Asat and Sat in Nasadiya Sukta and Brihadaranyaka Upanishad (1.2.28): The Problem of Translation and Interpretation
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##
Abstract
The paper concentrates on elucidating the key semantic and semantic connotations of the terms asat and sat in Nasadiya Sukta and Brihadaranyaka Upanishad (1.2.28) in order to determine possible ways of their interpretation and translation.
The relevance of the topic of the study is reasoned by discussions about the method of problematization of the concept of being in the history of Indian philosophy. Vedic literature in the context of the study is interpreted as the source of the formation of the philosophical culture of India. We have chosen it as the subject of analysis in accordance with the methodological approach developed by V. Horskyi. Despite the importance of the problem of interpreting the concepts of asat and sat in Indian philosophy, we must recognize the lack of relevant specialized study.
The issue of the translation of Sanskrit terms that are important for the history of Indian philosophy, into Ukrainian is open and requires careful analysis of primary sources. The translation of Nasadiya Sukta and Brihadaranyaka Upanishad (1.2.28), which provide the basis for the study, is viable and intermediate. In order to preserve the original semantic structure of the Sanskrit text, we have minimized the use of the transformational translation method.
If the terms asat and sat are interpreted in Nasadiya Sukta as non-being and being, respectively, a paradoxical construction of the statement “the existence of non-being” or “the non-existence of being” is formed. The Brihadaranyaka Upanishad asat and sat are mentioned in the context of the possibility of moving the subject in an effort to achieve the former and avoid the latter. In both cases, the translation of “non-being” and “being” is problematic, because the concept of being is a reality undefined by certain coordinates of time or space in the Western history of philosophy ever since Parmenides of Elea. According to the “Western approach”, it is possible to think of being or the existence of “something”, and not being in itself. In both primary sources we have studied, the oppositions of the concepts of mṛtyu are also mentioned – amṛta, which we interpret as Death – Immortality, and tamas (darkness), which in Brihadaranyaka Upanishad is contrasted with jyotis (light), and in Nasadiya sukta actually appears as an oxymoron: “darkness of darkness”.
If in the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, oppositions are defined as the opposition of the undesirable to the desirable, where perhaps it is more about the “states of the subject” than about certain “objective” realities, then in the Nasadiya Sukta they are most likely a “tool” for trying to express the unspoken, that is, what “precedes everything” but is nothing of the known, that is, defined in a certain way.
How to Cite
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
asat; being; Brihadaranyaka Upanishad; Indian philosophy; Nasadiya Sukta; philosophical culture; sat
Бурба Д. В. (2018b), “Бгаґавадґіта, Гл. 2, Переклад із санскриту, вступна стаття та коментарі Д. В. Бурби”, Східний світ, № 3, c. 86–105.
Бурба Д. В. (2020), “Бгаґавадґіта. Глави 16–17, Переклад із санскриту, вступна стаття та коментарі Д. В. Бурби”, Східний світ, № 4, c. 108–119. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15407/orientw2020.04.108
Гнатовська Г. В. (2022), «Лексичні репрезентанти концепту “буття” у англо-санскритському словнику Моньє-Вільямса», Вісник Київського національного університету імені Тараса Шевченка, Філософія, т. 1, № 6, c. 10–15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17721/2523-4064.2022/6-2/13
Голоси Стародавньої Індії. Антологія давньоіндійської літератури (1982), Дніпро, Київ.
Горський В. С. (2001), Філософія в українській культурі: методологія та історія, Центр практичної філософії, Київ.
Європейський словник філософій: Лексикон неперекладностей (2009), т. І, Дух i лiтера, Київ.
Завгородній Ю. (2013), Рецепція індійської філософії в Україні. Лінія Вед (1840–1930-ті рр.), Інститут філософії ім. Г. С. Сковороди НАНУ, Київ.
Завгородній Ю. (2017), «Індійська філософія й уявлення про звільнення (мокшу) у “Манава-Дгарма-Шастрі”», Sententiae, № 2, с. 117–132. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22240/sent36.02.117
Соневицький М. (1970), Історія грецької літератури. Рання доба, т. 1, Український Католицький Університет ім. св. Климентія Папи, Рим.
Стрелкова А. Ю. (2013), “Спiввiдношення буття, небуття та порожнечi в буддiйськiй онтологiї”, Актуальні проблеми духовності, вип. 14, с. 60–69. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31812/apd.v0i14.1833
Akter I. and Nahar F. (2024), “Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas as Tools for Understanding Psychological Disorders”, Journal of Ayurvedic Maulik Siddhant, Vol. 1, Issue 1, Part A, pp. 6–8. DOI: 10.33545/siddhant.2024.v1.i1.A.2
Aubenque P. (2005), Le problème de l’être chez Aristote, PUF.
Deussen P. (1980), “The Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad (of the Śukla Yajurveda)”, in Sixty Upanishads of the Veda, Part I, Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi, pp. 389–544.
Frazier J. (2022), “Chapter 24. The Classical Worldview: Early Foundations of Hindu Philosophy”, in The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Hinduism Second Edition Edited by Gavin Flood, John Wiley & Sons Ltd, рp. 417–448. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119144892.CH24
Halbfass W. (1992), On Being And What There Is: Classical Vaiśeika and the History of Indian Ontology, State University of New York Press.
Heidegger M. (1953), Einfuhrung in die Metaphysik, Max Niemeyer Verlag, Tubingen.
Heidegger M. (1971), On the Way to Language, Harper & Row, New York.
Madhavananda Sw. (1950), The Brihadaranyaka Upanisad with the Commentry of Sankaracarya, The Modern Art Press, Calcutta.
Monier-Williams M. (1899), A Sanskrit-English Dictionary: Etymologically and Philologically Arranged with Special Reference to Cognate Indo-European Languages, Oxford.
Müller M. (transl.) (1884), “Bṛhadāraṇyaka-Upaniṣad”, in The Sacred Books of the East Translated by Various Oriental Scholars and Edited by F. Max Müller, Vol. XV: The Upanishads, Part II, The Clarendon Press, Oxford, pp. 73–227.
Olivelle P. (1998), Upanisads: A New Translation by Patrick Olivelle, Oxford University Press.
Pinchard A. (2014), “Tad as a Predicate in Vedic”, in 6th International Vedic Workshop, Preliminary edition, рp. 1–15.
Plato (1961), Theaetetus. Sophist, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
Plato (1892), The Dialogues of Plato, Clarendon press, Oxford.
Prakash Dr. R. (2021), Indian Philosophy and Religion, K. K. Publications, New Delhi.
Vandana Upadhyay (2023), “An Analytical Study of Being (Sat) in Philosophy with Special Reference to the Nāsadīya Sūkta of Ṛgveda, X-129”, International Research Journal of Management Sociology & Humanity (IRJMSH), Vol. 14, Issue 5, pр. 429–434.
REFERENCES
Burba D. V. (2018a), “Praktychna transkryptsiia sanskrytskykh vlasnykh nazv ta terminiv v ukrainskii movi”, Shìdnij svìt, No. 1, pp. 104–122. (In Ukrainian). DOI: https://doi.org/10.15407/orientw2018.01.104
Burba D. V. (2018b), “Bhagavadgita, Hlava 2. Pereklad iz sanskrytu, vstupna stattia ta komentari D. V. Burby”, Shìdnij svìt, No. 3, pp. 86–105. (In Ukrainian).
Burba D. V. (2020), “Bhagavadgita. Hlavy 16–17. Pereklad iz sanskrytu, vstupna stattia ta komentari D. V. Burby”, Shìdnij svìt, No. 4, pp. 108–119. (In Ukrainian). DOI: https://doi.org/10.15407/orientw2020.04.108
Hnatovska H. V. (2022), “Leksychni reprezentanty kontseptu ‘buttia’ u anhlo-sanskrytskomu slovnyku Monie-Viliamsa”, Visnyk Kyivskoho natsionalnoho universytetu imeni Tarasa Shevchenka, Filosofiia, Vol. 1, No. 6, pp. 10–15. (In Ukrainian). DOI: https://doi.org/10.17721/2523-4064.2022/6-2/13
Holosy Starodavnoi Indii. Antolohiia davnoindiiskoi literatury (1982), Dnipro, Kyiv. (In Ukrainian).
Horskyi V. S. (2001), Filosofiia v ukrainskii kulturi: metodolohiia ta istoriia, Tsentr praktychnoi filosofii, Kyiv. (In Ukrainian).
Ievropeiskyi slovnyk filosofii: Leksykon neperekladnostei (2009), Vol. I, Dukh i litera, Kyiv. (In Ukrainian).
Zavhorodnii Yu. (2013), Retseptsiia indiiskoi filosofii v Ukraini. Liniia Ved (1840–1930-ti rr.), Instytut filosofii im. H. S. Skovorody NANU, Kyiv. (In Ukrainian).
Zavhorodnii Yu. (2017), “Indiiska filosofiia y uiavlennia pro zvilnennia (mokshu) u ‘Manava-Dharma-Shastri’ ”, Sententiae, No. 2, pp. 117–131. (In Ukrainian). DOI: https://doi.org/10.22240/sent36.02.117
Sonevytskyi M. (1970), Istoriia hretskoi literatury. Rannia doba, Vol. 1, Ukrainskyi Katolytskyi Universytet im. sv. Klymentiia Papy, Rome. (In Ukrainian).
Strelkova A. Yu. (2013), “Spivvidnoshennia buttia, nebuttia ta porozhnechi v buddiiskii ontolohii”, Aktualni problemy dukhovnosti, Issue 14, pp. 60–69. (In Ukrainian). DOI: https://doi.org/10.31812/apd.v0i14.1833
Akter I. and Nahar F. (2024), “Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas as Tools for Understanding Psychological Disorders”, Journal of Ayurvedic Maulik Siddhant, Vol. 1, Issue 1, Part A, pp. 6–8. DOI: 10.33545/siddhant.2024.v1.i1.A.2
Aubenque P. (2005), Le problème de l’être chez Aristote, PUF.
Deussen P. (1980), “The Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad (of the Śukla Yajurveda)”, in Sixty Upanishads of the Veda, Part I, Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi, pp. 389–544.
Frazier J. (2022), “Chapter 24. The Classical Worldview: Early Foundations of Hindu Philosophy”, in The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Hinduism Second Edition Edited by Gavin Flood, John Wiley & Sons Ltd, рp. 417–448. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119144892.CH24
Halbfass W. (1992), On Being And What There Is: Classical Vaiśeika and the History of Indian Ontology, State University of New York Press.
Heidegger M. (1953), Einfuhrung in die Metaphysik, Max Niemeyer Verlag, Tubingen.
Heidegger M. (1971), On the Way to Language, Harper & Row, New York.
Madhavananda Sw. (1950), The Brihadaranyaka Upanisad with the Commentry of Sankaracarya, The Modern Art Press, Calcutta.
Monier-Williams M. (1899), A Sanskrit-English Dictionary: Etymologically and Philologically Arranged with Special Reference to Cognate Indo-European Languages, Oxford.
Müller M. (transl.) (1884), “Bṛhadāraṇyaka-Upaniṣad”, in The Sacred Books of the East Translated by Various Oriental Scholars and Edited by F. Max Müller, Vol. XV: The Upanishads, Part II, The Clarendon Press, Oxford, pp. 73–227.
Olivelle P. (1998), Upanisads: A New Translation by Patrick Olivelle, Oxford University Press.
Pinchard A. (2014), “Tad as a Predicate in Vedic”, in 6th International Vedic Workshop, Preliminary edition, рp. 1–15.
Plato (1961), Theaetetus. Sophist, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
Plato (1892), The Dialogues of Plato, Clarendon press, Oxford.
Prakash Dr. R. (2021), Indian Philosophy and Religion, K. K. Publications, New Delhi.
Vandana Upadhyay (2023), “An Analytical Study of Being (Sat) in Philosophy with Special Reference to the Nāsadīya Sūkta of Ṛgveda, X-129”, International Research Journal of Management Sociology & Humanity (IRJMSH), Vol. 14, Issue 5, pр. 429–434.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.