[Advaita-l] to be and to have in Sanskrit

Anbu sivam2 anbesivam2 at gmail.com
Fri Mar 30 12:07:42 CDT 2007

Sri Guy's question clearly involves a grammatical question.  The grammer of
one language cannot be interspersed into another language.  Sanskrit should
not be judged from the point of view of another language.  A person
conversant with Sanskrit would have no problem conveying his ideas in that

On 3/30/07, Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at braincells.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Mar 2007, Guy Werlings wrote:
> > he priya mitrANi |
> >
> > I am rather surprised nay disappointed to see that my earlier question
> as to
> > the verbs to be and to have in Sanskrit did not arise the slightest
> interest
> > from the many learned members of the list.
> >
> I was interested but as you may have noticed I have not been very active
> of late.  Anyway as the respondents have said, the lack of "to have" is
> more due its replacement by the case system rather than any
> philosophical reason.  A few vestiges of this survive in English.  For
> instance you can say "I have a body" or "I am embodied."  There is no
> "have" in the second phrase but em- takes its place and the meaning is the
> same.
> --
> Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at braincells.com>
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list