Male
Member Since Jun 26 2007
Atomism with Piety
Aug 23 2007 | Views 68 |
Comments (0)
Leave a Comment
The early Nyaya-Vaisesika philosophers confine themselves to paying lip service to the Vedas; at the same time, they leave sufficient evidence to indicate that this lip service has precisely nothing to do with their philosophy and is to be taken as ransom given to the orthodoxy to save their science oriented philosophies (just like Brahmagupta's sham show of belief in the existence of Rahu being the cause of the eclipses). With the later Nyaya-Vaisesikas, things are different.
The greatest of the later Nyaya-Vaisesikas is Udayana (circa 10th century AD). By this time, the Vedic orthodoxy of this philosophy has become so strong a makebelief of these philosophers that Udayana finds it necessary to go to the extent of showing an actual Vedic passage sanctioning the view of the atoms (something none of his Nyaya-Vaisesika predecessors has bothered to do). Yet the way he does this shows the complete bankruptcy of this tendency of seeking Vedic sanction for atomism.
In Svetasvatara Upanisad is found a verse beginning with the expression visvatascaksuruta (Sv. Up. iii.3). In this verse occurs the word patatara. Udayana argues that this word patatara is the Vedic word for the atom! Hence this verse, according to Udayana, is evidence of scriptural sanction for atomism.
Let us examine the evidence. The verse under consideration is quoted in the Svetasvatara Upanisad from the Rig Veda (x.81.3). For its proper understanding, therefore, we may go back to its source (Rig Veda). Sayana, the most orthodox Vedic commentator, interprets the verse to mean:
"The one-god, whose eyes pervade all directions, whose mouth pervades all directions, whose arms and feet pervade all directions--he, after bringing heaven and earth into being, directs these with his arms and his moving feet."
Thus, as a verse belonging to the very late stratum of the Rig Veda, it does foreshadow some form of rudimentary monotheism. It is only natural for the most theistic of Upanisads--Svetasvatara--to quote it.
But where are the atoms in the verse? Udayana says that these are referred to by the word patatara occurring in it. But the word patatra ordinarily means 'bird's wing' (literally 'that which saves it from falling'), though in this particular context under discussion, Sayana prefers to interpret it as 'the moving feet' (gamanasilaih padaih). There is thus nothing in the plain meaning of the word to suggest the atom.
Udayana's claim to read the atom in it is based on a peculiar argument.
Derived from the root 'pat', the term 'patatra' implies movement and since the atoms are moving, the word stands for the atoms.
It is not difficult to see to what an absurdity this line of argument leads to. The oldest glossary of Vedic words, the Nighantu, mentions no less than one hundred and twenty two words implying movement. In the Rig Veda alone, these words along with their derivatives occur thousands of times. Does this mean that the Rig Veda is bursting with atomism?
The fact that a philosopher of Udayana's stature wants to show atomism in the Vedas on the flimsiest of grounds is thus most bewildering. Apparently the makebelieve in Vedic orthodoxy of the Nyaya-Vaisesika has become so strong in the later period that it leads even its greatest representative to an absurdity.
One should note here Adi Sankar's contribution to the subject of whether atomism is present in the Vedas. Being a consistent idealist, Sankar has clearly drawn our attention to the fact that no atomism is to be found in the Vedas and this, he explains, is the basis of his attack on atomism.
© Rashmun., all rights reserved.
In case you missed...
Some other recent posts by Rashmun
© 1998-2008 Copyright Sulekha.com Connecting Indians Worldwide, All Rights Reserved.
Recommend