal meaning is Lot of
>> Rice. But it is not Lot of Rice but person having lot of rice. A rich
>> man.
>>
>> 2015-12-16 10:47 GMT+05:30 Praveen R. Bhat via Advaita-l
>> <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>:
>> > Namaste,
>> >
>> > In the Bhashyam under Mundaka mantra 2.1.1, Bhashyakara says:
>> >
>> > *यदपरविद्याविषयं* कर्मफललक्षणम्, सत्यं तदापेक्षिकम् । इदं तु
>> > *परविद्याविषयम्*, परमार्थसल्लक्षणत्वात् । तदेतत् सत्यं यथाभूतं
>> > *विद्याविषयम्* ;
>> >
>> > All the three words underlined above are तत्पुरुषसमासs ending in neuter
>> > gender. However, the प्रातिपदिक of the उत्तरपद is विषय which is masculine
>> > (commonly) being derived using अच्। Since Bhashyakara couldn't have
>> > overlooked this, TikAkAra Anandagiri glosses over the व्युत्पत्ति of the
>> > word विषय as विषीयते विशेष्यते विद्याऽनेनेति व्युत्पत्त्या विषयशब्दस्य
>> > वस्तुपरत्वान्नपुंसकलिङ्गत्वं ।
>> >
>> > Now, the question is which pratyaya via which sUtra is the TikAkAra using
>> > for this करणव्युत्पत्ति? It is most likely an उणादिसूत्र that allows
>> > imagining this प्रत्यय with content as अ।
>> >
>> > Could someone throw some light on it? Thanks.
>> >
>> > Kind rgds,
>> > --Praveen R. Bhat
>> > /* Through what should one know That owing to which all this is known!
>> > [Br.Up. 4.5.15] */
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > 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
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Regards
>>
>> -Venkatesh
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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



-- 
Regards

-Venkatesh