--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" <dhamiltony2k5@...> wrote: > > Om, you Sanskrit scholars here, > did this get transliterated right? > Thanks in advance, > -Buck > > Saha Nav Avatu > Saha Nav Bhunaktu > Viryam Narava Yanai > Tejasvi Na Vadhitam A Stv > Ma Vidisavahai >
Here's ITRANS 5.1 from Sanskrit Documents ( Taittiriiya upanishad; http://sanskritdocuments.org/): saha nAvavatu . saha nau bhunaktu . saha vIryaM karavAvahai . tejasvi nAvadhItamastu mA vidviShAvahai . Without sandhi it *might* be something like this (long vowels in[?] "double-letters" and retroflex sibilant in[?] S instead of Sh ): saha nau[1]; avatu . saha nau bhunaktu . saha viiryaM karavaavahai . tejasvi nau; adhiitam astu maa vidviSaavahai . 1. In Sanskrit, 'au' represents the original(?) Indo-European 'aau' -- that's why it in sandhi sometimes changes to 'aav'; the o-sound represents the original(?) 'au' (~as in English 'how'; aum - om).
