--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister <no_reply@...> wrote: > > > Here's the third sentence of Bhojadeva's comment on > YS II 47 (prayatna-shaithilyaananta-samaapattibhyaam): > > yadaa caakaashaadigata aanantye cetasaH samaapattiH kriyate > 'vyavadhaanena tadaatmyamaapadyate tadaa dehaahaMkaaraabhaavaan > naasanaM duHkhajanakaM bhavati |
I'm not competent enough to come up with a "translation" of the above to resemble more like the syntax of English, but just for fun, let's give it a try: And when samaapatti, with avyavadhaana, of the cetas is "done" "in" aanantya, "gone" into aakasha, etc. (aakaasha, vaayu, tejas, jala and pRthivii?), then aatmya "aapats"(verb) [and?] then aasana shall not become duHkhajanaka because of abhaava of deha and ahaMkaara, phew! :D > > (Attempt at sandhi-vigraha: > > yadaa ca+aakaasha+aadi-gate/-gataH(?)[1] aanantye cetasaH samaapattiH > kriyate; avyavadhaanena tadaa+aatmyam aapadyate tadaa > deha+ahaMkaara+abhaavaat; na+aasanaM duHkha-janakaM bhavati | ) > > 1. Both are possible, but the locative singular (-gate) seems to me > way more likely to be the "correct" one, as it appears to be an > adjective attribute governed(?) by 'aanantye'. >
