|
Kámbal
Kambal + ań = kámbal. Etymologically kámbal means “one who is wrapped in a kambal [blanket]”. In common usage, it means one who is oversensitive to cold. You must have come across some people who use a sweater or a muffler at the slightest cold weather; they will stop taking bath if they have a little cough. Such people are called shiitkáture or “oversensitive to cold”. In chaste Bengali you can use the word kámbal for such people.
Kárańa
The word kárańa is obtained by adding the suffix lyut́ to the verbal root kr in the causative. According to some scholars, when [the vowel a in] the word karańa is elongated, it becomes kárańa and assumes a special distinction. Then it is neither causative nor is it ań-suffixed. Thus etymologically kárańa means “the root entity transformed into a sequence of cause and effect that has now become an effect in the present moment”. In common usage, it means many of the theories discussed below:
In the ancient world, when human beings reached the first stage in forming a society, it was a matriarchal society. In addition to maternal lineage that was already in force, there were regulations regarding maternal heritage. In other words, the family line was determined by looking at the mothers of a family. When one asked a persons name, one asked the name of the mother, the name of the mothers mother, then her mother and so on. This custom was observed in the case of both men and women. After marriage the husband assumed the surname of his wifes family line. This means that a man marrying a woman living on the hills, that is, in a particular gotra [lineage] had to take on the title of that gotra in all respects. (The practice is prevalent in some communities even today.) The law of inheritance was also matrilineal; that is, the children used to inherit the property of the mother. This system was prevailing in the world for a long time. The only flaw was that in this system, though the mother was identified, the father was not, and unless the father is also identified, it is not possible to determine the qualitative excellence of a person.
Both the patriarchal system and the matriarchal system have their merits and demerits. However, because man is physically stronger, ultimately the patriarchal system came to prevail. Though the patriarchal system had many defects, which I have referred to earlier, it had two advantages. First, in the matriarchal social system the woman had to shoulder all kinds of responsibilities, as a result of which her life became miserable. In the patriarchal system the man, that is, the father, was obliged to share a large part of the responsibility. Secondly, the institution of marriage came into force to help divide the responsibilities and identify the father. Even after the introduction of the patriarchal social system, many men did not easily accept the institution of marriage, because they wanted the rights of domination but without accepting their responsibilities. Lord Shiva was the first to shoulder this great responsibility, and compelled men to take part in the marriage system.
In India, which is otherwise a predominantly patriarchal society, among the Bengalees there are still remnants of the matriarchal social system. Here a nephew [sisters son] inherits the property of a childless maternal uncle. If the maternal uncle has no children, the nephew becomes entitled to perform the last rites of his maternal uncle after observing three days, impurity rites. On the death of her father, a daughter has to observe similar impurity rites and has to organize a shráddha ceremony [obsequies] on the fourth day of the death of the father.
In Kerala the matriarchal social system is a little more dominant than in Bengal. There the nephew [sisters son], instead of using the surname of the father, uses the surname of his maternal uncle, that is, the maiden name of his mother. He inherits the property of his maternal uncle and assumes the name of his mother even if born of an inter-caste marriage. A hundred percent matrilineal social system is prevalent today only in a certain community in Meghalaya. When the mother-dominated social system prevailed, a man used to assume the same gotra [community name] of the mother, which was the same as that of the mothers mother, and so on; and the mother was considered as the leader of that community. And the chief of all chiefs, the original chief or the primal mother was considered as the causal matrix. Kárańa means this primordial cause or causal matrix.
While tracing back the cause-effect relationship, the stage immediately preceding the stage where the non-existential fallacy arises, that final stage, is called kárańa or “primal cause” the causal factor.
The name of the great sage Kańáda eventually featured in our discussion of the cause-effect theory. This Kańáda was the first inventor of the atomic theory. Many people knew about this cause-and-effect theory in a casual, perfunctory manner both before and after Kańáda, but he was the first person to establish it as a systematic and fundamental theory. He was the first to say, Kárańábhávát karyábhávah. These two parts of Kańádiiya Nyáya (the atomic theory and the cause-effect theory) later helped greatly in unravelling many knotty problems of the world. It is worth mentioning in this connection that Indian theistic theory developed into three distinct, original branches of philosophy: two sáḿkhyas, two miimáḿsás and two nyáyas. The oldest of these is Kapilas Niriishvara Sáḿkhya. The great sage Kapila, the proponent of this philosophy, hailed from a village named Patijhalda in the Ráŕh region. He attained divine grace on the hill of Kapilá near Jhalda and established his mat́h [monastery] at Gauṋgáságar an oceanic island. The second system of Sáḿkhya is known as Seshvar Sáḿkhya, introduced by the great sage, Pataiṋjali. He was born in the village Patun situated near Burdwan of the Ráŕh region. The third theory was known as Purva Miimáḿsá Darshana. The great sage Jaimini, the exponent of this philosophy, was a man of southern India. There was a time when his Purva Miimáḿsá was widely accepted by the ordinary people of India. Kavikauṋkana Mukundaráma writes:
Pariccheda náhi sandhyá-divasa-rajanii,
Smaraye sakala loka Jaemini Jaemini.
–Kavikauṋkana Mukundaráma
[Evening, day and night, people ever remember the name of Jaemini.]
The second miimáḿsá darshana is the Uttara Miimáḿsá of the great sage Bádaráyańa Vyása. He also belonged to southern India. The great sage Gaotama, who founded the Gaotamiiya Nyáya darshana, belonged to a place near Kamtaul of Mithila ... and the exponent of the second nyáya darshana or vaesheśika darshana was the great sage Kańáda (Kańádiiya Nyáya). He was born in Puruśpur (Peshavar) of the then Gandhára [the border region of Afghanistan and northwest India]. Although Gaotamiiya Nyáya had originated and developed in the beginning in Mithila, it was navyanyáya [new logic theory] based on it that brought glory to Navadvip [Nadia District, West Bengal]. Raghunath Bhattacharya (Raghunath Shiromańi), one of its interpreters, was born in the district of Burdwan near Navadvip. The famous nyáya of Raghunath, navyányaya and Raghunath – all three became almost identical.
Although there are thousands of varying opinions among scholars regarding the six forms of atheistic philosophy, these can be broadly divided into three categories [the first of which is Jaena Darshana (Jain Philosophy)].
The first Jaena Darshana is Digambar Jaena Darshana. Although Jain philosophy believed in spirituality, it is called atheistic philosophy because it does not state clearly its views regarding átman and Paramátman due to its opposition to the Vedas. According to the old school of thought, a philosophy that does not believe in any of the three – Vedas, the átmá [soul, spirit] or Paramátmá [Supreme Subjectivity]–is called atheistic. Belief in any of these three absolves one of the charge of atheism.
The second Jaena Darshana is Shvetámbara Jaena Darshana.
There are two sub-branches of Buddhism based on the Buddhist Abhidhammapit́aka [main Buddhist scripture] branches – [the first] Theráváda, or Sthavirváda (Hiinayánii Darshana – the southern school of Buddhistic philosophy) and the second, Maháyánii, the northern school of Buddhistic philosophy). The latter has four sub-branches: 1) Saotántrika, 2) Vaebháśika, 3) Mádhyamika and 4) Baoddha Yogácára – Kśańena jáyate kśańena mriyate, tayaeryogaphalam [“Born in a moment, dead in a moment: life is the sum of these”].
One sub-branch of the third branch of atheistic philosophy is the dehaparińámváda [worldview based on bodily transformations] of Cárváka.
Yávajjiivet sukhaḿ jiivet nástimrtyuragocarah;
Bhasmiibhutasya dehasya punarágamanaḿ kutah?
[One should live happily as long as one lives, since death is inevitable.
Where is the return of the body once it is turned into ashes?]
And the second sub-branch is Cárvákas dehátmaváda [philosophy of the body or materialistic hedonism].
Caturbhyo khalu bhutebhyo caitanyamupjáyate;
Kińvádibhyah sametebhyah dravyebhyo madashaktivat.
[That is to say, as the result of the combination of four elements, the fifth element, consciousness,comes into being; just like wine prepared by the combination of ingredients such as leaven, grapes, etc.]
According to many, there was no actual person named Maharśi Cárváka. It was Devaguru Brhaspati who introduced atheistic philosophy only to refute it in order to strengthen theistic philosophy. While propagating this theory of atheism, Brhaspati introduced himself as “Cáruvák” [“One Who Says Sweet Words”]. This Cáruváka became Cárváka, the name by which he was later known.
So the hill springs and those small rivers are the cause of Gauṋgottarii. According to Puranic legend, the sacred water washing the feet of Viśńu descended to earth due to the penance of Bhagiiratha. Everyone was afraid that the tremendous pressure of such a huge volume of water might split the heart of the earth. However, Lord Shiva caught that water in His matted hair and then gradually released it, letting it flow downwards. According to the Puranic account, this water then divided into four parts:
Svargete Alakándá, martte Bhágiirathii,
Pitrloke Mandákinii, pátále Bhogavatii.
[Alakánandá in heaven, Bhágiirathii on earth,
Mandákinii in the ancestral world and Bhogavatii in hell.]
Nirguńa Brahma [non-qualified Supreme Entity] expresses the complete balance of both faculties in Itself. Therefore neither any instrumentality nor any material causality is manifest in It. The first stage of Cosmic expression, when theoretically the manifestation of Nirguńa Brahma is distinctly split into instrumental and material, is known as Saguńa Tattva [Manifest Reality]. Tvameko dvitvamápannah shivashaktivibhágashah [“You are one. You have split yourself into two: Shiva and Shakti”]. Thus another name of what is Pradhána as instrument is Shiva, and what is Pradhána as material is known as Shakti or Prakrti or Máyá. This Shiva-tattva is an original or root tattva [factor] and Shakti-tattva is also an original factor.
Paramá Prakrti [Supreme Operative Principle] is endowed with three guńas [binding principles] – [the guńas of] existential experience, existential functions, and manifest or unmanifest expressions of actions. The relation between the triguńabháva [three guńas before manifestation] and the three guńas when associated with their manifestation is inextricable. So, sattvarajastamah [sentient, mutative and static] – these three guńas also deserve recognition as múla tattvas [original realities]. The balanced triangle of three guńas of Nirguńa Tattva, which is known as guńatrikońa, lies dormant. But when balance is lost, the resulting expression, in embryonic form, emerges from one of the vertices of the triangle. It is dominated by the sentient principle, and its acoustic root is sa.
The primal shakti contained in the acoustic root sa [the Operative Principle at the first stage of creation], which is described using various names such as Kaośikii Shakti or Mahákaośikii or Mahásarasvatii, is also a múla tattva [original reality]. The force at a later stage, which becomes more and more manifest, or becomes eloquent with explicit cadence, is known as Bhaeravii Shaktii or Kaoverii Shakti. It is also an original reality. Again, when Cosmic idea (bháva) turns into action, where the oneness of the singular Supreme Entity is transformed into many, it is known as Bhavánii Shakti. In Buddhist philosophy it is called Káliká Shakti or Mahámáriici. This Mahámáriici is also an original reality. In other words, Shiva and Shakti, sattva, rajah, tamah, along with Kaośikii, Kaoverii and Mahámáriici, are also known as original realities. In different stages and circumstances they acquire varying unique characteristics.
Kaośikii sá ástitvikii, Kaoverii sá dattákrtih;
Mahámáriicih sá vastusamprktih bhávasaḿyuktih vá.
[Kaośikii is the existential form, Kaoverii is the manifest or assumed form, and Mahámáriici is the objectivated form and ideational link.]
But even this shilpana-kriyá [manual craft] – is it of a uniform nature and character? Can the dexterity of a highly skilled weaver enable him to make an ornament of gold? Alternately, can the fine dexterity of a highly skilled goldsmith be of any use in the craft of pottery? Different kinds of skill originate from one generic mental faculty, but their manifestations are different and self-evident. This self-creating, characteristic generic skill may be regarded as the cause of many varied, specific skills, which preserve their diversities and specialties. The word kárańa is also used to suggest this in the world of action.
When a natural instinct is carried into effect or translated into action, not directly, but indirectly through some medium, then that medium is also called kárańa.
This creative shakti is also called sarjaniidevatá, because devatá(4) means “divine idea” (devatver bháva).
While explaining the word deva the great sage Yájiṋavalkya said:
Dyotate kriid́ate yasmádudyate dyotate divi;
Tasmaddeva iti proktah stúyate sarvadevataeh.
[The vibrational manifestations emanating from the Supreme Nucleus are known as devatás, and these devatás address that Supreme Nucleus as Deva. He with His powers vibrates the entire universe, makes the entire universe dance; and He by dint of His occult and supra-occult powers brings everything back onto His lap.]
So you understand that kárańa also signifies this sarjaniidevatá. All of you know very well that by adding the suffix lyut́ to the verbal root srj, we get sarjana [creative] and not srjana. No one can have srjanii-pratibhá; one can only have sarjanii-pratibhá [creative talents].We use sarjana in utsarjana, visarjana, etc., but when we have to use the word without a prefix, we say by mistake srjana, srjanii. From now on, do not use the word srjana, understand?
Even then, let me repeat what I have already said above: Since ancient times, human beings have been addicted to wine, or to put it correctly, wine caught hold of human beings. If someone takes wine due to addiction, it shows their weakness, but it does not affect their simplicity. But if someone takes wine in the name of religion, it shows, in addition to weakness, ones perversity. According to the Puranic Tantra and according to Buddhist Tantra, Kálikáshakti holds in one of her hands a chalice of nectar it contains the Kárańa-Biija [the Seed of Creation] of the world. Even the Bhadrakálii of the Atharvaveda has been somehow associated with this chalice of nectar. This is a philosophical postulate. It may have a relationship with wine or it may not. The contention of the philosophical postulate is that at the expected time of the pralaya [dissolution] of the universe, Bhadrakálii preserves the seed or quintessence of the world in the chalice of nectar. But when the addicts drink wine and call it kárańavári or seed water – let them think for themselves how far that is desirable. In any case, one meaning of kárańa is wine used for religious purposes.
Satsauṋgena bhavenmuktirasatsauṋgeśu bandhanam;
Asatsauṋgamudrańaḿ yá sá mudrá parikiirtitá.
[Keeping good company leads to liberation, whereas the company of bad people leads to greater bondage. The mudrańam – shunning – of bad company is called mudrá sádhaná.]
The verse quoted above is the theme or the central idea of the story. One meaning of the word kárańa is this central idea.
The relation between the cognitive force and the material force that exists in the embryonic stage continues to exist even in the final stage of pratisaiṋcara. The only difference is that at the embryonic stage of saiṋcara, sattvaguńa gradually begins to reduce, and at the final stage of pratisaiṋcara, sattvaguńa regains its original nature, that is, goes back to its original stance. We can, of course, call the embryonic stage of saiṋcara the causal state, although the cognitive force and material force do not strictly exist at that stage. The final stage of pratisaiṋcara cannot be called kárańa, because that is actually the culmination of its effect. So we call it sámányávasthá. If the first one is described as kárańadeha [causal body], the second one should be described as sámányadeha [body beyond the subtle layer of mind].
Just take note of a few more household items – káḿsya means a water tumbler made of any material. It does not mean only tumblers made of bell-metal. Káḿsiká/káḿshiká means káṋsi or a kind of utensil; káḿsik/káḿshik means bát́i or bát́t́ika [a round cup without a handle]. Prastarbát́t́ika >pattharabát́t́ia > pátharbát́i [a cup made of stone].
This causal part of the composition makes the composition most charming, and this is also called kárańa.
One of you was asking about maháshauṋkha, is that not so? Then listen. It should be borne in mind that if words like yátrá, nidrá, máḿsa, shauṋkha and shúdra are prefixed by mahá [great], it affects the meaning adversely. These words should not be prefixed by mahá when used in the normal sense (mahaiṋchabdah na yujyate). Maháyátrá does not mean a great journey, maháyátrá means death; mahánidrá does not mean a long sleep, mahánidrá means death; mahámáḿsa does not mean plenty of meat or very good meat, mahámáḿsa means human flesh. Maháshauṋkha does not mean a large conch shell, maháshauṋkha means a human skull; maháshúdra does not mean a great Shúdra [a person belonging to the lowest caste], but a milkman.
If some scripture or some great man uses the prefix mahá in a sense other than the correct sense, then we can accept such usage as an exception, but such usage does not absolve it of its grammatical error. In the Vedas, at some places, the word shikśá has been spelt as shiikśá for the sake of rhythm. Even if we accept it as an exceptional sagacious application, we cannot ignore the grammatical flaw, because in the verbal root shikś, only i was used, both in common parlance and in Vedic Sanskrit.
Footnotes
(1) Ga means “an expansive land”. Gam means “towards the expansive land or in the expansive land”. Gá means “a woman who is going”. Gam + gá, i.e., gauṋgá means that river which is going towards the expansive land. The ma in the word gam is not the end phoneme of a word. It is the inflected form of the accusative singular. Since the end ma is not the phonemic end-ma one has to write gauṋgá and not gaḿgá.
(2) We get the word káya by adding the suffix ghaiṋ to the verbal root ci. The word káyá is wrong. Here the word kśudrakáyá is not an independent word. By adding the feminine marker áp to the word following the rule striyám áp we get the word káyá).
(3) Compare with the authors Ánanda Sútram, Sútra 1-2. –Trans.
(4) Devatá is feminine gender. Whether it is male or female, that is, “god” or “goddess”, the feminine gender is used indiscriminately in all cases.