Nasadiya Sukta - Summary
Below is the Sanskrit Text, Bengali Text, ITRANS transliteration and translation/summary of the entire Nasadiya Sukta.
नासद् आसीन् नो सद् आसीत् तदानीं नासीद् रजो नो व्योमा परो यत्
किम् आवरीवः कुह कस्य शर्मन्न् अम्भः किम् आसीद् गहनं गभीरम्
न मृत्युर् आसीद् अमृतं न तर्हि न रात्र्या अह्न आसीत् प्रकेतः
आनीद् अवातं स्वधया तद् एकं तस्माद् धान्यन् न परः किं चनास
तम आसीत् तमसा गूऌहम् अग्रे ऽप्रकेतं सलिलं सर्वम् आ इदम्
तुच्छ्येनाभ्व् अपिहितं यद् आसीत् तपसस् तन् महिनाजायतैकम्
कामस् तद् अग्रे सम् अवर्तताधि मनसो रेतः प्रथमं यद् आसीत्
सतो बन्धुम् असति निर् अविन्दन् हृदि प्रतीष्या कवयो मनीषा
तिरश्चीनो विततो रश्मिर् एषाम् अधः स्विद् आसी३द् उपरि स्विद् आसीत्
रेतोधा आसन् महिमान आसन् स्वधा अवस्तात् प्रयतिः परस्तात्
को अद्धा वेद क इह प्र वोचत् कुत आजाता कुत इयं विसृष्टिः
अर्वाग् देवा अस्य विसर्जनेनाथा को वेद यत आबभूव
इयं विसृष्टिर् यत आबभूव यदि वा दधे यदि वा न
यो अस्याध्यक्षः परमे व्योमन् सो अङ्ग वेद यदि वा न वेद
নাসদ আসীন নো সদ আসীত তদানীং নাসীদ রজো নো ব্যোমা পরো যত
কিম আবরীবঃ কুহ কস্য শর্মন্ন অম্ভঃ কিম আসীদ গহনং গভীরম
ন মৃত্যুর আসীদ অমৃতং ন তর্হি ন রাত্র্য়া অহ্ন আসীত প্রকেতঃ
আনীদ অবাতং স্বধয়া তদ একং তস্মাদ ধান্যন ন পরঃ কিং চনাস
তম আসীত তমসা গূল্হম অগ্রে ঽপ্রকেতং সলিলং সর্বম আ ইদম
তুচ্ছ্যেনাভ্ব অপিহিতং যদ আসীত তপসস তন মহিনাজায়তৈকম
কামস তদ অগ্রে সম অবর্ততাধি মনসো রেতঃ প্রথমং যদ আসীত
সতো বন্ধুম অসতি নির অবিন্দন হৃদি প্রতীষ্যা কবয়ো মনীষা
তিরশ্চীনো বিততো রশ্মির এষাম অধঃ স্বিদ আসীদ উপরি স্বিদ আসীত
রেতোধা আসন মহিমান আসন স্বধা অবস্তাত প্রয়তিঃ পরস্তাত
কো অদ্ধা বেদ ক ইহ প্র বোচত কুত আজাতা কুত ইয়ং বিসৃষ্টিঃ
অর্বাগ দেবা অস্য বিসর্জনেনাথা কো বেদ যত আবভূব
ইয়ং বিসৃষ্টির যত আবভূব যদি বা দধে যদি বা ন
যো অস্যাধ্যক্ষঃ পরমে ব্যোমন সো অঙ্গ বেদ যদি বা ন বেদ
nAsad AsIn no sad AsIt tadAnIM nAsId rajo no vyomA paro yat
kim AvarIvaH kuha kasya sharmann ambhaH kim AsId gahanaM gabhIram
na mR^ityur AsId amR^itaM na tarhi na rAtryA ahna AsIt praketaH
AnId avAtaM svadhayA tad ekaM tasmAd dhAnyan na paraH kiM chanAsa
tama AsIt tamasA gUL^iham agre .apraketaM salilaM sarvam A idam
tuchChyenAbhv apihitaM yad AsIt tapasas tan mahinAjAyataikam
kAmas tad agre sam avartatAdhi manaso retaH prathamaM yad AsIt
sato bandhum asati nir avindan hR^idi pratIShyA kavayo manIShA
tirashchIno vitato rashmir eShAm adhaH svid AsI3d upari svid AsIt
retodhA Asan mahimAna Asan svadhA avastAt prayatiH parastAt
ko addhA veda ka iha pra vochat kuta AjAtA kuta iyaM visR^iShTiH
arvAg devA asya visarjanenAthA ko veda yata AbabhUva
iyaM visR^iShTir yata AbabhUva yadi vA dadhe yadi vA na
yo asyAdhyakShaH parame vyoman so a~Nga veda yadi vA na veda
Neither was there non-existence, nor was there existence then
Neither was there land, nor the heaven/sky beyond that.
(In that case), what was the facade (or envelope)? Where? Encased in what?
How could there be/ was there, water, impenetrable and deep? --- 1
Neither was there death, nor immortality then.
Neither was there any sight of night and day.
Motionless (it was) most definitely/ assuredly. That One (became) a pulsating consciousness, by its own Self Nature.
There was none other. --- 2
At first darkness lay hidden in darkness (or nothing-ness existed in nothing-ness, but concealed).
(And/ thus) water was visible everywhere.
(From) the gigantic all pervading void/ emptiness (that) existed,
With a mighty reverberation, the One was born, out of Contemplation. --- 3
Desire was first (created), by It's same-motion (vibration).
This was the Primal seed (of desire) in the mind.
The relation/ connection/ join between existence and non-existence, they (the Seers) found out,
by reflecting (on the matter) in their heart, and have accepted (this). --- 4
The cord (or connection between existence and non-existence), cut accross and spread in all directions (in the middle or perhaps above).
It was insemination (of existence) by the Great Self, above and below. --- 5
How can this be know with certainty? (Who can tell this to us with certainty?)
Who here can tell us?
From where was it born?
From where was it released/ projected?
The Gods came subsequent (to this creation).
How then can the (birth of) this world/ universe (existence) be known? (Who then knows (about the) birth of this world/ universe? (existence)) --- 6
This creation of (this universal) existence (earth/ universe),
perhaps He (the Great Self) placed (it there) or perhaps not.
The one who is the (Absolute) Lord of the Supreme Cosmos,
नासद् आसीन् नो सद् आसीत् तदानीं नासीद् रजो नो व्योमा परो यत्
किम् आवरीवः कुह कस्य शर्मन्न् अम्भः किम् आसीद् गहनं गभीरम्
न मृत्युर् आसीद् अमृतं न तर्हि न रात्र्या अह्न आसीत् प्रकेतः
आनीद् अवातं स्वधया तद् एकं तस्माद् धान्यन् न परः किं चनास
तम आसीत् तमसा गूऌहम् अग्रे ऽप्रकेतं सलिलं सर्वम् आ इदम्
तुच्छ्येनाभ्व् अपिहितं यद् आसीत् तपसस् तन् महिनाजायतैकम्
कामस् तद् अग्रे सम् अवर्तताधि मनसो रेतः प्रथमं यद् आसीत्
सतो बन्धुम् असति निर् अविन्दन् हृदि प्रतीष्या कवयो मनीषा
तिरश्चीनो विततो रश्मिर् एषाम् अधः स्विद् आसी३द् उपरि स्विद् आसीत्
रेतोधा आसन् महिमान आसन् स्वधा अवस्तात् प्रयतिः परस्तात्
को अद्धा वेद क इह प्र वोचत् कुत आजाता कुत इयं विसृष्टिः
अर्वाग् देवा अस्य विसर्जनेनाथा को वेद यत आबभूव
इयं विसृष्टिर् यत आबभूव यदि वा दधे यदि वा न
यो अस्याध्यक्षः परमे व्योमन् सो अङ्ग वेद यदि वा न वेद
নাসদ আসীন নো সদ আসীত তদানীং নাসীদ রজো নো ব্যোমা পরো যত
কিম আবরীবঃ কুহ কস্য শর্মন্ন অম্ভঃ কিম আসীদ গহনং গভীরম
ন মৃত্যুর আসীদ অমৃতং ন তর্হি ন রাত্র্য়া অহ্ন আসীত প্রকেতঃ
আনীদ অবাতং স্বধয়া তদ একং তস্মাদ ধান্যন ন পরঃ কিং চনাস
তম আসীত তমসা গূল্হম অগ্রে ঽপ্রকেতং সলিলং সর্বম আ ইদম
তুচ্ছ্যেনাভ্ব অপিহিতং যদ আসীত তপসস তন মহিনাজায়তৈকম
কামস তদ অগ্রে সম অবর্ততাধি মনসো রেতঃ প্রথমং যদ আসীত
সতো বন্ধুম অসতি নির অবিন্দন হৃদি প্রতীষ্যা কবয়ো মনীষা
তিরশ্চীনো বিততো রশ্মির এষাম অধঃ স্বিদ আসীদ উপরি স্বিদ আসীত
রেতোধা আসন মহিমান আসন স্বধা অবস্তাত প্রয়তিঃ পরস্তাত
কো অদ্ধা বেদ ক ইহ প্র বোচত কুত আজাতা কুত ইয়ং বিসৃষ্টিঃ
অর্বাগ দেবা অস্য বিসর্জনেনাথা কো বেদ যত আবভূব
ইয়ং বিসৃষ্টির যত আবভূব যদি বা দধে যদি বা ন
যো অস্যাধ্যক্ষঃ পরমে ব্যোমন সো অঙ্গ বেদ যদি বা ন বেদ
nAsad AsIn no sad AsIt tadAnIM nAsId rajo no vyomA paro yat
kim AvarIvaH kuha kasya sharmann ambhaH kim AsId gahanaM gabhIram
na mR^ityur AsId amR^itaM na tarhi na rAtryA ahna AsIt praketaH
AnId avAtaM svadhayA tad ekaM tasmAd dhAnyan na paraH kiM chanAsa
tama AsIt tamasA gUL^iham agre .apraketaM salilaM sarvam A idam
tuchChyenAbhv apihitaM yad AsIt tapasas tan mahinAjAyataikam
kAmas tad agre sam avartatAdhi manaso retaH prathamaM yad AsIt
sato bandhum asati nir avindan hR^idi pratIShyA kavayo manIShA
tirashchIno vitato rashmir eShAm adhaH svid AsI3d upari svid AsIt
retodhA Asan mahimAna Asan svadhA avastAt prayatiH parastAt
ko addhA veda ka iha pra vochat kuta AjAtA kuta iyaM visR^iShTiH
arvAg devA asya visarjanenAthA ko veda yata AbabhUva
iyaM visR^iShTir yata AbabhUva yadi vA dadhe yadi vA na
yo asyAdhyakShaH parame vyoman so a~Nga veda yadi vA na veda
Neither was there non-existence, nor was there existence then
Neither was there land, nor the heaven/sky beyond that.
(In that case), what was the facade (or envelope)? Where? Encased in what?
How could there be/ was there, water, impenetrable and deep? --- 1
Neither was there death, nor immortality then.
Neither was there any sight of night and day.
Motionless (it was) most definitely/ assuredly. That One (became) a pulsating consciousness, by its own Self Nature.
There was none other. --- 2
At first darkness lay hidden in darkness (or nothing-ness existed in nothing-ness, but concealed).
(And/ thus) water was visible everywhere.
(From) the gigantic all pervading void/ emptiness (that) existed,
With a mighty reverberation, the One was born, out of Contemplation. --- 3
Desire was first (created), by It's same-motion (vibration).
This was the Primal seed (of desire) in the mind.
The relation/ connection/ join between existence and non-existence, they (the Seers) found out,
by reflecting (on the matter) in their heart, and have accepted (this). --- 4
The cord (or connection between existence and non-existence), cut accross and spread in all directions (in the middle or perhaps above).
It was insemination (of existence) by the Great Self, above and below. --- 5
How can this be know with certainty? (Who can tell this to us with certainty?)
Who here can tell us?
From where was it born?
From where was it released/ projected?
The Gods came subsequent (to this creation).
How then can the (birth of) this world/ universe (existence) be known? (Who then knows (about the) birth of this world/ universe? (existence)) --- 6
This creation of (this universal) existence (earth/ universe),
perhaps He (the Great Self) placed (it there) or perhaps not.
The one who is the (Absolute) Lord of the Supreme Cosmos,
He would definitely know (right?) .... or maybe even He does not. --- 7
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For more details on the individual slokas and Sandhi analysis, you may refer to my previous posts:
Sloka 1 - http://theadvaitist.blogspot.com/2011/01/nasadiya-sukta-part-01.html
Sloka 2 - http://theadvaitist.blogspot.com/2011/01/nasadiya-sukta-part-02.html
Sloka 3 - http://theadvaitist.blogspot.com/2011/01/nasadiya-sukta-part-03.html
Sloka 4 - http://theadvaitist.blogspot.com/2011/01/nasadiya-sukta-part-04.html
Sloka 5 - http://theadvaitist.blogspot.com/2011/01/nasadiya-sukta-part-05.html
Sloka 6 - http://theadvaitist.blogspot.com/2011/01/nasadiya-sukta-part-06.html
Sloka 7 - http://theadvaitist.blogspot.com/2011/01/nasadiya-sukta-part-07.html
Subhodeep Mukhopadhyay (2011)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For more details on the individual slokas and Sandhi analysis, you may refer to my previous posts:
Sloka 1 - http://theadvaitist.blogspot.com/2011/01/nasadiya-sukta-part-01.html
Sloka 2 - http://theadvaitist.blogspot.com/2011/01/nasadiya-sukta-part-02.html
Sloka 3 - http://theadvaitist.blogspot.com/2011/01/nasadiya-sukta-part-03.html
Sloka 4 - http://theadvaitist.blogspot.com/2011/01/nasadiya-sukta-part-04.html
Sloka 5 - http://theadvaitist.blogspot.com/2011/01/nasadiya-sukta-part-05.html
Sloka 6 - http://theadvaitist.blogspot.com/2011/01/nasadiya-sukta-part-06.html
Sloka 7 - http://theadvaitist.blogspot.com/2011/01/nasadiya-sukta-part-07.html
Subhodeep Mukhopadhyay (2011)
---- END ----
Thanks for your time. Please feel free to leave your comments and do share this post with those who might find it useful.
Subhodeep
Hi Subhodeep,
ReplyDeleteThanks for your comment on the article on Battle of Ten Kings.
Well, it's true that there's no Aryan Invasion, but it's also true that the Aryans are not autochthonous to Indian subcontinent. For the past few years I've been studying all materials published by both Indian and Western researchers and finally I've come to the conclusion that the out of India theory of the Aryans and the very antique date of Rig Veda is also not well supported. The problem is that most of the researchers don't understand Rig Veda properly. Any day I'd vouch for Aurobindo and Tilak's knowledge of Sanskrit and Rig Veda than that of any other researcher. Incidentally both of them acknowledge, though in different ways, some form of the Indo European connection. I find Aurobindo's interpretations of Rig Veda the most authentic because of his profound knowledge of Greek and Latin languages, apart from Sanskrit. The way he breaks down each word and finds the etymology is just fascinating and that's missing in most other researches. I use Griffith's translation because it's most widely available, but I always validate it against Aurobindo's interpretations.
Anyway, you may refer to the compilation of research papers and books on the history of Aryans:
https://sites.google.com/site/awesomesneakpeekers/reference
You may also check these articles:
https://sites.google.com/site/awesomesneakpeekers/reference/compilations
Regards,
Sudipto
Hi Sudipto,
ReplyDeleteI could not agree with you more - neither am I a proponent of "Out of India Theory", nor am I supporter of the "Aryan Invasion Theory". In fact I am somewhere in between - a migration from somewhere to India did happen a really long time ago and a latter migration may also have happened out of India at a much latter date. And I am also a supporter of the "Out of Africa" model of the origin of humanity.
So the Vedic Aryans must have somehow come to India from Africa - whether they came directly via the Asian coastline or via the polar region (Tilak) or via southern India (Graham Hancock) is open to debate.
As far as interpretations are concerned, I find Griffith extremely ritualistic and Sri Aurobindo very symbolic - so I guess we need to select the most contextually appropriate interpretation. And most importantly, at least in my case, my knowledge of Sanskrit is very elementary classical Panninian Sanskrit and as we all know Vedic Sanskrit is a different ball-game especially the older mandalas of the rk. So I rely on my best judgment, like I did for Nasadiya (a latter hymn).
In this regard, I think the best recourse is to read texts of all the schools and come to one's own conclusion - I liked Sethna's book. The problem with Wietzel's and Prapola's analysis is the pre-assumption of Aryan invasion. Shrikant Talageri's views are different but I did not agree with his chronology of the the mandalas of the rk - the approach was sound but the conclusions were mathematically inconsistent (kind of like solving a 5 unknown equation using only 3 equations).
Most of Tilak's conclusion are very convincing - about the remnants of an ancient Aryan home. But it would be difficult to prove using other sources.
BTW, thank you for the links - I'll scan thru them soon.
Subhodeep Mukhopadhyay