The Etymologies in the Satapatha Brahmana

Email

Whatsapp

Facebook

Pinterest

Twitter

Copy link

सर्वमङ्गलमाङ्गल्ये शिवे सर्वार्थसाधिके ।

शरण्ये त्र्वन्बिके गौरि नारायणि नमोऽस्तु ते ।।

After offering salutations to the universal mother, the source of all auspiciousness, the accomplisher of all cherished desires, the giver of refuge, possessed of the eye of wisdom and beautiful form and the divine power, I start the preamble of the work. I remember I had keen insight into the history of words and their interpretations in my student life. At the same time I was much interested in the study of the Vedas: the compendium of all knowledge and embodiment of the oldest cultural heritage of mankind. The book in hand. entitled as, The Etymologies in the Satapatha Brahmana is an outcome of the consistent culmination of both Linguistic as well as Vedic Studies sprouting forth the etymological queries in the most significant treatise of ancient ritualistic culture. I have tried my best to render a definite and distinct shape to my plan and project ty a humble and curious attempt at the vedic etymologies scrutinizing therein the compatibility of Morpho-Semantic metamorphosis of the words used therein.

It was with 'Etymologies of Yaska' by Dr. Sidheshwara Verma that the study of Indian Etymologies gained momentum. That was the first attempt to analyse and enumerate the principles propounded by Yaska as regards the science of Etymology in his famous work 'Nirukta'. Since then much has been written in that connection but an advanced state of the science of etymology was also found in the Brahmaņas much older than the Nirukta. This fact was for long known to Indian scholars as well. The very definition of the Brahmapas in the mediaeval times, accepted etymology as one of the major constituent factors. But a study of these etymologies, though well developed and of advanced nature, was never taken seriously. It seems as if it was never accepted as a major contribution of the Brahmagas. This was also one of the reasons why the author of the present work considered herself fortunate to serve the world of scholars by pouring some drops from her pen into the ocean of learning Consequently an attempt has been made to investigate the problem -of vedic etymologies in proper perspective. The present study is indebted to the preceding studies of Dr. Sidheshwara Verma and Dr. Fatah Singh and numerous other scholars, whose works have helped and influenced the writer to a great extent. Casting a glance on the dilemma of researchers in the department of Sanskrit all over India, it is observed that there were many contemporary writers in the same field of Indological studies during the same half decade when Shri Mohammed Ali from Aligarh and Shti S.N. Bhavasara from Poona also worked on the etymologies in the Brahmanas While I am grateful to numerous predecessor scholars whose works could influence and serve as guideline to me, I am fully confident that the present study has its own merits which deserve consideration. It will be befitting to point out that the most salient feature of the present work is that while on one hand, a solid linguistic classification has been proposed for the individual etymologies of the Satapatha on the lines of Yaska's Nirukta; on the other hand, another kind of division has also been adopted, based on the subjective study. Thus as far as possible I have tried to sift out the worthy points of my predecessors as well as I have tried to carve my work in my own way.

In the recent past the study of the Brahmavas, as a part of the wider study of the Vedic literature, has gained importance and momentum. Vedic literature is being studied in the West, for the past two centuries. Dr. Roth and his followers were against the reliance being put on the commentaries of the great Indian commentators, like Sayaņa and others. They thought of their own linguistic interpretation as perfect and infallible. To them, the key to success in the field of Vedic Studies was nothing but the mastery over the linguistic break- up of the Vedic language. Hence, the neglect of the Brahmaņas which were otherwise supposed to be the key to the Vedic study.

No doubt, for seeking the new frontiers in the field of research, one has to ignore the tradition. But, at the same time, we cannot ignore the fact that the language, as a whole, is nothing but a carrier of the tradition and culture. The tradition and culture really make the back-bone of any literature. Literature, in its own turn, is nothing but an expression through the physique of language, of thought and emotion of a whole culture; though expressed by an individual. Thus, mastery over a language does not mean only the know- ledge of the physical structure of that particular language, but it also includes the knowledge of the tradition and culture of its speakers, at the same time.

Here was the failure of Dr. Roth and his associates. They could not gauge the importance of the available Indian material for the knowledge of the Vedic culture and the tradition related to it. On the other hand, Sayaņa might have mistaken at so many places, but his overwhelming reliance on the Brahmaņas makes him more reliable as far as the know- ledge of tradition and background is concerned. The Brahmaņas, thus, contain the precious information regarding the thought-current and traditions, along with the custom and rituals of the Vedic people. That is why, the recent attempts are directed towards understanding this background in an earnest way.

The Brahmatas are indispensable for the study of the Vedic literature. A person cannot be called a real scholar of the Vedas, until and unless he has studied the Brahmana texts. That is why, it is quoted by Apastamba in his commentary on the Vedas: 'मन्त्रब्राह्मणयोगामधेयम्', Vedas can be studied into two parts (i) Mantra portion and (ii) Brahmaņa portion. The general understanding is that the Vedas deal with the Mantra portion only and the Brahmaņas are the later texts, that deal with the application of those Mantras. But a probing study of the Vedas and the associated literature, will reveal that the Vedas and the Brahmaņas were one in giving us knowledge about the fourfold compendium of our life (Dharma, Artha, Kama, Moksa). This knowledge has been rendered in theoretical form in the Mantra and in practical form in the Brahmaņas. In other words, it may be maintained that the Mantra part deals with the Jaanakanda, where as the Brahmaņa-part deals with the Karmakanda or the application of the mantras to the rituals. The combination of both the texts, i.e. mantra as well as brahmaņa, is essential, in as much as Jnana (knowledge) without Karma (practice) remains incomplete.

The Brahmaņas are supposed, generally, to be related with the ritualistic aspect of the Vedas. Performance, rather than thought, is supposed to be the main object of the different Brahmaņas, related to the respective Vedas. But, Sayana and others enlighten us more, as they enumerate several aspects of the subject of the Brahmaņas. Vidhi or ritual is, no doubt, prominent amongst them, but Arthavada or semantic consideration, alongwith so many other things, is also no less the thought-current and traditions, along with the custom and rituals of the Vedic people. That is why, the recent attempts are directed towards understanding this background in an earnest way. The Brahmatas are indispensable for the study of the Vedic literature. A person cannot be called a real scholar of the Vedas, until and unless he has studied the Brahmana texts. That is why, it is quoted by Apastamba in his commentary on the Vedas: 'मन्त्रब्राह्मणयोगामधेयम्', Vedas can be studied into two parts (i) Mantra portion and (ii) Brahmaņa portion. The general understanding is that the Vedas deal with the Mantra portion only and the Brahmaņas are the later texts, that deal with the application of those Mantras. But a probing study of the Vedas and the associated literature, will reveal that the Vedas and the Brahmaņas were one in giving us knowledge about the fourfold compendium of our life (Dharma, Artha, Kama, Moksa). This knowledge has been rendered in theoretical form in the Mantra and in practical form in the Brahmaņas. In other words, it may be maintained that the Mantra part deals with the Jaanakanda, where as the Brahmaņa-part deals with the Karmakanda or the application of the mantras to the rituals. The combination of both the texts, i.e. mantra as well as brahmaņa, is essential, in as much as Jnana (knowledge) without Karma (practice) remains incomplete. The Brahmaņas are supposed, generally, to be related with the ritualistic aspect of the Vedas. Performance, rather than thought, is supposed to be the main object of the different Brahmaņas, related to the respective Vedas. But, Sayaņa and others enlighten us more, as they enumerate several aspects of the subject of the Brahmaņas. Vidhi or ritual is, no doubt, prominent amongst them, but Arthavada or semantic consideration, alongwith so many other things, is also no less important. Itihasa i.e. history and mythology also occupy a prominent place, amongst these aspects. All these three aspects are so much interspersed in the Brahmaņas, particularly in the Satapatha, that for an ordinary reader there may arise a confusion in distinguishing one from the other. This confusion, if it arises at all, is solely due to the lack of a compact perspective of any reader. This compact perspective is very essential for the correct understanding of the background, on which a particular Sukta or ritual is based. For example, we may take the case of the Brahmaņicat etymologies. It is in the context of a particular ritual that some of the employed Mantras are explained and the etymologies of a few words, used therein, are given, in the Brahmaņas. A close scrutiny of these etymologies will show that mostly these are there not to assist us that much in the search of the literal meaning of the Mantras in question, as they are there as the means to explain the background of these Mantras being employed in that particular context. In addition, these contain portions not to be considered as parts of the etymologised words, in an ordinary and traditional sense of the term, but are important otherwise, as far as the historical or mythological aspect is concerned. Still, they are interspersed in a way that one cannot separate them from the rest.