Apparent sandhi irregularities in the Bhagavad Gita

Harry Spier harryspier at HOTMAIL.COM
Thu Feb 25 10:48:10 UTC 1999

Charles Wikner Wrote

>On Mon, 22 Feb 1999, Dermot Killingley wrote:
>> > Verse 10.41 "tejoMzasambhavan".
>> This is also insignificant, but for a different reason. There is
>> considerable variation in practice with avagraha. It's treated as
>> an aid to the reader rather than an integral part of the text, which
>> explains why some people use it where word-initial "a" is elided
>> after word-final "A".
>> But in the interests of consistency, I'd advise you to keep the
>> avagraha in the above line in your edition.
>Presumably that is transliterated as "tejo'Mzasambhavan".
>However, two editions to hand that have the avagraha
>(Sargeant, Sastry), have the bindu above the "jo" rather
>than the avagraha.  Although this makes no difference to
>the sound, is it in fact a typo (it seems odd to append
>an anusvAra to an avagraha), or is it correct (in which
>case the transliteration is asymmetrical).  Any offers?
>Regards, Charles.

Whitney addresses this question in his grammar section 16 b.

"If the elided initial-vowel is nasal, and has the anusvara-sign (70,
71) written above, this is usually and more properly transferred to the
eliding vowel; but sometimes it is written instead over the



Get Your Private, Free Email at

More information about the INDOLOGY mailing list