[INDOLOGY] Metrically restored Rgveda and traditional recitation

Tue Jan 13 17:01:54 UTC 2015

13 01 15

I too have to apologise for *íḍyo*/*íḷiyo* instead of *ī́ḍyo*/*ī́ḷiyo*.

Among others, there is no evidence that sandhi was compulsory in the Vedic
verse at least till the composition of the Paippalāda-Saṁhitā. There is a
saying quoted by Bhaṭṭoji Dīkṣita on SK 2232 (P 8.4.18) and ascribed to
Bhartṛhari (not found in the Vākyapadīya) telling where sandhi is
compulsory. The saying does not mention verse as calling for compulsory
sandhi. It was the norm, that I admit, but not in the early Vedic days nor
even in Pāṇini's time. By the time of the RP the Ṛgveda had started to be
read as a Saṁhitā  that is as a sandhied text and the old metrical balance
was lost. That compelled the RP to enunciate rules of disyllabic reading
which had been the only norm at the time of composition.

The above requires elaboration and that is possible. But this is no place
for that. But I mention one classical verse that reads unsandhied

*Yo dhruvāṇi parityajya adhruvāṇi niṣevate/ dhruvāṇi tasya naśyani adhruvaṃ
naṣṭam eva ca/ * The 'queer' phenomenon raised many eyebrows. Some even
emended *hy adhruvāṇi* and *hy adhruvaṃ* in violation of manuscript
readings. That was unfair.

Best

DB

On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 7:37 PM, George Cardona <cardonagj at verizon.net>
wrote:

> My apologies for the inadvertent typos: pādfas > pādas, elibible >
> eligible. GC
>
> On Jan 13, 2015, at 6:52 AM, George Cardona <cardonagj at verizon.net> wrote:
>
> I have a suggestion, which I proposed some years ago in *Purāṇa Itihāsa
> Vimarśa*, *Essays in Honour of Professor S. G. Kantawala, *Delhi/Varanasi,
> 1998, pp. 313-335 (‘Ideal and performance in Sanskrit’): the accepted text
> of the Ṛgveda included hypermetric (*bhurik*) and hypometric (*nicṛt*)
> pādas, which the Ṛgvedaprātiśākhya acknowledges.  The same prātiśākhya also
> provides that, for perfecting a pāda, one may break up the results of
> sandhi, including the insertion of *i *and *v* to give *iy, uv* instead
> of *y, v*.  The apparent inconsistencies are reconciled if one accepts
> that the ideal pādas arrived at are intended not for recitation but for
> theoretical purposes: to allow stating by rules the syllalbles of pādfas
> that are elibible for metrical lengthening and the structures of cadences.
> which Śaunaka also does in his prātiśākhya.  George
>
> On Jan 13, 2015, at 12:26 AM, Dipak Bhattacharya <dipak.d2004 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Is there a misunderstanding? There is no doubt that metrical defects that
> are incorrigible do exist. I came across cases of nine syllable
> gāyatrīs/anuṣṭubhs that have not been classified by the Prātiśākhyas.
> Whitney too noted some of them. These are defective metres and are meant
> when it is asserted that one syllable too many or less does not matter.
>
>
> But is not *íḍyo nū́tanair utá* to be read as *íliyo nū́tanair utá *covered
> by Ṛk-Prātiśākhya 17.14(22-23) and 8.22(40)? Again, that one is still asked
> to recite *váreṇiyaṃ *in RV 3.62.10a also points to the old tradition of
> reading disyllabic for metrical consistency. Obviously the RP means such
> cases as can be made regular by disyllabic reading. The tradition became
> weak and slack through the ages.
>
> Best
>
> DB
>
> On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 6:41 AM, Madhav Deshpande <mmdesh at umich.edu>
> wrote:
>
>> Hello Tim,
>>
>>      I myself was surprised by the statement from the Aitareya Brāhmaṇa
>> that I have cited.  How to bridge that statement and the treatment in the
>> Prātiśākhyas that you refer to is an important question.  One possibility
>> is that the analytical tradition of the Prātiśākhyas became consciously
>> aware of the metrical deviations and tried to account for them, while the
>> tradition represented by the AB did not much care for this issue.  This is
>> perhaps analogous to the earliest oral traditions of the Veda did produce
>> variant branch Samhitās with different readings, but with the later
>> development of the rigorous methods of recitation like the various
>> permutational Vikṛtipāṭhas, further splitting of the Saṃhitās was
>> arrested.  With metrical deviations, there is a similar possibility.  That
>> is just my guess.  Best,
>>
>> Madhav
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 6:26 AM, Lubin, Tim <LubinT at wlu.edu> wrote:
>>
>>>  But, Madhav, isn't it the case that the Prātiśākhyas (e.g., Ṛkpr. 8.22
>>> and 17.14) recognize that in Vedic hymns y and v must often be pronounced i
>>> and u?  Isn't indeed the Taittirīya convention of writing, e.g., suvar an
>>> explicit acknowledgement that it is dissyllabic, despite the convention
>>> elsewhere (where, nevertheless, a dissyllabic pronunciation might tacitly
>>> be acknowledged -- albeit this is a special case, a fixed form in TS.
>>>
>>>  Tim
>>>
>>>  Timothy Lubin
>>>  Professor of Religion and Adjunct Professor of Law
>>> Washington and Lee University
>>> Lexington, Virginia 24450
>>>
>>>   http://home.wlu.edu/~lubint
>>>  http://wlu.academia.edu/TimothyLubin
>>>  https://twitter.com/TimothyLubin
>>>  ḷ
>>>
>>>   From: Madhav Deshpande <mmdesh at umich.edu>
>>> Date: Monday, January 12, 2015 6:43 PM
>>> To: Dipak Bhattacharya <dipak.d2004 at gmail.com>
>>> Cc: Indology <indology at list.indology.info>
>>> Subject: Re: [INDOLOGY] Metrically restored Rgveda and traditional
>>> recitation
>>>
>>>   It is not clear how much the tradition was bothered by metrical
>>> inconsistencies.  There is an interesting passage in the Aitareya Brāhmana
>>> that says: na vā ekenākṣareṇa chandāṃsi viyanti na dvābhyām.  Even by a
>>> deviation of up to  two syllables, the tradition did not consider the meter
>>> to be violated.  The text titled Vedavicāra (19th century) that I am
>>> editing and translating cites this passages and extends it further: ekena
>>> dvābhyām ity upalakṣaṇam, tasmād akṣaranyūnādhikabhāvena chandāṃsi nānyathā
>>> bhavanti.  Thus, it seems to be that "metrically restored RV" is a purely
>>> modern creation.  If the Brāhmaṇa texts were not bothered by deviations of
>>> meters up to two syllables, can we be so certain that the authors of the
>>> Vedic hymns were so bothered.  There is a possibility that "metrically
>>> restoring texts" could be something like a modern hyper-correction.  Modern
>>> reciters of the Vedas that I am familiar with do not seem to worry about
>>> reciting a metrically correct text.  While they seem to show interest in
>>> reciting the various Pāṭhas and their permutations, I am not at all certain
>>> that they are scanning the recited text for metrical deviations.
>>>
>>>  Madhav Deshpande
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 8:46 PM, Dipak Bhattacharya <
>>> dipak.d2004 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> It is the metrically restored text which the Ṛk-Prātiśākhya enjoins for
>>>> recitation. I have heard the disyllabic recitation from at least two Vedic
>>>> reciters and was myself advised to do so with the few verses that I had to
>>>> learn to utter as a child. But I have not examined each and every case of
>>>> recitation.  I hope Professor Deshpande has the same experience
>>>>
>>>> Best
>>>>
>>>> DB
>>>>
>>>>  On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 8:12 PM, Harry Spier <
>>>> hspier.muktabodha at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>  Dear list members,
>>>>>
>>>>>  Do any members know if when the Rg Veda is recited by Vaidikas if
>>>>> that recitation agrees with the metrically restored Rg Veda or if they
>>>>> recite it like the written text with the metrical anomalies.
>>>>>
>>>>>  Thanks,
>>>>> Harry Spier
>>>>>
>>>>>  _______________________________________________
>>>>> INDOLOGY mailing list
>>>>> INDOLOGY at list.indology.info
>>>>> http://listinfo.indology.info
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> INDOLOGY mailing list
>>>> INDOLOGY at list.indology.info
>>>> http://listinfo.indology.info
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>  --
>>> Madhav M. Deshpande
>>> Professor of Sanskrit and Linguistics
>>> Department of Asian Languages and Cultures
>>> 202 South Thayer Street, Suite 6111
>>> The University of Michigan
>>> Ann Arbor, MI 48104-1608, USA
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Madhav M. Deshpande
>> Professor of Sanskrit and Linguistics
>> Department of Asian Languages and Cultures
>> 202 South Thayer Street, Suite 6111
>> The University of Michigan
>> Ann Arbor, MI 48104-1608, USA
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> INDOLOGY mailing list
>> INDOLOGY at list.indology.info
>> http://listinfo.indology.info
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> INDOLOGY mailing list
> INDOLOGY at list.indology.info
> http://listinfo.indology.info
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> INDOLOGY mailing list
> INDOLOGY at list.indology.info
> http://listinfo.indology.info
>
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://list.indology.info/pipermail/indology/attachments/20150113/f34c407b/attachment.htm>