Theology / वैचारिकी

वैचारिकीय / वैचारिकी

--

The Theology :

The artical 'the', the pronouns : 'this', 'that', 'these', 'those' could be traced to have root in the Sanskrit noun word -'धी', and 'लोक', 'लग्'. The two root words together take the form : 'धी-लोकीय' that becomes "Theology".

Other words similar and cognates are from the Sanskrit Root, pronoun-word :

"तत्".

It would not be imprudent if we say that the words "think", "thought" and "thing" are also the developed forms of "धी" / Theo, because they all correctly and exactly too, express the same sense / meaning.

The many ramifications of the Sanskrit word "धी" help us think that "Tao" is also likewise a cognate.

Another word,  -the suffix "logy" may be seen to have roots in the Sanskrit root-words : लोक, लौकिकी, लग्, लग्न ...

which denote "association".

The Sanskrit word, - the root-verbs :

बुध् / बोध / बुध्यते / बोधयति,  धा / धारयति / ध्यै / ध्यायति

form the compound word "बुद्धि", that could be translated in English as "intellect".

There is yet another word "Therm" (in the Greek language?) that too could be seen to have root in the Sanskrit word :

"धर्म / धृ - धारयति".

And the last word is : "temper", that is again from the Sanskrit compound word :

"तं परं।  तत् परं ।"

Thought is the nature of Intellect. 

"nature" could also conveniently, logically be derived from the Sanskrit root-compound word : "नृ चरः"; where "नृ" points out to "नरः" / "पुरुषः", and "चरः" is the noun-form of : "चर् /  चरति".

"Nature" is therefore equivalent of :

"धर्म", while the "तत्परः / तत् परः / तत् परं / तं परं / temper / temperature are synonyms.

What about the word - "religion"?

"re" prefix (Sanskrit : प्र-स्पृश्) points out the sense : "having a prior touch", while "lig" is from the Sanskrit verb-root "लग् / लगति", that has a vast application in varied ways, such as : lag as in 'lag behind', log, lug, lig, luggage, ligature, ligament, leg, legion, .. and so on. 

All point out to the sense "association with".

Therefore "religion", where "re" (Sanskrit -- उपसर्ग -परि) is attached as prefix with the verb "lig" denotes tradition and the ritual.

--

There is a prevalent notion about languages.  Which one were the earliest of them?

There are old and new languages because a language is like a river. Keeps moving on and on. 

At least, since the evolution of the mankind.

So there is Prakrit (प्राकृत). The same was then refined and purified and then there was this  Sanskrit language which is not an invented one like any other language that we human speak. The very words Prakrit and Sanskrit have been described in the Sanskrit text like देवी-अथर्वशीर्षम् / deviatharva-Sheersham being the two; - one of them was (पशु भाषा) / pashu-bhasha, that was itself born from nature.  The same was purified, discovered, given the divine status according to the laws inherent there in the scheme of Creation. This follows the phonetics, because sound (संस्कृत - स्वन्, स्वर्, स्वः) is the very foundation of any language.

That is how Sanskrit seems to have been as if programmed in such a way as these days we use a computer-language and create so many apps accordingly, supported by a language.

To conclude, I would like to point out a new aphorism invented by myself. 

"Source is the course".

The two words, - source and course rhyme also. Both could be thought of having the same Sanskrit root-verb -- "सृज्", which in Sanskrit denotes the sense of renouncing, to  leave, giving out. Imperatively this becomes the "creation" also.

For,  in Vedika view, nothing could be made a-new, nor annihilated. 

Law of conservation of "What Is." / सत् .

Unfortunately the same has become "Satan" in the Abrahmic religions.

They pelt the epithet of "Satan" to denounce the idolatry and Sanatana Dharma too.

That has been the irony, farce and injustice to humanity as well. 

***

The two fundamental tenets of the Abrahmic religion are basically a diversion from the Sanatana Dharma principles.

One is the concept of mono-theism and the other is the polytheism, and yet another, the concept of idolatry. 

Sanatana Dharma categorically points out to the uniqueness of the God-principle. That is,  there is One and Only One Supreme Reality that governs, maintains the whole existence.

Another, the same Reality is manifest in the myriad forms also.

The word poly-theism implies and points out to the multitude and the plurality of minds.

The word mono-theism means the unity in apparent diversity.

Hope,  some-day for the wellness of humans for Peace and harmony among us, we could reconcile these differences between the two diverse approaches of the Abrahmic and the Sanatana Dharma.

ईशिता सर्वभूतानां सर्वभूतमयंश्च यत्।।

ईशावास्येन निर्दिष्टं यत्पदं नमाम्यहम्।। 

***