Vaidik Vakya Rachnama Sarvanamo Ane Vyakaranni Visangati - Book Summary

Here's a comprehensive summary of the provided Jain text, "Vaidik Vakya Rachnama Sarvanamo Ane Vyakaranni Visangati (A Critical Analysis of Pronouns and Grammatical Discrepancies in Vedic Sentence Structure: Tat Tvam Asi (Chā. Up. 6.8-16))" by Bansidhar Bhatt:

Core Argument and Problem Statement:

The author, Prof. Dr. Bansidhar Bhatt, argues that Indian scholars, particularly those specializing in Sanskrit or Prakrit literature, often exhibit an "inexcusable neglect" of the other tradition. This narrow focus, described as staying within their "puddles of interest," leads to a lack of comprehensive understanding, especially concerning linguistic and philosophical development. Bhatt highlights that scholars of Upanishadic or philosophical texts often ignore Prakrit-Pali literature for the evolution of philosophical ideas, while grammarians remain confined to Panini's Ashtadhyayi, neglecting other linguistic sources like Pratisakhyas, Nirukta, Upanishads, epics, Puranas, Jataka tales, and Pali-Prakrit literature. He asserts that parallel study of Sanskrit and Prakrit texts is crucial for understanding philosophical, dramatic, grammatical, and vernacular developments.

Focus of the Article: "Tat Tvam Asi" in Chandogya Upanishad (6.8-16)

The article specifically focuses on a critical analysis of the well-known Upanishadic phrase "Tat Tvam Asi" (Thou art That) found in the Chandogya Upanishad (Chā. Up.) 6.8-16. Bhatt aims to provide a precise and intended meaning of this phrase, claiming it to be a "first" for an in-depth discussion in India. He bases his analysis on a 1986 research paper by American scholar Joel P. Brereton.

Critique of Previous Interpretations (Shankara and others):

Shankara's Commentary: Bhatt examines Shankara's commentary on the Chā. Up. 6.8-16, where the phrase "Tat Tvam Asi" is part of a recurring refrain. Shankara interprets the pronouns "saḥ" (he/that) and "tat" (that) as referring to "Sat" (Being/Existence). While acknowledging the philosophical validity of this interpretation within Vedanta, Bhatt argues that in the specific sentence structure of the Chā. Up. verse, "sat" and "animan" (subtlest) are distinct concepts. He contends that, except for the final "tat" in "Tat Tvam Asi," other pronouns are used in the context of "agamana" (arrival/coming to), not "sat."
Textual Variations: Bhatt discusses variations in the reading of the phrase "etadātmyam," noting different interpretations by various commentators (e.g., etadātmyam, etadātman, retadvānyam). He favors the reading "etadātmyam" and highlights that his analysis supports this reading.
Pronoun Usage and Grammatical Discrepancies: A significant portion of the article delves into the intricate rules of pronoun usage in Vedic prose, particularly the "Gender-Number Agreement Rule."
- The Rule: This rule states that demonstrative pronouns generally adopt the gender and number of the noun they refer to, especially when acting as a predicate or subject.
- Examples from Vedic Literature: Bhatt provides numerous examples from Vedic texts (e.g., Jaiminiya Brahmana, Aitareya Brahmana, Satapatha Brahmana) to illustrate how pronouns often agree with the predicate noun rather than the antecedent, or how they can be used in an adjectival capacity.
- Application to "Tat Tvam Asi": He argues that the "Tat Tvam Asi" statement, when analyzed through these Vedic grammatical rules, presents a discrepancy. The pronoun "tat" (neuter singular) in "Tat Tvam Asi" does not consistently agree in gender and number with its potential antecedents like "animan" (masculine singular) or "tvam" (second person singular, masculine). He critiques interpretations that force "tat" to agree with "sat" or "brahman" without proper grammatical justification based on the immediate context.

Hypothesis on the Origin and Placement of "Tat Tvam Asi":

Bhatt proposes that the "Tat Tvam Asi" refrain, along with its associated phrases, did not originate in its current position (6.8-16) but likely emerged from Chā. Up. 6.12.

Chā. Up. 6.12 and the Banyan Tree Analogy: This section describes Uddalaka Aruni's explanation to his son Shvetaketu using the analogy of a banyan tree. He explains that the entire massive tree originates from an imperceptible, subtlest essence (animan). Bhatt suggests that "Tat Tvam Asi" was likely conceived here to express this fundamental truth: just as the banyan tree and the entire universe arise from this imperceptible essence, Shvetaketu, too, is constituted by this essence.
Redaction and Insertion: Bhatt theorizes that the refrain was later "inserted" or "projected" into other sections of the sixth chapter (6.8-11, 6.13-16) to reinforce the teaching. He points out that this insertion, while serving to emphasize the concept, sometimes disrupts the original flow and coherence of the passages (e.g., in 6.14 and 6.15, where the core ideas differ from the "Tat Tvam Asi" concept).
Analogy with "Neti Neti" in Brihadaranyaka Upanishad: He draws a parallel with the repeated "Neti Neti" (Not this, not this) in the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, suggesting that such repetitions can be a method to embed key philosophical pronouncements. However, he also notes that "Neti Neti" appears in only one version of the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, hinting at potential textual layers or redactions.

Conclusion and Reinterpretation:

Bhatt concludes that the pronoun "tat" in "Tat Tvam Asi" is not referring to Brahman, Atman, Sat, or Animān as traditionally interpreted. Instead, based on his extensive analysis of Vedic grammatical rules and contextual usage of pronouns, he suggests that "tat" functions more like an adverb.

His proposed reinterpretation suggests that "tat" in "Tat Tvam Asi" indicates a causal or contextual relationship, similar to adverbs meaning "therefore," "consequently," "thereupon," or "in this regard." Therefore, a more contextually accurate translation of "Tat Tvam Asi" might be:

"That which is this subtlest element; this (subtlest element) is this entire universe. That is Truth. That is Atman. In this manner (tat), thou art, O Shvetaketu."

This interpretation emphasizes the method or manner by which Shvetaketu is to understand himself in relation to the subtlest essence that underlies the banyan tree and the universe.

Appendices:

The article includes two appendices:

Appendix 1: Summarizes the rules of pronoun agreement in Vedic prose and the adverbial functions of pronouns like "tat," "tad," and "kim."
Appendix 2: Lists the various Vedic texts and Upanishadic sections cited in the analysis.

Overall Significance:

This article provides a rigorous linguistic and grammatical critique of a foundational Upanishadic statement. It advocates for a more interdisciplinary approach to Indological studies, emphasizing the importance of understanding the evolution of language and thought across different textual traditions. By meticulously applying grammatical rules and historical textual analysis, Bhatt aims to offer a more accurate and nuanced understanding of "Tat Tvam Asi," challenging established interpretations.