From: kishore patnaik
Message: 51921
Date: 2008-01-27
On Jan 26, 2008 10:19 PM, kishore patnaik <kishorepatnaik09@...> wrote:
With regard to your exclamation ...hmmm.... I invite your attention to my earlier post on Mandukya Upanishad, where in I have requested the group to date the scripture based on the language. There was not a single reply from the group.
Kishore patnaikOn Jan 26, 2008 10:17 PM, kishore patnaik <kishorepatnaik09@...> wrote:Maya is a proper noun as I have used it all along.
However, in this post, I have brought out the other meanings of Maya,as their Russian meanings were mentioned.
Kishore patnaikOn Jan 26, 2008 9:56 PM, Francesco Brighenti <frabrig@...> wrote:
--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Kishore patnaik"I don't think so. As a matter of fact, maya:- (long final -a-) is
<kishorepatnaik09@...> wrote:
> In Sanskrit, maya also means mine.
the instrumental case of the Sanskrit first person singular personal
pronoun, i.e. 'by me'. The genitive singular ('of me') is mama- or
me-, whence the possessive ma:maka- (also mamaka-) 'mine'.
Moreover, in your previous posts you always referred to the proper
noun Maya (with two short -a-) as a possible source of the
Mesoamerican ethnonym Maya. This Sanskrit name, designating the
architect of the Daityas (demonic beings), is not based on the root
of the first person singular personal pronoun, but on the verbal
root ma:- 'to measure' instead.Hmmm...
> I am somehow not sure that this group caters to discussions on
> Sanskrit.
Regards,
Francesco