Correct Pronounciation of brahma & vahni

Courtesy: S/Sri.HN Bhat,Arvind,PKR,Deejayvaidya

We were taught to pronounce वह्नि as वह्नि and never as वन्हि or
ब्रह्म as ब्रह्म and never as ब्रम्ह.

As to pronunciation of Sanskrit words being affected through common
speech, an interesting example is that of the word व्रज. It changes
from the original व्रज to ब्रज and from there to बृज. The latter is
spelt in English as Brij and we find it in names like Brij Bhushan
Kabra, the famous Hindustani instrumentalist of the guitar.

Arvind Kolhatkar, Toronto, May 20, 2011.

I entirely disagree with this statement. I got introduced to Sanskrit by my
father
who was a Sanskrit scholar.
The word for fire though written as वह्नि is to be pronounced as वन्हि.

Similarly the word ब्रह्म is to be pronounced as ब्रम्ह.

P.K.Raamakrishnan 

I too would like to know the basis of this assertion by PKR. That the
metathesis took place in prAkRta languages is probably documented in
one of the prAkRta grammars.
e.g. In the following google-book
http://books.google.com/books?id=UoV5Dz20oo4C&pg=PA97&lpg=PA97&dq=prakrita++mh+metathesis&source=bl&ots=vHWe9nqcTq&sig=fEoiFO6IVuUeM-jxNk1Hd9GpM7Y&hl=en&ei=-5vWTYOSF8Tu0gH67q3SBw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CBwQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q&f=false
please see section 5.2.3.7 on page 97

In my native language of modern Marathi, which is a post-prAkRta
language, I ALWAYS use the metathetic pronunciation bram-ha and vanhii
(note the long final vowel, as per Marathi sandhi rules). Just because
those happen to be the correct pronunciations in Marathi does not make
them the correct pronunciations in the spoken saMskRta of ~250 BC. Of
course, it is OK to pronounce bram-ha while reciting shlokas or
mantras for home use - that is the family's home-use dialect, and any
family or individual has every right to have their own dialect of
saMskRta. Though that is right, it does not make them the correct
pronunciations in the spoken saMskRta of ~250 BC.

The observations recorded by pANini are "he mapare vA (mo.anusvAraH)"
and "(he) napare (mo) naH". They show to me quite clearly that in his
time pANini heard the "h" sound before the "m" sound (or the "h"
before the "n" sound, respectively).

Since some of the prAtishAkhyas are prior to pANini, I would be glad
to have evidence from those too. pANini was most familiar with
saMskRta as spoken in the west of India, and pata~njali was from the
central parts. They may have missed specialties of the speech patterns
from the east or south.

Dhananjay

I also knew from my grand father in the same way who used to correct my
pronunciation. Vidwan Bannanje Govindacharya, does not support ब्रह्म and
वह्नि the two words pronounced as bramha and vanhi in Kannada though it is
written as ब्रह्म.
Some member had long ago raised the question and some other member has
bumped it with the reply of DJ Vaidya, another learned member of this forum.
I have added my comments too in that thread.

Once again recapitulate the discussion, it was solved by quoting the
Paniniya Shikshta that the "h" in association with nasal consonants and
antaHstha-s semi vowels y, v, l, v is to be pronounced as औरस्य.

आत्मा बुद्ध्या समेत्यार्थान् मनो युङ्क्ते विवक्षया ।
मनः कायाग्निमाहन्ति स प्रेरयति मारुतम् ॥६॥
 
मारुतस्तूरसि चरन्मन्द्रं जनयति स्वरम् ।
प्रातःसवनयोगं तं छन्दोगायत्रमाश्रितम् ॥७॥
 
कण्ठे माध्यन्दिनयुगं मध्यमं त्रैष्टुभानुगम् ।
तारं तार्तीयसवनं शीर्षण्यं जागतानुगम् ॥८॥
 
सोदीर्णो मूर्ध्न्यभिहतो वक्‍त्रमापद्य मारुतः ।
वर्णाञ्जनयते तेषां विभागः पञ्चधा स्मृतः ॥९॥
 
अष्टौ स्थानानि वर्णानामुरः कण्ठः शिरस्तथा ।
जिह्वामूलं च दन्ताश्च नासिकोष्ठौ च तालु च ॥१३॥

हकारं पञ्चमयैर्युक्तमन्तःस्थाभिश्च संयुतम् ।
औरस्यं तं विजानीयात्कण्ठ्यमाहुरसंयुतम् ॥१६॥
 
कण्ठ्यावहाविचुयशास्तालव्या ओष्ठजावुपू ।
स्युर्मूर्धन्या ऋटुरषा दन्त्या लृतुलसाः स्मृताः ॥१७॥

According the above highlighted portion of पाणिनीयशिक्षा, the ह् is
pronounced as in the originating place of the voice i.e. उरस्. But in other
cases, it is pronounced in the same place कण्ठ like others. There seems to
be something wrong in the next line कण्ठ्यावहौ इचुयशाः
probably should be read as कण्ठ्यौ कुहौ (as कवर्ग considered as gutteral is
left out in the list and "h" is repeated in the previous and the next line).

Yet we have to take it granted that the pronunciation in uras+ may be
practically impossible, as it is a common place of origin for vocables next
to नाभि the air for articulation raises up for any vowel "स्वर" now to
demonstrate it and a similar pronunciation to something like bramhma. will
have to be posed as our respectable Ramakrishnnan has heard from his father
and me too from my uncle who differed from me when I pronounced it as "hm"
sequence like other conjuncts.

And also I am not sure about the answer to be given to Daniel's original
question and let him infer the position. If we observe ourselves as we
pronounce the sequence, the pronunciation of "h" is suppressed as the whole
mouth is closed for pronouncing "m" "n" unlike when "h" is pronounced alone
without any vowel or consonant following it. Thats why we may hear it like
bramm or like that.

Our Dhananjaya Vaidya's reply is there before I post this. Yet I post it for
further consultation.

With regards

> हकारं पञ्चमयैर्युक्तमन्तःस्थाभिश्च संयुतम् ।
> औरस्यं तं विजानीयात्कण्ठ्यमाहुरसंयुतम् ॥१६॥

> So, there is a special rule for h in said conditions and we don't know
actually what does it mean. So, it can't be said to be supporting म्ह-view.
We should try to find some commentary for this part of shixA....


-- 

>> So, there is a special rule for h in said conditions and we don't know
> actually what does it mean. So, it can't be said to be supporting म्ह-view.
> We should try to find some commentary for this part of shixA....

Commentaries won't help much in the pronunciation, I am afraid. The can't
record the "aurasya" pronunciation. Either we have to follow what is remnant
of the pronunciation like "mhm" or the like as Ramakrishnan said. But may
not be identical and never could be represented as hm.

-- 

>> हकारं पञ्चमयैर्युक्तमन्तःस्थाभिश्च संयुतम् ।
>> औरस्यं तं विजानीयात्कण्ठ्यमाहुरसंयुतम् ॥१६

shixA says that h should be aurasya, it doen't say that it has to be
pronounced before m

I remember there is the reference to long लृ, and short ए ओ in some Vedic
शाखा-s but extinct before Panini's time, as recorded in महाभाष्य. Panini has
recorded some regional variations of semi-consonants, like
व्योर्लघुतरप्रयत्नः शाकटायनस्य, etc. There may be more, but have to be
checked. His main concern was with morphology and to some extant semantics.
Still no short pronunciation of these vowels are present in any regional
Vedic recitations.

> Hakaaram panchamairyuktam anta:sthaabhishca samyutam .
>
>  Aurasyam tam vijaaniiyaat kaNthyamaahurasamyutam ..
>
>
>
> Paaniniiyashikshaa 16
>
>
>
>   Panchama = all the fifth consonants of each vargah
> Anta:sthah= 'yaN' pratyaaharah ie     ya, va ra, la,
>
>
>
> The rule clearly  states that if 'hakara' is followed by any of the above
> alphabets, then it should  NOT be pronounced as 'KANTHYAM" but pronounced as
> 'AURASYAM'
>
> "akuhavisarjaniiyanaam kanthah".... by this we know that 'hakarah' is
> pronounced from the 'kantha'
>
> But how do we pronounce 'aurasya' hakaarah. None of the present day
> scholars know it. It is lost. If any of the readers in this list, know or
> know any scholar who knows how to pronounce 'Aurasya hakarah', do inform .
>
> As this method of pronunciation is lost,we have to rely on the Vedic
> scholars who learnt it orally from their acharyas.
>
> As per the oral tradition, brahma is pronounced as bramha, prahlada is
> pronounced as pralhadah, madhyahne is pronounced as madhyanhe and so on.
>
> But if we apply the same logic, it is impossible to pronounce 'hyah' as
> 'yhah' which means 'yesterday'.
> 

 would go with Sri. Bannanje Govindacharya's opinion, with some slight
> modification as per shrI kamalesha pAThaka's reply to you.
>
> (The modification being that disciples of horourable traditions can
> pronounce words as per their tradition. Their tradition each creates
> grammatical variations that are applicable only within their own traditional
> group.)
>
> Nothing in the pANinIya shikShA or sUtras suggests that the order of 'h'
> and the other consonant cn be interchanged. Indeed pANinIya sUtras suggest
> quite clearly that 'h' is pronounced before.
> The sUtras mentioned by shrI suma in reply to you are:
> 8.3.26 he mapare vA |
> 8.3.27 napare naH |
> In both cases the anusvAra before the 'hm' or 'hn' is modified. If the 'h'
> was not pronounced before the m, n in these combinations, the anusvAra would
> be modified automatically by "8.4.58 anusvArasya yayi parasavarNaH" and
> these two sUtras become superfluous. Because we know that pANini does not
> make superfluous sUtras, we know that the 'h' is pronounced before the 'm'
> and 'n' respectively.
>
> shrI. suma's teacher is quite right in insisting the correct pronunciation
> of the -mhm- and -nhn- combinations that are the subject of these sUtras.
> However, note that both of these sUtras are optional rules signalled by the
> "vA"
> kiM + hmalayati = (Option 1) kiM hmalayati ; (Option 2) kimhmalayati
> kiM + hnute = (Option 1) kiM hnute ; (Option 2) kimhnute
> (So I hope shrI suma's teacher allows both the anusvAra-h-m and the -m-h-m-
> pronunciations.)
>
> In any case for the original words 'hmalayati' or 'hnute' the order is that
> 'h' is pronounced before the nasal consonant.
>
> Now what may be the reason as to why some regional accents of saMskRta
> switch the order of -hm- may have been reversed. By the time of the use of
> prAkRta languages such as pAlI, the combination -mh- -Nh- etc., have become
> common. e.g., the words tumhe, taNhA etc. (These combinations are never seen
> in saMskRta.) In the spoken standard version of the modern language Marathi,
> the combination -hm- is always converted to -mh-, etc., (e.g., brammha,
> Annhik, AvvhAn, etc., instead of the saMskRta words brahma, Ahnika, AhvAna,
> etc.). This is possibly a further development of this flow of phonetic
> change from the prAkRta languages. (I think, the same flow is true regarding
> kannaDa, but I am not sure.)
>
> Our native (regional) languages strongly affect our saMskRta accents. Thus
> with a respectful bow towards our rich and honourable mother-tongues, I
> suggest that these regional language specialities are the reason why some
> speakers switch the order of -hm- to -mh-, as you note.

knr
--
If God brings you to it, He will bring you through it.
Happy moments, praise God.
Difficult moments, seek God.
Quiet moments, worship God.
Painful moments, trust God.

  Every moment, thank God