taxonomy question

[Michael Brattus Jones]

Here is an interesting binary classification in two levels, though it  
doesn't situate humans in juxtaposition to the insentient, just to  
gods and animals.
The Kauśika Sūtra mentions "the mother of gods and mortal beings,"  
then, unpacking the latter term, "mortal beings," it specifies "mother  
of animals and men."

bhartrī devānām uta martyānāṃ bhartrī prajānām uta mānuṣāṇām |  
(KauśS_13,14[106].7)
[transliteration taken from Arlo Griffiths' GRETIL etext - thank you!]

I hope it helps.

Michael Brattus Jones
mbjones at utexas.edu
PhD Student, Dept. of Asian Studies
University of Texas at Austin

From: Herman Tull <hwtull at MSN.COM>
To: INDOLOGY at liverpool.ac.uk
Sent: Friday, August 5, 2011 12:26 PM
Subject: Re: [INDOLOGY] taxonomy question

CU 5.10.8 sets up a taxonomy of sorts in its reference to the “small  
things” (kshudrANi) that continually live and die in the round of  
rebirth, in distinction to men who attain one of the two paths after  
death (path of the gods, path of the fathers).

Herman Tull

From: James Hartzell
Sent: Friday, August 05, 2011 12:05 PM
To: INDOLOGY at liverpool.ac.uk
Subject: Re: [INDOLOGY] taxonomy question

Thanks Adheesh, I'd forgotten about "carācara" (mobile/immobile), and  
thanks for the reference.

Can we state then that what we modern folks call inanimate objects, as  
well as plants, fit the acara category, and then all animals and  
humans fit the cara category?  Or are there other distinctions?

My linguist colleague has clarified that she's looking specifically  
for the linguistic taxonomy of this.

Cheers
James

On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 12:01 PM, Adheesh Sathaye <adheesh1 at gmail.com> wrote:

     Dear James,

     In the epics, the phrase "carācara" (mobile/immobile) is quite  
common--see for example Bhagavad-gītā 10.39:
     yac cāpi sarvabhūtānāṃ bījaṃ tad aham arjuna |
     na tad asti vinā yat syān mayā bhūtaṃ carācaram ||


     All best wishes,

     Adheesh


     ----
     Adheesh Sathaye
     Department of Asian Studies
     University of British Columbia

     On Aug 5, 2011, at 8:36 AM, James Hartzell wrote:

     > HI
     >
     > A colleague has asked me the following question, and I thought  
some on this list might readily know the answer:
     >
     > 'Do you have in Sanskrit a conceptual dichotomy that  
corresponds to living/non-living or animate/inanimate?
     > What exactly does the taxonomy look like? (is the opposition  
something like human vs. animals vs plants vs material objects, or  
human and animal vs. plants vs material objects or human and animal  
and plant vs. material objects, or otherwise?)'
     >
     > Cheers
     > James Hartzell
     > Guest Researcher
     > CIMeC, Center for Mind/Brain Sciences
     > University of Trento
     > Mattarello, TN, Italy
     >