|
Defined meanings: There are certain words the meaning of which has been defined. For instance, the word Upansuyaja refers to the full moon. This is necessary in cases where
the subject is not under discussion in the text. But we can get this meaning from the connection of the parts of the word itself; and that is how we get the meaning in a majority of cases. We resort to this because
we get certain expressions which make little sense. For instance, there is nothing special in the sprinkling of clarified butter over Agni; but when we do this, we understand the whole idea clearly; and find that
any other meaning would be irrelevant to the context.
Method of division into parts: The rule in regard to the meaning of a word through its parts arises from the fact that this division is made in conformity with a common practice,
and there is plenty of sacred authority in support of it. There is the same connection with the combined word Pashu-Soma, where we get a combination of two substances (Pashu and Soma); and this combination is not useless
because we get its meaning by means of this division. Pashu means an animal, while Soma means not only the moon, but also the mind. So Pashu-Soma means (Soma) the mind of (Pashu) an animal; and the Mimansa tells us that
animals have a mind. The sacred books also tell us of five kinds of Pashus or animals,- men, horses, cows, goats and sheep.
Rules cannot be laid down: We cannot lay down rules in connection with such formations; we should only remember that when we sub-divide a word formation into parts, we should
be very near its correct meaning. For the substance itself is made up of parts, corresponding to which we have the parts of a word; otherwise no purpose would be served by this division.
Certain conditions should be satisfied: If the current meaning of a word correctly conveys the idea of the attributes associated with an object, it should not be divided into parts
to serve some other purpose. When we divide a word into parts, we should preserve their position as it is in the word; and if we wish to divide into parts a word connoting action, we should do so after due reflection. The
clear idea of the text, obtained in this way, should be such as meets with general approval. In case we can interpret a word in two ways, which are equally balanced, we should go in for a new combination only if there is
some special merit in it. If no special purpose is served by analyzing a word connoting action, its meaning in its place in the text should be accepted. Again, if there is mention of a result, we should see that there is
a reference also to its cause or action - for a result is always connected with action. If there are two ways of interpreting a word, and they appear to be of equal value,- we should select the meaning which fits in with
the peculiar character of the context; and in normal cases it should be associated with action.
Special cases: There are some special cases. In the hymns composed by Saubhari addressed to Purusha and in the concluding passage of a Saman hymn which is sung in chorus, we can
do as we like. In all these cases, as the author has said what he has desired, all that is necessary is that they should be pleasant to hear. The meaning if the concluding portion of a Saman hymn, sung is chorus, depends
on the repetition of certain notes. Saubhara means "of Saubhari"; and the latter is the name of the author of the hymns of the Rig Veda addressed to Purusha. The Mimansa tells is later on that it is necessary
to divide into parts words used in the Sama Veda. Here we are told that in certain hymns, which are sung in chorus, we may or may not do so, for the result is the same. |
|
