Excerpted from my Sanskrit manual.

• धिक् is nearly always used alone or with the accusative. It is interjective in nature, when considering something despicable or condemnable in some way. “Damn X, fie on X, damn, what a disappointment!” It is also often used with variants of the verb कृ, e.g. when saying “he condemned him.” स तं धिक्करोति।` कृष्णो देवः कलियुगभवं लोकमालोक्य सर्वं पापासक्तं समजनि कृपासिन्धुचैतन्यमूर्तिः । तस्मिन् येषां न भवति सदा कृष्णबुद्धिर्नराणां धिक् तान् धिक् तान् धिगिति धिगिति व्याहरेत् किं मृदङ्गः ॥९॥ सर्वं कलि-युग-भवं लोकम् पापासक्तं आलोक्य, कृष्णः देवः कृपा-सिन्धु-चैतन्य-मूर्तिः समजनि । तस्मिन् महाप्रभौ येषां नराणां सदा कृष्ण-बुद्धिर्न भवति, तान् धिक् तान् धिक् धिग् इति धिग् इति मृदङ्गः व्याहरेत् किं ? Lord Krishna, having seen how all those born in the age of Kali are attached to sin, appeared in the form of Chaitanya, the ocean of mercy. As to those who do not always think of him as Krishna, do the drums not pound, “Fie on them, fie on them! Damn! Damn!” ? dhik tān dhik tān dhik ! dhik ! (Narahari Sarkar Śacītanayāṣṭakam 9) धिग्जीवितं चोद्यमवर्जितस्य धिग्जीवितं ज्ञातिपराजितस्य । धिग्जीवितं व्यर्थमनोरथस्य धिग्जीवितं शास्त्रकलोज्झितस्य ॥ How shameful the life lived by one who never made an effort! What a pity the life of one dominated by his kin! Damned the life of one whose dreams have not been realized! And condemned be the life of who has not learned the art of studying scripture. === Getting some favorable responses lately from those following the course. My students are at various levels of competence, some are just beginning, but others are quite advanced and are just taking it for the pleasure, I think, which really fits my way of thinking about teaching Sanskrit. I am enjoying myself more and more, especially with the chanting and learning verses. In a few of the last classes, I felt that I was able to bring the group to a meditative stage through the chanting, etc. I even see the possibility of bringing it into the realm of performance art. This is more where I would like to take it, make Sanskrit class a religious [rasa] experience. I don't think that is an unreasonable ambition. You could say, it is aiming directly at what Jiva Goswami wanted to do, make Krishna bhakti instantly accessible through even the nuts and bolts of language itself. It is often wondered why the Goswamis wrote in Sanskrit. Well, their writings inspired transformation and new life into the vernaculars like Bengali, so the blame of elitism is not applicable. There are other, much better reasons for writing in Sanskrit, and the truth is that the broad Sanskritic knowledge tradition is where a new philosophical approach would have to establish itself, if it wished to achieve broad intellectual legitimacy. And that is what we believe the Goswamis did. Jai Sri Radhe


Anonymous said…
One man’s disappointed damnation is the vehicle of another’s salvation (all is relative); there is more to the text you have quoted than first meets the eye…

धिक् (dhik) → धि (dhi) + क (ká)

धिक् (dhik) “used as a prefix or as an interj. of reproach, menace or displeasure = fie! shame! Out upon! what a pity! Etc:”


धि (dhi) see 1. “abstracted fr. √ 1. dhā,” 2. “receptacle” and 3 “to nourish, satiate, satisfy; to delight, please.”


क (ká) see 3 “of Viṣṇu; the soul; splendour, light; sound; water; the head etc., etc..”

Anonymous said…

§ 9.21 All the Mantras with their Presiding Deities become servitors of a Sādhaka who knows the Supreme Reality beyond the letters of the alphabet.

§ 9.22 Of him who is founded in the sole consciousness of the self, every movement is worship, each utterance verily is a Mantra, and each gaze is meditation.

Chapter 9, verses 21 & 22, Kulārṇavatantra.
Anonymous said…
Whilst looking for the eighteenth chapter (ul-lāsa) of the Kulārṇava Tantra, my person came across the following quote which may be of some interest to you Jagadananda Das:


“A purely Vaiṣṇava work – the Īśānasaṁhitā (see note 1) dealing with the greatness of the well-known Vaiṣṇava reformer Caitanya – is also represented as forming part of the Kulārṇava (Tantra).”

1. A manuscript of this work is in the collection of the Vaṅgīya Sāhitya Pariṣat. One manuscript of the workhas been described by Rajendra Lala Mitra in his Notices of Sanskrit Manuscripts I. 824.

Source: Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Poona. Volume XIII (Part II), 1931-32:


Quote: “Īśānasaṃhitā and Ūrdhvāṃnāyasaṃhitā deal with worship of Kṛṣṇa as Gaurāṅga.”

Popular posts from this blog

"RadhaKrishn" TV serial under fire

Getting to asana siddhi

What is sthayi-bhava?