In the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 4.3 there is a sentence that, if memory serves, can be read as either sam enena vadiṣya iti '[He thought], "I will speak with him"' or sa mene na vadiṣya iti 'He thought, "I will not say [all that I know]"'. Again if memory serves, Patrick Olivelle and Śaṅkara -- two great authorities in their different ways -- both uphold the latter meaning, but I admit the former has always made more sense to me (not least because the two people concerned do end up conversing in the very next sentence, using the verb sam+vad).

Martin Gansten


Harry Spier wrote:
Thanks for these replies.

What will help me the most is some very simple Sanskrit phrases that show  completely different meanings by how you put breaks in the transliteration.  I need to show examples of this to non-sanskritist, non-devanagari knowing typesetters.

The best I could come up with is:

पुष्पमध्येति स्मरति च

which can be:

puṣpam adhyeti smarati ca He turns his mind towards the lotus and remembers it.

or

puṣpa-madhyeti smarati ca = puṣpa-madhya iti smarati ca = He  remembers  [the phrase] "the middle of the lotus"

More examples like this would be useful.

Thanks,
Harry Spier