June Topic: mAyA in the vedas: the One and the many/Vedangas and Yaska

[Guest guest]

Namaste all,

Apologies for the length of this posting but we are

getting into matters that need some explanation for

those who have not heard of vedangas and Yaska.

All the previous postings have been setting the scene

for this one which is the major step before we enter

the mAyA sections.

I am just about to take my wife to point A before

going to point B before going to point A again and

taking us both to point C which is Heathrow airport to

say farewell to my emigrating son later this

afternoon. It is unlikely that I will be able to get

on to the computer until tomorrow as most of the day

will be spent on what is fondly known as England's

'biggest car-park': the M25. Those of you who live in

England will understand what that all means.

 

Hope the following makes some sense:

 

YAska, Vedangas and Understanding the Hymns

 

The unavoidable understanding from this introduction

to the Rgveda is that the hymns of the saMhitA cannot

be presented without error in a written form or when

analysed in intellectual debate. In the various

postings we have encountered the tradition of

eternality of the Vedas, against which we have to

place ides of word sound, shabda, meaning, artha,

intention, tatparya and context. Throughout the

history of South Asian philosophical debate these are

much discussed and it would help us to understand

Shankara if we had all studied the six darSanas.

Hopefully, next month’s topic will help us in that

regard. For the moment we must take a further step

back towards the first attempts to understand the

Vedas as they had been collected together as we know

them today.

We have also, up to this point, considered the

possibility that the requirement for intuitive

understanding in the moment of hearing does not

prevent subsequent analysis being of significant value

as long as all ‘kindling’ is offered in sacrifice;

that there is purity of intention. Both intuitive

insight and rational thought are necessary events in

the exegesis of the mantras so the Vedangas, primarily

aids for the protection of the purity and accuracy of

meaning of the Vedas, evolved naturally as the

teaching and language practices were developed from

the archaic forms of Sanskrit to what we may call

classical Sanskrit.

The need for purity of language or speech, of action

and of the participants in ritual is at the centre of

such spiritual work. This awareness of the need for

purity implies that there is an underlying impulse for

the actions of a study, or ritual, an impulse that is

perfect, whole and ‘pure’. At the substratum level of

this purity no fault can appear, it is only at the

level of name and form, necessary for explanation or

demonstration, that imperfections occur through error.

That substratum is central to a non-dualist teaching

and it is illustrated by the final statement of the

ISha Upanishad. This has been well covered as our

April topic:

This Upanishad emerged out of the age of the Vedic

seers through the tradition of Yajnavalkya. It is at

the core of the fundamental questioning as to ‘How the

One becomes Many while remaining One.’ Centred around

the statement of the seventh verse, ‘seeing the same

in all’, the Upanishad, through its concluding shanti

mantra, makes the definitive statement on the

resplendent, Sukram, wholeness and indivisibility of

the all-pervading substratum, paryagAt:

‘When to that man of realisation, yasmin vijAnataH,

all beings become the very Self, atma eva abhUt, then

what delusion and what sorrow can there be for the

seer of oneness?’

Then follows:

 

‘That is perfect, purna, this is perfect. The perfect

arises from perfect. Realising the imperfect in the

perfect, the perfect remains.’ Isha Upanishad 7

(this is but one translation but I have never yet been

satisfied by any translation of this Sloka into

English.)

 

 

The Vedangas were first numbered as six in the

SadviMSa BrAhmaNa of the SAma Veda where they are said

to be the limbs of the goddess SvAhA, consort of Agni.

In the Mundaka Upanishad, the rishi Angiras gives the

traditional teaching on the two kinds of knowledge to

be acquired, dve vidye veditavye:

‘..There are two kinds of knowledge to be acquired;

the higher and the lower, this is what, as tradition

runs, the knowers of the import of the Vedas say.

Of these, the lower comprises the Rgveda, Yajurveda,

Samaveda, Atharvaveda, the science of pronunciation,

ShikshA, the code of rituals, kalpaH, grammar,

vyAkaranam, etymology, niruktam, metre, chandah and

astrology, jyotisham. Then there is the higher

knowledge by which is realised that immutable,

aksharam.

By the higher knowledge the wise realise everywhere

that which cannot be perceived or grasped; which is

without source, features, eyes, ears; which has

neither hands nor feet; which is eternal, multiformed,

all-pervasive, extremely subtle, and undiminishing;

and which is the source of all.

As a spider spreads out and withdraws (its thread), as

on earth grow the herbs (and trees), and as from the

living man issues out hair on the head and body, so

out of the Immutable does the universe emerge here (in

this phenomenol creation.).’ Mundaka Up. I.1.4-7.

 

Accustomed as he was to the classical Sanskrit of his

time, roughly 4th century BC , YAska needed to

penetrate the archaic Sanskrit of the Vedas. Coming in

a long line of those seeking the purity of the

original Rishi’s vision, YAska was concerned with

revealing the original meaning of the Vedic mantras as

used in the rituals of his time. He chose etymology

and grammar as being the primary skills in this

process while, of course, recognising the importance

of Chhandas, metre. He also stated that it was through

the correct pronunciation of these mantras, by

suitably qualified persons, that their meaning came to

a flowering and fruition in their study and practice.

Attitudes to his work vary from dismissing it

altogether, to regarding it as no more than folk

etymology to seeing it as a most valuable, ancient

forerunner in the history of linguistics. His Nirukta

is devoted to the explanation of difficult Vedic

words. The only work of the kind now known to us is

that of Yaska, who was a predecessor of Panini; but

such works were no doubt numerous, and the names of

seventeen writers of Niruktas are mentioned as having

preceded Yaska. The Nirukta consists of three parts

:-(1.) Naighantuka, a collection of synonymous words;

(2.) Naigama, a collection of words peculiar to the

Vedas; (3.) Daivata, words relating to deities and

sacrifices. These are mere lists of words, and are of

themselves of little value. They may have been

compiled by Yaska himself, or he may have found them

ready to his hand. The real Nirukta, the valuable

portion of the work, is Yaska's commentary, which

follows. In this he explains the meaning of words,

enters into etymological investigations, and quotes

passages of the Vedas in illustration. These are

valuable from their acknowledged antiquity, and as

being the oldest known examples of a Vedic gloss. They

also throw a light upon the scientific and religious

condition of their times, but the extreme brevity of

their style makes them obscure and difficult to

understand. But we are here to understand.

Failure to penetrate to the very heart of meaning when

sounding the mantras, or the listening to such a

recitation without understanding their meaning, in his

opinion, withers the ‘flowers so that they fail to

fruit.’ Through such failure the sweetest fruit at the

top of the tree cannot be directly experienced ( I

have put that bit in as a reference to RV. I.164 and

the image of the two birds but cannot digress too far

into that one now.). YAska referred to that one who

chanted the mantra without understanding as a ‘wooden

post’, sthanu, and we may note that a post is the dead

product of a tree, unable to flower and fruit.

 

‘Who heard speech without fruit and flower in the

abodes of gods and men, for that man speech has no

fruit or flower, or has very little fruit and flower.

The meaning of speech is called its fruit and flower.

Or the sacrificial stanzas addressed to deities, or

the deity and the soul are its fruit and flower.’

Nirukta I.20

In this passage, YAska’s fundamental understanding of

the effectiveness of speech at three levels can be

discerned: the mantras may be spoken with no

understanding of the powers beyond the gross level,

spoken with insightful understanding at the subtle

level or ‘spoken’ in the fullness of the Atman. Hence

he states: yAjnadaivate pushpaphale devatAdhyAtme vA.

Durgacharya, YAska’s commentator, develops this

statement:

‘Knowledge of sacrifice is the flower, of which the

knowledge of divine beings may be considered as the

fruit. The knowledge of divine beings is in turn the

flower whose fruit is universal knowledge of the Self.

This is what is established by the whole Veda If the

dharma is leading to material prosperity is performed,

the knowledge of the gods is the reward. If on the

other hand the dharma leading to spiritual beatitude

is practised, then both the yajnika and daivika become

the flower; the daivika, which includes in itself the

yajnika becomes the flower and the adhyatmika the

fruit.’ This has been quoted from ‘The Heart of the

Rigveda’ Mahuli R Gopalacharya, Somaiya pub. 1971

pp.10-11

(These three levels, gross, subtle and causal as it

were, of Adhibhautica, regarding the external world,

Adhidaivica, regarding divine beings, and Adhyatmica,

regarding spiritual truths, is a central teaching in

Vedanta.

Bhagavad Gita, Chapter Seven concludes with, ‘They who

know Me as the Adhibhuta and the Adhidaiva, as well as

the chief of sacrifice, they truly know Me with

steadfast thought even at the hour of death.’)

We can now try to relate this statement with the

‘power and the glory’ of the posting on the context of

the hymns’ oral tradition. The acquisition of any

speck of knowledge requires a certain sacrifice before

the acquired skill gives meaning and authority, as any

school pupil could observe. When the child learns to

multiply numbers, status and awards follow, but the

true delight to be directly experienced is not in the

limited power and authority of that newly acquired

status, but in the magnificent, inspired flow in the

work itself from the first perception of the question

to be answered, through its working and finally to a

successful conclusion. The child will naturally

exclaim, ‘I like this.’

The full meaning is not to be found in merely chanting

the mathematical tables as instructed by the teacher.

Nor is the full meaning to be found in the newly

acquired status as ‘one who can do multiplication.’

It is found in the pure application of this acquired

knowledge in the correct situation, in the right place

at the right time. As a young child I would sit up in

my bedroom, writing the longest sum in the world

around the walls. My parents thought this neither the

right time nor right place for such activity.

This process of learning and final delight is an

example, it must be stated in my opinion only, of

YAska’s yAjnadaivate pushpaphale devatAdhyAtme vA.

The fullness of meaning comes through the mantra

realising its own knowledge, as it were, in the fields

of being and becoming. As individuals our role is to

bring, as kindling, our limited knowledge to the place

of sacrifice in that field, at the place of ritual,

where we may recall the teaching of the RgVeda:

agninAgniH samidhyate

‘By Agni, Agni is inflamed.’ RV I.12.6

 

This is a simple mantra to chant, easy to interpret,

power-full when realised. In truth, our spiritual

practice is no more than allowing that which is

already present to manifest in ever expanding

fullness.

It may be a distraction to mention this here but an

essential point relevant to YAska’s thinking needs to

be made. For the meaning of mantra to be realisable

today we have to consider the eternality of meaning

hidden within sound.

In our day-to-day language sounds stay the same but

meanings appear to change at random. For example,

here in UK when I was a child, the sound ‘gay’ meant

‘merry’ and was an adjective. For my children’s

generation ‘gay’ is a noun or adjective and means

‘homosexual’. For my grandchildren, ‘gay’ is once more

an adjective and means ‘pathetic’. Such confusion of

meanings faced YAska and those who wished to

demonstrate and explain the meaning of mantra used in

ritual. If sounds could change their meaning then the

permanence of the mantra after an individual’s death,

indeed, the very eternality of the Vedas themselves,

would be challenged. The SatapaTa-brahmaNa had stated

that the knowledge attained through the ritual

pronunciation of the Vedas remained with the ‘knower’

after death; te vidyAkarmano samavArabhete SB

14.7.2.3. If permanence of meaning of sounds is in

speech only there can be no subtle sounds manifesting

a causal impulse or inspiration, so YAska begins his

Nirukta by dismissing such a view because it would

inevitably be a denial of the Vedas as an eternal

repository of knowledge. Nirukta I.1.

We may like to reflect on this in relation to the

sound mAyA. Are the Vedas eternal and their mantras

able to realise themselves in all times? Should we

try to understand mAyA through the Vedic commentators

in history or through its translation into English as

‘illusion’? Or should we wait to hear the word afresh

in the moment ‘now’?

(I am aware of the claim, by such as Kautsa, that

Rgvedic mantras are meaningless and/or contradictory

therefore rendering Nirukta as without value in Vedic

exegesis. I leave it to others to argue this point if

they wish.

When countering Kautsa, YAska argues that

contradictions only arise when the whole context is

not known, that the ‘appeal to a plant is to the

divinity of the plant’, and that the inability to

discover the meaning of such allegedly meaningless

words as ‘amyak’ or ‘jArayAi’, is that error of the

blind man walking into a post and blaming the post for

his injury. Nirukta I.15-16 .

It is in the light of such viewpoints that YAska

pronounced yAjnadaivate pushpaphale devatAdhyAtme vA.

Nirukta I.20 This final, fulfilling fruition of the

meaning of the mantra, expanding totally in the subtle

and gross levels as thought and speech, is

illustrated by the Vedas themselves so YAska writes:

‘With these words, ‘And to another she yielded her

body’ ( RV.X.71.4) she reveals herself, knowledge; the

manifestation of meaning ( is described) by this

speech….this is the praise of one who understands the

meaning.’ Nirukta I.19

(Please note, this is Sarup’s translation so I have

not altered his version of RV.X.71.4 which we have

already had posted in a fuller translation in the last

couple of days.)

 

‘From this Supreme Self are all these, indeed,

breathed forth.’

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

=====

‘From this Supreme Self are all these, indeed, breathed forth.’

 

 

 

 

 

 

Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Messenger.

http://messenger./