Madhuvidya

Author(s): S D Laddu, T N Dharmadhikari, Madhvi Kolhatkar, Pratibha Pingle
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

Page 63

UPANIŞADIC ETYMOLOGIES
In a few instances the etymology is not directly stated as in the above examples. But even so these implied etymologies can be easily noticed. That páti and pátni are related to pat is only suggested by the statement sa imam evātmānam dvedha 'patayat; tataḥ patis ca patni cabhavatām Br 1.4.3. In the case of púrusa, as noticed above, the etymology is hinted by putting the grammatically regular form purisaya by its side. In a third type the verb, synonymous with the one intended in the derivation, is mentioned. Thus muñe occurs for
tra in tasmäd enam sarvasmat putro muñcati tasmat putro nama Br. 1.5.17.21 But the verb a hú, from which ahuti22 is intended to be derived, is not mentioned in any form. It is to be understood from the expression ehi ehi. cf. ehy ehiti tam ahutayaḥ...yajamānam vahanti Mundaka 1.2.6. The following case is very peculiar in the sense that the entire etymology is left to be inferred. istaphalam evodānaḥ; sa enam yajamanam aharahar brahma gamayati Praśna 4.4. Here obviously udana is traced in the 'unorthodox' etymology to utni, but this is indirectly stated as brahma (ut) gamayati (nayati).
The peculiar identifications, to which we have already referred, have sometimes led to what we might call 'unorthodox'23 etymologies. Thus yájus is derived not from yaj but yuj: prāņo vai yajuh; prane himäni sarvāni bhūtāni yujyante Br 5.13.2; samaná is derived not from saman but from sama + ni esa hy etad dhutam annam samam nayati Praśna 3.5.24 vidyút is derived from vi da (do) in vidänad vidyut Br 5.7.1. Even the verbal form svapiti is analysed as sva + api + ita (i): svam apito bhavati tasmad enam svapitity acakṣate Ch. 6.8.1. In the Ch. 8.3.5 satyá is analysed as sat, ti, and yam of which the last element is derived from yam (atha yad yam tenobhe yacchati). We may also mention here sama which is analysed as sd and ama in the Br. 1.3.22:2 Ch. 1.6.1; 1.7.1. But it is also stated to have come from sami+anc in the Br 5.13.3 prano vai sāma; prāve hīmāni sarvani bhutani samyañci.
NOTES
1. This is in keeping with the principle later enunciated by Yaksa (apy akṣaravarnasamanyan nirbrüyat) in the Nirukta 2.1. The three syllables of the word hrdaya are similarly derived from hr. v da and Vi in the Br 5.3.1. In the Ch. 8.3.3. however, it is analysed as hrdi+ ayam.
2. J. Scheflelowitz (KZ 53.255, 1925) who derives purusa from *par-usa (Lat. pario) remarks that púrusa 'bedeutet eingentlich "Erzeuger".... For other explanations see F.B.J. Kuiper, Kirfel Festschrift (Studia Indologica) p. 146 (1955) and M. Mayrhofer, Kurz. ety. Wörter, p. 312 (1958).
3. ayam does not seem to refer either to Atman or to the indefinite 'one' as Hume thinks it to be (p. 298 f.n. 2). It is clearly related to garbha which is first supposed to exist in the man in the form of retas.
4. That by pur we have to understand heart' or 'inside of the body' is shown by such expressions purusaḥ.... sadā janānāṁ hrdaye samnivisṭaḥ Katha 6..17,
Madhu Vidya/38