मनलाई नियन्त्रण कसरि गरौँ ?

ओ३म्..

मनलाई नियन्त्रण कसरि गरौँ ?

एक प्रसिद्ध सूक्ति छ- मन नै बंधनको कारण हो र मन नै मुक्तिको कारण पनि। मनलाई दुष्ट घोडाको उपमा लिइएको छ, जुन अनियंत्रित भएर कुमार्गमा दौडन्छ र स्वयंको तथा सवारीको पनि हानि गर्दछ। त्यस्तै अनियंत्रित मनले पनि प्राणीलाई संकटमा पार्दछ।

यस्तो चंचल मनलाई कसरि नियंत्रण गर्ने? यसलाई नियंत्रण गर्ने दुई वटा मार्ग छन्  – या त यसको दमन गर्ने या यसको मार्ग नै बदलदिने। जुन वस्तुलाई दमन गरिन्छ, त्यो कालांतरमा नि:सत्व हुन्छ। कुनै पनि पदार्थलाई हातमा लिएर दबाइयो भने त्यसको सारतत्व निस्कन्छ। मनलाई निस्सार त गर्नु छैन। यस्तो गर्नाले ऊ बलहीन हुनेछ र मनोबल क्षीण हुनाले साधना र आराधना पनि गर्न सक्दैन।

मन कै कारणले हामि मनुष्य छौं। मनले गर्दा नै चिंतन-मननको पनि सामर्थ्य हामीमा छ। मनलाई वशमा गर्ने सबभन्दा सरल उपाय हो – उसको दिशा नै बदल्दिने। जो मन विकार तिर जाँदैछ, उसलाई सद्विचार तिर मोडिदिने। यो दिशा-परिवर्तन गर्नु नै मनमा विजय पाउनु हो। पदार्थहरु तिरको आसक्तिले नै मनुष्यलाई दिग्भ्रमित गर्दछ। पदार्थ प्रति आकृष्ट हुँदा असल-खराब तथा लाभ-हानिको विवेक लुप्त हुन्छ। केवल जो प्राप्त छैन त्यसलाई प्राप्त गर्ने र जो प्राप्त छ, त्यसको संरक्षण गर्ने लालसा प्रबल हुन्छ।

अत: मनलाई वशमा गर्ने प्रथम उपाय हो सत्को संगति, जो सत्य छ, त्यसको साथमा रहने। अयथार्थको साथमा रहनेहो भने हामि पनि अविश्वसनीय बन्नेछौं। सत्संगमा सत्को अर्थ हो श्रेष्ठ, उत्तम वा राम्रो। यसको आशय यही हो कि हामि त्यस्ता व्यक्तिहरुको संगतिमा रहौं जो श्रेष्ठ छन्, जसको चरित्र, व्यवहार या आचरण श्रेष्ठ छ।

एकपटक केशी श्रमणले गौतम गणधर संग सोधेका थिए- “तपाइको मनले तपाईलाई दुष्ट अश्व झैं उन्मार्ग तिर किन लैजान्न?” गौतमले भने- “मैले आफ्नो मनलाई धर्म शिक्षा द्वारा निगृहीत गर्ने गर्दछु र शास्त्र ज्ञान रूपी रसिले उसलाई कसेर बाँध्छु, त्यसैले ऊ उन्मार्ग तिर जान पाउँदैन।”

ज्ञानीहरुको भनाइ छ कि मनमा सीधा आक्रमण नगर। यस्तो गर्नाले मन हाम्रो हातबाट पारो जस्तै फुस्किन्छ र हामीले हात मलिरहनेछौँ। मनुष्यलाई प्रवृत्त गर्नको लागि मन, वचन र काया रूपी तीन योग भनिएको छ। यिनमा मन सूक्ष्म छ, यो भन्दा स्थूल वाणी या वचन छ र यो भन्दा पनि स्थूल हाम्रो काया, शरीर छ। यस काया भन्दा पनि स्थूल छ त्यो आहार जसबाट हाम्रो शरीरको निर्माण हुन्छ। वैदिक पद्धति यहि छ कि स्थूल देखि सूक्ष्म तिर अघि बढ। सबभन्दा स्थूल हाम्रो आहार हो। त्यसैले सर्वप्रथम आफ्नो आहारमा विजय प्राप्त गरौँ। यदि आहारलाई शुद्ध र सात्विक बनाउन सफल भयौं भने मनमा विजय पाउने दिशामा एक कदम अघि बढ्नेछौं।

‘जस्तो खान्छौं अन्न, त्यस्तै हुन्छ मन’ यो भनाइ निरर्थक छैन। आहार भन्दा सूक्ष्म छ हाम्रो काया। आहार विजय पछी शरीरलाई साधौँ , यसलाई नियंत्रणमा लिउँ। विविध प्रकारका आसन-प्राणायाम-व्यायाम आदिको विधान कायालाई साध्नको लागि नै बनाइएको हो। यसबाट शरीरको चंचलता कम हुन्छ, यसको असर मनमा पर्नेछ। काया भन्दा सूक्ष्म छ वाणी या वचन र यो भन्दा सूक्ष्म छ हाम्रो मन। वाणीमा नियंत्रण भयो भने त मन स्वत: वशमा हुनेछ। तर हामीले विपरीत क्रमले पुरुषार्थ गर्ने गर्दछौं- सर्वप्रथम मनलाई जित्ने प्रयत्न गर्दछौं र यहीं नेर मात खान्छौं। यदि अर्को ढंगले कोशिश गरियो भने मन दुर्जेय रहदैन। उसको शत्रुभाव पनि समाप्त हुनेछ, उसले हामीसंग मित्रवत व्यवहार गर्नेछ। अस्तु..

नमस्ते..!

(प्रेम आर्य, दोहा-कतार)

The Swastik Symbol : Shri Virjanand Devkarni (translate by :Vinita Arya)

The Svastik Symbol:The The Most Ancient Depiction of AUM – Acharya VirjanandDevkarni (including PDF of his groundbreaking Hindi book – Svastik Chinn (AUM KaPracheentamRoop)

AUM

In the dharmic tradition of India (or Aryavart to give its ancient name), the marking of the Svastik symbol has been going on since very ancient times.The symbol has been found mainly and repeatedly on India’s ancient coins, seals, utensils and homes.At India’s most ancient, historical sites – MohenjoDaro, Harappa and Lothal, seals bearing the anticlockwise left handed facingsymbol  swastik

have been found at excavations. Evidence in the form of pictures of these ancient seals can be seen at the end of this article.

In addition to this, the Svastika symbol can be found formed on ancient Indian stamped (punch marked) coins, cast metal copper seals, seals of Ayodhya, Arjunayangan, Eran, Kaad, Yaudheya, Kuninda, Kaushambi, Takshashila, Mathura, Ujjaini, Ahichhatra, Agroha, ancient statues, cooking vessels, rubies, prayer ritual vessels (such as the yajnakund – a vessel for the performance of yajna a purificatory fire ceremony), spoons, ornaments and weapons. The Svastika symbol can be found in abundance on ancient historical artefacts belonging to the Maurya and Shunga Dynasty. On a Buddhist statue obtained from Japan the Svastika symbol can be seen drawn on its chest. Even today in the life of ordinary Indian people one can see that the symbol’s use is widespread. Every day one can see the symbol on houses, temples, cars etc. and on other types of vehicles. Even Hitler had made this symbol his own.

The Svastika symbol has also been found in its many forms outside India on ancient remains in countries such as China, Japan, Korea, Tibet, Babylonia, Austria, Chaldea, Persia, Phoenicia, Armenia, Laconia, Greece, Egypt, Cyprus, Italy, Ireland, Germany, Belgium, America, Brazil, Mexico, Africa, Venezuela, Assyria, Mesopotamia, Russia, Switzerland, France, Peru, Columbia etc.

A question worth pondering over now is; what is the real nature of the Svastika symbol which has been found in such great numbers over such extensive areas of land?

After much confusion, discussion, debate and deep research, I have arrived at this conclusion that the Svastika symbol is an amalgamation of two “AUM” signs written in an artistic style in the ancient known script of Brahmi.

The greatest distinguishing feature of the Svastika symbol is that if looked at from any of the four sides it always reads ‘AUM’.

In ancient India there were sixty four writing systems of which the Brahmi script was one of them.  The way in which “AUM” was written in this script was as follows –

1= AUM2= M  ( • ) signifies the “anusvar” or the accompanying nasal sound or letter M.

After adding both together its form is like this: 3.

AUMhere is formed by the joining of 1=AU and 2= M or the (• )anusvar.

If this AUM sign is also written twice in an artistic manner then its form becomes as shown below-

4

The AUM form in Figure 1 can be seen on Arjunayangan and Ujjaini seals (see the AUM (Svastik) form on page 20 of the pdf Hindi book). The AUM (Svastika) form in Figure 2 and the clockwise right handed form like this 5  are seen nowadays throughout India.

Due to ignorance of the script, writers have changed it during the interval of thousands of years from the left handed to the right handed form. Of the Svastika symbols drawn by artists today only fifteen percent of the symbols are left handed which is interesting as only a few right- handed examples of Svastika have ever been found.

As the writing of the ordinary script changed, other prevailing customary writing styles also changed. However among ordinary people the deeply ingrained AUM (Svastik) word remained unchanged. For thousands of years it has existed in its ancient form having been given a spiritual wrapping. Nevertheless as seen below, from the fifth to fourteenth centuries the symbolused to depict AUM changed and the examples given below are very different from the ॐ symbol which is currently used –

7

This symbol ॐrepresenting AUM is its changed form.Some ignorant people call it the “pauranik AUM” and regard ‘ओ३म्’ as the AUM belonging to the Arya Samaj. The only difference however is in the scripts. Ordinary people continue to this day to write the ॐ symbol which is about a thousand years old.  There are nevertheless those who depict the symbol ॐ by writing ‘ओ३म् in the modern day prevailing script, like these examples of AUM being written in different modern-day scripts–

8

In this way the difference between ॐ and ओम् is only that of scripts used over a passage of time and not one rooted in sectarian differences.  The left handed AUM 9symbol was changed to the right handed AUM symbol 10  due to ignorance and in some places its anusvar has been removed.  Similarly today the symbols ऊँ and the inverted11are written on both sides of some cars, houses, doors. This dual method of writing seems to have been adopted when writing AUM in its Svastika form.

 

Some people are under the misconception that the Svastika symbol should only be drawn in its right handed form like this:  13  because it is a spiritual symbol and being so it should only face the right. The main argument is that if it were left-handed it would be inauspicious. In the spirit of good will it is humbly asserted to the proponents of such an argument, that this supposed difference between the left and right is pure fantasy and it bears no connection with any auspicious and inauspicious form. The left handed form is adopted also in the Arya writing style. While starting to write the symbol from the right occurs in the Kharosthi, Arabic/Urdu, Farsi, Sindhi etc. scripts which are derived from the scripts of non-Arya, Ashura countries.

The prevalence of the Svastika symbol was such that the rulers Sher Shah Suri, Islam Shah Suri. Ibrahim Shah Suri and even a Mughal ruler marked their coins with this symbol. It can also be found on the seals of the Maharaja of Jodhpur Jasvant Singh’s contemporary, the ruler of Pali, Hemraj.

On numerous ancient Indian inscriptions, copper plates and manuscripts, the line ‘AUM svasti” is written. Moreover the traditional blessings that are given at the end of the yajnas which are part of Indian rituals are “AUM svasti, AUM svasti, AUM svasti”. In such places the AUM form is regarded as being one that lends auspiciousness and it is supposed to bring good fortune. The meaning of AUM and Swasti have become so intertwined that it has become difficult to identify the difference between the first and second. For this reason in religious rituals the meaning of ‘AUM svasti’ is on the one hand ‘in the remembrance of AUM, Paramatma (Supreme Spirit), the bestower of good fortune’ and on the other hand it is ’may AUM, Paramatma look to our welfare’.

Maharishi Yaskacharya writes in the ‘Nirukta’ that:

Svasti – ityavinashinam

Astirabhipujitahsvastiti

Nirukta 3.20

This sukta from Nirukta means that Svasti is the name of the indestructible. There are three indestructible things in this universe – matter, the soul and God (prakriti, jeev and Ishvar). Matter cannot by itself be for the welfare of the soul because, matter is inert. The soul is not the embodiment of well-being as it can only wish for its own well-being.  What cannot be attained from within can be taken from others.  For this reason Isvar, God, the embodiment of well-being, who acts for our welfare and so delivers all remaining justice, is the only accomplished one,  after whom ‘svasti’ and its representation ‘AUM’ can be named.  This explains why the ancient Aryans at the beginning of each auspicious deed remembered God in their oral and written depiction of the ‘svasti’ form. AUM Svasti in its written form has gradually over time become just a religious symbol, and its written script-related form has become largely forgotten.  God acts for our well-being, he makes us happy, keeps us healthy and in order to explain these kinds of sentiments, the word AUM was changed into the Svastika symbol. So in fact it is a symbol depicting God. In India today, five forms of the Svastika symbol are prevalent. For instance –

14

Indian civilisation until 5,000 years ago was spread throughout the whole world. It is for this reason that among many relics discovered the Svastika symbol has also been found in many different places and in many places it has also been seen that the symbol is still in everyday customary use. The Svastika symbol and its different forms as seen throughout the world are as follows –

15

In Figures 10 to 13 this type of circle ० represents the anusvar of AUM, in other words (•) represents the ‘m’ sound.

The greatest distinguishing feature of the Svastika symbol is that whichever of the four sides you look at it from it still reads ‘AUM’ in the Brahmi script. In this way this beautiful unparalleled symbol really succeeds in expressing God’s omnipresence.

In Ahichatra (modern day Bareilly), the capital of ruler Maharaja Drupad’s and Guru Dronacharya’s kingdom of Panchal, a pendant from a necklace has been found.  In the middle of the pendant there is a circle like this and in the middle of that circle formed in the Brahmi script is  = the ‘AU’ sound. Around it there is a circle formed out of  = ‘m’ symbols. This is another clear example of AUM in the form of a Svastika. This type of AUM has also been written like this –

16

1                              2                              3

 

Nowadays AUM can be written in Devanagari and Roman letters like this –

ओम् = OM

 

The above brief description establishes to a higher degree that the Svastika AUM symbol was spread throughout the world over an extensive area and  even today it is still being used everywhere in India. However those that draw and use this symbol today are altogether unaware of the secret that this symbol was once the ancient form of AUM.

In order to establish the antiquity of the Svastika symbol, photographs of seals obtained from excavations from ancient historical sites in India have been given from which the reader will see and understand its various forms very easily (for more details and for the photographs mentioned in this article please see the pdf book SvastikChinn  -AUM KaPracheentamRoopby Acharya VirjanandDaivkarnibelow).

Author’s Biography

Shri VirjanandDevkarni was born at home to his mother ShrimatiSariyandevi and father Shri DevkaranYadav on 2 December 1945 in the village of Bhagadyana in the Mahendragadh district of Harayana. Having completed the eighth standard at Yadavendra High School, Mahendragadh, he entered GurukulJhajjar in 1951 and was awarded subsequently the titles of Siddhantvachaspati, Vyakaranacharya, Darshanacharya and Itihasacharya.

He has through GurukulJhajjar’s Haryana Literature Institute (HarayanaSahityaSansthan) edited books on subjects such as the Ved, Darshan and Upanishad. Under the close guidance of Swami OmanandSaraswati he has collected artefacts belonging to ancient India for GurukulJhajjar’sHarayana State Archaeological Museum and has provided praiseworthy assistance in publicising them. In the current Arya “world” there is no-one who can match his expert status in deciphering and analysing scripts such as Brahmi, Kharosthi and Yavnani.  The Government of India’s Department of Archaeology invites him to decode what is written on coins and seals that have been found during its archaeological excavations. Some of his important works are –

  1. Maharishi DayanandaurUnkaSiddhant (Maharishi Dayanand and his Principles)
  2. PrachinBharatiyaItihaskeSrota (The Source of Ancient Indian History)
  3. QutbMinarEkRahasyaudghatan (An Uncovering of the Secret of QutabMinar)
  4. MahabharatYuddh, Mahatma Buddh, Shankaracharya, Sikanderaur Harsh adikeKalkram Par VisheshRachnaye (Special works on eras such as the Mahabharat War, Mahatma Buddha, Shankaracharya, Alexander and Harsh)
  5. SvastikChinn – AUM KaPracheentamRoop(The Swastik Symbol: The most Ancient depiction of AUM)
  6. Agaroha’skiMrinmurtiyan (Agaroha’s Clay Sculptures)
  7. PrachinTamrpatraevamShilaLekh (Ancient Copper Plates and Stone Inscriptions)
  8. Bharat kePrachinMudrank (India’s Ancient Mint (Part 1))

He is the founder of the Ancient Indian History Research Council based at GurukulGautamnagar, Delhi. He has through the Council edited and published the following books –

  1. Prachin Bharat me YaudheyGanrajya (The Yaudheya Republic in Ancient India)
  2. Panchal RajyakaItihas (The History of the Panchal Kingdom)
  3. Maharishi DayanandkeDharmopdesh (The Teachings of Maharishi Dayanand)
  4. AadimSatyarth Prakash Aur Arya SamajkeSiddhant (The First Satyarth Prakash and the Principles of the Arya Samaj)
  5. Vedaaur Arya Samaj (Ved and the Arya Samaj)
  6. AumkarNirney (The Aumkar Judgment)

He has with the help of Paropkarini Sabha Ajmer compared Maharishi Dayanand’s famous book Satyarth Prakash with the original manuscript of this book and got the most correct version published. Swami Omanand gave him his full support when he got the Satyarth Prakash inscribed on copper plates. This copper plate version of the Satyarth Prakash is now in the Gurukul Jhajjar Museum. He has contributed through GurukulGautamnagar to the excavation of copper plates concerning the Yajurved, Samved, Ashtadhyayi, Linganushasan and Phitsutra.   

The translator of Shri VirjanandDevkarni’s work “The Swastik Symbol: The most Ancient depiction of AUM” is Vinita Arya, a Freelance English Translator and Teacher committed to the Vedas and bringing its message to everyone through translating key Vaidik works into English.

 

स्वामी दयानन्द सरस्वती जी की मूर्ति सही या गलत : आचार्य सोमदेव जी

जिज्ञासा  समाधान – ११९

– आचार्य सोमदेव

जिज्ञासा:- आदरणीय सम्पादक महोदय सादर नमस्ते। निवेदन यह है कि मैंने आर्य समाज मन्दिर में महर्षि दयानन्द जी का एक स्टेचू (बुत) जो केवल मुँह और गर्दन का है जिसका रंग गहरा ब्राउन है, रखा देखा है। पूछने पर पता चला कि यह किसी ने उपहार में दिया है। आप कृपया स्पष्ट करें कि क्या महर्षि का स्टेचू भेंट में लेना, बनाना और भेंट देना आर्य समाज के सिद्धान्त के अनुरूप है? जहाँ तक मेरा मानना है महर्षि ने अपनी प्रतिमा बनाने की सख्त मनाही की थी। कृपया स्पष्ट करें।

धन्यवाद, सादर।

– डॉ. पाल

समाधान:- महर्षि दयानन्द ने अपने जीवन मेंं कभी सिद्धान्तों से समझौता नहीं किया। वे वेद की मान्यतानुसार अपने जीवन को चला रहे थे और सम्पूर्ण विश्व को भी वेद की मान्यता के प्रति लाना चाहते थे। वेद ईश्वर का ज्ञान होने से वह सदा निभ्र्रान्त ज्ञान रहता है, उसमें किसी भी प्रकार के पाखण्ड अन्धविश्वास का लेश भी नहीं है। वेद ही ईश्वर, धर्म, न्याय आदि के विशुद्ध रूप को दर्शाता है। वेद में परमेश्वर को सर्वव्यापक व निराकार कहा है। प्रतिमा पूजन का वेद में किसी भी प्रकार का संकेत नहीं है। महर्षि दयानन्द ने वेद को सर्वोपरि रखा है। महर्षि दयानन्द समाज की अवनति का एक बड़ा कारण निराकार ईश्वर की उपासना के स्थापना पर प्रतिमा पूजन को मानते हैं। जब से विशुद्ध ईश्वर को छोड़ प्रतिमा पूजन चला है तभी से मानव समाज कहीं न कहीं अन्धविश्वास और पाखण्ड में फँसता चला गया। जिस मनुष्य समुदाय में पाखण्ड अन्धविश्वास होता है वह समुदाय धर्म भीरु और विवेक शून्य होता चला जाता है। सृष्टि विरुद्ध मान्यताएँ चल पड़ती हैं, स्वार्थी लोग ऐसा होने पर भोली जनता का शोषण करना आरम्भ कर देते हैं।

महर्षि दयानन्द और अन्य मत सम्प्रदाय में एक बहुत बड़ा मौलिक भेद है। महर्षि व्यक्ति पूजा से बहुत दूर हैं और अन्य मत वालों का सम्प्रदाय टिका ही व्यक्ति पूजा पर है। महर्षि ईश्वर की प्रतिमा और मनुष्य आदि की प्रतिमा पूजन का विरोध करते हैं, किन्तु अन्य मत वाले इस काम से ही द्रव्य हरण करते हैं। इस व्यक्ति पूजा के कारण समाज में अनेक प्रकार के अनर्थ हो रहे हैं। इसी कारण बहुत से अयोग्य लोग गुरु बनकर अपनी पूजा करवा रहे हैं। जीते जी तो अपनी पूजा व अपने चित्र की भी पूजा करवाते ही हैं, मरने के बाद भी अपनी पूजा करवाने की बात करते हैं और भोली जनता ऐसा करती भी है। इससे अनेक प्रकार के अनर्थ प्रारम्भ हो जाते हैं। महर्षि दयानन्द ने जो अपना चित्र न लगाने की बात कही है, वह इसी अनर्थ को देखते हुए कही है। महर्षि विचारते थे कि इन प्रतिमा पूजकों से प्रभावित हो मेेरे चित्र की भी पूजा आरम्भ न कर दें। इसी आशंका के कारण महर्षि ने अपने चित्र लगाने का निषेध किया था।

यदि हम आर्य महर्षि के सिद्धान्तों के अनुसार चल रहे हैं, प्रतिमा पूजन आदि नहीं कर रहे हैं तो महर्षि के चित्र आदि लगाए जा सकते हैं रखे जा सकते हैं। चित्र वा मूर्ति रखना अपने आप में कोई दोष नहीं है। दोष तो उनकी पूजा आदि करने में हैं। महर्षि मूर्ति के विरोधी नहीं थे, महर्षि का विरोध तो उसकी पूजा करने से था। यदि महर्षि केवल चित्र वा मूर्ति के विरोधी होते तो अपने जीवन काल में इनको तुड़वा चुके होते, किन्तु महर्षि के जीवन से ऐसा कहीं भी प्रकट नहीं होता कि कहीं महर्षि दयानन्द ने मूर्तियों को तुड़वाया हो। अपितु यह अवश्य वर्णन मिलता है कि जिस समय महर्षि फर्रुखाबाद में थे, उस समय फर्रुखाबाद बाजार की नाप हो रही थी। सडक़ के बीच में एक छोटा-सा मन्दिर था, जिसमें लोग धूप दीप जलाया करते थे। बाबू मदनमोहन लाल वकील ने स्वामी जी से कहा कि मैजिस्ट्रेट आपके भक्त हैं, उनसे कहकर इस मठिया को सडक़ पर से हटवा दीजिये। स्वामी जी बोले ‘‘मेरा काम लोगों के मनो से मूर्तिपूजा को निकालना है, ईंट पत्थर के मन्दिरों को तोडऩा-तुड़वाना मेरा लक्ष्य नहीं है।’’ यहाँ महर्षि का स्पष्ट मत है कि वे मूर्ति पूजा के विरोधी थे, न कि मूर्ति के।

आर्य समाज का सिद्धान्त निराकार, सर्वव्यापक, न्यायकारी आदि गुणों से युक्त परमेश्वर को मानना व उसकी उपासना करना तथा ईश्वर वा किसी मनुष्य की प्रतिमा पूजन न करना है। इस आधार पर महर्षि का स्टेचू भेंट लेना देना आर्य समाज के सिद्धान्त के विपरीत नहीं, सिद्धान्त विरुद्ध तब होगा जब उस स्टेचू की पूजा आरम्भ हो जायेगी। आर्य समाज का सिद्धान्त चित्र की नहीं चरित्र की पूजा अर्थात् महापुरुषों के आदर्शों को देखना अपनाना है।

कि सी भी महापुरुष के चित्र वा स्टेचू को देखकर हम उनके गुणों, आदर्शों, उनकी योग्यता विशेष का विचार करते हैं तो स्टेचू का लेना-देना कोई सिद्धान्त विरुद्ध नहीं है। जब हम उपहार में पशुओं वा अन्य किन्हीं का स्टेचू भेंट कर सकते हैं तो महर्षि का क्यों नहीं कर सकते?

घर में जिस प्रकार की वस्तुएँ या चित्र आदि होते हैं उनका वैसा प्रभाव घर में रहने वालों पर पड़ता है। जब फिल्मों में काम करने वाले अभिनेता अभिनेत्रियों के भोंडे कामुकतापूर्ण चित्र वा प्रतिमाएँ रख लेते हैं, लगा लेते हैं तो घर में रहने वाले बड़े वा बच्चों पर उसका क्या प्रभाव पड़ता है आप स्वयं अनुमान लगाकर देख सकते हैं। इसके विपरीत महापुरुषों क्रान्तिकारियों के चित्र घर में होते हैं तो घर वालों पर और बाहर से आने वालों पर कैसा प्रभाव पड़ता होगा। घर में रहने वालों की विचारधारा को घर में लगे हुए चित्र व वस्तुएँ बता देती हैं। अस्तु।

महर्षि ने अपनी प्रतिमा बनाने का विरोध किया था, वह क्यों किया इसका कारण ऊपर आ चुका है। स्टेचू, चित्र आदि का भेंट में लेना-देना आर्य समाज के सिद्धान्त के विरुद्ध नहीं है। यह लिया-दिया जा सकता है, कदाचित् इसकी पूजा वा अन्य दुरुपयोग न किया जाय तो। इसमें इसका भी ध्यान रखें कि पुराण प्रतिपादित कल्पित देवता जो कि चार-आठ हाथ व चार-ेपाँच मुँह वाले वा अन्य किसी जानवर के  रूप में हों उनसे लेने देने से बचें।

– ऋषि उद्यान, पुष्कर मार्ग, अजमेर

पुराणले केहि भन्दैछन्…

ओ३म्..!

पुराणले केहि भन्दैछन्

-प्रेम आर्य, दोहा-कतार

के पौराणिकहरुले सुन्लान् ? के सुनेर केहि विचार गर्लान् ?? र के विचार गरेर स्वीकार पनि गर्लान् ???
त्यसो त हमेशा आर्य समाजीहरुले नै पुराणको विरुद्ध लेख्ने गर्दछन्। लेख्नाको कारण कुनै द्वेष हैन अपितु आफ्ना प्रिय बन्धुहरुलाई वेद मार्गी बनाउनु हो।
वेद मार्गी बन्नाले हिन्दु दाजु-भाईहरु विशेषगरि पौराणिकहरु संगठित होलान् जसले गर्दा एक ईश्वरको उपासना होला र नित्य नयाँ-नयाँ ईश्वर बन्न बाट रोक्न सकिएला।

पढेर हो या त्यसै अनुमान गरेर या कसैले भनेको सुनेर हो कुन्नि उनीहरुले भन्ने गर्दछन् कि पुराण वेदानुकुल नै छन्। तर पुराणहरु वेदानुकुल छन् भन्नु र मान्नुमा त्यति नै सत्यता छ जति पिठोमा नुन। नुनको पनि आफ्नै महत्व छ | यहाँ यस लेखमा पौराणिक बन्धुहरुलाई त्यहि पुराणको वेदानुकुल नुनको अलिकति स्वाद चखाउने प्रयास गरिनेछ।

सुरुमा अलिकति टर्रो या तितो अथवा भनौं बुक्लो पिठो बुकाएको जस्तो लाग्न सक्ला तर आशा छ कि सत्यप्रिय महानुभावहरुले यसलाई अवश्य चाख्नुहुनेछ।

पौराणिक समाजले प्रायः ईश्वरलाई जन्म लिने अर्थात् समय समयमा अवतार लिने भनेर मान्दछ। तर जसको जन्म हुन्छ उसको मृत्यु पनि निश्चित् छ र जो जन्म मृत्युको चक्रमा फस्छ, त्यो कस्तो ईश्वर होला? जो जम्निन्छ र जसले अवतार लिन्छ, त्यो सर्वव्यापक कदापि हुन सक्दैन। पुराणमा त्यस्ता थुप्रै विरोधाभाष कथा-कुथुंग्री र श्लोकहरु छन्। तिनको उक्त मान्यतालाई मिथ्या सावित गर्ने श्लोकहरु पनि ठाउँ-ठाउँमा छन्, जस्तै:

पौराणिकहरुको यस मिथ्या मान्यतालाई चोट गर्दै लिंग पुराण अ० २ को श्लोक २०ले ईश्वरलाई अजन्मा भन्दै छ:-
“प्रधानपुरूषोतीतं प्रल्योत्त्पत्तिवर्जितम् ||”
अर्थात्, परमात्मा प्रकृति र जीव भन्दा पर तथा उत्तपत्ति र विनाश रहित छ।।

पौराणिक समाजले जहाँ ईश्वरलाई जन्म लिने र साकार पनि मान्दछ तर उनको लागि उनकै विष्णु पुराण ४.१.८४ को श्लोक बडो महत्वको छ-
कलामुहूर्तादिमयश्च कालो न यद्विभूतेः परिणामहेतुः

 अजन्मानाशस्य सैदकमूर्तेरनामरूपस्य सनातनस्य।।
अर्थात्, कला, मुहूर्त्त आदिमय काल पनि जसको विभूतिको परिणामको कारण हुन सक्दैन, जसको जन्म र मरण हुँदैन, जो सनातन र सर्वदा एक रूप छ तथा जो नाम रूप बाट रहित।।

शिवपुराण वासुसंहिता अ० ४को श्लोक ८७ले पनि पौराणिकको साकार मान्यतामा चोट गर्दै भन्दछ-
अचक्षुरपि यः पश्यत्यकर्णोSपि श्रृणोति यः

सर्वं वेत्ति न वेत्तास्य तमाहुः पुरूषः परम्।।
अर्थात्, आँख बिना नै उसले देख्छ, कान बिना पनि सुन्छ, उसले सबलाई जान्दछ, उसलाई पूर्णतः कसैले जान्न सक्दैन, त्यसैलाई परम पुरूष भनिन्छ।

उपर्युक्त प्रमाण बाट सिद्ध भयो कि पुराणले पनि ईश्वरलाई निराकार स्वीकार गरिसक्यो। र जो निराकार छ, उसको प्रतिमा या मूर्ति कसरि? जसले ईश्वरलाई मूर्ति मानेर पूजन गर्दछन् र उसलाई जल-स्थान आदि तथाकथित तिर्थहरुमा खोज्न जान्छन् यस्ता अन्धा र अधमहरुलाई भागगवत पुराण १०.८४.१३ मा गधा भनिएको छ

यस्यात्मबुध्दिः कुणपे त्रिधातुके स्वधी कलत्रादिषु भौम इज्यधीः

यत्तीर्थबुध्दिः सलिले न कर्हिचिज् जनेष्वभिजेषु स एव गोखरः।।
अर्थात्, वात-पित्त-कफ तीनै मल बाट बनेको शरीरमा आत्मा बुध्दि, स्त्री आदि मा स्वबुध्दि, पृथ्वी बाट नेको मूर्तिमा पूज्य बुध्दि र पानीमा तीर्थ बुध्दि गर्दछ त्यो गधा हो।।

देवीभागवत पुराण शाक्तहरुको मूल ग्रन्थ हो। मूर्ति पूजा र तीर्थका सम्बन्धमा देवी भागवत पुराणलर ९.७.५२मा निक्कै महत्त्पूर्ण कुरो भनेको छ-
न ह्यम्मयानि तीर्थानि न देवा मृच्छिलामयः

ते पुनन्त्युरू कालेन, विष्णुभक्ताः क्षणादिह।।
अर्थात्, पानीको तीर्थ हुँदैन, माटो र पत्थरको देवता हुँदैनन्, तिनले कुनै कालमा पवित्र गर्दैनन्, प्रभुले भक्तलाई यस संसारमा क्षणभरमा पवित्र गर्दिन्छ।

माथि पुराणका केहि यस्ता श्लोकहरु राखियो जुन वेदानुकूल छन् र वेद ईश्वरवाणी हुनाले परम प्रमाण हो अतः पौराणिक बन्धुहरुले गम्भीरता पूर्वक विचार गर्नु पर्दछ। र जसले अब पनि आफ्नो मनपरी गर्दछन्, त्यस्ता पौराणिक पण्डितहरुको लागि भागवत महात्म्य अ० १ श्लोक ७५ ले जे भन्दछ त्यो वास्तवमा गम्भीर छ-
 पण्डितास्तु कलत्रेण रमन्ते महिषा इव

पुत्रस्योत्पादने दक्षा अदक्षा मुक्तिसाधने।।
अर्थात्, पण्डितहरुको यो दशा छ कि ति आफ्ना स्त्रिहरुका साथ राँगो सरह रमण गर्दछन्, उनमा सन्तान पैदा गर्ने मात्र कुशलता पाइन्छ, मुक्ति साधनमा सर्वथा अकुशल छन्।।

यो लेख लेख्नाको उद्देश्य कसैको कुनै भावनामा ठेस पुर्याउनु नभएर वैदिक मान्यताहरुको दर्शन गराउनु हो जसलाई आर्य समाजले मान्दछ

पौराणिहरुले आर्य समाजलाई आफ्नो शत्रु मान्नु स्वयं आफ्नै साथ छल गर्नु हो। आर्य समाजीको ईश्वर भक्ति, र राष्ट्र भक्ति माथि संशय गर्न सकिन्न । अस्तु..

नमस्ते..!

..योग र यसका अंग-०९

ओ३म्..

..योग र यसका अंग: (अन्तिम भाग)

संयमजयको फल
==================

“तज्जयात्प्रज्ञालोकः।।” (योगदर्शन ३/५)

माथि संयमको बारेमा भनिएको छ, संयम-जय सम्यक् अभ्यस्त हुनाले योगीको समाधिजन्य प्रज्ञा (बुद्धिको आलोक) प्रकाश प्रकट हुन्छ, अर्थात् स्वच्छ एवं सूक्ष्म हुनाले प्रज्ञा विकसित हुन्छ।

व्यास भाष्यः “तस्य संयमस्य जयात् समाधिप्रज्ञाया भवत्यालोको यथा यथा संयमः स्थिरपदो भवति तथा तथेश्वर प्रसादात् समाधिप्रज्ञाविशारदी भवति।”

अर्थः पूर्वोक्त सूत्रोक्त संयम-जय अभ्यस्त हुनाले समाधि-प्रज्ञा अर्थात्, समाधिजन्य प्रज्ञा बुद्धिको आलोक (प्रकाश) दीप्त हुन्छ र जसै-जसै संयम स्थिर पद राम्रो प्रकारले अभ्यस्त हुन्छ, त्यसै-त्यसै ईश्वरको अनुग्रहले समाधिजन्य प्रज्ञा विशारदी निर्मल तथा सूक्ष्मविषयलाई पनि शीघ्र ग्रहण गर्न सक्ने हुन्छ।

संयमको उत्तरवर्ती दशाहरुमा उपयोग

“तस्य भूमिषु विनियोगः ।।” (योगदर्शन: ३/६)

सूत्रार्थः ति पूर्वावस्थाहरुमा अभ्यस्त संयमलाई उत्तरवर्ती अतिशय उन्नतदशाहरुमा उपयोग गर्नु पर्छ।

व्यास भाष्यको अभिप्रायः

त्यो संयम जसले योगसाधना भूमि अर्थात्, अवस्था विशेषलाई जितीसकेको छ, अर्थात् अभ्यास गरिसकेको छ, त्यसले अनन्तर (व्यवधान रहित) अतिशय निकट क्रमप्राप्त अगाडिका अवस्थाहरुमा विनियोग (उपयोग) लिनु पर्छ। किनकि निम्न अथवा प्रथम भूमि (अवस्थाहरु) नजितेर त्यसको उत्तरवर्ती भूमिको उल्लंघन गरेर (नजितेका प्रान्तभूमि) अत्युच्च सूक्ष्म भूमिहरुमा संयम गर्न सकिन्न र उक्त संयम बिना योगीलाई प्रज्ञालोक (समाधिजन्य बुद्धि) को प्रकाश कसरि प्राप्त हुन सक्ला? र ईश्वरको अनुग्रहले यदि योगीले उत्तर भूमि (उच्च दशा) मा संयमको अभ्यास गरिसकेको छ भने त्यसले निम्न परचित्त (ज्ञानादि अवस्थाहरु) मा संयम गर्नु उपयुक्त छैन। अर्थात्, उन्नत दशा प्राप्त भएर अधर दशामा संयम गर्नु व्यर्थ छ। यसको कारण यहि हो कि उक्त प्रयोजनले अधारभूमिमा  संयम गर्नुको संयम भन्दा भिन्न उपाय ईश्वरानुग्रहले नै बोध अथवा सिद्धि हुन्छ  र यो जान्नको लागि यस भूमि (दशा) को अनन्तर भूमि कुन चाइ हो, यस विषयमा योगको अभ्यास नै उपाध्याय अथवा गुरु हुन्छ।  यसको कारण यस्तो भनिएको छ:-

“योगेन योगो ज्ञातव्यो योगो योगात् प्रवर्तते।
यो अप्रमत्तस्तु योगेन स योगे रमते चिरम्।।”

योग बाट नै योगलाई जान्नु पर्दछ । योगको अभ्यास बाट नै योग अगाडी बढ्दछ। जुन योगीले योग-साधनहरुमा प्रमाद गर्दैन अर्थात् सदा अभ्यास गर्दछ, ऊ योगाभ्यासरूपी गुरु संग योगसाधनामा दीर्घकाल सम्म रमण गर्दछ। अस्तु..

नमस्ते..!

-(हार्दिक आभार: शिशु संस्कृतम्)

प्रेम आर्य

दोहा, कतार बाट

ज़वाले हैदराबाद और पुलिस ऐक्शन’: राजेन्द्र जिज्ञासु

सन् १९८८ में श्री राजीव गाँधी के काल में इस नाम की घातक, विषैली तथा देश के लिए सर्वथा अपमानजनक एक पुस्तक हैदाराबद में छपी थी। संसद सदस्य ओवैसी जी मजलिस इत्तहाद उलमुसलमीन के सर्वमान्य नेता हैं और आज श्री राहुल व केजरीवाल की पंक्ति में खड़े सबसे अधिक भाषण देने वाले राजनेता हैं। इस पुस्तक का लेखक इसी पार्टी का नेता कासिम रिज़वी देशद्रोही का अंगरक्षक व एक सेनापति रहा है। हैदराबाद के भारत में विलय को हैदराबाद का पतन बताया गया है। नेहरु जी का तो गुणगान किया गया है। सरदार पटेल, भारतीय सेना व भारतवर्ष को कोसते हुए इन्हें अन्यायी सिद्ध किया गया है। भारत में हैदराबाद के लिये की गई कार्यवाही को पशुतापूर्ण व दानवता सिद्ध किया गया है। क्यों आज तक काँग्रेस ने इस पुस्तक के बारे में चुप्पी साध रखी है। क्या केजरीवाल इसके बारे में ओवैसी से झड़प लेगा? क्या इसका लेखन व प्रकाशन देशद्रोह नहीं है। कासिम रिज़वी को सबसे बड़ा जिहादी बताकर महिमामण्डित किया गया है। पुस्तक २०८ पृष्ठ की है। यह कोई टै्रक्ट नहीं। इसमें यह भी सप्रमाण दिया गया है कि नेहरु जी तो हैदराबाद की शक्ति से भयभीत थे। सरदार ने उसी हैदराबाद को तीन दिन में रौंद डाला।

PADMAVATI The Flame of Valour :Vinita arya

The Flame of Valour “Padmavati” – Vinita Arya – Part 1

 

The country’s modern uneducated historians are creating a new folk tale regarding Queen Padmavati. Blinded by money and fame these “experts” are bent on selling the honour of their ancestors.

Today the young people who should be coming forward to defend the honour of these brave men and women, have instead sacrificed their characters on the altar of materialism.

So called patriotism today has become infested by casteism and selfishness.

A poet has quite rightly said “it is but a stone, the heart which has no love for its country, which is not full of emotions flowing with feeling”.

Sanjay LeelaBhansali, the director of the soon to- be released film “Queen Padmavati” has dared to twist Queen Padmavati’s history and show such distortions in his film.

The patriots who should be opposing this however, have instead just called this matter a caste issue and are sitting quietly. The reason for their silence must be their ignorance of the real life story of Queen Padmavati.

The historians of today just rely on Mohammed Jayasi’s “Padmavat” and unfortunately ever since the making of Bhansali’s romance and action film their ill deserved reputation has only increased due to the film being riddled with references from this inaccurate book.  Many articles on Queen Padmavati exist on social media, but the sad fact is that there is an alarming lack of research seen in such articles.

In these two articles I have made an effort to reproduce and use some parts of the research work undertaken on this subject by writers such as GaurishankarHeerachandOjha and DamodarlallGarg, whose works are evidence based. Queen Padmavati was not only a valorous fiery woman in her time, but she is very much a burning symbol of bravery even today.

 

The lands of Rajasthan are not made up of sand, but it is the never ending birthplace of brave men and women of iron-wills.

 

History is witness to one of the most nationally and internationally famous among these valiant souls – Queen Padmavati or Padmini. In other words Queen Padmavati is a synonym for Chittorgarh Fort which is well known for its association with this brave queen. Both Queen Padmavati and Chittorgarh Fort have played a huge part in defending the nation and protecting the honour of women.

Influenced by this a bard once quite rightly said

“Garh to Bas Chittorgarh, baki Sab Garhiya” (Chittorgarh is theFort and all the rest (forts) are just fortresses. Padmavati is the Queen and all the rest are …”).

It is said by writers and historians about Queen Padmavati or Padmini that she was such a beauty that anyone on seeing her would be captivated by her. As for her bravery and intellect very few have lauded these aspects of her character.

The Mughals who were always tormented by Indian bravery, interfered with history by adding their biased insertions to show Mughal valour instead.

This conspiracy to distort history continued two hundred and fifty years after Queen Padmavati’s “jauhar”, self-immolation at Chittorgarh, when in 1540, Malik Mohammed Jayasi’s “Padmavat” was written.

Before his work, it is said that a wandering bard called Vain composed a piece on the Queen, however this was never published. Since Jayasi’s composition no serious research has been done on the life of Queen Padmavati and Jayasi’s work has been followed blindly ever since. In order to destroy the historical authenticity of Queen Padmavati’s story, her husband Ratan Singh is described as being from Sri Lanka, and furthermore he is portrayed as a sensual character.

Unintelligent people have increased the period that he was active in this story from one year to twelve years during which he is described as wandering around as sadhu.

He is described as going to Sri Lanka and as having married Queen Padmavati there. Other writers have just followed this line without questioning its truthfulness and in doing so have also supported other myths from Jayasi’s work namely that; Ratan Singh fulfilled the condition of showing his Queen to the attacker AlauddinKhilji, Padmavati was more of a beauty than a fierce warrior and that she placated a royal servant called RaghavChetan with a gift.

In reality the evidence of accounts of Queen Padmavati’s bravery and that of the traditions of her royal household tell a very different story. In reality, one can only imagine the robustness of Queen Padmavati’s bravery. In the articles that follow, the true history of Queen Padmavati will be told and the distortions of so called historians and writers on this subject will be exposed.

 

 The Flame of Valour“ Padmavati” – Vinita Arya – Part 2

 

Malik Mohammed Jayasi wrote a poem called “Padmavat” about King Ratan Singh and Queen Padmavati and today it is that poem which is at the centre of controversy and much opposition.

Due to there being very few instances of their lives being documented in history, Jayasi’s “Padmavat” has been accepted by many as a serious historical book.

His tale in fact bears greater resemblance to the highly imaginative and fictional romances we see today than any genuine historical work.

Evidence of the indifferent attitude of Indian historical researchers to this subject is found in the way that they have so easily accepted “Padmavat” as being an authoritative and authentic depiction of the bravery of the Rajputs.

This is despite the fact that this work was written by a poet of the Mughal court who lived two hundred and fifty years after the “jauhar” or the self-immolation of Queen Padmavati. The reason why it is so disheartening to see ‘Padmavat” regarded as authentic today and to see a film actually based on this work is because this poem has completely destroyed the honour the dignity, the pride and the traditions of the Rajputs.

Jayasi has written quite a lot in the “Padmavat” but in brief the story can be summarised as follows.

The daughter of King Gandharvasen of the kingdom of Singhal was called Padmini. This princess loved to keep birds.

Among her birds was a parrot called Heeramun, who understood and spoke the language of humans. One day a hunter caught this parrot and in his greed he sold the parrot to a Brahmin. The Brahmin in turn gave it to the King of Chittorgarh, Ratan Singh. One day the wife of Ratan Singh was praising her own beauty when the parrot began to praise the beauty of Padmini. Ratan Singh having heard the parrot’s praises became determined to have the princess for himself and went to the kingdom of Singhal, which is in modern day Sri Lanka.

As he was a lone warrior, King Ratan Singh abandoned the idea of war and decided to spend twelve years as a sadhu, or wandering sage during which time he made many attempts to try and get Princess Padmini. One day the parrot Heeramun, escapes from Ratan Singh and goes to Princess Padmini and he tells her about Ratan Singh. By just listening to Heeramun’s account she falls in love with Ratan Singh. One day, both Ratan Singh and Padmini meet and Ratan Singh on seeing Padmini’s beauty faints. King Gandharvasen witnessing the princess’ love for him, respects his daughter’s wishes and both Ratan Singh and Padmini get married. Ratan Singh then takes Padmini back to Chittorgarh.

Now, in order to make this tale more interesting and to link the royal couple to Khilji, Jayasi adds another character, RaghavChetan to the story, One day this person enters the court of King Ratan Singh and requests employment from him. The king gives him employment but later finds out that RaghavChetan, knows black magic.

He removes him from the court, however Queen Padmini takes pity on him and personally gives him money. When Raghav sees the Queen in person, he falls madly in love with her beauty.

Filled with feelings of vengeance against King Ratan Singh he goes to Delhi and poisons the mind of Sultan AlauddinKhilji and incites him to wage war against him. Raghav also tells him about Padmini’s beauty and cunningly persuades him that he needs to make Padmini a part of his court. Khilji then attacks Chittorgarh and a battle ensues between him and King Ratan Singh for sixth months.

The Mughal army become despondent but then Khilji hits apon a great idea; he tells Ratan Singh that if you allow me and my army to see your wife through a mirror, then we will leave you. King Ratan Singh accepts Khilji’s proposal, and he makes preparations for a mirror to be brought to the palace through which Khilji can see Ratan Singh’s wife from afar. When Khilji sees Padmini he becomes enchanted by her beauty.

He makes arrangements to leave Chittorgarh and King Ratan Singh comes to see him off personally. However the king is deceived by Khilji and gets captured by him instead and he is taken to Delhi. Having taken Ratan Singh there, Khilji sends a message to Chittorgarh, that if you give me Queen Padmini, then I will let Ratan Singh go.

Queen Padmini then makes a plan to rescue her husband. She goes with seven hundred soldiers dressed in royal maid servants’ clothes in palanquins to Khilji. With great cunning and skill the Queen rescues her King from Khilji’s clutches and brings him back to Chittorgarh. Khilji on discovering this deception attacks Chittorgarh again, during which Ratan Singh becomes martyred and Queen Padmini and her many royal maidservants commit “jauhar” or self immolation.

Khilji on hearing the news of Queen Padmini’s death becomes very depressed and full of despair. He leaves soon after for Delhi. (This brief summary of “Jayasi’sPadmavat” has been taken from DamodarlallGarg’s book –ChittorgarhkiJvala Rani Padmini- Chittorgarh’s Fiery Queen Padmini)

The Jayasi’s “Padmavat” story has been given in brief here but this is enough to show that the poem has been laced with so much romance that the honour, duty, traditions and bravery of the Rajputs are nowhere to be seen.

According to the writer of the book “The History of the Kingdom of Udaipur p. 174” (in the original Hindi – “Udaipur RajyaKaItihaas)

“at the end of the “Padmavat” tale, Jayasi calls the whole tale a metaphor”. Writers that come after Jayasi have also regarded the tale as authentic and have used it to support their works, by diluting the story even further and writing their own even more watered-down version.

Readers who already have knowledge of the honour and the sense of duty of the Rajputs on actually reading the “Padmavat” can easily see that in this tale Queen Padmavat’s “jauhar” and Rajputivalour have been meddled with.

Evidence instead of their actual bravery can be seen in these lines from other poems –

“Chittor champak hi rahayadyapiyavanali ho gaye, dharamarthHaldighat me kitnesubhatbali ho gaye”

(Chittor’s rose fragrance remained despite the foreigners turning into wasps, how many great warriors were sacrificed for Dharma, righteousness at Haldighat!),

“Kulmaan jab takpraan tab tak, yah nahin to vahnahin”

(maintain the honour of the clan until the last breath, as if that disappears so will it (the clan)”.

These instructions have resounded throughout the Mewar region of Rajasthan. The burning fiery blood of those born on Rajasthani soil can also be seen in these lines

“vikhyaat ve jauhar yahan ke aaj bhi hai lok men, ham magna hai, un padmini-si deviyon ke shok men! Aarya striya nij dharm par marti hui darti nahin, sadyant sarv satitva-shiksha visva men milti nahin”

(jauhar is still commemorated today and throughout the world, we are plunged into mourning for noble, virtuous ladies such as Padmini! Arya ladies defend their own virtue, are never afraid to die and such a lesson in wifely fidelity you will never see anywhere else in the whole world”.)

The following points are also worthy of serious consideration:

  1. By reading the Padmavat poem and comparing it with the actual reign of Ratan Singh then Jayasi’s whole poem becomes clearly a baseless total lie. According to the evidence that is available, the inscriptions that have been found, Ratan Singh’s reign was only for around a year (see “The History of the Kingdom of Udaipur” p. 187) Now what’s worth thinking about is how in reality all of the events described in the poem could have occurred within his very short reign, for example Ratan Singh’s coronation, his taking care of his kingdom, then shortly after meeting the parrot, making plans to go to the Kingdom of Singhal, actually going to Singhal and spending twelve years as a sadhu, a wandering ascetic, coming back to Chittor, the arrival of RaghavChetan in his court, his subsequent removal, Raghav’s trip to Delhi where after several months he meets Khilji, Khilji’ssubsequent six month attack on Chittor, the imprisonment of King Ratan Singh and his removal to Delhi, his subsequent release and return to Chittor, followed by a battle and the jauhar of Queen Padmini. If these events really did happen they would have taken years to take place! But the clear evidence that the duration of Ratan Singh’s reign was only for one year is proof enough that Jayasi’s poem is pure fantasy.

 

  1. If for argument’s sake Ratan Singh’s reign was longer, then for a king to wander around for twelve years dressed as a sadhu seems not in keeping with the world famous reputation of the Rajputs. It is more plausible and credible that Ratan Singh in his capacity as king would have gone to King Gandharvasen and asked for Padmini’s hand in marriage up front and that it would have been readily accepted.

 

  1. There was in fact no King Gandharvasen of the Kingdom of Singhal during the reign of King Ratan Singh. Nor was there a person called HammeerShankh who was king as written somewhere else. The ruler of Singhal was actually KeertinisshankdevParakrambahu the Fourth (“The History of the Kingdom of Udaipur” p. 187)

 

 

  1. It is very doubtful that Queen Padmini would have helped the courtier RaghavChetan as described in Jayasi’s tale because according to Rajput etiquette no wife, daughter, sister can speak to a man who doesn’t belong to her family, let alone give him alms. This is not only the etiquette of the Rajput’s but of all good families in India.

 

  1. It also impossible that King Ratan Singh would have gone against all Rajput etiquette and ignored the Rajput’s great history of chivalry and accept Khilji’s alleged proposal – i.e. that of showing his wife off to another man in exchange for Khilji’s cessation of war. Ratan Singh being a very powerful King with everything at his disposal would never have acted against the honour and dignity of the Rajputs. No husband in his right mind would ever accept such a proposal.

 

 

  1. There is no evidence whatsoever also for – the imprisonment of King Ratan Singh by Khilji and the seven hundred palanquins that are taken to Delhi to attack Khilji. These are all figments of Jayasi’s very vivid imagination.

 

  1. As during King Ratan Singh’s time the blood of a Rajput was a synonym for valour, it is very wrong of Jayasi to depict Ratan Singh as fainting on seeing Padmini for the first time. It is frankly laughable when even today men do not swoon on seeing a woman.

 

  1. Queen Padmini did not in fact live in Singhal. She belonged to the Kingdom of Pangal, Pingal or Pungalgadh, which is within modern day Bikaner, Rajasthan. The heroine of the romantic folk tale of Dhola-Maru lives in fact in this citadel. Lines from Rajasthani folk songs also are proof that Queen Padmini lived in Pangal (Pungalgadh) such as – “Pagipagipangipanth sir upariambarchah, pavaspragatuPadmini, kahutpangaljah”. To re-emphasise the truth about Queen Padmini’s parents and husband, it must be underlined that her father’s name was actually King Punyapal, her mother was Queen Jamkavar and her husband was King Ratan Singh.    (See –ChittorkiJvala “Rani Padmini” –from Rani Padmini Ki AitihasiktaaurKhyatipraptJauhar -Chittor’s Flame – “Queen Padmini” in the Hindi book – “Queen Padmini’s Historical and Famous Jauhar” – p. 51)

 

In conclusion, the historical authenticity of Jayasi’s “Padmavat” is non-existent due to a lack of evidence. Spatially, geographically and in terms of the alleged events that occurred theygo against all authentic historical accounts.

 

Having read and understood all these facts my opposition to Bhansali and his film is that he has based his film on “historical” accounts which can not be regarded as the truth.

In doing so Bhansali has distorted history, which is unacceptable. Another unacceptable thing about this film is the choice of actress to play the role of Queen Padmavati (DeepikaPadukone).

She is in my view a person with a questionable character. Contrast the input of such a person in this film to the non-existent consultation of the Rajput community who are rightly very concerned about how this film depicts their iconic Queen, Queen Padmini.

By stubbornly ignoring their sentiments and continuing to distort history this has inevitably led to this level of opposition. A cynic would say that this is what Bhansali has always wanted as courting such opposition is only giving him free publicity.

Whatever Bhansali’s secret agenda is, one can only make a final judgment on his film once it is released. It is left to the reader’s own conscience whether s/he should go and see this film or not.

 

Namaste

(Hindi Article translated and edited by Vinita Arya)