Manava Dharmashastra 2.33

2.33

puṃsa ityadhikṛtatvātstrīṇāmaprāptau niyamyate | sukhenodyate sukhodyam | strībālairapi yatsukhenoccārayituṃ śakyate tatstrīṇāṃ nāma kartavyam | bāhulyena strīṇāṃ strībhirbālaiśca vyavahārasteṣāṃ ca svakaraṇasauṣṭhavābhāvānna sarvaṃ saṃskṛtaṃ śabdamuccārayituṃ śaktirasti | ato viśeṣeṇopadiśyate | natu puṃsāmasukhodyamabhyanujñāyate | udāharaṇaṃ ‘maṅgaladevī’ ‘cārudatī’ ‘suvadanetyādi’ | pratyudāharaṇaṃ ‘śarmiṣṭhā’ ‘suśliṣṭāṅgī’ti | akrūramakrūrārthavāci | krūrārthavāci krūrārthaṃ ‘ḍākinī’ ‘paruṣeti’ | vispaṣṭārthaṃ yasyārtho vyākhyānagamyo na bhavati, śruta eva viduṣāmaviduṣāṃ vārthapratītiṃ karoti | avispaṣṭārthaṃ yathā, ‘kāmanidhā’ ‘kārīṣagandhyeti’ | ‘kāmasya nidheva nidhā tayā kāmastatraiva tiṣṭhatīti’ evaṃ yāvanna vyākhyātaṃ tāvannāvagamyate | evaṃ karīṣagandherduhitā kārīṣagandhyeti vyākhyānamapekṣyate | manoharaṃ cittāhlādakaraṃ, ‘śreyasī’ | viparītaṃ tu ‘kālākṣī’ | śarmavatī maṅgalyam | viparītam‘abhāgā’ ‘mandabhāgeti’ | dīrgho varṇo'nte yasya | viparītaṃ śarat | āśiṣaṃ vadatītyā‘śīrvādam’, ‘abhidhānaṃ’ śabdaḥ, tayorviśeṣaṇasamāsaḥ | tadyasminnasti vidyate tatāśīrvādābhidhānavat | ‘saputrā’ ‘bahuputrā’ ‘kulavāhiketi’ | ete hyarthā āśīrviṣayā | viparītā ‘apraśastā’ ‘alakṣaṇeti’ | “atha maṅgalyasyāśīrvādasya ca ko viśeṣaḥ” | na kaścit | vṛttapūraṇārthaṃ tu bhedenopādānam |

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):
Inasmuch as significance has been attached to the mention of the ‘male’ child (in verse 29), what has been said in the preceding verses is not applicable to women; and the present verse is going to lay down rules regarding the names of women.

‘Easily pronouncible’;—that which can be easily pronounced; the name of women should be such as can be uttered, with ease, even by women and children. It is mostly women and children that have got to deal with women; and the woman’s organ of speech being not very efficient, she cannot pronounce each and every Sanskrit word; hence the Text lays stress upon this pronouncibility in the case of feminine names. This however docs not mean that the masculine names may be unpronouncible. As examples of ‘pronouncible’ names wo have, ‘Maṅgala-devī,’ ‘Chārudati,’ ‘Suvadanā,’ etc., and as counter-examples (i.e., of unpronouncible names), ‘Śarmiṣṭhā,’ ‘Suśliṣṭāṅgī,’ and the like.

‘Not harsh,’—i.e., not denoting any thing harsh; names denoting harsh things are such as ‘Ḍākinī’ (Sorceress), ‘Paruṣā’ (Rough) and so forth.

‘Of plain meaning,’—whose moaning does not need to be explained before it is comprehended; which, as soon as it is heard, couveys its meaning to the learned and the unlearned alike. As examples of names with meanings not plain, we have, (a) ‘Kāmaniḍhā’ and (b) ‘Kāriṣagandhī’; the meaning of these terms is not comprehended until the following explanations have been provided:—(a) ‘who is, as if it were, the very receptacle of love, she in whom all love is contained,’ and (b) ‘Kārīṣagandhī’ is the ‘daughter of Kariṣagandhi.’

‘Heart-captivating,’—that which pleases the mind; e.g., ‘Śreyasī’; while of the contrary kind we have the name ‘Kālākṣī.’

‘Auspicious,’—such as ‘Śarmavatī’; of the contrary kind is the name ‘Abhāgā,’ ‘M andabhāgā.’ ‘Ending in a long vowel,’—that which has a long vowel at the end. Contrary to this is the name ‘Śarat.’

‘Āśīrvāda’ is that which denotes benediction; ‘abhidhāna’ is term; and when the two are compounded in tho dhāraya form, we get the meaning ‘benedictory term’; and the name that contains such a term is called ‘āśīrvādābhidhānavat,’ ‘containing a benedictory term.’ Examples of such names—‘Saputrā,’ ‘Bahuputrā,’ ‘Kulavāhikā’; these are benedictory names; of the contrary kind are such names as, ‘Apraśastā,’ ‘Alakṣaṇā.’

“What is the difference between ‘auspicious’ and ‘benedictory’?”

None whatsoever. The second epithet has been added only for the purpose of filling up the metre.—(33)

That of women should be easily pronouncible, not harsh, of plain meaning, heart-captivating and auspicious; it should end in a long vowel and contain a benedictory term.—(33)