View Full Version : सखा?

Jaskaran Singh
17 January 2014, 01:33 AM
I came across a statement on the following website (http://hijodevecino.net/2013/08/05/el-mantra-tvameva-mata-ca-pita-tvameva/) by a Argentinian Hindu:

Aadiendo un par de notas a la traduccin, la palabra bandhu, que traduzco en su ms usual acepcin de ‘pariente’ tambin podra significar ‘hermano’, sobre todo en traducciones ms poticas. Asimismo, la palabra sakhā, con ‘a larga’, significa ‘amigo’ pero en hindi, y al parecer se habra colado en este mantra de lengua snscrita (si fuera snscrito quedara sakhas).
The author, Naren Herrero (as quoted above) is arguing that the word sakhA is orginally a Hindi word and that the actual word in saMskR^it would be "sakhas." Why is that the case? As far as I know, sakhA is used in both saMskR^itam and Hindi. In addition, wouldn't sakhastvameva and sakhA tvameva mean the same thing? "sakhas" comes from the prAtipadika "sakha" (i.e. companion) whereas sakhA comes from the prAtipadika sakhi (i.e. friend). How then is सखा only a hindi word whereas सखस् a saMskR^ita word? त्वमेव बन्धुश्च सखा त्वमेव sounds like shuddha saMskR^itam to me; if I were trying to say it in Hindi, I would say "तू मेरा भाई और दोस्त अवश्य है."

What's even more odd is that he later states the following:

La conexin Rāmānuja

Sri Rāmānuja fue un gran santo y filsofo vaishnava del sur de la India, que vivi en el siglo XI-XII d.C. Es muy conocido por sus filosficos comentarios de las escrituras y por ser el precursor de lo que se conoce como la escuela del ‘No dualismo cualificado’ o Vishishtādvaita. Al mismo tiempo, Rāmānuja era un ferviente devoto y promulgador del camino del corazn, por lo que tambin escribi inspirados versos a su amado Seor Vishnu.

Especficamente nos interesa su Sharanāgati Gadyam, una plegaria de entrega total al Seor Nārāyana en que aparece un mantra familiar:

tvameva mātā ca pitā tvameva /

tvameva bandhush ca gurustvameva /

tvameva vidyā dravinam tvameva /

tvameva sarvam mama deva deva //

La nica diferencia es que la palabra sakhā (que ya dijimos sera en lengua hindi), es reemplazada por guru (“t eres ciertamente maestro espiritual”).
Why does he assume that the sharaNAgati gadyam/chUrNikai of bhagavadrAmAnujar is any less interpolated than the pANDava gItA (assuming that the latter is indeed interpolated)? This sounds like stupidity, especially if the difference between the two mantram-s (as he admits) is only ONE shabda. I seriously don't understand what this guy is trying to argue...:rolleyes: Could someone please help me understand?

Sudas Paijavana
17 January 2014, 09:27 AM

In the Shri Rg-Veda, the "word", sakhA, is used quite often. It is both in the plural and mostly used for two persons or things - anything in twos.

"sakhA"/सखा is as Vedic as we can get.

....sakhā sakhāyam atarad viṣūcoḥ (R.V.7.18.6)

In the above, Rishi Vasishtha "speaks" about how two friends (सखा) helped each other, referencing to the BhRgavo and Dryuhavo.

ps - "Wind/VAyu to us - you are a brother and friend" = "....uta bhrātota naḥ sakhā...." (R.V.10.186.2); interpolation/Hindi word? No.

Sudas Paijavana
18 January 2014, 05:19 PM

Out of curiosity, I went through a rushed scanning of many Rca-s of the Shri Rg-Veda, and I found that the "word", sakhA, is extremely popular. And, I still fail to see how the "word" has its origin in Hindi rather than in Vedic or Sanskrit, an assessment that I feel is highly unsubstantial. :dunno:

Before I post another Rca in which the word can be found in the plural, hence the sakhA, or even in the nominative singular; On page 275 of Macdonell's A Vedic Grammar for Student's, D.K. Printworld's Edition, a non-plural form of sakhi is mentioned: yāvayat-sakha (protecting friend; protective comrade; caring friend; an enduring compatriot). Due to the adjective, sakhi becomes sakha. However, in Vedic, sakhA would represent the dual-declension of the nominative, and in the ablative it would be followed by -au, hence sometimes - sakhAyau (but can also be used in dual declension as "sakhAyA").

But, I fail to see how "sakhA" can be "sakhas" in Vedic. It may be the case in Classical Sanskrit, but it is not the case in Vedic, since the -as suffix is usually found in the nominative plural declension of "R" stem nouns such as mātR/pitR/dātR and even with -an stem nouns such as rājan, hence rājānas.

In Vedic, "sakh-i" is an irregular i-stem. But, with vRddhi, it is able to form sakhA in the nominative, sakhAyam in the accusative, sakhyA in the instrumental, sakhye in the dative, sakhyur both in ablative & genitive, sakhe in the vocative...and a few other declensions (see more on page 84).

We notice that in the RV, there is the mentioning of an epithet for one or two Rishis "having the Maruts as friends", hence Marutsakhā.

Here's an example of it in the nominative, but still with the same dual ending:

yo rāyo vanir mahān supāraḥ sunvataḥ sakhā tasmā indrāya gāyata (R.V.1.4.10)

An appropriate translation would be something similar to Wilson's:

"Sing unto that Indra, who is the protector of wealth, the mighty, the accomplisher of good deeds, the friend of the offerer of the libation." (R.V.1.4.10)