[INDOLOGY] Alchemy metaphor

[Dominik Wujastyk]

Trying to firm up the idea that vedh- means convert, transmute, or (for the
philosophers among us, perhaps) transubstantiate.

The *Rasaratnasamuccaya* is a kind of late-ish nibandha text that brings
together, organizes and medicalizes the earlier, more tantric alchemical
literature.  Meulenbeld argues that it is datable to the sixteenth century
(HIML IIA 670).  Earliest dated MS: 1699 CE.  This text is not bad as a
representative of the developed ("classical"?) rasaśāstra tradition; one
would expect less standardization of vocab. in earlier texts.

At *Rasaratnasamuccaya* 8.94-95
<http://sarit.indology.info/newphilo/getobject.pl?c.7:8:165.indologica>
there is a definition of śabdavedha.
from blowing of iron, with mercury in the mouth, there is the creation of
goldenness and silverness. That is known as Word-vedha.
and the commentator makes it even more explicity that this is
transmutation, using pari-ṇam.  *Rasaratnasamuccayabodhinī* on 8.95
<http://sarit.indology.info/newphilo/getobject.pl?c.7:8:166.indologica>:
... *tat lauhakhaṇḍaṃ svarṇādirūpeṇa pariṇatam//*
that bit of iron is converted into the form of gold etc.

... yatra vedhe svarṇādirūpeṇa pariṇamet sa śabdavedha ityarthaḥ//
Word-vedha is where it converts with the form of gold etc. ...

The operation being described here is not unclear.  The alchemist puts a
piece of mercury in his mouth and blows on a piece of iron.  It becomes
golden or silvery.  This "becoming" is "vedha."

The *Bodhinī* authors were Āśubodha and Nityabodha (hence the witty title),
the sons of Jīvānanda Vidyāsāgara Bhaṭṭacārya, and the *Bodhinī* was
published in Calcutta in 1927.  So it's arguable that their interpretation
was influenced by 19th-20th century thought.  However, their commentary is
very śāstric and elaborate (note the Pāṇinian grammatical parsing, "dhama
dhāvane ityasmāt lyuḥ" (>P.1.3.134 and pacādi ākṛtigaṇa).  And as
Meulenbeld points out, they cite an exceptionally wide range of earlier
rasaśāstra texts (HIML IIA 671-2).  Their interpretations are based on a
close reading of classical rasaśāstra literature.  At the very least, one
can say that their view represents the understanding of learned panditas in
turn of the century Calcutta, that vedha meant pariṇāma, or transmutation.

Best,
Dominik


Dominik






On 9 July 2014 12:27, Dominik Wujastyk <wujastyk at gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
>
> On 9 July 2014 11:26, Matthew Kapstein <mkapstei at uchicago.edu> wrote:
>
>
>> I have a vague recollection, by the way, of discussing this with David
>> Pingree back in the 80s, and he pointed me to an old, but interesting
>> monograph on Indian chemistry (not alchemy) that had some interesting
>> things to say about vedh-. I’ll try to locate the reference, but no doubt
>> others on this list will be more familiar with the literature in this area.
>>
>
> ​I imagine David was thinking of P. C. Ray's *History of Hindu
> Chemistry​ * (link
> <https://www.dropbox.com/sh/3iamb3e84kp2o2k/AADzPHJXs8rxHNgRsINzLVH9a>)
>
> Best,
> Dominik
>
>


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://list.indology.info/pipermail/indology/attachments/20140709/1cedb8c8/attachment.htm>