Thank you for your suggestion and interest, Jan. It is very refreshing to be allowed to discuss the technical meaning of Sanskrit astrological texts for once.

Your analysis of my translation is absolutely correct. However, I cannot help wondering how you know that the author 'KNEW that 99 percent of his contemporaneous readers' would understand sahita asya to represent sahitaḥ asya rather than sahite asya (for that, as I understand it, is the nub of your argument). But even granting for the sake of argument that this should be so, the sense of the verse still requires, in my view, that we side with the 1 percent.

Your suggested translation has the ruler of the ascendant:

there (tatra) [in that house, positively] aspected, or if [the ruler...] is (if not placed in that house, at least) joined (sahita[ḥ]) with it (tena) [with the house],

That is a rather long translation of six short words (tatra ca dṛṣṭe | tena vā sahita[ḥ]), and it has the presumed logical subject of the clause jumping from the earlier nominative (-patiḥ) to the locative (dṛṣṭe) and back again (sahitaḥ). More importantly, though, it conveys no real meaning, for a planet being joined with a house means nothing more or less than the planet occupying the house. This is a matter not only of established meaning (rūḍhi), but of lack of alternatives: what else could it mean? So I cannot agree with your suggestion.

Phrases meaning 'joined or aspected by' (often in compounds like yutekṣita, dṛṣṭayuk, etc.) are extremely common in astrological texts; the two typically go together and refer to the same subject (which may be a house, a planet, or some other point in the horoscope). To give just one example, consider the following stanza from the same work and chapter (12.47):

sute savīrye śubhayuṅnirīkṣite suteśvare kendragate balānvite |
tathaiva sāde sutasaukhyam īritaṃ sutātyayaḥ syād viparītage tathā ||

'If the fifth house is strong, joined or aspected by benefics; if the ruler of the fifth house, endowed with strength, occupies an angle; and if the lot likewise [is strong and benefic], happiness from children is declared [as the result]. Likewise, if [all are] conversely situated, the death of a child will occur.'

It thus seems more natural to me to take the sahita in dṛṣṭe ... sahita asya to represent sahite (agreeing with dṛṣṭe) than sahitaḥ, even if we could find a translation to make sense of the latter alternative.

Best wishes,
Martin


Den 2019-03-20 kl. 00:12, skrev Jan E.M. Houben:

HOWEVER, if we accept the verse without emendation, should not we read it in the way the author KNEW that 99 percent of his contemporaneous readers would read it?


The verse you quoted:

 

janmalagnapatir uttamavīryo yadgṛhe januṣi tatra ca dṛṣṭe |
tena vā sahita asya ca labdhis tad yathāṅgasukham abdatanau syāt ||

The translation you proposed (I supply the words on which each part is based, if I understand your analysis and interpretation correctly):

***

As the meaning is quite technical, I give my translation:

'If the house in which (yadgṛhe) the ruler of the ascendant of the nativity (janmalagnapatir) is [placed] with excellent strength (uttamavīryo) in the nativity is aspected (tatra ... dṛṣṭe) or (vā) joined by that [ruler] (tena ... sahite), [there is] attainment (labdhis) of [the matter signified by] that [house] (asya): for example (tad yathā), [if it is placed] in the ascendant of the year (abdatanau), there will be (syāt) be pleasures of the body (aṅgasukham).'

***

 

Now, reading the verse – if specialists familiar with the text agree there is no reason to propose any ad hoc emendation – with similar conceptual interpretations BUT in the way the author KNEW that 99 percent of his contemporaneous readers would read it (and paying more attention to the two ca’s, and letting both tatra and tena refer anaphorically to yadgṛhe) we get something that perhaps amounts to the same but is based on a different anvaya... :

 

If in a house (yadgṛhe) in a nativity (januṣi) the ruler of the ascendant of the nativity (janmalagnapatir) is having excellent strength, and [ca, extending the noun phrase] is there (tatra) [in that house, positively] aspected, or if [the ruler...] is (if not placed in that house, at least) joined (sahita[ḥ]) with it (tena) [with the house], then also [ca, perhaps referring to a statement in a previous verse, other conditions favouring labdhis?] [there is] attainment of [the matter signified by] that [house] (asya): for example (tad yathā), [if it is placed] in the ascendant of the year (abdatanau), there will be (syāt) pleasures of the body (aṅgasukham).


Bottom line: the use of square (and round) brackets is very much required when analysing Sanskrit especially in scientific or philosophical arguments -- as in the publication by Vincent Eltschinger, John Taber, Michael Torsten Much, Isabelle Ratié on Dharmakīrti’s Theory of Exclusion recently announced for "those among you who are still happy with square brackets". 


Best, 

Jan Houben

 


On Sun, 17 Mar 2019 at 20:11, Martin Gansten via INDOLOGY <indology@list.indology.info> wrote:
I have a question for the vaiyākaraṇas among us (who may find it very basic, in which case I apologize in advance):

In the Tājikayogasudhānidhi of Yādavasūri (fl. possibly early 17th century, possibly in or near Gujarat) there occurs the following stanza (12.15), the form of which is corroborated by several independent witnesses:

janmalagnapatir uttamavīryo yadgṛhe januṣi tatra ca dṛṣṭe |
tena vā sahita asya ca labdhis tad yathāṅgasukham abdatanau syāt ||

(As the meaning is quite technical, I give my translation: 'If the house in which the ruler of the ascendant of the nativity is [placed] with excellent strength in the nativity is aspected or joined by that [ruler, there is] attainment of [the matter signified by] that [house]: for example, [if it is placed] in the ascendant of the year, there will be pleasures of the body.')

From the context, the underlined phrase clearly stands for sahite + asya, with e > a. While this is standard sandhi before other vowels, I have never come across it before a. Is there a traditional rule that allows for  this?

Best wishes,
Martin Gansten

_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY@list.indology.info
indology-owner@list.indology.info (messages to the list's managing committee)
http://listinfo.indology.info (where you can change your list options or unsubscribe)


--

Jan E.M. Houben

Directeur d'Études, Professor of South Asian History and Philology

Sources et histoire de la tradition sanskrite

École Pratique des Hautes Études (EPHE, PSL - Université Paris)

Sciences historiques et philologiques 

54, rue Saint-Jacques, CS 20525 – 75005 Paris

johannes.houben@ephe.sorbonne.fr

johannes.houben@ephe.psl.eu

https://ephe-sorbonne.academia.edu/JanEMHouben