Taittiriiya BraahmaNa

[JR Gardner]

The replies to this need not be addressed to the list as a whole as there
are other issues being discussed.  I'm simply having a slightly
frustrating time reconciling TB accent.  As below in 2.8.8.9, it's kind of
important as my dissertation concerns the development of the notion of the
self, accordingly the distinction between bra'hman and brahma'n is quite
important!

I am interpreting 2.8.8.9 as follows:

bra'hma devaa'najanayat | brahma vi'zvamidaM ja'gat | bra'hmaNaH kSatraM
ni'rmitam | bra'hma braahmaNa aatma'naa

This assumes that the the verticle stroke above a consonant indicates that
svarita is the following accent, with udaatta preceding the verticle mark.
The problem is--why would we have bra'hmaNaH kSatraM instead of
brahma'NaH kSatraM?  Unless ni'rmitam is to blame-- nir + -mA --
"constructed, built" -- by bra'hman the kSatra is constructed(?).  I
could, perhaps, be misreading the copy of the TB and kSatram is not the
word in the first place (the "tr" is not overly clear . . .. .).  The
brahma vi'zvamidaM ja'gat troubles me as well-- there is an underscore
below the "hm" of brahma, and a verticle stroke above the "zv" of
vi'zvam-- that is why i've taken it as I have.  I am not certain enough
about accent rules to know why--if it be the case--brahma is not accented
in that portion.

I'm willing to be quite wrong in all this, in many ways I just want to
know which brahman is which, and I'll sort out the significations for the
development of the self accordingly.

I thank anyone for answers in advance!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
John Robert Gardner      Obermann Center
School of Religion         for Advanced Studies
University of Iowa       University of Iowa
319-335-2164             319-335-4034
http://vedavid.org       http://www.uiowa.edu/~obermann/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
It is ludicrous to consider language as anything other
than that of which it is the transformation.