Download pdf Book : http://ia600105.us.archive.org/15/items/satakasofbhartri00bharuoft/satakasofbhartri00bharuoft.pdf

Read Book Online : http://www.archive.org/stream/satakasofbhartri00bharuoft#page/n5/mode/2up

thanks!

ah, this one does not include the shringara shataka, citing difficulty of translation!

I am sure RBSI will dig up the missing rasa. What does the word shataka mean? 100 or 6? It is too close to cricket and some might claim the game was invented in India!

But Shringara-shataka is available with poetic rendering in Hindi from Chaukhamba Vidya Bhavan. But the swami who commented on the Nitoi and Vairagya Shatakas has glossed over the Shringara-shatakam as the same falls outside his purview. His Sanskrit commentary is invaluable on the other two. Though strictly speaking the shatakas' language is faily simple. The thoughts however are very apt and valid even to this day. I simple marvel at "sarve guNAH kA~nchanamAshrayante" where people fall over themselves to find non-existent virtues among the moneyed and powerful..

shatakam(शतकम्) = collection of 100 = centum; 6= ShaTkam(षट्कम्)

Sixers and centuries not to mention overs. (The Sringara one was perhaps a no-ball.

did anyone notice how the publisher/translator happily claims on the cover that the volume has all the 3 shatakas (shataka-trayam)?

Yes, Pankaj the cover is misleading. But the fact that Bhartrihari wrote the three shatakas is known to all students of Sanskrit. Of Bhartrihari's life the same legends that are current are only recounted. The dating of the poet is also as confusing as ever. Just as I generally feel about ancient Indian writings. Authors neither mention much about themselves, their family and scholastic background, nor are of any help regarding recording the period of time in which the work was written. Thus fixing the date becomes for every translator/editor of commentaries his.her first exercise in Logic with the very sketchy material available. Most dating exercises are like solving a complex equation with almost infinite number of possibilities. This is not just the fate of Bhartrihari. This is true of every author from Ancient India.

If one observes vAkyapadIyam's depth of scholarship, or the plan of the work as an effort in building in one compass a two-in-one work on rephrasing of Sanskrit Grammar as a Philosophy of Advaita Vedanta- IOW, the vAkyapadIyam seems to have been composed to serve at once as a compendium of Sanskrit Grammar and Vedanta Philosophy. It is very difficult to accept that the person who composed the shatakas and vAkyapadIyam are one and the same.

In vAkyapadIyam the author goes to great lengths to create in Principles of Sanskrit Grammar,in the Organizational Structure of Grammatical primitives and derivatives, a dual of the argumentation of the Vedantic Philosophy's Organization. I have seen my teacher a Vishishtadvaitin by birth and training get very disconcerted by the effort. It is a very subtle way of trying to impress upon the scholar somehow Advaita is the real import of the Vedas!

Contrast vAkyapadIyam with the shataka traya esp. the astute realism of the nItishataka and the total abandon in the amorous shringarashataka, the picture that emerges is that of the disillusioned royal family member. The realism of the nItishataka makes one laud the closeness of the author to workaday world. The shringara shataka of someone who could have gained firsthand experience of art of love as made possible for someone who has had the fortune of the permissive pleasures of the harem. The disillusionment with the engagement of the pleasures of the senses is much evident in the vairagya-shatakam. Thus the normal progression of life and life's education is very clear in the three. In contrast the vAkyapadiyam is an exercise in intellectual flight, in the capacity of a lifelong scholar of only Language and Philosophy.

I have seen many a romeo turn philosophers when the heart was broken. So there should be no reason why the author of Shatakas cannot be the author of Vakyapadiyam. I find it difficult to understand a study of grammar and the philosophy of adwaita, both are woven in the same text. But as Mahadeva S Sarma seems to suggest, one must have a first hand experience or the fortune to understand the pleasures of Sringar and hardships of vairagya; likewise for the philosophy contained in the duality of grammar and adwaita. I am struggling with this as with many other things. In the mean time, I wonder what the 'anta' represent in vedanta.

@Sekhar: The 'anta' suffix in Vedanta is to be understood as the positioning of the Upanishads in any Veda SaMhita. Whereas any Veda would begin with Mantras- the direct utterances of the RiShis, the brahmaNas which lay down the rituals to be followed by the followers of that Veda, the AraNyakas deal with elements of the concept of Godhood as conceived in that Veda, the Upanishads form the conclusive portion of the Vedas. Thus the anta in Vedanta is a suffix indicating the position (= ending portion ) of the Veda. It also means what is the end (in the sense of ends and means) of the Veda i.e. the Conclusion. Thus the Upanishads discuss God and His relationship with Man and Nature.

So Vedanta does not mean Vedic; it means Upanishadic.

Exactly.