[Advaita-l] (no subject)

Praveen R. Bhat bhatpraveen at gmail.com
Tue May 3 08:01:46 CDT 2016

Namaste Muraliji,

On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 10:22 PM, Murali S via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> I have a related question.Which of the grammatical interpretations is more
> natural?

For the grammatical interpretations to be natural, it has to be a रूढ्यर्थ
or a commonly used meaning. Many times we see that in the Vedas/Vedanta,
such meaning is used, but etymological meaning is used. The former takes
the priority over latter in laukika but not in Vedas. Moreover, there is a
possibility of more than one meaning applicable in the context since
धातुनाम् अनेकर्थाः. Thats where Bhashyas come to the rescue, be it
Sayanacharya, Bhattabhaskaracharya, or Bhagavatpada Shankararacharya.

Having said that, there should also be a grammatical possibility of a
meaning given to the word while interpreting. कपि is explained as कम् = जलं
रष्मिभिः पिबति इति कपिः =sun. That is perfectly fine grammatically, but how
about आसम् ? आसम् is just said to be blossomed. But how? There neither
seems to be a रूढ्यर्थ nor व्युत्पत्ति for that! It is derived from the
धातु आस् उपवेशने which means to sit or a seat, or what Bhashyakara takes
आस्यते अनेन इति, that by which one sits. (The other धातु from which आस can
be derived is अस् क्षेपणे but it would mean that with which one throws,
like a bow). So I don't think Ramanujacharya has it grammatically right,
else surely Bhashyakara himself would have given the meaning.

However, since dictionaries don't give all possibilities of words with all
prefixes and their meanings, grammatically, one *may* be able to *stretch*
and say आस has an उपसर्ग आ in a meaning opposite to आस "seated" which has
घञ् प्रत्यय in कर्मणि sense. Then one may say it means unseated and use
that in the compound कप्यासम् to say कपिना आसः = unseated by sun. Further,
it has to be extended to mean, unseated = not unblossomed = blossomed! You
see how far the stretching goes. Moreover, if you use this meaning, the
word lotus already exists in its own meaning and "blossomed by sun" meaning
becomes kind of redundant. Grammarians are to use such a method only when
the direct meaning makes no sense and Bhashyakara shows that the direct
meaning makes sense since it is an उपमा for the colour of the lotus.

Needless to say, Bhashyakara's usage is more natural/ appropriate.

--Praveen R. Bhat
/* Through what should one know That owing to which all this is known!
[Br.Up. 4.5.15] */

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list