ahdyatma ramayane paniniya prayoga vimarsha

8/16/2019 Ahdyatma Ramayane Paniniya Prayoga Vimarsha

1/421

Adhyātmarāmāyaṇe’pāṇinīya–

prayogāṇāṃ Vimarśaḥ

Ācārya Giridharalāla Miśra Prajñācakṣuknown later as

Jagadguru Rāmānandācārya Svāmī Rāmabhadrācārya

Edited with notes by

Nityānanda Miśra


2/421


3/421

२०३८तम े व ैम ेऽ े स ूणा नस ंृितविवालयिवािवािरधः (पीएच ्. डी . ) इ ुपाधय े ुतः शोध ब ः

अारामायण ऽेिपाणनीययोगाणा ं िवमश ः

ण ेतारः

प द वा मा णपा रा वा री णाः ष श न प र म वी णाः स नात न धम स रंणध रुीणाःआचाय ि िगर ध रलािलम ाः ा च षुः(त युा म े जग ुरामानाचाय िामरामभाचाया ः िइत ाताः )

स च िवमश गौतमाय ेन ि प परा गौ त म ा मम ूलक े न िप डत गा य ी भ ूषिणमस ून ुनािनानिम णे

य था मि त स िाद त उ र णम ूल नाम ो क स िा ट णीि याि भः स ंिवध त


4/421

काशकःीत ुलसीपीठस ेवाासःिचक ू टः, स तनाज नप दः , म द ेशः, भार तम ्

ततृीयसणकीयस ंरणम ्ि वज यद शमी, ि व मा ः २ ० ७१(October 22, 2015)

© सवा िधकारःण ेतसृादकायः

Cover art created using two images. The first image is of amanuscript of the work Śābdabodha (MS Add.2464) available fromthe UCDL website under http://cudl.lib.cam.ac.uk/view/MS-ADD-02464/1. The second image is that of a painting from HimachalPradesh (1775-1800) titled as ‘Rama’s Court, Folio from a Ramayana(Adventures of Rama)’ available from the LACMA website under http://collections.lacma.org/node/198599.

प ुकिाानम ्http://www.jagadgururambhadracharya.org

अरस ंयोजकःिनानिमःTypeset in XƎLATEX using XƎTEX engine version 0.9998.

http://www.jagadgururambhadracharya.org/http://collections.lacma.org/node/198599http://cudl.lib.cam.ac.uk/view/MS-ADD-02464/1http://cudl.lib.cam.ac.uk/view/MS-ADD-02464/1


5/421

अन ुिमणका

सादकीयम ् १िपरचयः ११ क तृ जीवनव ृम ् १९

आचाय चरणाना ं िवदावली २७िशवाचः २९

श संा ३७आलोकनम ् ३९आभारदश नम ् ४१मलाचरणम ् ४५

ावना ४७१ िस का रक स मा स क रण म ् १२५ थमः िपर ेदः . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . १२७

बालकाडीययोगाणा ं िवमश ः . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . १२७अयोाकाडीययोगाणा ं िवमश ः . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . १५९

ि तीयः िपर ेदः . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . १८२

अरयकाडीययोगाणा ं िवमश ः . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . १८२ि िक ाका डीय यो गा णां ि व मश ः . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . २०५स ु र का डी य योगा णां ि व मश ः . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . २२०य ु का डी य योगा णां ि व मश ः . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . २२१


6/421

उरकाडीययोगाणा ं िवमश ः . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . २२७

२ क ृ ितकरणम ् २३१ थमः िपर ेदः . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . २३१

बालकाडीययोगाणा ं िवमश ः . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . २३१अयोाकाडीययोगाणा ं िवमश ः . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . २५१

ि तीयः िपर ेदः . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . २७३अ र य का डी य यो गाणां ि व मश ः . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . २७३ि िक ाका डीय यो गा णां ि व मश ः . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . २९२स ु र का डी य योगा णां ि व मश ः . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . २९९

य ु का डी य योगा णां ि व मश ः . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ३०१उ र का डी य यो गा णां ि व मश ः . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ३०६

३ धा त ुकरणम ् ३०९ थमः िपर ेदः . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ३०९

बालकाडीययोगाणा ं िवमश ः . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ३०९अयोाकाडीययोगाणा ं िवमश ः . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ३३९

ि तीयः िपर ेदः . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ३६९अरयकाडीययोगाणा ं िवमश ः . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ३६९ििकाकाडीययोगाणा ं िवमश ः . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ३८०स ु र का डी य योगा णां ि व मश ः . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ३९०य ु का डी य योगा णां ि व मश ः . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ३९७उ र का डी य यो गा णां ि व मश ः . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ४०३

स े तारस चूी ४०७


7/421

सादकीयम ्

श ु ा ातोः क ृ ा ं ि णि च िसन ियङ वा नामजा ोपस गा -ातोवा ित द ं िवकरिणिविधभागमाद ेशकाय ः।

क ृ ािता ं ितपदजनकााधयन ् स ुििभ ंाक ु व न ् सव शा ं जयित ग ु वरः ि या ा नन ेः॥

‘‘Deriving the conjugational form (tiṅanta) and theform with a primary sux (kṛdanta) using the rules of

inserted conjugational axes (vikaraṇa‑s) and the operations of

augmentation (āgama) and substitution (ādeśa) in the natural

( prakṛti), causative (ṇic), desiderative ( san), or intensive ( yaṅ)sense from an original root (dhātu), or from a denominative root

(nāmadhātu), or from a root with a prex (upasarga); [deriving]

the form with a secondary sux (taddhitānta) from a form with

a primary sux (kṛdanta); [and deriving] the inected form

( subanta) from a lemma ( prātipadika)—thus explaining the entire

scripture [of Vyākaraṇa]—the foremost Guru, one of whoseeyes is the knowledge of the derivational process ( prakriyā) [of

Vyākaraṇa], is [ever] victorious.’’अ ा ा य स भा ा ं सवरिचक ृ ित ं क ठ े दधानो

ायान ् सवा न ् िवजानन ् भरणिहरक ृ तौ वा ं कीण म ।्

िसाान ् िकारकाथा न ् िफ णिप तर च नाः कौ ड भ ाय सार ंच ा णः शा बो ध ं जयित ग ुवरो दश नानन ेः॥

‘‘Having committed to His memory the Aṣṭādhyāyī ,along with the work of Vararuci (the Vārttika‑s) and the


8/421


commentary ( Mahābhāṣyam); specially knowing all the axioms

(nyāya‑s), [the three books titled] Brahma, Vākya and Prakīrṇa

in the work of Bhartṛhari (Vākyapadīyam), the principles

( siddhānta‑s) [of Vyākaraṇa], the meanings of the kārikā‑s [inthe Vaiyakaraṇasiddhāntakārikāḥ], the works of Nāgeśa, and

the sāra (Vaiyākaraṇabhūṣaṇasāraḥ) of the noble Kauṇḍabhaṭṭa;

and expounding on verbal cognition ( śābdabodha)—the foremost

Guru, one of whose eyes is the knowledge of the philosophy [of

Vyākaraṇa], is [ever] victorious.’’This phenomenal work is the result of spontaneous dictation

over only thirteen days by my Gurudeva, the polymath saint

Jagadguru Rāmānandācārya Svāmī Rāmabhadrācārya, earlier

known as Ācārya Giridharalāla Miśra Prajñācakṣu. While

Gurudeva and His life need no introduction, the events which

led to the authoring of this work certainly deserve a mention.

Gurudeva entered the academic world of Vārāṇasī in 1971, afterfour years of schooling in Jaunpur. He completed His bachelor’s

( śāstrī ) and master’s (ācārya) degrees from the Sampurnanand

Sanskrit University in 1974 and 1976, respectively. In 1976,

He was awarded the Chancellor’s gold medal, along with seven

gold medals. He then registered for a doctoral (vidyāvāridhi

or PhD) degree at the same university, but hardly spent any

time on research over the next ve years during which, as a

wandering kathā artiste (kathāvācaka) and ascetic (tapasvī ), He

traversed across the length and breadth of northern and western

India. In 1981, when Gurudeva wanted to be initiated as a

virakta saṃnyāsī in the order ( sampradāya) of Rāmānanda, one

of His close associates suggested that He complete the task

which He had set on ve years ago before severing all ties of

pūrvāśrama. Gurudeva then came to Vārāṇasī, and dictated this

work over thirteen days, as I have heard from Him and His close

२


9/421


associates. It may sound incredible to some, but it does not

take much to believe. All one needs to do is to take a look

at the endless literary output of Gurudeva consisting of more

than one hundred books and innumerable articles, speeches,songs, and verses—and consider the fact that all of this comes

from somebody who has been without eyesight since the age

of two months and had no formal education till the age of

seventeen. Although I was not born in 1981, I can attest to

another such miraculous feat in December 2013 when Gurudeva

authored a 300-page book—the Mūlārthabodhinī commentaryon the Bhaktamāla of Gosvāmī Nārayaṇadāsa (Nābhājī)—in just

sixteen hours of recording spread over nine days.1 Being a

witness to this feat, I have no doubts that this PhD thesis

was dictated by Gurudeva over thirteen days. On September

24 1981, the thesis was examined by Paṇḍita Bhūpendrapati

Tripāṭhī, the former Head of Department of Vyākaraṇa at theSampurnanand Sanskrit University, and recommended for the

viva voce examination. The signature of Paṇḍita Bhūpendrapati

Tripāṭhī in green ink still adorns the rst page of the typed

manuscript. The thesis was then successfully defended in

Sanskrit by Gurudeva in the viva voce examination where the

examiners included stalwarts like Paṇḍita Kālikāprasāda Śukla

and Paṇḍita Paṭṭābhirāma Śāstrī.2

I had read about this work in the bibliography of Gurudeva

published in many books authored by Him, as well as in

Svarṇayātrā, Gurudeva’s autobiographical account of His life till1 I co-edited the book. While proofreading, I listened to the complete

recording twice. There was never a pause to think or reect, and nobody

recited or read the original text of the Bhaktamāla for Gurudeva during therecording.2 It is unfortunate that no recording of the session exists—technology was

not as ubiquitous in India then as today. We all can only imagine what awonderful treat for the ears it would have been to hear the conversationsbetween the examiners and the researcher.

३


10/421


the year 2000. I was very curious to read this work given its

rather interesting title. I unsuccesfully tried to search for this

work at the Citrakūṭa āśrama of Gurudeva during my several

visits to the āśrama between 2009 to 2012. Nobody at theāśrama remembered where Gurudeva’s copy of the thesis was.

In 2011, I tried to nd it in the Rajkot āśrama of Gurudeva

with no success. I had almost given up on my search and

had decided to go to the Sampurnanand Sanskrit University,

hoping against hope to procure this thirty-year old thesis, when

fortunately, in the month of June 2012, I paid my rst visitwith my gurubhrātā Pavana Śarmā to Vasiṣṭhāyanam, Gurudeva’s

āśrama at Haridvāra. There, while going through a stack of rare

and old books, I found Gurudeva’s copy of the thesis—buried

under many other books, and with a torn cover, weak binding,

and yellow and brittle pages. I ipped through its pages and

started reading—like a curious child, who has just learned thebasics of linear algebra, going through derivations in the notes

of Isaac Newton or Carl Friedrich Gauss. Though I had been

teaching myself Vyākaraṇa since 2007, my ve years of self-

learning was cast away by reading a few lines of the thesis. So

engrossed I was in the two or three derivations of the work that

the typographic mistakes became invisible to me. After around

ve minutes, I could not read it any further—it was too much for

me to understand. I put down the thesis and said to myself, “This

work has to be published, else one day it may be lost forever.”

Gurudeva kindly gave me the permission to take the thesis with

me, and also gave His blessing to my wish. I feel His blessing is

what has materialized as this editor’s note after three years.

For those who work in the investment banking industry,

time is a luxury they can rarely aord. The typed manuscript

was full of errors—unfortunately the scribe and the typist did

४


11/421


not have even basic knowledge of Sanskrit. Due to the many

mistakes, I abandoned my idea of typing the work myself as it

was too time-consuming. I decided to scan the book and posted

a message on several mailing lists asking for help in data-entry. Iwas enthused by the several responses, some of them oering

to work for free, that I received.3 One of the responses was

from the Bangalore-based scholar Vedavāridhi Dr. P. Ramanujan,

the āsthāna vidvān (assembly scholar) of the Ahobilamaṭha, an

authority on the Kṛṣna Yajurveda’s Taittirīya Śākhā, and currently

a member of the Second Sanskrit Commission. Dr. Ramanujan’sParankushachar Institute of Vedic Studies (PIVS) is engaged in

the digitization and publication of many Sanskrit works. Dr. K.

S. Mukundan of the institute ably typed the work in a few months

and Dr. Ramanujan did the rst round of proofreading. I oer

my fervent thanks to both Dr. Mukundan and Dr. Ramanujan

without whose help this work would not have been published.Over the next few months, I proofread and edited the work,

adding original verses of Adhyātma Rāmāyaṇa and citing the

work’s around 1650 references in the process. Several members

of the Bhāratīyavidvatpariṣad mailing list helped me trace the

original sources of many citations, and I thank all of them. The

rst edition of the work was released online in HTML format in

June 2013, one year after I had rst seen the work. The second

edition, which made many corrections, was released online in

HTML format in October 2013.

Although the second edition was complete and many

typographic mistakes in the typed manuscript had been

corrected, I was nevertheless not satised as I knew I had not3 And also amused by a self-proclaimed Sanskrit scholar who tried his

best to eece me by quoting a ludicrously high price. Frustrated with hisrepeated questioning on who I was engaging and how much I was paying,when I told him even esteemed scholars were quoting one-fourth of his rate,he responded nonchalantly, “That is very reasonable [sic].”

५


12/421


understood the work and may had not done complete editorial

justice to the work due to the lack of my understanding. In

addition, I knew that at some places words or sentences were

missing in the manuscript, leading to a lack of continuity. Thefollowing words of Gosvāmī Tulasīdāsa in the Rāmacaritamānasa

(1.30A-B) were echoing in my mind—

म प ुि िन न ज ग ु स न स ुनी क था सो स ूकरख ेत।सम ुझी िन ह ं ित स बा ल प न त ब िअ त र ह ेउ ँ अच ेत॥

ोता बा यानिनिध कथ ा राम क ै ग ूढ़।

ि किम सम ुझ म जी व ज ड़ िक ल म ल ि स ित ब म ूढ़॥‘‘And then I heard the same kathā from my Guru at

Vārāhakṣetra, but I could not understand it as I was extremly

ignorant in that phase of childhood. The kathā of Rāma is

dicult to understand; the listeners and speakers are rich with

knowledge. How could I, an especially foolish and unintelligent

being seized by the vices of the Kali age, understand it?’’The answer came from what Tulasīdāsa had said next in the Rāmacaritamānasa (1.31.1)—

त िद प क ही ग ु बारिह ं बारा। सम ुि झ प री क िम त अ न ुसारा॥

‘‘Still, the Guru narrated it again and again, and then Iunderstood it somewhat, in accordance with my intellect.

’’I decided to read the work, my edited version, againand again. After three iterations, I was condent of my

understanding, and decided to publish a third edition with

footnotes reecting my insights. In addition, I decided that the

this new edition would be typeset in XƎLATEX. The typesetting

was completed in December 2013, following which I started

editing the work again. My understanding of grammaticalprocess and philosophy increased manifold while editing the

work second time, and I could successfully solve the derivations

for the explanations. These derivations were also included as

६


13/421


footnotes. The work on the third edition began in January

2014 and was completed in February 2015, interrupted by

another book of Gurudeva which I proofread, typeset and co-

edited;4

and my move from Hong Kong to Mumbai in July 2014.From February to August 2015, I was occupied with authoring,

typesetting, designing, and publishing my rst English book,

Mahāvīrī: Hanumān-Cālīsā Demystifed.5 This delayed the online

publication of the third edition of this book, Adhyātmarāmāyaṇe’-

pāṇinīyaprayogāṇāṃ Vimarśaḥ.

The text of the third edition with nearly 1,200 footnotesruns into nearly 375 pages now, as opposed to around 240 pages

for the text of the rst and second editions. The number of

works cited in the second addition is close to 175 as opposed

to 65 in the rst and second editions. Hundreds of vyutpatti‑s

(etymologies) and prakriyā‑s (derivations) have been included

in footnotes. Most of the original text in this third edition isthe same as that in the rst and second editions except for

orthographic and editorial corrections, and supplying the text

missing from the manuscript after consultations with Gurudeva.

Some minor additions have been made at some places following

my discussions with Gurudeva regarding several usages and

forms, in order to facilitate better understanding of the matter

at hand.

I am indebted to the many sources I have used for my

understanding and editing of Gurudeva’s work. The Hindi

commentaries on the Aṣtādhyāyi by Devaprakāśa Pātañjala and

Paṇḍita Īśvaracandra (each in two volumes), the six-volume

English commentary by Prof. Ramānātha Śarmā, and the

three-volume Hindi commentary on the Laghusiddhāntakaumudī 4 This book was the Mūlārthabodhinī commentary on the Bhaktamāla.5 The book is a translation and expansion, with notes, of the Mahāvīrī

commentary on the Hanumān-Cālīsā by Gurudeva.

७


14/421


by Ācārya Govindaprasāda Śarmā have been of invaluable

help. Their focus on the derivational process of Pāṇinian

grammar is remarkable. Puṣpā Dīkṣita’s Aṣṭādhyāyī Sahajabodha,

T. R. Kṛṣṇācārya’s Bṛhaddhāturūpāvalī , and S. RāmasubrahmaṇyaŚāstrī’s Kṛdantarūpamālā have been especially helpful in

understanding the third chapter ( Dhātuprakaraṇam), arguably

the most involved chapter of the work.6 The Kṛdantarūpamālā

has also been helpful in understanding the second chapter

( Kṛttaddhitaprakaraṇam). The Upasargārthacandrikā of Cārudeva

Śāstrī is another work which I have found very useful. The Śabda-kalpadrumaḥ and Vācaspatyam—possibly the greatest dictionaries

ever written in any language—and the Amarakoṣa and its various

commentaries (especially Vyākhyāsudhā) have been helpful for

many etymologies, as has been Apte’s Sanskrit-Hindi dictionary.

Comments and responses over emails from members of the

Bhāratīyavidvatpariṣad mailing list and discussions over phoneand email with Mātājī Puṣpā Dīkṣita, Prof. Ramānātha Śarmā,

and Prof. George Cardona on specic forms and derivations

have greatly benetted my understanding. The meticulous

proofreading by Dr. H. N. Bhat has helped correct several errors

in the draft and add some more insightful footnotes. Lastly, I

am indebted to all the traditional commentaries including thegreat Mahābhāṣya, the brilliant Kāśikā, the useful Nyāsa, the

illuminating Siddhāntakaumudī , the delightful Bālamanoramā,the

enlightening Tattvabodhinī , and the small yet illuminating Laghu-

siddhāntakaumudī .

I cannot thank enough Prof. Mādhava Deśapāṇḍe, Devarṣi

Kalānātha Śāstrī, Dr. Himāṃśu Poṭā, and Dr. BaladevānandaSāgara for taking time out of their busy schedules to write6 I have heard that mastering verbal derivations is the most challenging

part of Sanskrit grammar, and I can attest to the same—(s)he who can deriveverbal forms can easily derive all other forms.

८


15/421


praśasti‑s for this work. I oer special thanks to Śatāvadhāni

R. Gaṇeśa for writing a citrakāvya praśasti in praise of Gurudeva.

All these are exemplary scholars in the eld of Sanskrit, and it is

a privilege for me that they have adorned my rst edited workin Sanskrit with their words. I shall be forever indebted to all of

them.

Before I end this note, I would like to oer thanks to my near

and dear ones who made this work possible. The cooperation

of my wife was indispensable in completion of the work—her

support has always been present for the digitization and editingof Gurudeva’s works. My children Nilayā and Nirāmāya often

made me get up from long sessions spent with my books and

laptop, and return afresh to solve intricate derivations. My elder

sister and her children were often troubled by my early morning

and late night work on the this edition for nearly a month in

Hong Kong, and were very kind to adjust. Relentless and selesshard work is what my mother has taught me, not by her words

but by her actions, and the same spirit kept me going during the

editing. The genius of my father and his indomitable self-belief

has been and will continue to be my inspiration. Lastly, the work

is dedicated to my late grandparents, Śrīmatī Kausalyā Devī Miśra

and Śrī Śrīgopāla Miśra, to whom I owe my love of all the threetreasures of humans—literature ( sāhitya), music ( saṅgīta), and art

(kalā).

No part of this work would have been even conceivable

without the divine grace of Gurudeva, the saint of our times and

the personication of all of India’s traditional knowledge. I bow

to His lotus-feet again and again for giving me this opportunityto serve Him and taking time out to adress doubts I had while

editing the work.

I respectfully oer this work to all scholars and students of

९


16/421


Sanskrit grammar, and request them to excuse and point out any

editorial mistakes that may have still remained. I summarize my

humble eort as—

राम भ ो ि ह जानाि त राम भ सर तीम ।्राम भ ो ि ह जानाि त राम भ सर तीम ॥्

त ृ पयवै जा निात ि ना न ः िच ि चत ॥्

‘‘Verily, [only] Rāmabhadrācārya understands the speechof the auspicious Rāma. Verily, [only] the auspicious

Rāma understands the speech of Rāmabhadrācārya. By the

divine grace of both, Nityānanda understands [the speech of Rāmabhadrācārya] here and there.’’

Nityānanda Miśra

Mumbai, August 22 2015

१०


17/421

िपरचयः

Adhyātmarāmāyaṇe’pāṇinīyaprayogāṇāṃ Vimarśaḥ

(English: Deliberation on non-Pāṇinian usages in the Adhyātma

Rāmāyaṇa) is a comprehensive Sanskrit essay (nibandha) inaround 50,000 words, authored in 1981 by my Gurudeva, Ācārya

Giridharalāla Miśra Prajñācakṣu (known in his current Āśrama

as Jagadguru Rāmanandācārya Svāmī Rāmabhadrācārya). The

work was spontaneously dictated by Gurudeva over only thirteen

days in 1981. A disciple of Gurudeva, Dayāśaṅkara Pāṇdeya,

was the scribe who took dictation from Gurudeva. The entirework was authored by Gurudeva without any book or references,

with all the text of Adhyātma Rāmāyaṇa, Aṣṭādhyāyī , Mahābhāṣya

and many other works in the memory (kaṇṭhastha) and all the

Pāṇinian prakriyā‑s in the mind (buddhistha). At the end of the

work, Gurudeva says—

ब ुा ीग ु पा दप र ज सा स ंश ु या साद र ंकृ ा ल ेखकमाशीलयशस ं िश ं िशश ु ं राघवम ।्बालो न ि वलोच नो ि गि रध रः श ा न ् िवभााऽना

बाित िनबम ेतममल ं तोषाय सीताप त ेः॥

‘‘Making the infant Rāma, his disciple endowed with moralconduct and fame, as the scribe, the child Giridhara, devoid

of physical vision, after respectfully examining words with hisintellect which was made especially pure by the pollen from

the lotus-feet of the revered Guru, composed this work for the

pleasure of the lord of Sītā.’’


18/421

िपरचयः

The work was then typed and presented as a doctoral thesis

( śodhaprabandha) at the Sampurnanand Sanskrit University, for

which the degree of Vidyāvāridhi (Ph.D.) was conferred upon

Gurudeva in 1981. The thesis was reviewed by the grammarian(vaiyākaraṇa) and epic-poet (mahākavi) Kālikāprasāda Śukla,

who wrote the following verse in the Vasantatilakā metre to

describe it—

शो ध ब िप रशीलन तः स म ा ा य त े मितमद ं मम य ुिय ुम ।्शोधबमकरमध ुतोऽय ं िविमृियवद ं लभितामदानीम ॥्

‘‘My logical conclusion, that arises from having thoroughlyexamined the dissertation, is that he (Giridhara Miśra) isthe bumblebee for the nectar of literary compositions for

purication. May he now [eortlessly] obtain the praise and

fame which is especially sought after by the learned.’’The work is divided into four parts— Prastāvanā, Sandhi-

kārakasamāsaprakaraṇam, Kṛttaddhitaprakaraṇam, and Dhātu- prakaraṇam.

Prastāvanā: The introduction begins with tracing the

tradition of Vyākaraṇa. A wide range of topics are rst covered

like nature of Veda, origin of Veda, apauruṣeyatā of Veda,

vedatrayī and vedacatuṣṭayī , śruti and Veda, lakṣaṇa of vidhi and

niṣedha, relation between śruti and smṛti, ve sampradāya‑s basedon smṛti‑s, ve types of Vaiṣṇava upāsanā‑s, Vedānta, Purāṇa,

Itihāsa, fourteen vidyā‑s including six darśana‑s, three types of

āgama‑s and two types of mārga‑s, and the six vedāṅga‑s—the

chief amongst which is Vyākaraṇa. Next, the importance of

Vyākaraṇa is stressed. The nine vyākaraṇa‑s are mentioned,

following which some unique aspects of Pāṇini’s grammar arediscussed. The terms āpta and śiṣṭa are dened, along with

generic denitions of śiṣṭaprayoga and sādhutva, which are to be

followed by Vyākaraṇa and not the other way round. Sādhutva is

१२


19/421

िपरचयः

then redened in the context of the prakriyā of Pāṇini’s grammar.

Deeper insights going beyond the realm of grammar are arrived

at from some sūtra‑s of Pāṇini. The essay then delves on sūtratva

and lakṣaṇa of six types of sūtra‑s and their interplay is explainedwith the comprehensive example of iko yaṇaci (PS 6.1.77). This

is followed by the position of works of Kātyāyana and Patañjali in

the Vyākaraṇa tradition. Mahābhāṣya and its position is described

in detail with examples. Following this, prakriyā and darśana—

the two eyes of the Vyākaraṇa tradition—are described with

the works of both, and the philosophy of Vyākaraṇa traditionis compared with that of other darśana‑s. Śābdbodha and śakti

are then explained as per Vyākaraṇa. The relevance of Pāṇini’s

grammar is discussed in the context of the Rāmāyaṇa tradition,

including the Adhyātma Rāmāyaṇa. Some insights into the

Rāmāyaṇa tradition from Pāṇini’s grammar are discussed, and

all the fourteen Śiva Sūtra‑s are then interpreted in the contextof Rāmāyaṇa. The question of seemingly non-Pāṇinian usages

in śiṣṭaprayoga‑s, like those in Adhyātma Rāmāyaṇa, is raised.

Gurudeva says that it is very much possible to explain all

śiṣṭaprayoga‑s by Pāṇini’s grammar. After explaining the the

relation between Vyākaraṇa and Adhyātma Rāmāyaṇa, the latter

work is described in some detail. Adhyātma Rāmāyaṇa’s origin,

poetic features, rasa‑s, nāyaka and its relevance and usefulness

in the context of the Rāmāyaṇa tradition is discussed. The

author stresses that since both Pāṇini’s grammar and Adhyātma

Rāmāyaṇa come from Lord Śiva, there must be consistency

(ekavākyatā) between the two. Gurudeva says that in the

Adhyātma Rāmāyaṇa, there are 700-odd usages that “appear to

be non-Pāṇinian.” Around half of these usages are examined and

explained using the Pāṇinian framework (others being similar to

those explained).

१३


20/421

िपरचयः

I. Sandhikārakasamāsaprakaraṇam: The rst chapter

is split into two parts and examines 140 sequential usages

in the Adhyātma Rāmāyaṇa pertaining to sandhi, kāraka and

samāsa. It begins with an insightful grammatical explanation of the compound Adhyātma Rāmāyaṇa. Quite often two or three

solutions, and sometimes upto six or seven solutions in the

Pāṇinian framework are given for the seemingly non-Pāṇinian

forms.

II. Kṛttaddhitaprakaraṇam: The second chapter is also

split into two parts and examines 90 sequential usages in the Adhyātma Rāmāyaṇa pertaining to kṛt and taddhita axes. Again,

multiple Pāṇinian explanations are oered for many usages.

IIII. Dhātuprakaraṇam: The third chapter explains 135

sequential tiṅanta usages in the Adhyātma Rāmāyaṇa that are

seemingly non-Pāṇinian. Mostly one and sometimes two or three

explanations are oered in the Pāṇinian framework for theseusages.

Features

Some unique features of the work include—

1. Pāṇinian explanations of 365 seemingly non-Pāṇinian usages

using various Pāṇinian sūtra‑s, vārttika‑s, kārikā‑s, niyama‑s, paribhāṣā‑s, and jñāpaka‑s, in accordance with traditional

commentaries.

2. More than 1500 citations from works of diverse elds, and

many more from oral traditions. On including the editor’s

footnotes and derivations in the third edition, there are more

than 6500 citations from around 175 works.3. Śiva Sūtra‑s explained in the context of Rāmāyaṇa, with a

Rāmāyaṇa-centric interpretation of each sūtra. This section

of the work compares with the Nandikeśvara Kāśikā.

१४


21/421

िपरचयः

4. Hundreds of Pāṇinian prakriyā‑s, some abridged and some

detailed. In the second addition, hundreds of complete

Pāṇinian derivations are given in the editor’s footnotes,

corresponding to the abridged and detailed derivations bythe author.

5. Lucid explanations of complex grammatical concepts.

6. Vivid descriptions in poetic style, with some daṇḍaka-

style samāsa‑s formed from several hundreds of words

compounded together.

7. Didactic approach with many counter-questions and doubts

raised by nanu, na ca, et cetera, and all of them resolved in

favour of the proposed solutions.

8. Nyāya-styled lakṣaṇa‑s of many concepts, both grammatical

and non-grammatical.

9. Vaiyākaraṇa śābdabodha‑s of common terms ( śruti, veda,anuśāsana, vyākaraṇa, et cetera) and involved grammatical

usages (vāraṇārtha, karmamūlakasambandha, samāsa, śaiṣika-

ṣaṣṭhī , tatkaroti usage, tadiva ācarati usage, tiṅanta usage from

a pacādyajantakvibanta nāmadhātu, ṇijanta usage, svārtha-

ṇijanta usage, vartamānasāmīpya usage, et cetera).

10. Critical insights into many original verses of Adhyātma Rāmāyaṇa using traditional methods of interpretation. The

work may be thought of as a mini-commentary on the

Adhyātma Rāmāyaṇa.

Besides satisfying scholars of Vyākaraṇa and the

connoisseurs of Adhyātma Rāmāyaṇa, the work is very useful for

students learning Pāṇini’s Vyākaraṇa. Having acquired all mylimited learning in Sanskrit grammar exclusively from self-study

( svādhyāya), I can personally attest to the extraordinary benets

the work oers for grammar students, especially those studying

१५


22/421

िपरचयः

by svādhyāya. Just like a picture is worth a thousand words,

similarly a prakriyā is worth the understanding of tens of sūtra‑s,

a grammatical insight is worth tens of such prakriyā‑s, and a

śābdabodha is worth tens of such grammatical insights. Thework—replete with prakriyā‑s, insights and śābdabodha‑s—oers

a rare source of learning for students and scholars of Pāṇinian

Vyākaraṇa.

I am a quantitative analyst by profession, and Applied

Statistics is one of my areas of work. From the viewpoint

of Statistics, I see the Pāṇinian grammar as a parsinomiousstatistical model which Pāṇini formulated to explain the variation

in the innitely many śiṣṭa prayoga‑s which formed his dataset.

No statistical model with nite predictors can explain all of

the variation in an innitely large dataset. Pāṇini’s model was

the best model ever formulated for this purpose, and could

account for a very large degree of variation. Vararuci’s vārttika‑sand Patañjali’s bhāṣya extended the model by introducing

additional model complexity, and explaining further variation

in the data of śiṣṭa prayoga‑s. All of these great grammarians

were mathematicians, and I see them as statisticians since like

Statistics, Sanskrit grammar also combines mathematics and

philosophy—the two eyes of Sanskrit grammar being prakriyā

(mathematical derivations) and darśana (philosophy). This work

is also largely mathematical in nature, interpreting or extending

Pāṇini’s model to explain the variation of śiṣṭa prayoga‑s seen in

the Adhyātma Rāmāyaṇa. With this conclusion, I believe students

and scholars of computational liguistics also stand to gain from

the study of this work.

The original work and the editor’s footnotes in the third

edition (except for some citations) are entirely in Sanskrit. For

the benet of students of Sanskrit and linguistics, I plan to

१६


23/421

िपरचयः

translate the work into English and Hindi some day. The next

edition of the work will hopefully come with an English or Hindi

translation.

Nityānanda Miśra

Mumbai, August 22 2015

१७


24/421


25/421

क तृ जीवनव ृम ्

ल े खकौ – वाचि तिमः, त ुलसीदासपरौहा( स ाद कः – ि न ान ि म ः)

स ंृत सिाह ज गि त िथ तकीत यो ि वल ण ितभाव ः पद वा मा ण-पा रा वा री णाः प ि वभ ूषणिसाहाकादमीिरायप ुरािरादप ुरृताः कि वक ु लरिानमद ेश सतनामडलवित ि न म िाक नी सि लिलव मल सि ललास े ि चक ू ट ेक ृ ितन वा सा अ हो रा ं कारचनााज ेन स ुरभारतीसमच न े सिमप त जी वना था चिवकलाजनतोपासनाया ं सतत ं स ंल ाः श ताव धाि न कव यः िाम राम भ ा चाया ः क े न नाय े।

वदन ं सादसदन ं सदय ं दय ं स ुधाम ुचो वा चः ।करण ं परोपकरण ं य ेषा ं क े षा ं न त े वाः॥

िइ त य तृ िह र णा सा क ू त ं स मा िभा ण त द ेतदश ेष ं समस ं ुत र ण ेतषृ ुधम चिवत ष ु महामहोपााय ेष ु वाचितष ु महािकवष ु सव तत ेष ु ानयी-भाकार ेष ु सवा ायिीचक ू टत ुलसीपीठाधीर ेष ु ीमग ुीरामानाचाया द-िामीरामभाचाय चरण ेष ु।

ज – ाि मराम भ ाचाया णा ं िजनरद ेश े जौनप ुरजनपदाव ित िनिशाडख ुद नामक े ाम े ि सहिाधकष े वैम ेऽ े माघक ृ कैादया ं तदन ुसार ंपाशर ैकोिनव ंिशत शत ई सवीया े म करसाौ (१४ जनवरी १९५०) व ैवत-वासर े ि नि श ि न शी थाि भ म ुा ं मकरिराशगत े िस व ितर िव स गो ी यस र य ूपारीिणवामल ेक ु ल े ि विव ुताणक ु लालार ीराजद ेविम च त ुथा पप ेणाखड-सौ भा य वाः ीम ाः श ची द ेा दिणक ु ितः समभवत ।् एत ेषा ं नामकरण ं

ििगरधरलाल िइ त क ृ ा ि पत रौ मोद मा वह ौ मास यािवध म ेव याि पतवौ हा हतदानीम ेव दवैिव पाकात ् रोआ जा को पा ा लक बा िग ता । व ुतसारम ेत ंस ंसार ं नावलोिकयत ुकाम ेनान ेन न वजा ति शश ुन ैव िमास ेन भ ौि तक े च ुषी ि नमीि लत ेइ ु ेामह े। ए ता न ् ििबाधतान ् ि व ा य म ह ुःखमन ुभ व ः ि प ता म हाः ी स ूय िबल-


26/421


िममहोदयाान ् ीमगवीता ं वार ं वार ं िाव तव ः । त ेन प व ष ावायाम ेवज ा रीय ि तभा ा ग भ ग व ज नसा धन ध ना ि व ल ण ि त भा शीलाः ाच ुोििगरधरनामानोऽश ेषा ं गीता ं कठीक ृ तवः।

िशाज नम ् – बा े ि िगरधरलािलाभध ेयाना ं जग ुरामभाचाया णा ं ािथम की ि श ा ि पतामह सि धाव ेव सा। एत े जानकीजीवनलीलािलाल-िधयो िपतामहचरण ेो गोािमत ुलसीदासणीत ं ीमामिचरतमानस ंसाोपा ं सान ुप ूवक ं िपसािसहत ं ााम ेव मासाा ं कठीक ृ ाम एववष रामनवामावयन ।् एत ेषा ं ि िवशा ं ा ं लोच ं लोच ं ि प ता महाः स ूय िबल-महोदयाः िपतरौ च स ंृत पा र ि रिक श ा ं दािपयत ु ं ि नकटिवत न ं स ुजानप ुर ं

ीगौरीशरस ंृतमिहावालयम ेतान ् षैयन ।् क ु शाब ुिस ा एक ुता१ि िग रध िरम ा ा िर क ा क रणि श ा ं ताकरिणवभागा े ः ीशीत ला -सािदम ेः सावः ोकस ंाररचना ं च स मि धग तव ः त साि ह-िवभागा े ः ी राम म नो र िथ पाि ठ महा भा ग े ः। ीगौरीश र स ंृतमिहावालय ेनाकरण ं म ुिवषय ेन ीक ृ थ मातो ममा ेणीपय ं सवा ः परीाःिसवष ेशा ं सव ाथ ेन थम ेया सम ुीयिशाथ वाराणा ं स ूणा न-

स ंृितविवालय ं ि व व ः। त ाली न ा कर िणव भागा ा णा ं ीभ ूप ेिपत-ििपाठना ं शीतल ेहायाया ं वयैाकरणभ ूषणसारम ् एव ं िशािकशरोिमणीिपडत-िकालकासादश ुमहाभागाना ं ीचरणकमलिसधावा ं ाकरणटीकाान ्समधी प ुनिाितरसमय े िितदन ं साय ं ष ो रा िव धं २ सम ुिपव य श साग र-मरिमताकरिणवभागाचराणानािमभनविपाणनीना ं डॉ॰रामसािदिपाठना ंिस धौ भा ा ा कर ण ा ना म ेषा ं न ा कर ण प दवा मा ण ा ना ं

सिपरार ं िनग ूढतबोधप ुरःसर ं िवश ेषमयन ं ि िवधव ु वा णाः िशा क ा मीस वीया ेचत ुःस ुरकैोिनव ंिशतशत े ि विवालय े सव मा ैः स ह स म ुीय थम ं ान ंल व ः। आ चा य क ा या मधीयानाः स ो भार तसव कार ा रा ायोि जता िख ल-भारतीयितियोगतास ु सवा िनप ित यिोग नः ित भया िपर भा वािदव वा दा ा री-समाप ूित ाकरणसा ेितपितियोगतास ु थम ं ान ं लवः । त प ुरत ु य ंस मा गता त ा ली ना धा निम णी ी मतीि रा गा ी प प ुरार ैः स हो र द ेश

क ृ त े ि वशालरजतिपकाप ं चलव ैजयीप ुर ा रिमप स सा ध ुवादमदात ।् ईसवी या ेष ुरकैोिनव ंिश त श त आ चा य का ं ि व ि व ा ल य स व ि प ि व भा ग ेष ु सवा िधकाैः१ ए कपाि ठन ए किस िाह णो वा।२ कालानोरसयंोग े (पा॰स ू॰ २.३.५) इ न ेन ि तीया।

२०


27/421


स ह स म ुीय ि िवशा ं िकीत मा भ ज ः िा म व य ो ि िग रध र ला लाि भ ध ेय े ः स ण -पदकािन क ु िलाधिपतण पदक ं िचामलन ।् स ूणा नस ं ृित व ि व ा ल य वैपी॰एच ॰् डी ॰ (िव ा विािर धः ) इ ुपाधय े अारामायण ेऽिपाणनीययोगाणा ं ि वमश ः

िइ त ि व ष य े शोध ब मि प ि िल ख त व ो ऽ न ुस ा नि वध या क े वलैयोदिशभर ेव ि द व सःै।त था च िपा णनी या ा ा ाः ि त स ू ं शाबोधसमीा िइत ि वष य े ि स ह पृाक ंशोधब ं णी य त ा द ेिव व ि व ा ल य तो डी ॰ि ल ट ्॰ ( वा च ि तः ) इ ुिपाधमलभ।

िवरदीोरजीवनम ् – १ ९ ८ ३ ई स वी या े िका कश ुपौण माा ं ीरामान-व ैवसदाय े िवरव ेषो ग ृही तो ि िगर ध र ला िलम चर ण ैः ीम दलक प ुरीयािगनिवासःफ ला हिार स या िस े ः ी ी रा मच रण दा सम हा भा ग ेः। यिप िमचरणःै

ी रा म म ो ि व र वै व स दा य दी ा च ग ृहीत े जी व न ा म ए व व ष ीमामवभा-शरणमहाराजचरणािरवम ुखक ृ पापा े ः ीम दी र दा सम हा भा ग ेो िवरव ेष-समकालम

ahdyatma ramayane paniniya prayoga vimarsha

Documents