Here we see the kanyādāna mantra. The words dāsyāmi दास्यामि and pradāsyāmi प्रदास्यामि clearly show that the kanyā (daughter, bride) is given to the groom. Of course the groom “accepts” her, but for him to accept, she first had to be “given”.
Lest we get carried away that the bride is “given away” for free use to the groom, there are conditions/ strings attached! Before taking he promises (thrice) to honour her and not transgress her in dharma, artha and kāma by uttering nāticarāmi
Author notes that this is not in āpastamba sūtra but from the subsequent #vAyupurANa. Note that this purANa is one of the oldest purANas & there’re references to it in the #mahAbhArata &c. So it goes back to, at the very least, about 2000 years
The definition of what is pure/SiShTa differed from language to language. It is fairly black and white for a language that is largely only literary. For a spoken language, it is lot more challenging to define or agree on this- also it changes with time dynamically
Tampering with grammatical structure is a no-no for any language- spoken or written. For instance, you cannot use another language’s vibhakti pratyaya wily-nily. Same with application of grammar rules from another language. That will be “impure” even if done just once.
2/19
One may create a “maNipravALa” or “bhANDIra” style specifically for writing & that may in time be accepted for that purpose, but this will not become accepted in common spoken language. In common speech, it will still be “impure”. Again, this will have its own specific rules
3/19
மன்னவன் தொண்டையர் கோன் வணங்கும் நீள் முடி மாலை வயிரமேகன்
தன் வலி தன் புகழ் சூழ்ந்த கச்சி அட்டபுயகரத்து ஆதி தன்னை
கன்னி நன் மா மதிள் மங்கை வேந்தன் காமரு சீர்க் கலிகன்றி குன்றா
இன்னிசையால் சொன்ன செஞ்சொல் மாலை ஏத்த வல்லார்க்கு இடம் வைகுந்தமே
2-8-10 #vairamEga
Ahem! These early references to asafoetida/ ಇಂಗು/ಹಿಂಗು iṅgu/ hiṅgu in kannaDa literature surely don’t matter. They must all be post-Mughal interpolations! But humour me anyway please
And for some comic relief from the permanent jester that is #GoogleTranslate🤪🤭
They are ever so clever- getting straight to the point eg! They sure know what Sringara rasa and ಮೋಹನತರಂಗಿಣಿ mōhanataraṅgiṇi are all about at the end of the day 😂
The fair-complexioned #Siva and the dark #kALi have taken black and white complexion respectively from each other, saying they will not accept any distinction between themselves, but will become one the other; the mother & father that are never two!
Name #Dravidian for lang family was coined by Robert Caldwell who discussed this at length in “A Comparative Grammar of the Dravidian or South-Indian Family of Languages”1856
He gives his rationale-justification, also cleverly sowing seeds for today’s “Dravidian movement”
1/15
He sort of acknowledges Francis Whyte Ellis & Stevenson for recognising that today’s “#Dravidian” languages had much common between them, distinct from samskRta.
Ellis noted this in his intro to Alexander D Campbell’ book, “Grammar of the Teloogoo Language” (1816)
2/15
But the idea of putting tamiZ at the centre of this language, giving it a disproportionately large importance wasn’t just Caldwell’s. He mentions the use of “tamulic” and “tamulian” for this family by European writers prior to him.
Desire (kāma) to get a thing is sorrow. The pleasure when I get it & feel it my own is attachment (mōha). When attachment grows & I feel “Hey! No one’s equal to me”- that‘s conceit (mada). To want all gain only for myself is greed (lōbha)..