Having looked at White's book The Alchemical Body, I can report that he frequently takes vedha in the sense of "transmute" and "transubstantiate". Of course, he is not a Sanskritist but an historian of religion.  Dominik, is it true that vedha is often listed as the seventeenth samskāra after the 16 rasa-saṃskāras, and is seen as their fruit?  For such he claims in that book.

best, CW

On 9 July 2014 12:09, Christopher Wallis <bhairava11@gmail.com> wrote:

This is a rather wonderful discussion!  Thanks to all for adding evidence. The video Dominik posted seems very important insofar as our authors were in touch with reality, which I like to think they were. Taking account as best I can of what everyone has said, and the physical evidence, here is my new translation of the passage. Comments most welcome.

yadā tu parāmṛṣṭa-nityatva-vyāpitvādi-dharmakaiśvarya-ghanātmanā ahambhāva-siddharasena śūnyādi-deha-dhātv-antaṃ vidhyate yena prameyatvāt tat cyavata iva, tadā turyadaśā;

But when [all the layers of limited selfhood] from the Void to the tissues of the body are penetrated by the “alchemical elixir” that is the [true] I-sense—replete with the sovereignty in which the qualities of eternality, all-pervasiveness, etc. are cognized [as aspects of that “I”]—through which [penetration-cum-transmutation] their objectivity falls away as it were, then that is [called] the Fourth State.
yadāpi viddho 'sau prāṇadehādi-dhātuḥ saṃvid-rasena abhiniviṣṭo ’tyantaṃ kanaka-dhātur iva jīrṇaḥ kriyate yena sa druta-rasa iva ābhāti kevalaṃ tat-saṃskāraḥ, tadāpi turyātīta-daśā sā bhavati
When, further, these elements of prāṇa, body, etc., penetrated by the elixir of Consciousness, are thoroughly permeated [by it], they are [then] “digested” like the element of gold [is by mercury], by which the “liquified essence” [of consciousness], their purifier, alone appears – then too it becomes the state Beyond the Fourth.

On 9 July 2014 05:36, Dominik Wujastyk <wujastyk@gmail.com> wrote:

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 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:

... 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@gmail.com> wrote:

On 9 July 2014 11:26, Matthew Kapstein <mkapstei@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)

Best,
Dominik

_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY@list.indology.info
http://listinfo.indology.info