Vedas and phonetics
Western languages emphasize the linguistic rather than the phonetic, whereas the vedic view gives more importance not so much to the meaning of the written or spoken word as to the special sound it should produce, and the composition of that sound. Hence the Sanskrit language is phonetic, not linguistic; the emphasis is more on the sound than on the word. And so, for thousands of years it was felt that these valuable scriptures should not be written down, because it was natural that no sooner would it be written down than the emphasis on sound would be lost. The insistence was that the knowledge be passed on by word of mouth, rather than in writing, because in writing words down – they would be mere words and the subtle sensations associated with the sound would be lost and so become meaningless.
If we write down the word Rama, those who are reading it will say the word in many different ways. Someone will put more emphasis on ”r” and someone else, more emphasis on ”a,” and still somebody else will put more emphasis on ”m.” It will depend on the individual reader. So as soon as a word is written down, the effect of sound is destroyed. Now, to understand the effect of the sound of those words, a whole decoding exercise to pronounce the words correctly will have to be done. So for thousands of years there was a strong insistence on not writing down any scripture, because the ancient seers did not want the phonetic arrangement lost. The scripture had to be passed on to others directly by word of mouth, so scriptures were known as Shrutis, meaning that which is learnt by listening.
What was passed down in the form of written books was never accepted as scripture. It was all scientifically based on the arrangement of sound. At some places the sound had to be soft, and at others it had to be loud. It was very difficult to write these words in script form. The day the scriptures were reduced to writing, the essential, inherent, original, inner arrangement of sound was lost. It was no longer necessary to understand only through listening. You can read a scripture – it is available in the market. Now there is no relationship or relevance to sound.
It is important to note that the emphasis of the scriptures was never on the meaning. The emphasis on meaning became relevant later, when we reduced those scriptures to writing. If something written down has no meaning it will look insane, so meaning has necessarily to be given to the written word. There are still some parts of vedic lore where no meaning could be deciphered – and these are the real parts, because they are totally phonetic. They do not convey any meaning.
For example, the question about the meaning of the Tibetan mantra, ”Aum mani padme hum,” does not arise because its significance is totally phonetic. Similarly, there is no question of any meaning in the mantra,”Aum,” but it has a sound-based impact which creates a special effect. When a meditator repeats,”Aum mani padme hum”, again and again, the sound affects the various chakras and they are activated.
The question is not of the meaning, the significance concerns the sounds themselves.So the fact that the old scriptures did not lay any stress on the meaning, but on their utility – the purpose for which they could be used and the benefits which could be derived from them – deserves our special attention.
If we write down the word Rama, those who are reading it will say the word in many different ways. Someone will put more emphasis on ”r” and someone else, more emphasis on ”a,” and still somebody else will put more emphasis on ”m.” It will depend on the individual reader. So as soon as a word is written down, the effect of sound is destroyed. Now, to understand the effect of the sound of those words, a whole decoding exercise to pronounce the words correctly will have to be done. So for thousands of years there was a strong insistence on not writing down any scripture, because the ancient seers did not want the phonetic arrangement lost. The scripture had to be passed on to others directly by word of mouth, so scriptures were known as Shrutis, meaning that which is learnt by listening.
What was passed down in the form of written books was never accepted as scripture. It was all scientifically based on the arrangement of sound. At some places the sound had to be soft, and at others it had to be loud. It was very difficult to write these words in script form. The day the scriptures were reduced to writing, the essential, inherent, original, inner arrangement of sound was lost. It was no longer necessary to understand only through listening. You can read a scripture – it is available in the market. Now there is no relationship or relevance to sound.
It is important to note that the emphasis of the scriptures was never on the meaning. The emphasis on meaning became relevant later, when we reduced those scriptures to writing. If something written down has no meaning it will look insane, so meaning has necessarily to be given to the written word. There are still some parts of vedic lore where no meaning could be deciphered – and these are the real parts, because they are totally phonetic. They do not convey any meaning.
For example, the question about the meaning of the Tibetan mantra, ”Aum mani padme hum,” does not arise because its significance is totally phonetic. Similarly, there is no question of any meaning in the mantra,”Aum,” but it has a sound-based impact which creates a special effect. When a meditator repeats,”Aum mani padme hum”, again and again, the sound affects the various chakras and they are activated.
The question is not of the meaning, the significance concerns the sounds themselves.So the fact that the old scriptures did not lay any stress on the meaning, but on their utility – the purpose for which they could be used and the benefits which could be derived from them – deserves our special attention.