[Advaita-l] Brief speech in Sanskrit

[Ajit Krishnan]

namaste,

> Well the language of the Vedas should not be strictly referred to as
> Sanskrit at all as it is a pre-systematic stage.

No disagreement with the facts, but this is a very narrow definition
of Samskritam.  What is the benefit of such a narrow definition [1] ?

> Puranic Samskrit is just Samskrit i.e. it follows Paninian rules.
> The commentators on the puranas take care to explain usages based on
> Panini and like in other genres which contain examples of apabramsha
> ("corrupt" words--a telling description isn't it?) they bend over
> backwards to try and provide a Paninian explanation.

It is the narrow definition of Samskritam that leads to such
intellectual gymnastics.

> Kalidasa is like Joyce.
> He is deliberately twisting language to provide an artistic effect

Interesting take.

> Ok this is a tangent and I'm not quite sure I understand its relationship

Indeed a tangent. I was needlesly on a soapbox.

         ajit

[1] I have no hidden agenda of wanting to change Samskritam grammar in any way.