𝗠𝗘𝗚𝗛𝗨𝗣𝗗𝗔𝗧𝗘𝗦 🚨

Ancient grammatical puzzle solved after 2,500 years : Indian PhD Student at Cambridge Solves 2,500-Year-Old Sanskrit Puzzle Rishi Rajpopat made the breakthrough by decoding a rule taught by Panini, known as the father of linguistics.

Resharing a comment verbatim, by a subscriber named Tarun, which was earlier automatically deleted by Rosebot, as it removes comments with links.

The comment has been reshared just to help engage in a meaningful discussion.

By resharing we don't support nor disagree with any argument on the subject matter, as it is outside our working knowledge.

......

Tarun:

For those of us who aren't living under a rock, we might have heard by now that a scholar has — "Solved an ancient problem in Sanskrit grammar and proven that all the previous authorities were all incorrect for thousands of years". (Link: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cg3gw9v7jnvo )

It's amusing to see how the university-media eco-system works in the west. A student pursuing PhD in one of the most reputed universities in the west discovers a novel interpretation of a Sanskrit grammar sūtra, and then ends up getting his PhD from that university based on that interpretation without even getting his novel interpretation checked from traditional vidvāns (learned scholars) in other parts of the world.

Media reports that the student who learnt Sanskrit simply in a few years after "swimming, cycling, cooking, praying and meditating" suddenly had a "Eureka!" moment and proved the entire tradition wrong. 🤦

For those who wish to take pleasure in declaring that the tradition was incorrect all along, it's a great day to celebrate and forward the article to hundreds of contacts. However, for those who know the seriousness of the nuances of Pāṇini's grammar sūtras will take such wild claims with a pinch of salt.

The traditional vidvāns are now beginning to speak up against this newfound interpretation. One such place where the PhD thesis is being critically examined is the Bharatiya Vidvat Parishat : https://groups.google.com/g/bvparishat/c/IN7LLhJWk6Q

Sanskrit Scolar Hari Parshad Comments on Bharatiya Vidvat Parishat on this topic:

In the thesis, the author himself acknowledges (on pages 83,84) that his solution doesn't work while deriving the term — trayāṇām, but rather gives an incorrect form. He then himself gives a "speculative" (in his own words) reasoning for why it doesn't work. He says that the earlier Vedic form was trīṇām and it later got fully replaced by the newer form trayāṇām. He then also speculates that someone inserted the sūtra — trestrayaḥ (7.1.53) into the Aṣṭādhyāyī to justify the form "trayāṇām", and that this sūtra was not penned down by Pāṇini.

All this speculation may look good for a PhD thesis, but I'm not sure how well it will go down with those who side with the traditional commentators. I surmise that those who side with the tradition will say that it is still best to interpret the sūtra as Patañjali did — iṣṭa-vācī para-śabdaḥ, vipratiṣedhe paraṁ yad iṣṭaṁ tad bhavati (Mahābhāṣyam on 1.1.3).

I think we should wait before declaring that the entire tradition was incorrect for thousands of years. (End of Comment)

*PS:* Interested people can read further comments by various traditional vidvāns on the Bharatiya Vidvat Parishat link given above. I have tried to be as uncritical of the author of the PhD thesis as possible, but it's simply amusing to see how some individuals are so eager to declare the entire tradition as incorrect on the drop of a hat. Although the truth regarding such claims will definitely come out in some time, but most people will remain blissfully unaware of it because of the hype generated by the media. This entire phenomenon reminds me of the following verse:

*ghaṭaṁ bhindyāt paṭaṁ chindyāt*
*kuryād rāsabha-rohaṇam*
*yena kena prakāreṇa*
*prasiddhaḥ puruṣo bhavet*

If needed, break pots on the street or tear up your clothes, or maybe ride a donkey in public view, but somehow or other (by hook or crook), you must become a popular person. — (Subhāṣita-ratna-bhāṇḍāgāram) 😊

👍466🙏87🤔12👏6👌2❤1🥰1💋1

14.2K viewsH, edited 14:56