On Jul 9, 2008, at 2:44 AM, cardemaister wrote:
The compound of this month (prayatna-shaithilya) "comes"
from YS II 47:
prayatnashaithilyaanantasamaapattibhyaam
That suutra as a whole is a dvandva of two components,
which both seem to be tatpuruSa-samaasa's ("that [= his]-man -
compounds"):
prayatna-shaithilya and ananta-samaapatti
Well, tat-puruSa's are dependent compounds
"in which the prior member is a substantive word [...]
standing to the other member in the relation of
a case dependent on it." (Whitney).
The relation is usually *possessive*:
'tat-puruSa' itself is an example of, well, tatpuruSa-samaasa's,
and actually means '*his* man' ('puruSa' here translated to 'man'),
*not* 'that man', although there is nothing in 'tat' to suggest
it should be treated, in this case, as a possessive.
What tells us the whole suutra is a dvandva, is the
instrumental/dative/ablative [sic!] *dual* (that
is, *not* singular or plural) ending -bhyaam.
So, in this suutra, the compound 'prayatna-shaithilya'
[shite (rhymes with 'white')-hill-yah] is probably
to be treated as an instrumental case form, corresponding
the instrumental singular 'shaithilyena', perhaps best
translated to English using the preposition 'by':
'(by) relaxation (shaithilya) of effort (prayatna)'.
That suutra in fact tells us what is perhaps the
most important thing in "doing" TM, don't it?
It's about asana, not mantra, but nice try. ;-)
