04-17-2007, 10:13 AM
Wow, thanks Ashok. I found Sayana's version of Rig Veda last night, and spent the entire night reading through it and studying it, and also comparing it to Griffith, and the few translations I could find of Devi Chand and Sri Aurbindo. The Sayan version was far more superior to Griffith, and I could understand it much more.
I think you might be mistaken about Devi Chand. He does not follow Griffith or Sayana's translation, but Swami Dayanadas. His translation of the Vedas is the most scientific I have seen. He interprets the verses as discussing electricity, atomic fission etc
For example
<i>The atomic energy fissions the ninety-nine elements, covering its path by the bombardments of neutrons without let or hindrance. Desirous of stalking the head, ie. The chief part of the swift power, hidden in the mass of molecular adjustments of the elements, this atomic energy approaches it in the very act of fissioning it by the above-noted bombardment. Herein, verily the scientists know the similar hidden striking force of the rays of the sun working in the orbit of the moon.</i>
The original sanskrit is:
indro dadhIcho asthabhirvR^itrANyapratiShkutaH jaghAna navatIrnava
ichchhannashvasya yachchhiraH parvateShvapashritam tadvidachchharyaNAvati
atrAha goramanvata nAma tvaShTurapIchyam itthA chandramaso gR^ihe
(Rig Veda, book 1, hymn 84)
At first I was extremely skeptical of Devi Chand. But after reading Sayana translation, it makes a lot more sense. Its becoming increasingly clear to me that Indra slaying Vrittra, is referring to a natural phenomena. The word vritra is synonymous with cloud(megha) and Sayana's translation refers to vritra as condensed vapour.
So is this referring to how rain is caused? Yes it is on one level, by Indra causing an electrical discharge in the cloud, the waters within the cloud are released, and fall to earth as rain. But, Vritra is described as the first cloud, which eternally holds the waters.
And then it says that the sun is produced. Therefore Vritra existed, even before the sun existed. Hence the production of the sun or stars, is dependent on Indra releasing the waters from the hold of Vritra.
In the Vedas, the waters are described as both waters that flow on the Earth, and celestial waters such as space. Indra is the deva that presides over space(Varuna presides over the atmospheres) therefore he deals with celestial phenomena.
The production of stars and elements is therefore presided over by Indra. Without Indra releasing the waters there are no stars or suns. Hence, why the vedas describe the Sun as being made of waters(apah) and the waters as being made up of agni . The fluidic substance of space is apah. If Vritra is taken to be the very first cloud(primordial state of the universe) then other borns are therefore interstellar clouds(from which stars are born)
Thus Indra is the principle which causes these interstellar clouds to form into suns. Thus indra is some kind of atomic phenomena. The vedas describe Indra as using some kind of discharge to cause the process. This discharge is born from Rudra(Rudra and Agni are both the same) it could be electricity, or some other phenomena.
The 99 places described in the verse could be 99 clouds, 99 interstellar clouds. However, they are described as being <i>parvateShvapashritam</i> thus being solid matter. Thus, cloud becomes unlikely. It then says that that the swift bombardment by the discharge released by Indra(Vajra) fissions them.
I know that Devi chand has translated this correct, because in Sayana and Griffiths translation, it is translated as "the horses(ash) head hidden inside the mountain" which makes absolutely no sense <!--emo&:lol:--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='laugh.gif' /><!--endemo--> It is referring to the nucleus(the core/chief part) hidden inside the 99 elements.
Therefore it does seem that Devi chands translaton is accurate. The bombardment then must be a neutron striking the nucleus of those 99 elements. I am not sure if Devi Chand has explained this the same way(or provided any commentary)
What I don't understand is the last part:
atrAha goramanvata nAma tvaShTurapIchyam itthA chandramaso gR^ihe
Can you help me translate this?
I also need help in translating the subject of what a verse refers to. I am getting the impression that the Western Indologists are getting the word order wrong, and I am also starting to doubt that the Vedas are describing fire sacrifices. The principle behind yagna seems to be transforming something into something else and Soma is an ingredient needed in it.
Reading Sayanas ritualitic interpretation. It sounds like preists making prayers to the fire and praising the "gods" and preparing Soma juice for them to drink. In return they pray for blessings and boons, thousands of cows and horses. But if it is indeed that, then how can these Devas be natural principles? How can they possibly get more cows and horses by just praying?
Devi Chand has translated these Yagnas much more differently
Indra Kratuvidang sutang somang harya purushtut Piba vrishaswa taatripim(RV, book 3, hymn 40, verse 2)
Let electricity, so highly spoken of by many learned people, help extract the essence of medicines, thus produced by those, who are well-versed in manufacturing things. Let it keep safe and shower, on us the rain, satisfying all.
Devi Chand has obviously taken Indra to mean electricity here. The rest according to Monier-Williams Sanskrit dictionary means:
Kratuvidam = grant power' sutang(extract) somang(part of soma) harya(take) purushut(many praise) Piba(drink) vrishaswa(rains) taatripm(delight)
Order is: Indra - grant power - extract- part of soma - take - many praise - drink - rains - delight
This is translated by Griffith as:
Indra, whom many laud, accept the strength-conferring Soma juice:
Quaff, pour down drink that satisfies.
And By Sayana as:
3.040.02 Indra, the praised of many, accept the effused Soma, the conferrer of knowledge; drink, imbibe the satisfactory draught. [Imbibe: vr.s.asva, sprinkle, shower, that is, into the stomach, so that it may not descend below the stomach].
We can clearly see the difference between Chand and Griffith/Sayana is the word order. While Chand is based on using Indra to extract a part of soma for our use, where we are the drinkers. The others are about us preparing Soma for Indra to come and drink. Which one is correct, and why? How is the sentence constructed? What are the rules?
I think you might be mistaken about Devi Chand. He does not follow Griffith or Sayana's translation, but Swami Dayanadas. His translation of the Vedas is the most scientific I have seen. He interprets the verses as discussing electricity, atomic fission etc
For example
<i>The atomic energy fissions the ninety-nine elements, covering its path by the bombardments of neutrons without let or hindrance. Desirous of stalking the head, ie. The chief part of the swift power, hidden in the mass of molecular adjustments of the elements, this atomic energy approaches it in the very act of fissioning it by the above-noted bombardment. Herein, verily the scientists know the similar hidden striking force of the rays of the sun working in the orbit of the moon.</i>
The original sanskrit is:
indro dadhIcho asthabhirvR^itrANyapratiShkutaH jaghAna navatIrnava
ichchhannashvasya yachchhiraH parvateShvapashritam tadvidachchharyaNAvati
atrAha goramanvata nAma tvaShTurapIchyam itthA chandramaso gR^ihe
(Rig Veda, book 1, hymn 84)
At first I was extremely skeptical of Devi Chand. But after reading Sayana translation, it makes a lot more sense. Its becoming increasingly clear to me that Indra slaying Vrittra, is referring to a natural phenomena. The word vritra is synonymous with cloud(megha) and Sayana's translation refers to vritra as condensed vapour.
So is this referring to how rain is caused? Yes it is on one level, by Indra causing an electrical discharge in the cloud, the waters within the cloud are released, and fall to earth as rain. But, Vritra is described as the first cloud, which eternally holds the waters.
And then it says that the sun is produced. Therefore Vritra existed, even before the sun existed. Hence the production of the sun or stars, is dependent on Indra releasing the waters from the hold of Vritra.
In the Vedas, the waters are described as both waters that flow on the Earth, and celestial waters such as space. Indra is the deva that presides over space(Varuna presides over the atmospheres) therefore he deals with celestial phenomena.
The production of stars and elements is therefore presided over by Indra. Without Indra releasing the waters there are no stars or suns. Hence, why the vedas describe the Sun as being made of waters(apah) and the waters as being made up of agni . The fluidic substance of space is apah. If Vritra is taken to be the very first cloud(primordial state of the universe) then other borns are therefore interstellar clouds(from which stars are born)
Thus Indra is the principle which causes these interstellar clouds to form into suns. Thus indra is some kind of atomic phenomena. The vedas describe Indra as using some kind of discharge to cause the process. This discharge is born from Rudra(Rudra and Agni are both the same) it could be electricity, or some other phenomena.
The 99 places described in the verse could be 99 clouds, 99 interstellar clouds. However, they are described as being <i>parvateShvapashritam</i> thus being solid matter. Thus, cloud becomes unlikely. It then says that that the swift bombardment by the discharge released by Indra(Vajra) fissions them.
I know that Devi chand has translated this correct, because in Sayana and Griffiths translation, it is translated as "the horses(ash) head hidden inside the mountain" which makes absolutely no sense <!--emo&:lol:--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='laugh.gif' /><!--endemo--> It is referring to the nucleus(the core/chief part) hidden inside the 99 elements.
Therefore it does seem that Devi chands translaton is accurate. The bombardment then must be a neutron striking the nucleus of those 99 elements. I am not sure if Devi Chand has explained this the same way(or provided any commentary)
What I don't understand is the last part:
atrAha goramanvata nAma tvaShTurapIchyam itthA chandramaso gR^ihe
Can you help me translate this?
I also need help in translating the subject of what a verse refers to. I am getting the impression that the Western Indologists are getting the word order wrong, and I am also starting to doubt that the Vedas are describing fire sacrifices. The principle behind yagna seems to be transforming something into something else and Soma is an ingredient needed in it.
Reading Sayanas ritualitic interpretation. It sounds like preists making prayers to the fire and praising the "gods" and preparing Soma juice for them to drink. In return they pray for blessings and boons, thousands of cows and horses. But if it is indeed that, then how can these Devas be natural principles? How can they possibly get more cows and horses by just praying?
Devi Chand has translated these Yagnas much more differently
Indra Kratuvidang sutang somang harya purushtut Piba vrishaswa taatripim(RV, book 3, hymn 40, verse 2)
Let electricity, so highly spoken of by many learned people, help extract the essence of medicines, thus produced by those, who are well-versed in manufacturing things. Let it keep safe and shower, on us the rain, satisfying all.
Devi Chand has obviously taken Indra to mean electricity here. The rest according to Monier-Williams Sanskrit dictionary means:
Kratuvidam = grant power' sutang(extract) somang(part of soma) harya(take) purushut(many praise) Piba(drink) vrishaswa(rains) taatripm(delight)
Order is: Indra - grant power - extract- part of soma - take - many praise - drink - rains - delight
This is translated by Griffith as:
Indra, whom many laud, accept the strength-conferring Soma juice:
Quaff, pour down drink that satisfies.
And By Sayana as:
3.040.02 Indra, the praised of many, accept the effused Soma, the conferrer of knowledge; drink, imbibe the satisfactory draught. [Imbibe: vr.s.asva, sprinkle, shower, that is, into the stomach, so that it may not descend below the stomach].
We can clearly see the difference between Chand and Griffith/Sayana is the word order. While Chand is based on using Indra to extract a part of soma for our use, where we are the drinkers. The others are about us preparing Soma for Indra to come and drink. Which one is correct, and why? How is the sentence constructed? What are the rules?