A new approach to the Vedas : an essay in translation and exegesis

NOTES

Panjab manufactures, 1872, II, iii) are not likely to be disappointed by the results of their researches, the only marvel is why they undertake thematall. In the case of those who devote their lives to a study of the Vedas, despite an a priori conviction of their spiritually negligible content, one may well ask yastanna veda kimyrca karisyati? (Rg Veda, I, 164, 39 = Suvetdsvatara Up., IV, 8). What in fact can the Veda mean for these? Ta ete vacam abhipadya papaya siristantvam tanvate aprajajnayah, Rg Veda, X, 71, 9.

It is hardly possible for the western scholar to realise that the very terms applied by themselves to Vedic texts (e.g., “‘ puerile, arid, and inane,’’ said of the Brahmanas, Lanmann, Sanskrit Reader, p. 357), are precisely those in which their own exegetical productions are evaluated by the most competent Indian scholars, who are either too polite to say what they think, or politic enough to play the game of western scholarship by way of condescension to the pratyaksa-priyata of the present day and age.

‘The western scholar (e.g., Lanmann, 2bid., 356, 357) complains that “ what we deem the realities of life’ are for the Brahmanical thinker “mere shadows” (and so at least puts the Brahman in a class with Plato and others of his rank) : and that for the Brahman “‘ Everything is not only that which it is but also what it signifies ’’ (and so ranks the Brahman with Deity or Buddha, for whose omniscience “ all principles are same’). The Indian thinker may be insufficiently arrogant to accept such praise, but he is at least sufficiently intellectual to understand that one in whom “ the line of demarcation between ‘is’ and “signifies ’ becomes almost wholly obliterated ’’ cannot be far from His “‘ omnipotence and salvation ” in whom the distinction of Essence from Nature is altogether obliterated.

It is not without reason that Jung confesses ‘‘ Our western air of superiority in the presence of Indian understanding is a part of our essential barbarism ” (Psychological types, p. 263), or that as Salmony remarks, ‘‘ Man darf ruhig sagen: Das europdische Urteil wurde bisher durch den Drang nach Selbstbehauptung verfalscht ’’ (Die Rassenfrage in dey Indienforschung, Sozialistische Monatsheften, 8, 1926).

106 Uttanapad, “with feet outstretched”: cf. nyunnutanah “ downwards extended,” Rg Veda, IV, 13, 5. Or if uttana = uttana = prihvt, ‘* Earth-outspread,” then uttanapad would be equivalent to supratistha “firmly supported’’ in the possibilities of existence, of. supratisthapada, Maitreya~Asanga, Uttayatantra, Il, 16. In Rg Veda, I, 164, 33, both Heaven and Earth are “‘ uttana.’’

107 Daksa, Tvastr, ViSvakarma, properly essential names of God with respect to his creative activity, are called by Vedic scholars as ‘‘ Abstract gods,” and seem to be regarded by them as independent personalities. To create an adequate parallel, for example in Christian theology, we should have to regard Jehovah, the Father, the Creator, the Lord of Hosts, etc., and likewise Jesus and Christ as distinct “ gods,”’ with solemn discussion of their diverse ethnic origins and oppositions. Vedic and later authors on the other hand are perfectly aware of the identities ; for example, that Tvastr is the same as Savitr, Vi$vakarma, and Prajapati: as is indeed perfectly evident from the Vedic accounts of Tvastr’s personality and functions. To conceive of Aditi, Nirrti, Urvagi, Laksmi, etc., as distinct “ goddesses ’’ would be equally misleading. Uma, Parvati, Durga, Kali, etc., are by no means distinct essences, one more or less abstract than another.

Daksa = dinamis, Dante’s puro atto nel cima del mondo; Aditi = énergeta, Dante’s potenza in infime parte,

IOI