Upabrmhana and Rgveda Interpretation

Author(s): T G Manikar
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

Page 25

16
The Upabținhana and the Rgveda Interpretation
and must have returned home Indra-like, sarūpa. His wife therefore could pot recognise him regarding him a veritable Indra. Griffith, Wilson and others do not offer much help. We have to accept here either a mythclogical account or a purely historical episode imaginatively narrated. It is this confusing mix up of mythology and history that is responsible for many a obscurities in the Rgveda.
The Purāṇas also throw some light on the interpretation of a few Vedic 'mantras'. They often weave their poetry by using Vedic phraseology and also pick up concepts from celebrated Vedic passages. One may refer by way of illustrations to the Puruşa Hymn (Rgveda X. 90 ), the Nāsadiya Hymn (X.122) and the Hiranyagarbha Hymn (X.121) which figure now and then in the philosophical discussions in the Purānas and the Itihasa, the Mahabhārata. The celebrated Vedic verse 'catvāri šřnga trayo'sya padah (IV.58.3) is interpreted by the Skanda Purāņa (Kashi Khanda. 73.93-96) as glorifying Śiva while the Srimadbhagavata (8.16. 31) offers a ritualitistic interpretation by understanding it as glorifying the sacrifice. It is very well known that Patañjali reads here a glorification of the “sabda' while in the view of Jaimini, the 'mantra' is in praise of the sacrifice, i he Yajña. Rājasekhara is seen here reading a reference to the Kāryapuruşa. The Srimadbhāgavata Purana (11.11. 6-7) offers a fine and easy exposition of the celebrated Vedic mantra 'dva su parna sayujā sakhaya' (1.164. 20). It is in this manner that we can derive help for an understanding of a few Rgvedic mantras. As a result the Rgveda also helps us in understanding the obscure passages in the Itibāsa and the Purāņa.
My argument here all through has been that the Purānas and the Itibāsa should be used for help when faced with a problem of an interpretation of a Rgvedic hymo, or of a Vedic myth, or of a Vedic concept. This argument, traditionally known as 'upabrmhana' has been very popular with the ancient commentators and we find an excellent and easy exposition of this time-honoured principle in Rāmānu ja when he engages himself in the refutation of the interpretations of the Upanisadic texts by the Advaita Vedantins. In his comments Rāmänuja observes
'itihāsapurāņābhyām vedam samu pabțmhayet /
bibheti al paśrutāt vedah mānayam pratarisyati' I l (Mbh. 1.1.273) iti śāstrena arthas ya itihosa puranabl vām u pabrrhanam kāryam iti jñāyate | and he further explains what this elucidation, upabộmhana, is.
"upabrîhanam nāma viditasakalavedatadarthānām svayogamahimā-saksātkrtavedatattvārthanam vāk yaih sva-avagat avedavāk yärthavyaktikaronim / sakalasäkhänugatasya vākyärthasya al pabhāgasravanāt duravagamatvena, tena vina niscaya-ayogāt, upabỊmhanam hi kāryam eva'l (Rāmānujabhasya on BS. 1.1.1. para 54)