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:

• Asura in the Rig Veda

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.

---

The santṛpti and power of traditional Indian women

Just yesterday my mother was telling me a little snippet from old memories from more than 20 years ago.

Back then my parents lived in a joint family with my paternal grandparents and my two uncles (father’s brothers).

Apparently, one day there was some kind of an argument between grandmother and one of her sons. My mom witnessed my grandmother reportedly scolding her adult sons and saying, “You may be a big officer outside the house, but inside the house I’m your mother. Be careful what you say to me!”.

This is really remarkable to me. According to me mom, all of grandmother’s adult and financially independent sons and daughters were reverently afraid of their mother while being affectionate at the same time.

My grandmother was not a PhD, nor a top-level executive at a Fortune 500 company. She successfully raised 10 children who all become successful in their lives. Her contentment was in being the mother of her family and keeping everyone together. The spiritual power she wielded came only from her santṛpti and being a good mother and grandmother. Her power came from her sadācāra.

Of all her grandchildren, I was luckiest as I got to spend many years with her when my grandparents lived with us.

The only words that come to mind when I remember her is “divine majesty”. This word comes to mind even when I remember by maternal grandmother, my aunts and my own mother.

There is this indescribable majestic grace with which traditional Indian women conducted themselves. They knew how to be feminine but at the same time strong and courageous. Their mannerisms and their way of speaking is just something else altogether.

This was the real power of Indian women. This is the ancient tradition of strong courageous women like Damayanti, Savitri, Kausalya, Sumitra, Sita, Satyavati, Kunti and Draupadi.

Those who say that Indian society was oppressive to women only have an agenda, and have not lived in a truly cultured Indian family.