[Advaita-l] Grammatical question about Mundaka 2.1.1 bhashyam
v.subrahmanian at gmail.com
Sat Dec 19 03:20:34 CST 2015
On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 6:40 PM, Praveen R. Bhat <bhatpraveen at gmail.com>
> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 5:05 PM, V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>
>> I am afraid the above is not the case, at least in the bhāṣyam context.
>> It will be 'कर्मफलं लक्षणं यस्य तत्’.
> That may well be. It could be बहुव्रीहि here, representing not सत्यम् but
> अपरविद्याविषयम्। The विग्रह changes but the meaning doesn't change.
I consider these two questions to explain the two compounds:
किंलक्षणं इदं सत्यम् ? कर्मफललक्षणम् - कर्मफलं लक्षणं यस्य सत्यस्य ।
किंविषयमिदं सत्यम् ? अपरविद्याविषयम् - अपरविद्या (एव) विषयं यस्य सत्यस्य ।
Even if the vigraha changes (from tatpuruṣa to bahuvrīhi), the meaning
does not change. 'Satyam' of the earlier Mundaka mantra (āpekṣikam) is in
the domain of aparavidyā and hence that is the viṣaya of the aparavidyā
(veda purva bhāga) (त्रैगुण्यविषया वेदाः..).
> Sorry, I am back to my subjective complement argument. सत्यम् is विधेय not
> विशेषण here.
I do not think 'satyam' is विशेषण here. On the other hand, it is viśeṣya.
That is why the two expressions are there to qualify, explain it and
therefore are विशेषणs here.
I also think that the Anandagiri gloss considered in this thread is
irrespective of what samāsa the expressions are.
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list