Sanskrit: duḥkhaṃ kadācit sukhasya mūlam

M

MindBoggle

Senior Member
Copenhagen
Danish. English from childhood
Hello everybody!

In my book it says:

duḥkhaṃ kadācit sukhasya mūlam

Translating, I get:

Suffering once joy's root

Two things puzzle me:

1. There is no verb.
2. There is no subject - all nouns seem to be in oblique cases.

I'm thinking:

1. Usually, when there is no verb, a copula is implied.
2. Accusative anciently included the lative case, still used in some languages - motion towards a place or state.

Applying this, I try:

Into-suffering once joy's into-root was.

I guess that would translate into normal English like this:

Once the would-be root of joy became the root of suffering.

Am I close? What say you all?

MindBoggle
 
    • दु:खं कदाचित सुखस्य मूलं.

    I have studied Sanskrit till pre-university but have been out of touch for many years and I am not 100% sure about it. But I think the meaning of this statement would be:

    "Sorrow is rarely the root of happiness."

    I think as such literally there can be another meaning, which is different than above:

    "Sorrow is possibly the root of happiness."

    You can get the exact meaning from the context of this statement.

    I don’t think there is any confusion about verb, subject etc. “Dukham” is the subject here.

    Sanskrit => Hindi => meaning in English
    Dukham => dukh => sorrow
    Kadachit => kadachit => rarely, possibly
    Sukhasya => sukh ka => of happiness
    Moolam => mool => root (cause)
     
    rahulbemba said:
    You can get the exact meaning from the context of this statement.
    Click to expand...

    There is no context - it's all alone.

    I don’t think there is any confusion about verb, subject etc. “Dukham” is the subject here.
    Click to expand...

    If so, why then is duḥkhaṃ in the accusative? My dictionary has: nominative duḥkhas, accusative: duḥkhaṃ.

    "Sorrow is rarely the root of happiness."
    Click to expand...

    I don't believe this translation, I suspect you may be translating from Hindi.

    In my dictionary it says:

    kadā = when;
    kadācit = once upon a time;
    na kadācit = never.

    The meaning rarely in Hindi could have evolved from the last phrase.

    MindBoggle
     
    Kadachit is Sanskrit word only; even if used as it is in Hindi; the meanings can be seen here:

    [Ref1] ; [Ref2]

    Meanings:

    1) Belike
    2) lest
    3) likely (adverb)
    4) maybe (adverb)
    5) occasional (adjective)
    6) perhaps (adverb)
    7) possibly (adverb)
    8) probably (adverb)
    9) rarely (adverb)

    I see on this page that kadachit has been used as "sometimes" http://www.prabhupada.de/bhagwatam/3vol-sb1.pdf

    In that case, the translation could be:

    "Sorrow is sometimes the root of happiness"

    I am not sure about the grammar, but some other usage are:

    “Heyam Dukham Anagatam” — Avert the danger that has not yet come. [Ref] Ancient Indian sage Patanjali says in his Yoga Sutra (2,16)

    By context, I meant the whole verse from which this line has been taken. If you got it from someone who has written only this line, then it is another matter.
     
    First of all, let me warmly recommend this dictionary:
    http://www.sanskrit-lexicon.uni-koeln.de/monier/

    Unfortunately, every jewel has a flaw, and ‘kadācit’ yields no result apart from the correct Devanāgari transliteration, कदाचित्. (In accordance with the system, you need to tap in ‘kadAcit’.)

    However, ‘kadācit’ is a compound word, made up of ‘kadā’ (when) and the indefinite particle ‘cit’, meaning something like ‘-ever it may be’, so ‘kadācit’ = ‘whenever it may be’. However, its most frequent meanings are ‘sometimes’ and ‘perhaps’.

    Tap in ‘kadā’ (as ‘kadA’) and you get this page:
    http://www.sanskrit-lexicon.uni-koe...e=/scans/MWScan/MWScanjpg/mw0248-kadAcAra.jpg

    And, indeed, kadā cit is there; it just hasn't been joined up – of course, in the original Sanskrit Devanāgari there are far fewer spaces between words than is the case in English and indeed Hindi owing to a desire on the part of the scholars who invented the script to use up as little space as possible.

    As for दुःखं duhkhaṃ, I'm afraid your dictionary has let you down: it is a neuter noun, as you will be able to ascertain if you tap in 'duHkha'. Don't be confused by the adjectival use of the same word.

    So, yes, 'Suffering is perhaps/sometimes the root of joy.'

    Postscript:

    As for the correct Devanāgari version, I would say that this approaches it: दु:खं कदाचित सुखस्य मूलम् ।

    The म does not reduce to anusvāra at the end of a sentence, so the original transcription is spot-on in this respect.

    Ideally, however, I think it should be दु:खं कदाचित्सुखस्यमूलम् ।, and this illustrates the point I made about fewer spaces between words.
     
    Last edited:
    दुःखं कदाचित्सुखस्य मूलम्
    कदा [ka-daa] is an indeclinable in Sanskrit meaning at what time/when.
    When चित् [chit] is suffixed to it, meaning changes to 'once upon a time' or 'at some time or other'
    Here the second meaning is appropriate according to the context.
    Thus the whole sentence is translated as:
    At some time or other, suffering is the root of happiness.
    Implied meaning being: "Only after suffering comes happiness"

    Please ask if any more information is needed?
     
    Last edited:
    drkpp said:
    दुःखं कदाचित्सुखस्य मूलम्
    कदा [ka-daa] is an indeclinable in Sanskrit meaning at what time/when.
    When चित् [chit] is suffixed to it, meaning changes to 'once upon a time' or 'at some time or other'
    Here the second meaning is appropriate according to the context.
    Thus the whole sentence is translated as:
    At some time or other, suffering is the root of happiness.
    Implied meaning being: "Only after suffering comes happiness"

    Please ask if any more information is needed?
    Click to expand...


    Interstingly, in the link below the enquirer is asking for a Latin translation of the two sentences quoted below.

    1) Suffering is the cause of joy.

    2) Without suffering there can be no joy.

    http://latindiscussion.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&p=40829
     
    Thank you for your contributions! :)

    About the original
    I believe it goes like this:
    दु:खं कदाचित् सुखस्य मूलम् ।
    I went for the roman letters as my typing skills on my recently downloaded virtual devanagari keyboard still leave a lot to be desired – I'm blindly trial-and-error-ing for each and every letter, carefully piecing together the composites, so writing even a short sentence is a major undertaking. It is painfully slow.

    About कदाचित्
    The MW that seitt links to (thanks!) has:
    kadā cit, at some time or other, sometimes, once.
    The PSED that Great Bear links to (thanks!) has
    kadā […] with a following चित् means 'at one time', 'once upon a time', 'at some time or other'; अथ कदाचित् once upon a time;
    This is in line with my dictionary which has once upon a time, in days past.

    About दु:खं
    I'm afraid your dictionary has let you down: it is a neuter noun, as you will be able to ascertain if you tap in 'duHkha'. Don't be confused by the adjectival use of the same word.
    Click to expand...
    - but my dictionary does say that it is duHkha and neuter – and I saw that.
    I did make a simple mistake, though, and I've discovered what it is: My grammar says that nouns of this type are declined like aśva, and that was what I based my translation on. What I missed was the fact that it also says: except in N,V,A.
    - in other words: just like in Greek and Latin, neuters have no nominative (which, I suspect, must be baggage from an ancient ergative).
    Of course. Silly me.

    As मूल is also neuter, this changes the picture, and there is no need for my (much-too-clever) lative-interpretation. What a shame.
    Suddenly everything looks very simple – a straightforward word-for-word translation even becomes possible:
    Pain once pleasure's root (was).
    (which is almost what Rahul said from the beginning)
    It might be suffering or sorrow in stead, but it makes little difference; the meaning is clear.

    As I'm about to post, I notice drkpp's post:
    At some time or other, suffering is the root of happiness.
    Implied meaning being: "Only after suffering comes happiness"
    Click to expand...


    Exactly! Thank you!

    Thank you all for your kind contributions!

    MindBoggle :)
     
    You must log in or register to reply here.
    Back
    Top