This chapter points out problematical lenses for the study of Vedic rhetorical culture of ancient India and substitutes a Vedic lens derived from the Ṛig Veda and its ancillary texts by which to consider how and why its diverse modes and methods variously apply analogical thinking to meet their stated purpose: to bring Truth compellingly to light, with the ultimate goal, not of persuasion but of mokṣa. According to Vedic levels of speech cosmology, the transcendental source of speech is the home of all the laws of nature, which constitute and govern the universe. This resembles the universe according to string theory in interesting ways. In the Vedic view, however, this field of intelligence is consciousness, Brahman. When awareness is not open to this field, then the ability to grasp the full meaning and derive benefit from speech is limited. The Upanishads proclaim: Speech is Brahman, but speech cannot express Brahman. One can only know it experientially, with awareness open to that field, the state of yoga. So sages found ways to leverage language to guide others to attain mokṣa - using analogy, metaphor, sign, and symbol to express ineffable reality. These practices for meaning-making were theorized by nyayayikas (Nyāya theorists), grammarian-yogis, and other sage philosophers, giving rise to alaṃkāra, literary theory of figuration, which Sanskrit scholars consider Indian rhetoric. Keith Lloyd has explored analogical thinking in Nyāya (argument) and the Nāṭyaśāstra (poetics). I develop the theme in light of the Vedic paradigmatic framework, using three diverse rhetorical modes as examples.