How not to translate Vedic texts. Let us be wary of academic mistranslations.
Expanding the study of meanings (semantics), some tend to camouflage translations as a ‘cover’ for study of a civilization (kulturwissenschaft) based on texts.
This strategy results in taking the meanings of words or metaphors out of context and attribute ‘mythical’ overtones in ancient texts.
An honest scholar should just concede as Veda itself has done in a number of occasions: ‘I do not know’.
To gain adhikāra in studying a Vedic text, the scholar should first imbibe, adhyayana, the cultural traditions and treat the text as sacred.
There is no secrecy involved in the texts. If secrecy was the intent, the traditional transmittal of texts would not have been preserved with such intensity for thousands of years. Why not accept the possibility that the expressions were intended to transmit ‘insights’ as they occurred among the savants whose life mission itself was a journey into the cosmic wonder?
Some academics seem to translate itihāsa as myths. This is simply a motivated approach, motivated by the strategy to debunk tradition. There is no evidence in any ancient text to assume such a meaning for the genre of knowledge called itihāsa. I leave it to experts in historiography to evaluate the sources of history presented, if at all, in ancient Vedic texts. Deliberations engaged in prose texts are memory markers and aids to placing the performance of a sacred process in context. Many such discussions are evaluations of nuances in the the processes of performance of Yajña, as tradition enjoins. Repetitions in texts are perhaps mnemonic aids which reinforce the precise meanings intended for the use of specific words deployed to delineate the processes.
Some academics seem to translate itihāsa as myths. This is simply a motivated approach, motivated by the strategy to debunk tradition. There is no evidence in any ancient text to assume such a meaning for the genre of knowledge called itihāsa. I leave it to experts in historiography to evaluate the sources of history presented, if at all, in ancient Vedic texts. Deliberations engaged in prose texts are memory markers and aids to placing the performance of a sacred process in context. Many such discussions are evaluations of nuances in the the processes of performance of Yajña, as tradition enjoins. Repetitions in texts are perhaps mnemonic aids which reinforce the precise meanings intended for the use of specific words deployed to delineate the processes.
Chandogya Upanishad for example cites:
Eṣa somo rājā, tad devānām annam tam devā bhakṣyanti.
There is no need for a philologist to wax eloquent on the semantics of each word in this line. Clearly, the kavi is using a mix of metaphors referring to soma as king, as food and for divinities.
Who are the divinities? This core semantics itself has been a subject of deliberated right from the days of Yāska. Even Pāṇini does not dare to enter into the semantics of chandas and restricts himself to delineating the language features of derivative Sanskrit.
In my view, it will be an act of academic irresponsibility to bypass the traditional pundits and ignore the explanations offered by them.
Mysore palace has brought out a 36 volume excursus on the Rigveda. The text is in Kannada. For sincere scholars, who are interested in devoting themselves to the study of Vedic traditions and heritage, it will be apposite to start with these 36 volumes.
One should study these deliberations with care and try to understand the processes which were intended to sustain the sanctity of the Yajña. The gurukulas have to provide such educational opportunities for serious students, śiṣṭā.
The Vedic universe has many pillars:Ṛtam (cosmic order), Satyam(existential truth), Yajña(sacrifice), Dharma (social practice), Brahman (the sacred word, mantra). Firs step, pause and evaluate if the English pronunciation we have made of these pillars is correct. Many exegeses may be needed to expound on the true import of each of these pillars of Vedic knowledge, not excluding some exercises related to Indrajāla or viśvanīḍa.
We do not even know what Yajña signifies. Let us announce humility as we enter the domain of studying Vedic traditions and heritage.
PS: This note has been provoked by the strategies revealed by an academic at http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~witzel/How-to-Enter.pdf
S. Kalyanaraman
January 24, 2014