Fire and cognition in the Rgveda - Joanna Jurewicz - pdf, ebook – Ibuk.pl

(1)

Preface

This book is an attempt to reconstruct the efforts of the ancient Indian thinkers in understanding the world and themselves. They expressed their concepts in a text called the Çgveda, which is analysed in this book. The Çgveda is the earliest Indian composition and fundamental to its later culture. It is also an important testimony for the beginnings of Indian philosophy and for human philosophical thinking in general.

1. The Çgveda

The Çgveda (RV) is a collection of poetical hymns composed during the second half of the second millennium BC in the earliest form of Sanskrit. Its authors, who called themselves Ārya or Arya, belonged to the eastern Indo-Iranian branch of tribes speaking Indo-European languages, who gradually settled on the Panjab plateau during the second millennium B.C¹. At its peak the Çgvedic civilisation extended from the Kabul River to the Gaṅgā (Witzel 1995a: 93).

1 In the western archaeology there are two major hypothesis about the homeland of the Proto-Indo- Europeans (Rozwadowski 2003: 74–75): that of Pontic-Caspian steppe (Childe 1926, Gimbutas 1977, Mallory 1977, 1991) and that of Anatolia (Ivanow, Gamkrelidze 1984, Renfrew 1987). Some Indian scholars reject the European origin of the Çgvedic poets and argue for their indigenous origin (e.g. Talageri 2000, for discussion, cf. Witzel 2001a and Patton, Bryant 2005, Bryant 2001). Various problems connected with so called ‘Aryan problem’ are discussed in Erdosy 1995, for the terms ārya/arya, cf. Witzel 2001b, 2–3, Elizarenkova 1989: 455. The survey of archaeological problems connected with reconstruction of the Indo-Aryans can be found in Erdosy 1995. For reconstructions of Indo-Aryan ethnicity and languages, cf. Witzel 2000, 2004, Parpola 1988, 1997, 1999, Deshpande 1995, Southworth 1995, Oberlies 1998: 159 ff.; also Bronkhorst, Deshpande 1999. In this book I will use the term ‘Aryan’ as ‘a cultural term indicating the speakers of Vedic Sanskrit and the bearers of Vedic culture’ (Witzel 2001b: 3) which, as the Çgvedic poets themselves stress, is different from other cultures (be it Indo-Iranian or not).

(10)

The date of the RV is uncertain. The earliest hymns were probably composed around 1500 BC². Its final codification possibly took place around the 6^th century B.C. It came to us in one recension ascribed to Śākalya, although we know that there were others³. The RV is preserved in two versions: the version for continuous recitation (saṁhitāpāṭha) and the analytic version in which words are reconstructed without euphonic changes (padapāṭha); this is the version ascribed to the Śākala school. The RV was transmitted orally for centuries⁴.

The RV contains 1028 hymns⁵. They are gathered in ten parts (‘circles’, maṇḍala)⁶ which differ in their antiquity. The oldest parts are called the Family Books (II-VII);

each of which was composed by poets belonging to the same clan⁷. The remaining books are composed by poets belonging to different families. The earliest of them (but later than the Family Books) is the second part of the first maṇḍala (1.51-191).

The first part of this maṇḍala shows affinity with the eighth maṇḍala (e.g. the authors of more than a half of its hymns are the Kāṇvas who composed the hymns 1-66 of the eighth maṇḍala). The tenth maṇḍala is the most recent⁸. At the same time, one can find some old material in the later maṇḍalas (Oldenberg 2005). All these maṇḍalas include hymns to various gods. The ninth maṇḍala gathers together hymns composed by various poets, extracted from the Family Books and devoted solely to one god, namely Soma.

From the disruption of the chronological order of the RV it is inferred that its material was reorganised at some point during composition. The reorganising efforts can also be seen in the specific way the maṇḍalas are internally organised⁹. The Family Books are arranged according to the number of hymns each book contains;

the second maṇḍala is the shortest, the seventh is the longest. Within the maṇḍalas, hymns to a concrete deity are arranged according to the decreasing numbers of stanzas in each hymn and where the number of stanzas is the same, the metre decides which hymn is first (the metre with more syllables precedes). The first deity extolled by the hymns of the Family Books is Agni, followed by Indra, then hymns to other gods appear in ordered sequence. The hymns of the first, eighth and

2 Witzel 1995a: 98, cf. also Oberlies 1998: 155–156.

3 The names of the other schools of the RV are Bāṣkala, Āśvalāyana, Śāṅkhāyana and Māṇḍūkāyana, cf. Scheftelowitz 1906, Renou 1947.

4 The oldest manuscript of a Vedic text is dated from the 11th century AD (Witzel 1997: 259).

For hypothesis of an early written version of padapāṭha, cf. Bronkhorst 1982. For contestation of his approach, cf. Scharfe 2002: 12 who writes: ‘The best evidence today is that no script was used or even known in India before 300 B.C., except in the extreme Northwest that was under Persian domination’. For peculiarities of Indian oral tradition, cf. Staal 1986. For the issues connected with oral and written tradition in India, cf. Rocher 1994.

5 Eleven hymns, included in the eight maṇḍala, are known as the vālakhilya appendix (khila, RV 8.49–8.59)

6 It is also divided into aṣṭakas (eights). This is a mechanical division into portions which can be memorised, cf. Gonda 1975: 9.

7 G{tsamada, Viśvāmitra, Vāmadeva, Atri, Bharadvāja, Vasiṣṭha.

8 Cf. Gonda 1975: 9 ff., Elizarenkova 1989: 475, Witzel 1995b, Witzel 1999: 6.

9 For details, cf. Oldenberg 2005, Bergaigne 1889, Witzel 1995: 309–210.

(11)

tenth maṇḍalas are divided according to their authors. The ninth maṇḍala is divided into two parts according to metre; the first part consists of hymns composed almost exclusively in one metre gāyatrī while the second part is composed of hymns in other metres¹⁰.

The reinterpretative efforts can also be seen in the various traces of the long history of the RV which are preserved in the text. They have been analysed by Witzel (2004) who investigated how the Çgvedic poets tried to incorporate successive innovative elements which appeared during the historical development of their culture.

He concludes that the preserved text of the RV should be treated as a recapitulation of earlier speculation based on very old models ‘that has been poured into concrete, very elaborate form by the Çgvedic Çṣis’ (Witzel 2004: 620)¹¹.

If ‘the text represents a state of affairs at the end of this long oral tradition’

(Deshpande 1995: 68), one could ask who were those who did this huge reinterpretative work. They were generations of poets (they called themselves Éṣi, kaví) who, on the one hand, preserved the hymns by transmitting them within their families, yet on the other were responsible for the reinterpretation. The final version of the RV, according to Witzel (1995b, 1997), reinterprets earlier material to represent the history of two royal lineages of Pūru and Bharata thereby legitimising their rule. These efforts were continued by the poets under the rule of the Kuru dynasty who compose later saṁhitās (cf. Witzel 1995c, 1997).

The Çgvedic society was half-nomadic dividing their life between periods of war (yóga) and living peacefully (kṣéma)¹². During periods of yóga the Çgvedic tribes annexed new lands, during periods of kṣéma they led a settled way of life, raising cattle, cultivating fields and practicing crafts¹³. The society was organised into clans (víś)¹⁴ which consisted of several households (g{há, dám). Clans united themselves into bigger groups under the rule of one leader called ‘king’, rájan¹⁵. The biggest social group in Çgvedic society was the tribe¹⁶; the RV enumerates

10 For the Çgvedic metres, cf. classical works of Oldenberg 2005, Arnold 1905.

11 For possible social background for the redefinition of concepts of some gods, cf. also Dandekar 1997.

12 Cf. Oberlies 1998: 333 ff.

13 For a detailed reconstruction of the Çgvedic social organisation during both periods, cf. Oberlies 1998: 350 ff., Proferes 2007: 17–19.

14 For a survey of how this word was interpreted by scholars cf. Proferes 2007: 15–16. He himself understand them (following Sahlins) as ‘primary tribal segments’, emphasising only their relation to the larger polity’ and accepts ‘clan/clan-settlement’ (Proferes 2007: 16).

15 Oberlies 1998: 352–353, Proferes 2007: 19–20. For survey of words for king used in the Veda cf. Scharfe 1985; he is of opinion that the term ‘king’ should not be used in the translation of the RV at all. I, however, agree with Proferes’ opinion that we can use this term for pragmatic reasons. About legitimisation of king’s rule and the role of Soma in this process, cf. Oberlies 1998: 432 ff.

16 As Proferes (2007: 14–15) argues, the word ‘tribe’ has not a Çgvedic counterpart but, like the word ‘king’ is an useful term for denoting the ‘the highest political integration relative to other smaller segments’ (Proferes 2007: 19).

(12)

five main tribes: Yadu, Turvaśa, Druhyu, Anu, Pūru; other powerful tribes were the T{tsu and the Bharata¹⁷.

Priests constituted an important social group in Çgvedic society. They offered sacrifices and composed prayers; thanks to which, it was believed, the prosperity of the kingdom and of individual human beings was assured. In their function as composers of the hymns they were called ‘seers’ (Éṣi) or poets (kaví). They were paid for their ritual and poetic activity (the payment was called dákṣiṇā).

The Çgvedic pantheon consisted of many gods¹⁸. Taking into account their main features we can divide them into two groups. Concepts of gods in the first group unite features which come from natural, everyday life phenomena and the features of a divinity. In this group naturalistic background strongly motivates the conceptualisation of a godly personage. In the second group naturalistic features can be reconstructed but they are not as important for the conceptualisation of a godly personage as in the first group. These concepts integrate in a holistic way many features coming not only from the experiential ground but also from mythology and cultural knowledge. This is not to say that the concepts of the first group do not incorporate mythological and cultural features. The proportions, however, are different as far as their overall conceptualisation is concerned¹⁹.

The main gods of the first group discussed in this book are: Agni, the god of fire, Soma, the god of a plant called sóma and Uṣas, the goddess of the dawn²⁰. The main gods of the second group are Indra, B{haspati, Varuṇa, Viṣṇu²¹. Indra is the god of storm who fights with the snake V{tra. B{haspati is the god who unites features of a warrior and a priest. Varuṇa is the god of cosmic and moral order.

Viṣṇu creates the morning light and space.

We do not know much about Çgvedic ritual²². There were no temples and the sacrifices were performed on an altar (védi) on which sacrificial grass (barhís) was

17 For interpretation of the concept of ‘five people’ (páñca jánāḥ /páñca k{ṣṭáyaḥ /páñca carṣaṇáyaḥ) cf. Proferes 2007: 62. For reconstruction of their history, cf. Witzel 1995b. He includes a full list of the Çgvedic tribes.

18 About Çgvedic pantheon, cf. Bergaigne 1963, Macdonell 1897, Keith 1989, Oldenberg 1993, Hillebrandt 1990, Oberlies 1998: 174 ff.

19 For my research this simple classification of the types of the Çgvedic gods is sufficient. For more complex classification, cf. Oberlies 1998: 168–170.

20 Since in many cases it is not possible to specify whether the words agní and sóma used in a stanza to denote the real fire or the real plant, juice, or the god, I have decided to talk about them always in the masculine personal form. I also use the pronoun ‘she’ in reference to the Dawn. Other god concepts belonging to this group are: the solar deities (Sūrya, Savit{, Pūṣan and Aśvins), the god of rain (Parjanya), the god of wind (Vāyu) and the earth and the sky (Dyāvāp{thivī).

21 Varuṇa belongs to the group of gods called the Ādityas, ‘the sons of Aditi’. Other main gods belonging to this group are Mitra, Aryaman, Bhaga, Dakṣa, Aṁśa, Savit{. Another group of gods are the Maruts who accompany Indra. Main bibliography about the gods discussed in the book is given in the chapters in which they are analysed.

22 Besides discussion about the Çgvedic ritual as it can be reconstructed from Çgvedic data (cf.

Potdar 1953, Hillebrandt 1990, I: 267 ff., Kuiper 1960, Potdar 1945, 1946, Bosch 1985, Gonda 1979a, Oberlies 1999, Falk 1997, Houben 2000a, 2000b), scholars discuss the relationship between

(13)

laid. The fire was kindled and oblations were put into it. The main oblation was juice made of the plant called sóma; preparation of the juice was a part of the ritual²³. Other oblations were milk, clarified butter, honey, grains, sacrificial cakes and the meat of sacrificial animals²⁴. It was believed that fire took the oblations to gods in their heavenly abode. At the same time, it was believed that the gods came to earth and sat on sacrificial grass to drink oblations – the flames of fire were the visible signs of their tongues²⁵. The remaining Somic juice, which was not offered, was drunk by priests who performed the sacrifices²⁶. Under its influence, they could cognise and compose hymns; expression of cognition in words was the required result.²⁷

2. Basic thesis and main problems discussed in this book

The academic investigation of the RV has been undertaken in various ways.

First of all by the 19th century the text had been edited and painstaking work on its translation and on understanding peculiarities of its language had began²⁸. It has been enriched by the analysis of the Çgvedic poetry, from both a diachronic perspective, which takes into account its Indo-European grounds²⁹, and from a synchronic perspective which analyses its stylistic and syntactic features and its vocabulary³⁰. Another stream of investigation aims to reconstruct the religious system, ritual and everyday life of the Çgvedic people³¹.

It is generally assumed that the RV is not a philosophical text; even great Vedic experts such as Jamison and Witzel (1992) call the thought presented in the Veda

the Çgvedic hymns and the ritual (cf. e.g. Potdar 1953: 13, Renou 1947: 6–8, Elizarenkova 1968, Brereton 1985, Gonda 1989); the use of the Çgvedic mantras in the later ritual (cf. Bergaigne 1889, Renou 1962, Gonda 1978, 1980, Proferes 2003a, 2003b); the mantras which are not used in the solemn ritual are discussed by Gonda 1981.

23 About identification of the Soma plant see chapter 5, note 1.

24 Elizarenkova 1989: 453–454

25 This paradox of the Çgvedic sacrifice is discussed in section 11.4.

26 About drinking Soma by kings, cf. Oberlies 1998: 437 ff.

27 There were also other psychic results of Soma (see section 5.8.).

28 The editions of the RV: Müller 1849–1874, Aufrecht 1877, Nooten, Holland 1994. The standard translations are German translation of Geldner 1951, 1957 and of Witzel, Gotō 2007 (first two maṇḍalas, the next two will be published this year), French translation of Renou 1955–1966 (EVP), Russian translation of Elizarenkova (1989, 1995, 1999a). S. W. Jamison and J. P. Brereton are about to finish the English translation. In 1997 Lubotsky has published a complete Çgvedic concordance.

29 Watkins 1995, 1997.

30 Just to mention some of important contributions: Bergaigne 1883, 1933–1934, 1935–1937, Renou 1939a, Renou 1955a,b, Renou 1958, Gonda 1959a, 1960, Elizarenkova 1993, Grincer 1998, Jamison 1983, 1998, 2002, 2007.

31 Bergaigne 1963, Macdonell 1897, Keith 1989, Oldenberg 1993, Hillebrandt 1990, Kuiper (collections of papers: 1983, 1986), Schmidt 1968, Elizarenkova 1999b. A recent reconstruction of the Çgvedic religion is done by Oberlies 1998, 1999. For the exhausting survey of the academic research done till 1992, cf. Jamison, Witzel 1992.

(14)

“the philosophy” as if it did not deserve to be called such without quotation marks.

Classical histories of Indian philosophies³² devote minimal space to the RV; their implicit or explicit argument is that philosophy in India began with the Upaniṣads³³. I will argue however that the conceptual edifice built by the Upaniṣads must have been grounded in earlier texts that demonstrate a deep interest in the world and its origins and also develop methods of conceptual expression. The present book will therefore treat the RV as evidence as to how Indian philosophical thinking began.

Although Çgvedic thought is immersed in dense figurative language and seems to lack the discipline of rational thought, I will show that such a discipline can be found and that it is possible to reconstruct its main lines.

Everyone who interprets a text faces a problem as to what extent their understanding agrees with the intention of its composer. However, I will show that we can trace the conscious attempts of the Çgvedic poets to create a philosophical system with Agni, the god of fire, as its core. They themselves betray the centrality of Agni for their recipients by making ágni the first word of their text (agním īḷe puróhitam). Thus the concept of fire is ‘placed before’ (puróhita) the whole RV as that centre around which thought should concentrate³⁴. Agni’s conceptual precedence is also suggested by the fact that in the Family Books and in the tenth maṇḍala the hymns to Agni are always the first group of hymns³⁵. In my investigation I will focus on this unifying tendency.

We may presume that conceptualisation of reality as Agni was grounded not only in the general importance of fire for human culture but also in the specific way his nature was perceived by the Çgvedic poets. Oberlies (1998: 358–360) has shown that fire was both the domestic fire which burns at home and the fire that was carried when the tribe left its settlement and that this influenced thinking about Agni as mobile and connected with all phases of life of the Çgvedic people³⁶. Conceived in these terms Agni was omnipresent and possessed universality. Such a concept of Agni was expressed on the religious level: the stability of the cult of Agni contrasts with the alternating cults of Indra and Varuṇa (Oberlies 1998: 347).

According to Proferes 2007, fire symbolised the power of the Çgvedic clans and was the centre that united various social groups under one leader’s command. This concept of Agni can also be seen in the rites of fire during which political power was negotiated. This way of thinking about Agni that is reflected in ritual becomes a ground for philosophical reflection which sees him as the omnipresent essence of everything that exists.

32 Just to mention Dasgupta 1951, Radhakrishnan 1958, Frauwallner 1990, I.

33 Although Radhakrishan 1951, I: 97–98 sees the Çgvedic hymns as the poetic and mythological background indispensable for the development of later philosophy.

34 Jurewicz forthc. a.

35 As I have already mentioned, the hymns in the tenth maṇḍala are arranged according to their authors and not according to the gods, so hymns to Agni also appear in the later parts of that maṇḍala.

36 and contrary to Indra and Varuṇa, connected with only one phase, either yóga or kṣéma.

(15)

In the present state of research it is difficult to state exactly when these philosophical efforts were undertaken. According to Proferes, ‘after the redactional activity resulting in the RV was complete another editorial project was undertaken, in accordance to which selections of the Çgvedic verses from all the ten maṇḍalas were arranged together to fashion the verse liturgies for a whole range of sacred rites that together constitute the śrauta system’ (2003a: 3)³⁷. A few years later, he wrote:

‘The creation of the Çgveda was both the first step in the development of the Vedic canon and the prerequisite for the subsequent creation of the śrauta ritual system’

(2007: 8)³⁸. Taking into account the centrality of fire in the śrauta ritual, it seems probable that the editorial work posited by Proferes was based on the philosophical creation of earlier compilers of the RV whose theoretical concepts were now used to serve the needs of ritual³⁹. This would mean that the last composers of the RV wanted to legitimise the rule of their kings not only extol their deeds and history.

By organizing metaphysics around Agni they provide the philosophical basis for the śrauta rituals during which royal power was legitimised. At the same time, they laid foundations for theoretical philosophical thinking which survived the Vedic kings and was creatively developed in later Indian traditions.

So, the main aim of this book is to reconstruct the attempts of the Çgvedic composers to create a philosophical system with Agni at its centre. In that my approach differs from that of scholars who focus on Indra and Varuṇa as the main Çgvedic gods. Such investigations are conveyed in the field of mythology (Kuiper 1983, 1986, Brown 1942, 1965), in the reconstruction of religious and social activities (Schmidt 1968, Oberlies 1998, 1999), and of the influence of Soma (Nicholson 2002). The result of my analysis concerning metaphysics is closer to Bergaigne’s (1963) theory in that he too emphasises the importance of Agni as the central concept of the Çgvedic cosmology. Centrality of Agni for Çgvedic metaphysics was also observed by Kramrisch (1962, 1963) who interprets creation of the world as successive manifestations of fire⁴⁰. In my attempts to see a coherent concept of the world expressed by the various Çgvedic images I am also close to Bergaigne’s and Lüders’ work (1951, 1959).

37 In Proferes 2003b, he has showed how the śrauta liturgy was elaborated on the basis of the Çgvedic material composed by different clans. For the role of the poets in this process, cf.

Brereton 2004: 341–342, Jamison 2007: 138.

38 For reconstruction of how the Çgvedic material was redefined, cf. also Proferes 2007: 6–13.

39 I have shown elsewhere that the Çgvedic concept of a fiery reality motivates the concept of ātman in the upaniṣads (Jurewicz 2007), the pratītyasamutpāda construed by the Buddha (Jurewicz 2000) and the concept of Viṣṇu in the XIIIth chapter of the Bhagavadgītā (Jurewicz 2005a). The role of the concepts of heat and fire in the Brāhmaṇic thought and their conceptual connections with the RV was discussed by Knipe 1975, Vesci 1985, for reconstruction of the ritual of agnicayana, cf. Staal 1983.

40 The deficiency of Kramrisch’s work is that it is not clear how she comes to her conclusions;

she only refers to stanzas without analysis. As we will see, the Çgvedic stanzas rarely formulate their ideas explicitly, so Kramrisch’s reconstruction, although interesting, is better treated as hypothesis.

(16)

Philosophical thinking necessarily includes an ability for abstraction and generalisation. The Çgvedic data allows us to trace how this ability was realised by the poets. Firstly, in their hymns, the Çgvedic poets referred to some basic cosmic and ritual processes in such a way that they focussed more on their similar features than on differences between them. Thanks to that they could not only describe correspondences and mutual relationships between various aspects of the world, but also create a conceptual apparatus in terms of which they could express philosophical content. I call these basic cosmic and ritual processes ‘the defining events’ (see section 1.4.1). Secondly, the Çgvedic poets organised their thought with more general concepts which I will call ‘the general domains’ and which betray a tendency to abstract concrete experience in order to express various phenomena and processes (see section 1.4.2). Thirdly, there are overall models of reality within which the Çgvedic poets arranged their philosophical concepts. The models can be divided into two kinds. The first kind are models which encompass as wide a range of processes as possible; such models highlight the links between them but the recipient is expected to imagine the processes in concrete details.

These models are called ‘philosophical models’ (see section 1.5.1). The second kind of model is the general model of reality transformation which reduces all processes into one simple schema of transformations of opposing aspects of Agni (see section 1.4.3).

The above-mentioned concepts which attest to the ability of the Çgvedic poets for abstraction and generalisation are not explicitly expressed in the RV but can be reconstructed as conceptual structures. In order to reconstruct them I use the methodology of cognitive linguistics which is that branch of linguistics which sees language in more general terms of human cognitive capacities and investigates relationships between thought and its verbal expression (see section 1.1).

At the same time the RV remains a literary monument. Many of the Çgvedic stanzas are masterpieces of artistic skill and as such can be seen as an important source for later literary creation (Jamison 2007). However, I will only focus on those literary sophisticated stanzas which can be interpreted as serving the same purpose as the abstract and general and which make Agni the most important concept of the RV. The skill of the Çgvedic poets lies in their ability to elaborate theoretical concepts as well as picturesque images full of details which can be used for the expression of philosophical content.

The book presents the results of research which I have conducted for many years; its earlier outcomes were published in my habilitation book (Jurewicz 2001).

The main thesis and the approach remains the same. However, I have gathered much more evidence to support the thesis and have considerably enlarged the scope of material to be taken into account. I have also utilised further cognitive linguistic methodologies which have helped in the creation of useful tools for this investigation of the Çgvedic philosophical thought.

(17)

3. The content of the book

In the first chapter I outline the basic assumptions of cognitive linguistics and discuss its application in the analysis of the RV. The second presents interpretation of the Nāsadīyasūkta (RV 10.129) which takes into account the background of the hymn as briefly as possible. The aim of this chapter is to show the general and abstract character of the hymn. The following chapters of the book divide into three parts. In the first part, I discuss the defining events and I demonstrate how the unified concepts of fundamental processes are created and how they can be evoked in the description of the Nāsadīya. I also present the basic assumptions of the Çgvedic cosmology according to which the processes of the world are seen as transformations of Agni.

The second part of my book is devoted to the analysis of the philosophical models:

I examine their conceptual structure and links with the Nāsadīya. I also reconstruct Çgvedic metaphysics and anthropology which were organised around the concept of Agni. In the third and final part I focus on the concepts of four Çgvedic gods (Indra, B{haspati, Viṣṇu and Varuṇa). I discuss their relationships with the defining events on the one hand and with the Nāsadīya on the other, how activities of the gods are elaborated within the frames of philosophical models and the tendency of the poets to identify these gods with Agni.

In my attempts to understand the RV I have assumed that the recipient of this text was immersed in his contemporary culture and well versed in the RV itself. Its memorisation, which would have been usual in an oral and story telling culture meant that the recipient’s associations could encompass a very wide semantic range. In my English translation of the stanzas I have tried to preserve the ambiguity of the original because it is an important way by which the poets prompt a recipient to open his mind to various associations. I also assume that the meaning in poetry is construed not only on the basis of linguistic constructions and conceptual operations but also on the associations between phonetically similar words or phrases. Thanks to that, the understanding of a poetical text can be realised on several levels. Unfortunately, this phonetic ambiguity could not be rendered in English.

Fire and cognition in the Rgveda - Joanna Jurewicz - pdf, ebook – Ibuk.pl

Contents

Preface

1. The Çgveda

2. Basic thesis and main problems discussed in this book

3. The content of the book