[Advaita-l] A question on Chaandogya III.14.1
ryanarm at gmail.com
Sun Nov 13 02:00:40 CST 2016
Thank you Sri Chandramouli
This confirms the structure of the statement and is completely in line with
the explanation given by Sri Praveen.
In addition, you have provided a further source of discussion about the
Sruti itself and not simply the grammatical structure.
For this I am extremely grateful!
Yours in Truth
On 13 November 2016 at 09:31, H S Chandramouli <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
> Dear Sri Ryan,
> BSB 1-2-1 mentions एतदुक्तं भवति — यस्मात्सर्वमिदं विकारजातं ब्रह्मैव,
> तज्जत्वात् तल्लत्वात् तदनत्वाच्च.
> Just for information.
> On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 3:29 PM, Praveen R. Bhat via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>> Namaste Ryan ji,
>> You seem to have landed well on the समास तज्जलान्। It is indeed a compound
>> and the verse says that the one being शान्त should meditate उपासीत thus
>> "तज्जलान्" इति।
>> Grammatically, since the word तत् is heard before a द्वन्द्वसमास its
>> connection is with all words of the द्वन्द्व-- द्वन्द्वात् पूर्वं
>> तत्-शब्दस्य प्रत्येकसम्बन्धेन यथायथं विभक्त्यन्ततया अन्वयः । तस्मात्
>> इति तज्जम् (ड प्रत्यय, डित्वात् टिलोपः), तस्मिन् लीयते इति तल्लम्
>> (उपपदतत्पुरुषः) and तस्मिन् अनिति इति (उपपदतत्पु्रुषः)। Since it is born
>> from that, merges into that and lives/ is sustained in that, says
>> Bhashyakara, but समासविग्रह for the last can also be तेन अनिति lives due
>> Kind rgds,
>> --Praveen R. Bhat
>> /* Through what should one know That owing to which all this is known!
>> [Br.Up. 4.5.15] */
>> On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 12:51 PM, Ryan Armstrong via Advaita-l <
>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>> > Consulting the भाष्यम् again, it was seen that the dissolution is
>> > to as तल्लम्.
>> > So here some conjecture began, and the statement is now understood as
>> > (taken out of sandhi):
>> > तद् ज तद् ल तद् अन् इति
>> > Which can be translated as "Born from That, Dissolved in That, Existing
>> > That" with the इति terminating the idea.
>> > (I have repeated the तद् for explanation, in the verse it would seem to
>> > apply to all three concepts.)
>> > Sanskrit being as precise as it is, I am not satisfied with explanations
>> > coming from conjecture and would like this reasoning either confirmed,
>> > to be shown where errors have come in.
>> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>> To unsubscribe or change your options:
>> For assistance, contact:
>> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
+27 82 852 7787
ryanarm at gmail.com
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list