Illocutionary Force of Questions in Hymn of “Rigveda” bravavrttam

The topicality of the appeal to the language material of the “Rigveda” is conditioned by its significance for the study of the role of the archaic ritual in the formation of human communication. The point of issue of the paper is the questions contained in the cosmogonic hymn of the «Rigveda» bravavrttam where they are left unanswered. The work aims to throw light onto the illocutionary force of these questions against the background of a communicative in nature Vedic ritual practice. To achieve this aim the author deals not only with the meaning content of the hymn but also its pragmatics, the part it plays in the ritual communication as well as involved cognitive mechanism and traits of its phonetic, musical and poetic form. The research makes it possible to verify our ideas on the nature of the Vedic ritual and enhances the understanding of its texts. The work shows impossibility of an adequate interpretation of the Vedic text elements regardless to the pragmatics and communicative intents of the ritual speech. The main result of the research is the assumption of presumed by the Vedic mindset a divine verbal contribution to the magic practice of the ritual cosmogony.

Sattva Guna as a Predictor of Wisdom and PWB

The ancient Indian Vedic text places emphasis on balanced living through a conscious strive to evolve from lower states of being to higher ones thus providing physical, spiritual and psychological wellbeing. Similarly the western thought places emphasis on working on physical and psychological well being for humans to flourish and realise their infinite potential. Hence, the present investigation is an attempt to draw a concomitance between Indian and Western Psychology on the topic of psychological well being and how wisdom and satvikta are related to this concept. For the purpose of this study a sample of 100 university students (50 males and 50 females) between the ages of 18-24 years were selected. Three scales namely- (i) PWAS (Practicing Wisdom Assessment Scale) (ii) Trigunatmak Personality Inventory, and (iii) Ryff’s Psychological Well Being were used. Regression analyses was done. The results indicated that Sattva Guna significantly predicts PWB and Wisdom.

Avestan Ainita- “Unharmed”

Bartholomae explains Av. ainita- “nicht vergewaltigt, - gekränkt” (Yt. 13.34; 51; 63) and ainiti- “milde Behandlung, Milde” from an-inita-, resp. *an-initi- (owing to haplology, see Altiran. Wörterb. 125 f.). This theory is the inevitable consequence of his positing an Avestan word [initi-] “Vergewaltigung, Kränkung”, supposed to be attested in the Instr. Sg. inti- Vend. 18.61 and in nitī. Y. 30.11b. If however [initio] had really been in use both in Gāthic and in Later Avestan, it would be hard to conceive how its opposite *an-initi- could have become [aniti-], since the Avestan speaker, in that case, must always have been aware of its origin as a mere negation of [initi-]. Besides, a participle *inita- would be anomalous in several respects. In the first place the present inaoiti [inauti], corresponding to Ved. inóti, must be referred to a root i-, as there is no indication to show that from the stem i-nau- a secondary root in- had been created in Indo-Iranian. The participle -inita-, only twice attested in a comparatively late Vedic text (úpenita- Šat. Br. III) is certainly an occasional new formation of Sanskrit. The Indo-Ir. noun Ved. énas-, Av. aēnah- “act of violence, crime, sin” contains the IE. suffix *-nes- and is derived direct from the root (cf. Ved. rékllas-,Av. raēxinah- from the root *raik-). As for Ved. iná- “strong, mighty, fierce”, there is no reason why it should rather be analysed as in-á- (e.g. Lindner, Altindische Nominalbildung, p. 33) than as i-ná-:. the nominal stem derived from the present stem is, indeed, -invá- (Wackernagel, Altind. Gramm., II, 1, p. 181). Secondly Bartholomae disregarded the fact that, while in Sanskrit participles in -ta- with an analogical “connecting -i-” are quite common, they are completely unknown in Old Iranian. This is apparently due to the circumstance that the IE. formation in *-H-tó- contained a consonantal laryngeal, which vanished in Iranian while being secondarily vocalized in the Indian branch. Thus to Ved. gbhītá- (with a specific Indian lengthening of i<H after a labial sonant) corresponds grpta- in Avestan. The mutilated Old Persian form agrbi ( … ) in Dar. Beh. 2.73, for which Bartholomae, Tolman, and Kent read āgarbīta “seized” (p. p., with a long i!), is more likely to stand for āgrbi<ya> (: Ved. aghyata). Accordingly Fravrtiš agrbi<ya> anayatā abiy mām means “F. was seized (and) led to me” (cf. 2.88). As far as the noun [initio] is concerned, the fact should be stressed that even in Sanskrit the “connecting -i-” is confined to the participles but does not, as a rule, occur in the verbal nouns in -ti-.