Ayam anīvaśaḥ | Asthū Indraḥ | Tvāṣṭā cid viśvatohat:ḥ |
“This one is unoppressed; Indra is not permanent/fixed; even Tvastar who exists everywhere slays him.”
Structure
Ayam - anīvaśaḥ - Asthū - Indraḥ - Tvāṣṭā - cid - viśvato - haḥ
Tvāṣṭā (the maker) viśvato (from all sides) haḥ (slays) Ayam (this) anīvaśaḥ (non-weak one), Asthū (not firm/sturdy) Indraḥ (Indra)
Word-by-Word Grammar
| Word | IAST | Type | Grammar | Meaning |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ayam | ayam | pronoun | nominative · singular · masculine | this |
| anīvaśaḥ | anīvaśaḥ | noun | nominative · singular · masculine | unrestrained |
| Asthū | asthū | noun | nominative · singular · masculine | not thick or dense |
| Indraḥ | indraḥ | noun | nominative · singular · masculine | Indra |
| Tvāṣṭā | tvāṣṭā | noun | nominative · singular · masculine | Tvaṣṭā (a deity) |
| cid | cid | indeclinable | — | even, also |
| viśvato | viśvato | indeclinable | — | on all sides, entirely |
| haḥ | haḥ | verb | √hā · laṭ-present · third | kills, slays (√hā, to strike) |
Scholarly Commentary
Advaita Vedānta (Ādi Śaṅkarācārya): This verse from the Ṛgveda is interpreted by Śaṅkarācārya as pointing to the non-dual nature of reality, where the distinctions between various deities are ultimately illusory. Śaṅkarācārya, in his commentary on the Brahmasūtra, discusses the concept of apādhāna, or the removal of limitations, which is relevant to understanding 'anīvaśaḥ' as unoppressed or unlimited. The reference to Indra not being permanent and Tvāṣṭā slaying him suggests that even the gods are bound by the cycle of birth and death, but the ultimate reality, Brahman, remains unchanging and unaffected. This interpretation aligns with the concept of brahman-ātman identity, where the individual self (ātman) is ultimately the same as the universal self (Brahman). Śaṅkarācārya's reasoning emphasizes the need to look beyond the apparent multiplicity and diversity to realize the underlying unity of all existence.
Vaiṣṇava tradition (Rāmānujācārya / Madhvācārya): In the Vaiṣṇava tradition, this verse can be seen as highlighting the relationship between the jīva (individual soul) and Īśvara (the Supreme Lord). Rāmānujācārya, in his commentary on the Brahmasūtra, discusses the concept of 'śeṣa-śaiśvarya', where the jīva is both dependent on and intimately connected with the Lord. The description of Indra as 'asthū' (not permanent) and Tvāṣṭā as slaying him, underscores the idea that even the most powerful beings are subject to the will of the Supreme. This can be seen as an illustration of the Vaiṣṇava doctrine of 'bheda-abheda', where there is both a distinction and a non-difference between the jīva and Īśvara. The verse thus points to the ultimate reality of Īśvara's supremacy and the dependence of all beings on Him, while also hinting at the loving and personal relationship between the Lord and the individual soul.
Neo-Vedānta (Swami Vivekānanda / S. Rādhākrishnan): Swami Vivekānanda, in his lectures on the Upaniṣads, emphasizes the universal and practical application of the teachings found in the Vedas, including this verse. He interprets 'anīvaśaḥ' as the unoppressed and limitless nature of the human spirit, which can be realized through self-discovery and spiritual growth. The image of Indra and Tvāṣṭā in this verse serves as a reminder that even the most powerful forces in the universe are subject to the law of change and impermanence. This understanding can be applied to contemporary life, where individuals often struggle with the limitations and constraints imposed by their circumstances. By reflecting on this verse, one can cultivate a sense of detachment and inner freedom, recognizing that true fulfillment and liberation can only be achieved by transcending the bounds of the finite and ephemeral. As Vivekānanda states, 'the Vedas are not a book of creeds, but a book of knowledge' – knowledge that is relevant and applicable to human life in all its aspects.