Saturday, October 31, 2020

Context-based Vedic commentaries of Sāyaṇācārya

In several previous articles, I have elaborated on the deep intricate esoteric symbolism used in the Ṛgveda Samhitā to express very subtle and lofty spiritual knowledge and metaphysics, also known as brahmavidyā or adhyātmavidyā. In particular, the following articles describe in detail with direct quotations, the deep spiritual symbolism of Agni:

·  Essential nature of Agni 

· Agni – Part 2

·  Agni – Part 3

·  Bharadvāja’s enlightenment

The following article demonstrates another dimension of the esoteric symbolism of the Ṛgveda Samhitā:

I have also written a couple of articles on the life and work of the great medieval Vedic scholar and commentator Sāyaṇācārya:

·   Sāyaṇācārya: Part 1 -- His life and work

·   Sāyaṇācārya: Part 2 -- The unfair criticism of his Vedic commentaries

In the second article above, I believe I have given a good response, in defence of Sāyaṇācārya, to the point of view prevalent in many circles of modernist scholars that Sāyaṇācārya’s commentaries on the Vedas are strictly from the ritualistic perspective in complete suppression of the spiritual content. In the same article, I have quoted the full commentary of Sāyaṇācārya on a particular mantra of Ṛṣi Viśvāmitra, which is a completely spiritual interpretation. 

There are dozens of examples where the commentary of Sāyaṇācārya does full justice to the spiritual expression of the mantras, as also seen in the above article on Bharadvāja’s enlightenment.

However, we must endeavor to understand what the Vedas meant to Hindus prior to the modern period. The Vedas were considered the fount of all knowledge, and they were the basis of Dharma. As the Manu Smṛti says, “वेदोऽखिलो धर्ममूलम् -- vedo'khilo dharmamūlam”. Dharma was much more comprehensive than the modern understanding of "spirituality". Dharma defined society, it defined codes of conduct, it defined culture and civilization. The performance of the sacred ritual of yajña was an integral part of observance of Dharma and spiritual advancement. The ritual of yajña had a highly symbolic and spiritual original meaning which is evident in the study of the Brāhmaṇa texts of the Vedas.

The Vedas embody a wholistic and integral view and observance of life, where there is no demarcation between mundane and what modern Hindus understand by “spirituality”. Every aspect of life is important and has its place and significance in the spiritual advancement of an individual. Keeping this in mind, it becomes clear why tradition does not fall into the narrow and shallow pit of lop-sided “spirituality” in complete rejection of, or apathy towards, this wholistic integral vision of life.

The inherent pitfall of “spiritualizing” everything is that it is very easy to insert and force a “spiritual” symbolism into anything. Our speech is full of suggestive and interpretive nuances that can all be forced into "spiritual" meanings. However, spirituality does not exist in a vacuum. It needs the structure of society, culture, religion and rituals. Spirituality comes to life only within rituals. When enacting the physical aspects of a ritual, if one is cognizant of the inner meaning of the ritual, or the connecting link between the human world and the rest of the universe, that is the means of internalizing the equivalence or identity between our individual existence and the universal existence. In other words, “spirituality” is “sublimated ritual”.

The wholistic integral vision of the Vedas is kept alive in tradition, to which Sāyaṇācārya belongs. His Vedic commentaries are appropriate to the context of each mantra. As Yāskācārya the traditional author of the Niruktam says, “एवमुच्चावचैरभिप्रायैः ऋषीणां मन्त्रदृष्टयो भवन्ति -- evam uccāvacair abhiprāyaih ṛṣīṇāṃ mantradṛṣṭayo bhavanti". The vision of the rishis is inspired by various aspects of the universe. Hence, every mantra is unique in its context and intent. 

With the above vision in mind, tradition has assigned different contexts to different parts of the Veda, varying according to the viniyoga (application) of each part. As such, the Veda Samhitās and Brāhmaṇas are employed predominantly during the yajñas and other rituals, while the Āraṇyakas and Upaniṣads are employed predominantly as pedagogical texts to elaborate the internal philosophy of the rituals. Even here, there is significant overlap and crisscrossing of subject matter, as is evidenced in the above-mentioned articles.

Fortunately for us, there is Mahānārāyaṇa Upaniṣad, also known as Yājñikī Upaniṣad which is the tenth chapter of the Taittirīya Āraṇyaka. This Upaniṣad consists of numerous entire sections that are verbatim quotes of mantras from the Ṛgveda Samhitā. This clearly shows that the ancient Ṛṣis who composed the Taittirīya Āraṇyaka knew the deep spiritual metaphysics hidden within the Samhitā mantras, so much so that they felt that these mantras can speak directly about the philosophy that Upaniṣads are meant to convey.

This makes me feel completely validated and justified in sincerely understanding the deep and intimate concordance between the Ṛgveda Samhitā and the Upaniṣads. It proves to me incontrovertibly that my understanding of Vedas is completely in agreement with the long and ancient tradition. I have demonstrated the concordance in this article:

 ·  Concordance of Ṛg Veda Samhitā with Upaniṣads

Furthermore, this deep intimate concordance is also demonstrated by the context-based commentary of Sāyaṇācārya. What I mean by “context-based” is that his commentary differs in focus depending on the part of the Veda where a mantra occurs. In particular, a mantra occurring in the Samhitā is given a more ritual-oriented explanation, while the same mantra occurring in the Āraṇyaka is given a more philosophical explanation. Again, this has been made possible by the existence of the tenth chapter of the Taittirīya Āraṇyaka, i.e. Yājñikī Upaniṣad, which quotes big chunks of Samhitā mantras in their original form.



Following is an example of the context-based commentary of Sāyaṇācārya.

RV 4.58.1:

समुद्रादूर्मिर्मधुमानुदारदुपांशुना सममृतत्वमानट् ।

घृतस्य नाम गुह्यं यदस्ति जिह्वा देवानाममृतस्य नाभिः ॥

“A sweet wave has arisen from the Ocean, and one secretly attains immortality. The secret name of Ghṛtam that is both the tongue of the deities and the center of immortality.”

So even at the outset, clearly this mantra is mysterious and has potential for multiple levels of interpretation. Even tradition assigns five different deities (Agni, Sūrya, Ap, Go, Ghṛtam) to this entire hymn of Ṛṣi Vāmadeva (RV 4.58) in the Ṛgveda Samhitā.

Sāyaṇa’s commentary in the Samhitā:

संमोदन्तेऽस्मिन्यजमाना इति वा समुद्रोऽग्निः पार्थिवः अथवा समुद्द्रवन्त्यापोऽस्मादिति व्युत्पत्त्या वैद्युतोऽग्निः । तस्मात् ऊर्मिः ऊर्मिवदुपर्युपरि उद्भूतः मधुमान् माधुर्योपेतफलसमूहः उदारत् उद्गच्छति । अथवा वैद्युतादूर्म्युत्पादकः रस उदारत् उद्भूतः । अथवा समुद्रात् समुद्द्रवणसाधनात् आदित्यादूर्मी रस उदकलक्षण उदारत् । "आदित्याज्जायते वृष्टिः" इति श्रुतेः । यद्वा । समुद्रादुक्तव्युत्पत्तेः अन्तरिक्षादूर्मिरुदकमुदारत् । अथवा समुद्रादुक्तलक्षणात् गवामूधसः सकाशात् ऊर्मिरुज्ज्वलः क्षीररसः । एतत् घृतपक्षेपि समानम् । यद्यपि घृतं क्षीराज्जायते तथापि तस्योधसः उत्पत्तेरेवमुपचर्यते । शिष्टं वाक्यमग्न्यादिपञ्चसु पक्षेष्वपि समानम् । अंशुना दीप्त्यांशेन वा अमृतत्वं मोक्षम् उप सं आनट् । प्राप्नोति नरः । ’घृतस्य’ दीप्तस्य क्षीरद्रव्यरूपस्य वा ’गुह्यं नाम’ गोपनीयं नमनसाधनं ’यदस्ति’ तद्ब्रवीमि । तत् ’देवानां जिह्वा’ आस्वादकजिह्वास्थानीयं भवति । तदेव ’अमृतस्य नाभिः’ बन्धकं भवति । तदुभयं घृतस्य नामेत्यर्थः ।

“The terrestrial Agni is called Samudra because all the worshippers find bliss in him. Or else, Agni as lightning is called Samudra because the waters arise out of him. From him, the waves arise, i.e. the fruits of worship arise again and again like sweet waves. Or else from lightning arises the water which forms waves. Or else from the Sun which is the cause of generation of moisture, which causes waves. As the scripture says, “From the Sun comes rain”. Or else, the Samudra defined above signifies the udder of cows, from which sweet waves of milk arise. This also works for the case of Ghṛtam. The remaining sentence applies equally to all five deities. By means of the Amśu, i.e. the Light, one attains immortality, i.e. Mokṣa (liberation). I shall declare the secret name i.e. the protected means of worship of the ‘Ghṛtam’ i.e. Light or the milk product. It is the tongue of the deities, i.e. the location of enjoyment or tasting. It is also called the Center of Immortality. They are both names of Ghṛtam.”

The same mantra occurs in the Yājñikī Upaniṣad (10.15). However, Sāyaṇa’s commentary of this mantra here differs significantly from the one above for the Samhitā:

समुद्रवदतिप्रभूतात्परमात्मन ’ऊर्मिः’ ऊर्मिसदृशो जडप्रपञ्चो मधुमान् भोग्यत्वेन माधुर्ययुक्त उदारदुदगच्छत् । उत्पन्न इत्यर्थः । यथा लोके समुद्रात्तरङ्गा उत्पद्यन्त एवं हि चिदेकरसात्परमात्मनो जडं भोग्यजातं सर्वमुत्पन्नम् । घृ क्षरणदीप्त्योरिति धातोरुत्पन्नो घृतशब्दः । घृतं दीप्तं स्वप्रकाशं ब्रह्मेत्यर्थः । तस्य ब्रह्मणो यन्नाम प्रणवरूपं गुह्यं सर्ववेदेषु गोप्यमस्ति । तथा च कठैराम्नातम् - "सर्वे वेदा यत्पदमामनन्ति" इति प्रस्तुत्य "तत्ते पदं सङ्ग्रहेण ब्रवीम्योमित्येतत्" इति । तेन प्रणवरूपेणोपांशुना ध्यानकाले शनैरुच्चार्यमाणेन ’अमृतत्वं’ उत्पत्तिविनाशरहितं ब्रह्मतत्त्वं ’समानट्’ सम्यगानशे प्राप्नोतीत्यर्थः । तच्च प्रणवाख्यं नाम ’देवानां जिह्वा’ देवैर्ध्यानपरैर्निरन्तरमुच्चार्यमाणत्वेन जिह्वेव सर्वदा मुखमध्ये वर्तते । किंचेदं प्रणवरूपं नाम ’अमृतस्य’ विनाशरहितस्य मोक्षस्य ’नाभी’ रथचक्रस्य नाभिरिवाश्रयभूतम् । अनेन हि मुक्तिरूपं फलं प्राप्यते । अत एव कठैराम्नातम् - "एतदेवाक्षरं ज्ञात्वा यो यदिच्छति तस्य तत्" इति । एतस्यामृचि प्रणवस्य मोक्षसाधनत्वमुक्तम् ।

From the Paramātman, who is vast like an ocean, the universe arises like a ‘sweet wave’ because of being the means of enjoyment. In other words, just as waves come up from an ocean, similarly the universe was created from the One Ocean of Consciousness, Paramātman. The word ‘Ghṛtam’ is derived from the root ‘Ghṛ’ which has the meanings of flowing and shining. Hence ‘Ghṛtam’ means the shining, self-luminous Brahman. Of this Brahman, there is this hidden name of the form of Praṇava (i.e. Oṃ) present in all the Vedas. Hence the Kaṭha text says: “The word which all Vedas repeat, I shall tell you that word concisely, it is Oṃ.” By uttering the Praṇava ‘quietly’ during meditation, one attains ‘immortality’ i.e. the state of Brahman devoid of origin and destruction. This Praṇava is called the ‘tongue of the deities’ because they repeat it constantly and hence it stays on their tongue. Also, this Praṇava is the ‘center of immortality’ i.e. the state of Mokṣa which is devoid of birth and death, and it is like the central hub of the wheel. By this alone the fruit in the form of liberation is obtained. Therefore, the Kaṭha text says: “Having known this imperishable sound, one obtains whatever one wants.” In this Ṛk mantra, the usefulness of Praṇava as the means of Mokṣa is described.”

As you can see from a side-by-side reading of both of the above commentaries, they are completely interchangeable and very naturally fit the meaning of the original mantra. If anything, the second spiritual meaning actually fits the original intent of the mantra much better. The spiritual meaning makes full and competent use of the deep symbolism hidden in the mantra. Even a cursory casual reading of the original mantra in the Ṛgveda Samhitā suggests a deeper spiritual meaning, rather than the physical or ritualistic meaning.

The above comparison of the context-based commentaries also shows that the ancient Ṛṣis who added the original Samhitā mantra into the Upaniṣad knew exactly the deep metaphysical and spiritual meaning hidden within the symbolism. By repeating a Samhitā mantra in the Upaniṣad, the ancient Ṛṣis are pointing to, and giving clues and hints into, the mystical, metaphysical and spiritual teaching that is spread throughout the Veda, from the beginning to the end. By doing this, the Ṛṣis are actually validating the meaning of the word “Upaniṣad”, i.e. “a secret instruction”. This meaning only makes sense if there is something else of which the Upaniṣad is revealing the secret. This “something else” is the Samhitā mantras. Hence, Taittirīya Upaniṣad (1.11.4) says: “eṣā vedopaniṣat – This is the secret of the Veda. The word “Upaniṣad” has always been used in the sense of revealing the secret knowledge that was always present hidden under intricate symbolism of the Samhitā mantras. This further validates and strengthens my firm conviction about the concordance between the Samhitā and the Upaniṣad.


A second example of the context-based commentary of Sāyaṇācārya follows.

RV 4.58.2:

वयं नाम प्र ब्रवामा घृतस्यास्मिन्यज्ञे धारयामा नमोभिः ।

उप ब्रह्मा शृणवच्छस्यमानं चतुःशृङ्गोऽवमीद्गौर एतत् ॥

“We utter the name of the Ghṛtam, and in this yajña we hold it with great reverence and obeisance. May Brahmā hear our recitations. The four-horned ruddy bull emitted all this.”

Sāyaṇa’s commentary in the Samhitā:

“We, the performers of the ritual (yajamānas), praise the name of the Ghṛtam. In this yajña we hold it through reverence or through ritual offerings (havis). May Brahmā, the supreme deity, hear our recitations. The four-horned bull, i.e. the one who has the four Vedas has his four horns, i.e. either Agni or Āditya. The ruddy deity emitted, i.e. created all this, i.e. this ritual or this universe.”

 Sāyaṇa’s commentary in the Upaniṣad (10.16):

“We, the seekers of knowledge in this Jñāna-yajña, constantly utter, i.e. meditate on, the name of the Ghṛtam, i.e. the self-luminous Brahman, which is the Praṇava. And with deep reverence we hold the state of Brahman in our intellects. The metaphor of knowledge as a yajña has been expounded by Bhagavān (Gītā 4.28): “Self-study and knowledge as yajña are offered by the sages under vows of discipline.” May the knowers of this knowledge teach us through reciting the Praṇava. The four-horned bull, i.e. the one who has the four sounds of the Oṃ as his four horns. The white bull which is the Praṇava, emitted all this, i.e. taught the knowledge of Brahman.”

Here again, you will notice how the spiritual meaning fits perfectly into the symbolism of the mantra. So this spiritual meaning was always present hidden in the mantra even in the Samhitā, but the secret hidden meaning is revealed in the Upaniṣad due to providing the right context for the spiritual meaning.


A third example of the context-based commentary of Sāyaṇācārya follows.

RV 4.58.3:

चत्वारि शृङ्गा त्रयो अस्य पादा द्वे शीर्षे सप्त हस्तासो अस्य ।

त्रिधा बद्धो वृषभो रोरवीति महो देवो मर्त्यान् आविवेश ॥

“Four horns, three are his feet, two heads, seven hands are his. The Bull bound three-fold, roars. The great deity has entered into mortals.” 

Sāyaṇa’s commentary in the Samhitā:

“Even though this hymn being assigned five deities, this mantra needs to be explained in five different ways, following the tradition set by Niruktam this mantra is explained primarily for ritualistic Agni and the Sun. Of this ritualistic Agni, the four Vedas are his four horns. His three feet are the three Soma-pressings (prātaḥ-savanam, mādhyandina-savanam, tṛtīya-savanam). His two heads are Brahmaudana and Pravargya. These are said on account of the prominence of Iṣṭi and Soma rituals. His seven hands are the seven Vedic meters (chandases), on account of these being the main instruments of pleasing the deities, just as hands are the main instruments of doing work. The three-fold binding consists of the three forms of scripture – the Mantra, Brāhmaṇa and Kalpa, as these three are the modes of accomplishing the ritual. He is called the Bull (vṛṣabha) because he showers (varṣitā) the fruits of the ritual. He roars, i.e. makes a loud noise. This refers to loud recitations of Ṛk, Yajus, Sāmans, Ukthas, Śastras, etc. by the various priests Hotṛ, etc. The great deity has entered the mortals. This is said on account of the mortal worshippers accomplishing the ritual. Now, the explanation on behalf of the Sun. The four horns are the four directions, on account of being the refuge. The three feet are the three Vedas, on account of being the mode of motion. The Vedas are called the modes of motion on scriptural authority. His two heads are the night and day. His seven hands are his seven rays, which represent the seasons, six of the distinct seasons and seventh general season. He is bound three-fold as the three forms of terrestrial Agni, mid-air lightning and outer-space sun. Or else, he is bound three-fold by the summer, rainy and winter seasons. He roars, i.e. makes loud sounds through the rain, thunder, lightning, etc. The great deity has entered the mortals as the inner controller of all. Likewise, explanations are to be sought for the other deities assigned to this mantra. The grammarians use this mantra to explain the various parts of speech, etc. Others use this mantra in other ways. All those need to be noted.”

Sāyaṇa’s commentary in the Upaniṣad (10.17):

“The four horns are the four sounds comprising the Oṃ. This Brahman has three feet on account of being explained as the Praṇava of three modes. At the adhyātma level, the three feet are the waking (Viśva), dreaming (Taijasa) and deep sleep (Prājña) states. At the adhidaivata level, the three feet are the three forms of Virāṭ, Hiraṇyagarbha and Avyakta. His two heads are his two potentialities of conscious (Cit) and non-conscious (Acit) entities. His seven hands are the seven worlds of Bhūḥ, etc. He is bound three-fold by the sets of Viśva-Taijasa- Prājña, or Virāṭ- Hiraṇyagarbha- Avyakta, or A-U-M. This great deity or Bull roars, i.e. the Praṇava explicates the brilliant effulgent knowledge of the state of Brahman.”


A fourth example of the context-based commentary of Sāyaṇācārya follows.

RV 4.58.4:

त्रिधा हितं पणिभिर्गुह्यमानं गवि देवासो घृतमन्वविन्दन् ।

इन्द्र एकं सूर्य एकं जजान वेनादेकं स्वधया निष्टतक्षुः ॥

“The Ghṛtam that was hidden by the Paṇis in three forms in the Cow, was discovered by the deities. Indra generated one, Sūrya generated one, and they generated one from Vena.”

 Sāyaṇa’s commentary in the Samhitā:

“The Paṇis i.e. Asuras, hid the Ghṛtam i.e. the luminous light substance, in the cows in the form of milk, curds (yogurt) and ghee. It was discovered by the deities. Indra generated one, i.e. milk. Sūrya generated one, i.e. curds (yogurt). Vena means radiance or beauty. Vena is the radiant and beautiful Agni or the ever-moving Vāyu. From Vena, through offerings of materials, they generated the third form, i.e. ghee.”

Sāyaṇa’s commentary in the Upaniṣad (10.18):

“The Ghṛtam i.e. the self-luminous state of Brahman is hidden in three forms. In the body it is waking-dream-deep sleep (Viśva-Taijasa-Prājña). In the universe it is Virāṭ- Hiraṇyagarbha- Avyakta. The deities i.e. the human beings endowed with inner vision and divine Sāttvika qualities, discovered the Ghṛtam in the Cow i.e. Speech in the form of the Vedas. What kind of Ghṛtam? The one hidden by the Paṇis. The word Paṇi is derived from the root meaning transaction or praise. So Paṇis are the sages, the teachers and the Ācāryas. It is hidden by the Ācāryas due to being the highest secret. Indra, personifying the most majestic Virāṭ Puruṣa, generates one form, the waking state Viśva. Sūrya, personifying Hiraṇyagarbha generates one form, the dreaming state Taijasa. Vena means the beautiful or radiant that is free from all sorrow. From this Vena that is the Avyakta was generated one form, the deep sleep state Prājña. The word Svadhā means the form of Brahman which is established in itself without the need for another support, i.e. pure consciousness. Hence, Indra, Sūrya and Vena generated their respective states by means of this pure consciousness Svadhā.”

This particular mantra acutely and brilliantly demonstrates the extreme adherence and fidelity of the tradition to context, as exemplified by the striking differences between Sāyaṇācārya’s commentaries in the Samhitā versus in the Upaniṣad. Key points to note:

  • Samhitā commentary is very superficial, mundane, childish, and I dare say, crude. Upaniṣad commentary is highly sophisticated, deep, spiritual and lofty.
  • Samhitā commentary says Paṇis are Asuras. Upaniṣad commentary says Paṇis are Ācāryas. 
  • Upaniṣad commentary says that the Ācāryas intentionally hide the secret knowledge.

The last point above truly and finally demonstrates the context-based function of the Samhitā and Upaniṣad in the ancient traditional Vedic education system. The Samhitā is taught to every student as a foundation of their knowledge base. If the student’s mindset is superficial and mundane, the hidden secrets of the Samhitā mantras were automatically hidden from him by way of the superficial explanation of the meanings. However, if the student had a more philosophical, mature and spiritual mindset, the hidden meanings behind the symbols in the same Samhitā mantras would be revealed to him, to illuminate him with spiritual knowledge. Once again, my own deduction about the concordance between Samhitā and Upaniṣad has been justified.

The superficial student would be naturally satisfied with a superficial understanding, and hence a physical or mythological explanation would suffice for him, and he would not go seeking more knowledge. On the other hand, a mature student would not be satisfied, and would seek deeper knowledge, thus repeatedly seeking out Ācāryas to gain a true understanding.  The Ācāryas served as the doorkeepers to this secret knowledge, examining and testing each student before they felt the student was deserving of this knowledge. This dynamic between an earnestly seeking student and a wise, testing Ācārya is often seen in the Upaniṣads. The contrast between a superficial student and an earnest student is seen in the case of Indra and Virocana going to Prajāpati for knowledge.

This explains why the format of the most ancient Upaniṣads is one-on-one conversations between teacher and student. The original conversations were passed down from generation to generation until someone decided they were too valuable to not be codified into canonical texts.

To give a somewhat approximate and crude modern-day analogy, the Samhitā is like a chemistry textbook containing the theories, equations and formulas. Everyone in the class is prescribed the textbook uniformly. However, in the chemistry lab, each student gets individual notes and instructions because each individual lab apparatus is slightly different, and the same chemical reaction may need slightly different measurements, quantities and catalyst actions. These individual notes and instructions are somewhat analogous to the one-on-one conversations in the Upaniṣads.

This whole exercise has only increased my deep love, affection and reverence for this great ancient Vedic tradition, which is unsurpassed in grandeur, majesty, wisdom, depth, vision, truth expression and pedagogy. No other sacred tradition is so self-contained, supremely well-designed and well-organized.

The most venerable Sāyaṇācārya is the last great scion of this ancient lineage and tradition, and we are very fortunate to have inherited his Vedas commentaries complete and intact. His context-based commentaries clearly show the purposeful, self-sufficient and self-contained design envisioned by tradition. Only people who are not immersed in this tradition would dare criticize his commentaries as “ritualistic” or incomplete or some such label. Such criticisms only show their own half-baked, immature and superficial understanding of the great and inimitable Vedic tradition.

 

No comments:

Post a Comment