ramakris at EROLS.COM
Thu Aug 5 19:12:06 CDT 1999
Ravi <miinalochanii at YAHOO.COM> wrote:
> In the shrImukham to the commentary on shrI nilakanTha dIkshita's
> AnandasAgarastavaH which emphasizes on sharaNagati to ambaL and
> on the difficulty of other methods, kAnchi periyava says that this
> argumentation style falls under ths type
> "apashavo vaa anye go ashvebhyaH"
I was hoping someone would reply to this, I am confused by the
statement myself, Anyway my understanding:
apashavah - plural, nominative of a-pashu = not animal.
go = root for bull.
ashva = root for horse
anye = nominative plural of anya (anya = other is declined like
asvebhayaH taken alone is either the dative or ablative plural of
which would mean "to horses" or "from horses". But I don't see how the
compound with the root go and ashva can be written as go + ashva = go
ashva. For example if we want to form a compound bAla + ashva it
would become bAlAshva. So go + ashva = gA ashva or is the rule of
external sandhi not applicable here?
Can anyone tell me what I am missing here? pashavaH and anye should be
grouped together since they have the same case ending. Literally it
seems to mean
>From bulls and horses, others (are) not animals
To Bulls and horses, others (are) not animals.
I am unable to grasp the idiom in either case :-).
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list