Asat and Sat in Nasadiya Sukta and Brihadaranyaka Upanishad (1.2.28)

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

Context (archaeology) · Interpretation (philosophy) · Order (exchange) · Relevance (law) · Sanskrit · Semantic interpretation · Statement (logic) · Subject (documents) · Diverse Philosophical and Cultural Studies · Indian and Buddhist Studies · Indian History and Philosophy

• Orthographic Transcription of Sanskrit Names and Terms in Ukrainian

  Open Access•Independent Researcher, D Burba•The World of the Orient•2018

  Add to list

• Bhagavadgītā. Chapters 16–17 / Translation from the Sanskrit, Introductory Article and Commentaries by D. Burba

  Open Access•D Burba•The World of the Orient•2020

  Add to list