Page:The Hymns of the Rigveda Vol 1.djvu/14

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION.
xi

conformity with Sâyaṇa, Mahîdhara, etc. Consequently, we do not believe like H. H. Wilson, that Sâyaṇa, for instance, understood the expressions of the Veda better than any European interpreter; but we think that a conscientious European interpreter may understand the Veda far better and more correctly than Sâyaṇa. We do not esteem it our first task to arrive at that understanding of the Veda which was current in India some centuries ago, but to search out the sense which the poets themselves have put into their hymns and utterances. Hence we are of opinion that the writings of Sâyaṇa and the other commentators do not form a rule for the interpreter, but are merely one of those helps of which the latter will avail himself for the execution of his undoubtedly difficult task, a task which is not to be accomplished at the first onset, or by any single individual....We have, therefore, endeavoured to follow the path prescribed by philology, to derive from the texts themselves the sense which they contain, by a juxtaposition of all the passages which are cognate in diction or contents;—a tedious and laborious path, in which neither the commentators nor the translators have preceded us. The double duty of exegete and lexicographer has thus devolved upon us. A simple etymological procedure, practised as it must be by those who seek to divine the sense of a word from the sole consideration of the passage before them without regard to the ten or twenty other passages in which it recurs, cannot possibly lead to a correct result.”[1]

Professor Max Müller says: “As the authors of the Brâhmaṇas were blinded by theology, the authors of the still later Niruktas were deceived by etymological fictions, and both conspired to mislead by their authority later and more sensible commentators, such as Sâyaṇa. Where Sâyaṇa has no authority to mislead him, his commentary is at all events rational; but still his scholastic notions would never allow him to accept the free interpretation which comparative study of these venerable documents forces

  1. On the Interpretation of the Veda, by J. Muir Esq.