From: umeshmo@microsoft.com (Umesh Mokate)
Subject: Re: Shruti - A Reply
Date: 28 Jan 93 19:39:48 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation

In article <1993Jan24.140519.1264@uoft02.utoledo.edu> smahaja@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:
>From: umeshmo@microsoft.com (Umesh Mokate)
>Date: 22 Jan 93 20:59:11 GMT
>References: <1993Jan20.200657.1184@uoft02.utoledo.edu>
>Organization: Microsoft Corporation
>Writes
>i think this is totally incorrect information. Shruti is NOT the scale
>in which one sings though many common people in Carnatic music hold this
>opinion (based on my experience). "shruyate iti shruti" i.e. notes in an 
>octave that could be distinguished from each other. It is said that there 
>are 22 shrutis in an octave. I am sure knowledgable people like Dr. Gangolli
>and others will comment on this. 
>
>REply:
>
>I think that it is it is not logical of any person to make a statement
>such as "totally incorrect information" referring to my reply regarding the
>sruthi,especially when the person has had a background of Sanskrit.
>Basically, I do agree with our friend Mr. Umesh in saying that sruthi 
>is defined as "Shruyate yiti shruti".It means that any distinguishable 
>sound lying in the whole range of audible frequency is termed as sruthi.
>It is also true that major authoritative books onb music such as 
>Sangeetha Ratnakara etc., state that there are 22 srutis.
>
>The vedas too are known as shruti. This is because it is beleived that
>the vedas were given to man by sound and not by any written matter.
>Words become anologous tom many things based on the context.

This is what I understand about the word Shruti:

Though in simple terms Shruti is defined as "shruyate iti shruti" and 
though it means that any audible sound is called "shruti", in the
context of music it is not the case. Any sound is not called shruti when
one is referring to classical music. Also, the word shruti refers to particular
books (i.e Vedas) in the context of religion. Not any book, though orally
given, (in those days all things were transmitted by oral tradition), 
is not called Shruti. Another example: Tantra means "one which
extends konwledge". So by definition, any book could be called Tantra, but
in the context of religion, only particular kind of books are called Tantra.



>Also in no
>way was I trying to give a technical definition of SRUTHI.Hence,I do not
>see in what way it becomes incorrect to call the Adhara Shadjam (or the
>lower Shadjam in the middle octave) , which we use as the base for tuning
>our instruments and to base our singing as the sruthi.Obviously when a
>person is asking for the sruthi of a person,he is not referring it to
>the 22 srutis or to the tecnical definition of sruti or etc., etc..
>Hence, it is irrelevant to speak of those in this context.It may only be
>given as an additional information.Also, whatever information I had
>provided in my earlier letter was based on my own experiance as a practical 
>student of music and not from any texts.
>

Neither have I given any "technical" definition like "it is similar to
Pythagorian Delta which is obtained by ..."


>I think this is where we make a mistake. When a layman just interested
>in classical music comes to us and asks us a question, we like to make it 
>look very complicated and try to give him all the technical details
>the very first time. As a result he gets so confused and would never
>go further, thinking it is too advanced for him. The technical details 
>have to be simplified and given to the layman in form acceptable by him.
>It also does not mean that the facts have to be diluted. This is the main
>reason for people shying away from Indian Classical music.Probably when
>the person gets more involved in this music, he will be able to take in the
>technical complexities.
>
>Thank you,
>
>SATHISH


I disagree with your first three sentences above.
Encouraging a layman for classical music does not mean that
we give him incorrect information. I don't see why a layman will get
confused and shy away, if I tell him that, "probably you are referring
to the base-scale and not shruti. Though sometimes people refer to the 
base-scale as Shruti, it is not the correct defintion. If you are 
interested in knowing base-scale in which M.S.S. sings or the base-scale of 
Ramani's flute, then it is so and so. As far as Shruti goes, in simple words
it is defined as distinguishable sounds in an octave. It is believed that there
are 22 such sounds in an octave." Unless I know personally, I don't
assume that the layman is dumb and finds this much information too
technical and advanced.

Umesh...