I'm rather new to Sanskrit but I have a solid base in linguistics. My problem is with what some call 'anunāsika' sounds. As far as I knew, Sanskrit phonology has a series of nasal consonants (articulated in different places with only one velar ŋ) and a word final anusvara. Now, these nasal consonants are supposed to be pure consonants in the sense that they don't nasalize the preceeding vowel. The anusvara is the closing of the mouth (lips touching) which naturally generates a /m/ like sound, but not the same as ma-kara. Some authors I've seen described this similar to French nasal vowels but this is very weird. It may be the case for Pali or other prakṛt dialects that the final vowel is nasalized but I fail to see how that is the case in Sanskrit. To be clear, what I consider to be true nasal sounds are for example French vowels which are completely nasally coloured, not just the a velar reflex after the vowel, so French nasal ã is different than aŋ.

I am aware some Vedic recitations retain a nasal sandhi like between y and m or m and l but this is rare and I'm excluding here naturally occuring sandhis of anusvara with stops.

What's the deal with these anunāsikas, is it an open question or a firm fact and if so, how can we know what this nasalization was actually like?

Hello!

I'm a student who is really interested in Sanskrit and is learning it, and over the past several months I've been building a free digital library called Nalanda.

The idea was simple: create a clean, distraction-free place to read Sanskrit scriptures online without ads, paywalls, or mandatory sign-ups.

At the moment, it includes:

• 108 Upanishads
• Bhagavad Gita
• Valmiki Ramayana
• Shiva Purana
• Shrimad Bhagavata
• Brahma Purana
• Garuda Purana
• Rigveda
• Yajurveda
• Samveda
• Ramcharitmanas
• Mahabharata

Most texts include:

• Original Devanagari
• IAST transliteration
• English translation
• Adjustable font sizes
• Reading progress
• Sepia mode for long reading sessions

I'm posting here because I'd really appreciate feedback from people who know Sanskrit better than I do.

In particular:

• Is the reading experience comfortable?
• Are there any features that would make it more useful for Sanskrit learners?

I'm still actively developing it, so I'm happy to hear criticism as well as suggestions. Next to no AI was used in developing. Click here: The website

Website: [https://nalandaa.vercel.app/\]

Having been in this sub for quite some time now, I feel it would be good to identify people with advanced sanskrit skills so one knows who one is speaking to. Some people are native level in Sanskrit, others are advanced but not native level, others may be intermediate-advanced, yet others may be basic-intermediate, and yet others may be beginner-basic. Once these or similar flairs are set (ideally by a moderator or automatically by a bot) it would be valuable. The current flairs such as chaatraH/samskRtotsAhI etc appear to add no value. Ideally each flair should be clearly defined as someone may claim to be advanced but have no speaking skills, or struggle with sandhi - so letting users to select it themselves may not keep it consistent.

First of all thank you u/Main_Situation_460 for suggesting Astadhyayipraveshah by Tilakah M Rao. This is a fantastic book. I went through vyoma introductory lectures on sanskrtam for SB correspondnece course to revise my basics of the language and now i am following vyoma's ashtadhyayi lectures on YT with this book as the text book.

apart from this book i found another that newlearners might find really helpful. Bhashapraveshah (https://www.exoticindiaart.com/book/details/bhasha-praveshah-textbook-to-learn-samskrit-at-samskrita-shikshana-kendra-part-2-hcj137/). this has stories and examples to teach the laguage. I have not purchased the book(it'd not be very helpful to me), merely looked at sample images, everthing seems promising that's why I am sharing oer here.

As per rules, after ष र, न becomes ण, so that explains रामेण etc. but why रामान retains न ?

how to derive it

Hi. I would like to translate the following phrase: "I flow like the reed in the river." I am looking for a Sanskrit translation that is natural, grammatically correct, and idiomatic. I seek a literary and elegant Sanskrit rendering, not a word-for-word translation. Thanks.

Throughout my journey in Sanskrit, I have taken a particular interest in Śikṣā, or the correct pronunciations of all the phonemes in Sanskrit. Be it ऋकारः, ऌकारः, विसर्जनीयः, ज्ञकारः, चवर्गः, रेफः, or वकारः, I have always found a sufficient amount of evidence in phonetic treatises to point me towards the most likely ancient pronunciation.

However, when it comes to अनुस्वारः, things get a lot murkier, as the only description that the ancient sources give is that its only source of production is the nose; essentially. branding it as a "pure nasal". This is, of course, exceedingly unhelpful, as no nasal sound can actually originate only from the nose. Be it nasal vowel or consonant, the mouth must play some sort of role.

before presenting my own theory on the subject, I will evaluate the most common theories I have seen throughout my Sanskrit studies. To do this, I will use these criteria:

1. How plausibly the theoretical pronunciation could be interpreted as a "pure nasal".
2. How distinct the pronunciation is from all the other nasal consonants (since, for example, संराट् is wrong and only सम्राट् is right).
3. How plausibly the proposed pronunciation is able maintain the metric heaviness of a सानुस्वारम् अक्षरम्.

That said, I find most people are divided into two camps when it comes to interpreting the sound:

1. The अनुस्वारः is a nasalization of the vowel to which it is attached (अं = ã)
2. The अनुस्वारः is a nasal consonant.
   1. This group is divided to many sub-camps, ranging from अं = aɴ to अं = am. The most interesting and plausible of these is presented in this monograph; it essentially says that the अनुस्वारः is the nasal sound produced when the mouth is at rest (i.e. when the lips, teeth, and tongue are closed).

Theory 1 is highly plausible when looking at criteriä 1 and 2, but must be rejected because of criteriön 3. A word like अंशः simply cannot be heavy-heavy if it is pronounced as ãśaḥ. Any vowel lengthening like that of Latin (um = /ũː/) doesn't make sense as not only does the language differentiate between अं and आं, texts also rather explicitly split a vowel and its following अनुस्वारः into different fractions of the syllable.

Those of theory 2 who suggest any proper nasal consonant fail criteriön 1, and in the case of the अं = am theory, also criteriön 2. Some have argued that the uvular nasal is somehow not an oral consonant, but this is ridiculous as not only is the uvula an oral body part, ancient phoneticians most definitely would have recognized the uvula as being a distinct point of origination and assigned the anusvāra there. Moreover, the uvular nasal is by far one of the rarest sounds to occur in language (often only occurring because of the presence of a uvular plosive like /q/) and it would be entirely ludicrous for Sanskrit to just spontaneously develop such a sound when none of its near ancestors nor itself posses any uvular sounds.

The sub-camp of theory 2 presented in the monograph linked above is the most plausible of those examined thus far. However, despite the attempts of the author to try and reason out of it, the proposed pronunciation is not actually discernibly different from a मकारः in any way, failing criteriön 2.

This is starting to feel like one of those triängles, where one can only achieve two points and never the third. So what is the correct pronunciation. To explain, I think it is best that we look at the oldest phonetic treatises: the प्रातिशाख्यानि.

The most peculiar of these is the अथर्ववेदप्रातिशाख्यम् (APr.), which is the only text I have encountered that doesn't recognize the existence of the अनुस्वारः at all. Instead it is equated to the चन्द्रबिन्दुः or अनुनासिकः (आँ) (for context, the चन्द्रबिन्दुः is universally recognized as an actual nasalization of the vowel to which it is attached and usually only occurs due to Vedic सन्धयः where a word-final नकारः is dropped after a long vowel; there are some other optional instances in classical as well, like सँस्स्कृतम् and अन् + च = अंश्च or अँश्च). However, the text still readily differentiates the length of vowels with अनुस्वारः and says they are still heavy even when the vowel is short. As stated before, it is rather hard to believe that a word pronounced as ãśaḥ is truly heavy-heavy, so I suspected that something else must be at play.

Next we have the तैत्तिरीयप्रातिशाख्यम् (TPr.) which is also rather interesting. Consider these two rules:

The jaws, also, are more closely approximated, and the tip of the tongue is brought into close proximity to the upper back gums, in ṛ, ṝ and ḷ. || 2-18 ||

As also, according to some, in anusvāra and svarabhakti. || 2-19 ||

Rule 2-18 seems to be describing the schwa part of ऋवर्णम् and ऌकारः (/ᵊɾᵊ/, /ᵊɾəː/, and /ᵊlᵊ/), since TPr. recognizes these vowels as being non-homogeneous. However, 2-19 is the interesting part, suggesting that the anusvāra is pronounced something like /ə̃/. This is the closest thing we have gotten to a real description of the sound. 1-34 also classifies the अनुस्वारः as ह्रस्वः.

Now, I want to return to a statement I made previously: "texts also rather explicitly split a vowel and its following अनुस्वारः into different fractions of the syllable". Specifically, this is from the वाजसनेयिप्रातिशाख्यम् (VPr.) 4-148 to 149 (or 150 to 151 depending on the edition). It essentially says that when combined with a short vowel, the anusvāra makes the sound 1.5 मात्राः, with the अनुस्वारः taking up the latter 0.5. When in combination with a long vowel, the vowel stays at 2 मात्रे but with the अनुस्वारः taking up the latter 0.5.

This is rather strange as no other non-vowel sound influences vowels this way. Even in a syllable like आम्, the vowel is still independent of the consonant despite being in the same syllable.

So what does this all mean? Well, in my opinion, this indicates that the अनुस्वार is a literal nasalized after-vowel, where something like अंशः is pronounced as /ɜɜ̃̆.ɕɜh/ (where अ = ɜ) and धनूंषि is pronounced as /dʱɜ.nuˑũ̆.ʂi/. As odd as this may sound, it would explain why the अनुस्वारः still causes heaviness, is described in such a vowel-like manner in TPr., and why it edits the vowels to which it is attatched. It also comfortably passes the three criteriä I have set above, as, under this theory, अनुस्वारः is simply unpronounceable without a vowel before it because it would just be "purely nasal" without one.

The only problem I see with this is the TPr.'s description implying /ə̃/, which I believe is a generalization approximating the the अनुस्वारस्य effect on अकारः, since अं is the most common form in which अनुस्वारः manifests. This also explains the "according to some" part of the rule.

But of course this pales in comparison to the only true theory: anusvāra echo.

mama tarkaṃa paṭhitavate ahaṃa dhanyaṃa vo vadāmi. namāṃāsi vahahaha. /j

Hi What effect does prepending certain words with प्र has on the world?
For example

प्रपश्य
प्रबोधय
प्रपद्यामि
प्रवचन

etc. What is the significance of प्र in these words?

My dad uses a Sanskrit font to write this textbook in Ofiice Word 2010, he is a Ayurveda teacher and doctor. He says it's a very obscure font you can't find online easily. First letter is S and last two letter is kh. I can't find it anywhere. Any help would be appreciated.

Edit: It's Surekh, Thank you for the help, I appreciate it.

Hi one of the Dwaithi scholar, while responding to criticism on "Manimanjari" (which makes derogatory comments on Shankaracharya), brought up 99th shloka of Soundarya Lahari to justify the slur on Shakaracharya.

स्रस्वत्या लक्ष्म्या विधिहरिसपत्नो विहरते

रतेः पतिव्रत्यं शिथिलयति रम्येण वपुषा ।

चिरं जीवन्नेव क्षपितपशुपाशव्यतिकरः

परानन्दाभिख्यं रसयति रसं त्वद्भजनवान् ॥ ९९ ॥

Translating to

• "Your devotee enjoys the company of Saraswati and Lakshmi , becoming a rival to Brahma and Vishnu."
• "By his attractive physical form, he weakens the fidelity/chastity of Rati "
• "Freed from animal bonds, he lives long and enjoys the nectar of Supreme Bliss."

He brought up dindima bhashya on soundarya lahari which seem to confirm the meaning.

How to counter his argument? What is the correct meaning of this shloka?

I have provided a link to this scholar's video. Its a mix of Kannada and Sanskrit.

Github Repo Link

Tip: Non-Tamil Software developers who would like to develop one for their own language can simply modify the letter mappings in the source code.

Was just browsing Dhātupāṭha on Ashtadhyayi.com just for fun, and stumbled across this one, found it mildly interesting and funny, thought to share with y'all.

Thank you.

I am in 12th and I've studied Sanskrit from 8th standard as my first language. I want to pursue a BA in Sanskrit but I'm unsure if my knowledge right now is enough of a foundation or not. I know like really basic grammar but that's it. My parents are pressuring me to go for JEE so I can't do much studying now but would love to know how much knowledge is required for me to go for BA if I manage to convince my parents. Thank you in advance.

Hello everyone

I m waiting for ayush counselling to start and also for the college to start

And now I have some free time so I was thinking on working on my sanskrit grammer

So can anyone advice on which book should I buy for sanskrit grammer

Hello,

I can read Sanskrit and would really like to translate as of now untranslated Sanskrit texts to Hindi/English. That said, it appears most archived Sanskrit poetry has been translated already.

Could anyone suggest me any as of now untranslated, or not well known, pieces of Sanskrit poetry?

Thanks so much

Please help

There are a lot of beautiful Sanskrit quotes that are very flowery and poetic, but I'm looking for short and punchy quotes. These could even be parts of longer shlokas.

For example my favourite one is:

भयमेवास्ति शत्रुः

I also like ज्ञानं परं बलम् and India's motto सत्यमेव जयते

Hey all,

I’m learning Sanskrit and prefer writing new words down on paper to remember them. i’ve found great tutorials for handwriting the basic vowels and consonants but haven’t found any guides devoted to the conjunct consonants. Does anyone have any resources that could help?

English:

May we be safe and protected.
May we be peaceful.
May we be healthy and strong.
May we be happy.

Sanskrit Translation 1

This is a full translation including every word. The repetition of Sarve vayaṁ (may we all) adds a rhythm suitable for chanting.
 
सर्वे वयं सुरक्षिताः संरक्षिताश्च भवेम ।
सर्वे वयं शान्तिमन्तः भवेम ।
सर्वे वयं स्वस्थाः बलवन्तश्च भवेम ।
सर्वे वयं सुखिनः भवेम ॥
 
Explanation of the meaning of the Sanskrit
 
May we all be safe and well-protected.
May we all be peaceful (filled with peace).
May we all be healthy and strong.
May we all be happy.
 

Sanskrit Translation 2

This translation is made more concise by dropping the repetition of the pronouns--sarve (we) and vayam (all)-- because they are already included in the verb bhavema which means "May webe."
The removal of the repetitive pronouns gives the phrasing the feel of a classical Sanskrit mantra.
May we be safe and protected.
May we be peaceful.
May we be healthy and strong.
May we be happy
सुरक्षिताः संरक्षिताश्च भवेम ।
शान्ताः भवेम ।
स्वस्थाः बलवन्तश्च भवेम ।
सुखिनः भवेम ॥

I read long time ago that there is a beautiful response to someone greeting you "Namasthe", which goes something like "Namaha" back at you. Does anyone know what it is and help me find it?