Grammatical question. Strange case of doubled j's

[Madhav Deshpande]

        The only way a reading like -Atmajjyotir- with the doubled j can
be grammatical is through the rules of optional consonantal doubling.
Consider Panini's rule 8.4.47 (anaci ca) which says that a consonant of
the y-R group (= any consonant, except h), after a vowel, can be doubled
optionally, if it is not followed by a vowel.  Without getting into
interpretational problems of this rule, the rule is applied in a form like
-sudhyupaasya.h- (from sudhii+upaasya.h) to derive an alternate form such
as -suddhyupaasya.h-.  The traditional grammarians like Bha.t.toji
Diik.sita point out that for this form, with several optional rules of
duplication, we can have the following alternatives:
                        sudhyupaasya.h  (eka-dham, eka-yam)
                        suddhyyupaasya.h (dvi-dham, dvi-yam)
                        suddhyupaasya.h (dvi-dham, eka-yam)
                        sudhyyupaasya.h (eka-dham, dvi-yam)
Cf. Bha.t.toji's Siddhaantakaumudii.

        Such optional forms indicate differing habits of pronunciation
reflecting regional and other dialects of Sanskrit recorded by Panini.
Some of this variation is seen in forms like aatmajjyoti.  In fact the
grammarians prescribe far more possibilities of duplication than what is
attested in the usage of the manuscripts.  And, the reverse is also true
that manuscripts show occasional duplication which goes beyond the rules
of grammarians.
        Best,
                                Madhav Deshpande

On Sat, 6 Mar 1999, Harry Spier wrote:

> The Uddhava Gita verse 9.45 last line reads:
>
> vicaSTe mayi sarvAtmajjyotirjyotiSi saMyutam ||
>
> I had thought that the doubled jj's might be a misprint, or that
> the "a" before the j's should have been "A" but I asked an elderly
> Indian gentlemen who had been speaking sanskrit all his life and he said
> that it was correct and he knew this intuitively by the pronounciation
> but couldn't give the rule.  Could someone confirm if this is correct
> and if so why.
>
>
> Thank you
>
>
> Harry Spier
>
> ______________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>