|
Narach PHILOSOPHY SACRIFICE AND THE INTELLECT: THE METHOD OF INTERPRETATION (PART-2)GO TO: THE HOME PAGE Sacrifice and the intellect: the method of interpretation (Part - 1) Sacrifice and the intellect: the method of interpretation (Part - 3) |
Custom Search
|
This can be illustrated by means of a name, say Krshna. We can divide it into K, r, sh, na, and have to take the meaning of each letter one after the other. So too with regard to other names. Authority of teachers: If the text had only one meaning, we should doubt its value, both in respect of the Rig Veda and Sama Veda; for we have been taught by competent teachers that there should be correlation or continuity of thought in the Vedas. If, therefore, we find that the text can be interpreted equally well in two ways, the change of form of words should be made with due regard to the injunction of these teachers, who know how it has been composed. But Badari says that when there is a reference to the character of objects, we should understand their names as they are, because each object has a separate existence of its own. On the other hand some others say that, even as in the case of the hymns of the Rig Veda, there is no conflict between the properties of objects and their names. But in this method of interpretation, since the fundamental notions are so different there should be a complete substitution of one meaning for another; and the change of form should be complete, as people would say. We shall then find that there is a new natural order or connection of words in the text; but if we are unable to get a proper meaning, this order too will cease to exist. Indeed, this natural order itself would give us the explanation of the meaning of the text; and Jaimini says bluntly that it would be stupid to demand more. Object of this form of composition: As the text has been composed for a special purpose, namely, to describe the law of life, and it is free from all extravagance the cause that has made for this form of composition is the idea that the properties of objects should be correctly described, for they are closely connected with one another; and it requires that if there are any examples to be cited, they too should be in the same form. We should be able to get all this from the meaning so obtained, because that is the purpose of this formation of words. Thus, when a name is used in this form of composition, it would undergo a change, because it is quite new. Indeed, there is no similarity between the original and subsequent meaning of a word, because that is the very purpose of this form of composition, which is based on the correct formation or use of words. But it is only when we are unable to get a proper meaning, that words should be construed in this manner; and if we are satisfied with the one meaning as it is, there should be no division of words into parts; and their meaning should be determined on the basis of their description. The Mimansa tells us quite clearly that a number of names used in the text have been newly coined for this purpose. Indeed, it would be impossible to have this form of composition without it. Test of correctness: If, however, the words (or their parts) are badly arranged, the change would be for the worse, and there would be no consistency of ideas, with the result that the correct meaning cannot be determined. In this manner we can find out the correct meaning of any two Saman hymns by means of oneness of inference drawn from circumstances, and feel convinced in regard to the true meaning of words in the same manner as in connection with their original form. The hymns of the Sama Veda has been specially mentioned because it is necessary to change the form of words used in them. This, as has already been explained, is indicated by their having to be sung. Special cases: But this rule does not apply to two actions (or sacrifices) performed in accordance with a law, which takes place at different times, such as the new and the full moon. These phenomena (or actions) are personified as gods and honored as such; and that is how they are connected with the meaning of the text. We cannot say that this is intended to give us the idea of Time, and so Time should be personified in the same manner (that is, as a god), because that is not the principal topic of the text; and we get this from the description of the text itself. Nor can we say that, if it is not possible (to agree that the new and the full moon refer to Time), the idea of Time should be like that of Agni because (that too does not fit into the text, and) we have to see what constitutes the principal topic of the text and what does not. Indeed, there is uniformity of representation in regard to the idea of both Time and Agni throughout the text; for what is worshipped as a god is their different spheres of activity. We cannot even say that we should honor Time as a god at least at the beginning of things (preliminary sacrifice), because we cannot conceive of it at that stage ( or it cannot be acted upon by anything). It may be argued that Time should be represented as a god at least at the beginning of things, when life is created; for then at least it cannot be regarded as destructive. The answer to this is that at that stage we cannot conceive of Time at all; and so it cannot be personified in any form, even as a god. But when life begins, Time begins to act upon things, and cannot be acted upon by anything itself. The Mimansa explains: that Time cannot be represented as a god, because a god represents the great forces of nature acting in accordance with the law of sacrifice, that is, as creating and sustaining life. But Time cannot always be understood in this light, for it is often believed to be a great destructive force: hence it cannot be represented as god. It may be of interest to observe that the Bhagavad Gita describes Krshna (God) as revealing himself to Arjuna in the form of Time; but the latter is unable to bear the sight. Time, in the sacred books, is often represented as a Serpent; and the word Kala means Time as well as a poisonous serpent. This is the idea of Kaliya, the serpent, subjugated by Krshna in the story of the Bhagavad Purana; and it would be explained in its proper place. The association of Time with the idea of a serpent has also a special significance if its own, and is not merely due to the fact that some serpents are deadly, and so is Time believed to be. The ancients believed that Time is part of the energy of the Sun, a radiation, which has the form of a wave, and could best be represented as a serpent-wave, or a serpent. this has been explained at some length elsewhere. It may be of interest to observe that Vrtra, who is described in the Vedas as a serpent, conforms to the same idea.
|
|
LINKS: HOME PAGE SACRIFICE AND THE INTELLECT: THE METHOD OF INTERPRETATION (PART - 1) SACRIFICE AND THE INTELLECT: THE METHOD OF INTERPRETATION (PART - 3) SITEMAP |
|
© 2010 NarachPhilosophy - Privacy - Disclaimer |