All posts by rdhoot

VEDAS : IS THERE CHARM AND MAGIC IN THEM?

May 9, 2014 rdhoot 2 Comments

VEDAS : IS THERE CHARM AND MAGIC IN THEM?

Author : Pt Dharmdev Vidyamartand

The authors of the Vedic Age following copiously their western masters have not only entertained wrong concepts about all the four Vedas, but their treatment of the Atharvaveda is Worse as they see in some of its hymns dealing with medicinal herbs charm and magic.

The Atharvaveda, in reality, deals with medicine as evident from Gopath’s येSथर्वाणस्तद भेषजं तदमृतम तद ब्रह्म or Tandya Mahabrahman’s भेषजं वै देवानामथर्वाण: ( अर्थात ऋषिणा दृष्टा मंत्रा: ) भैषज्यायैवारिष्टयै|

l References made in Atharvaveda to medicinal herbs, masmerism, hypnotism incantation are entirely scientiﬁc.

lt is really a matter of great ragret that such wrong concepts should be entertained by these scholars about Atharvaveda which is also known as ब्रह्मवेद :-

(The use of this word “ब्रह्मवेद:” for Atharvaveda is justiﬁed by a number of hymns which, besides dealing with medicines also deal with the science of God and soul. There is no indication in it of any “charm” and “magic”.)

Western scholars like Bloomfield and Whitney misconstrued different “manis” (which are actually medicinal herbs) for charms, amulets or sorceries. Even while translating mantras dealing with medicinal herbs, coronation and family harmony, they gave misinterpretation and misleading meanings to show that there is magic and charm in Atharvavedas.

Bloomﬁeld in particular, gave such misleading captions as “Charm against Jaundice” to his translation of Atharvaveda`s 5.22 in which the reference is made to the cure of Takman (fever) through medicinal herbs.

“Charm with the Apamarg, a plant against sorcery, demons and enemies ” is the caption given by him to another mantra from the Atharvaveda in which there is mention of treatment of barreneness among women through the use of “Apamarga”

In Atharvaveda’s hymn 4.8, there is a beautiful description of a coronation ceremony. But unfonunately, Bloomﬁeld’s caption for the hymn containing this mantra, is “Charm pertaining to Royalty”

The hymn 3.3O of the Atharvaveda refers to family harmony, unity and mutual obligations and duties of the members of a family. Quoted below are three mantras from this hymn with Bloomﬁeld”s own translation :

(Unity of heart and unity of mind, freedom of hatred do I procure for you. Do ye take delight in one another as a cow in her new born calf.)

(The son shall be devoted to his father, be of the same mind with his mother, the wife shall speak honied, sweet words to her husband.)

(The brother shall not hate the brother and the sister not the sister. Harmonious, devoted to the same purpose speak ye words in kindly spirit.)

It is very shocking to ﬁnd that Bloomﬁeld has given the heading of this hymn as “Charm To Secure Harmony” knowing fully well that these hymns only stresses the importance of friendliness, harmony, mutual love, co-operation and sweetness of temper. etc. among the family members.

Following Bloomﬁeld, the authors of the Vedic Age commenting on this hymn write: “Of the same type but much more elevated in tone is the of quoted and justly celebrated charm for securing concord.”

In the hymns 7- 12 of Atharvaveda, there is a clear reference to सभा and समिति (which are the equivalents of the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha of the Modem Age.) Given below are the ﬁrst two mantras of this hymn with Bloomﬁeld’s translation :

(May assembly and meeting, the two daughters of Prajapati, concurrently aid me! May he with whom I meet, co-operate With me! May I obey Father, speak agreeably to those assembled. We know thy name, O assembly, Mirth verily is thy name; may all those that sit assembled in thee, utter speech in harmony with me.”

AUTHOR’S COMMENTS :-

Here the word “नरिष्टा” should mean benevolent to the people ( नृ + इष्टा ) or that which does not allow people to suffer) With this exception, it may be said the translation is not bad. What is disgusting is the title given to it by this western scholar : “Charm to procure inﬂuence in the assembly.”

The authors of the Vedic Age not only incorporated the blunders committed by such western scholar in this respect but went a step further and expressed ideas which are thoroughly absurd and misleading.

For instance, under the head “Medicinal Charms”, they write :

“Quite a number of medicinal charms are included in the Atharvaveda. The chief malady that was sought to be treated magically is the Takman. From the symptoms described it is almost certain that it was nothing but malarial fever. The plant kusha is maintained as potent in fighting Takman, but whether as medicine or as amulet is not quite clean”

This is indeed very misleading statement. Not only for fever alone but also for several other diseases like impotence, barrenness, leprosy, T.B. urinary troubles etc., the Vedas have suggested

treatment through administration of such medicinal herbs as Apamarga, Kushtaa Preshni, Parni, Soma, Darbh.

Even for fever, the cure suggested in the hymns 5-4 and 19-39 of the Atharva Veda, is through oral administration of “kustha “ and not its use in the form of amulets. One fails to understand how the authors of the Vedic Age misunderstood this point. A few mantras from these hymns, with their English translation by Bloomfield himself, will show how misleading is their interpretation :

(Thou that art born upon the mountains; as the most potent of plants, come hither, O kushtha, destroyer of the Takman to drive out from here, the Takman (fever).

It is clear here that Kushtha has been described as वीरूधामबलवतम: which is translated by Bloomﬁeld as “the most potent of plants”.

(Pain in the head, affliction in the eyes and ailment of the body, all that shall the Kushtha heal a divinely powerful medicine.)

The expression “powerful remedy” was enough to remove the doubt whether Kushtha was a medicinal herb or an amulet. But the authors of the “Vedic Age” deliberately entertained the doubt to confuse the readers.

In the hymn 19.39, the adjective विश्वभेषज has been used for this herb at least ﬁve times. This word has been rightly translated by Bloomﬁeld as “Universal remedy”. In mantra 4 of this hymn, this herb has been described as उतमो अस्योषधीनाम :-

“Thou art the most superior to the plants as a steer among the cattle, as the tiger among the beasts of prey. Verily no harm shall suffer this person here for whom I bespeak these mom and eve, aye the entire day.”

It is thus clear from the above that instead of any sorcery or amulet, the reference is only to treatment of fever by administration of medicinal herb called “Kushtha”.

In this connection we want to draw the attention of our readers to a very ridiculous comment by the authors of the Vedic Age:

“It is interesting to note that in one hymn (5.22) Takman has been asked to seize the Shudra and the Dasi or to go away to Mujavats or to the Valhikas further beyond and the last verse, the author says quite maliciously that he is sending Takman to the Gandharis, Angas and Magadhas like one sending a treasure to a person.”

The mantras which form the basis of the above comment are as follows :

lt is obvious that the whole confusion in these mantras has arisen from the misunderstanding of the words दासी, शुद्रा, गंधारी, मुजवान, मग्ध” in the above mantras.

The word “दासी”’ used in one of the above mantras, is in fact a herb called “काकजंघा“. दासी and काकजंघा are synonymous as evident from the following from राजनिघुनट्टू.

A lot of misunderstanding has been created by the authors of the “Vedic Age” by taking into account only the prevalent meaning of the words like dasa and shudra and ignoring their real meaning suitable in the context.

Just as the word dasi, so also the word shudra have been used in the above hymn for a medicinal herb-in this case for príyagulata प्रियंगुलता which is supposed to be good for curing fever.

About its power to cure fever, it is stated in Bhav Prakash Níghantu :

After knowing the real meaning of the words dasi and sudra in this context, the meaning of the above quoted mantras will be as follows :

(O, disease, pervading the body like poisonous serpent and making the body lethargic, go away by the use of blossoming Desi herb.)

The sum and substance of this mantra is that the herb dasí also known as kakjanga wards off fever.

(O fever, which growest in the grassy and shady regions, go away by the use of sudra also known as priyangoo)

A repeated reference to different mantras in the Atharvaveda such as आंजन मणि(4.9),शंख मणि(4.9),वरण मणि(10.3), जांगिड मणि(2.4 ),पर्ण मणि (3.5 ), शतवार मणि (19.36 ), etc. have led some scholars to think that there is charm or magic in the vedas. They misinterpret the Word मणि as a pearl only and feel that use of different pearls has been suggested in the AtharvaVeda for curing different diseases.

But the principal meaning of this word, as supported by Ayurvedic books, is a herb (destroyer of diseases). The word with three or four roots, has also other meanings.

According to the aphorism सर्वधातुभ्य इन् in the उपाधि कोष(4.118), the word मणि takes its existence from the root मणिशब्दे with इन् प्रत्यय. Thus the word मणि means a good orator or a leader :-

Other roots of मणि are मनु ज्ञाने, (दिवादि:) मन स्तम्बे, मनु अवबोधने ( तनादि ) which respectively mean a man of knowledge, one who deserts the enemies or the diseases, or one who imparts knowledge to others.

For instance, in the following mantra, it is said that through the help of Sraktya mani, an intelligent person, like a Risi, gains victory over all armies and destroys all enemies :

The use of the word sraktya mani for an intelligent person also occurs in another mantra in the Atharva Veda :

(You are full of action, you are able to ﬁght back your enemies, you can attack your rival)

When this meaning does not ﬁt in the context, it should be taken to mean some herb or the medicine.

We shall brieﬂy discuss the word मणि used in the context of medicines.

आंजनमणि, for instance, stands for a tablet made of antimony which removes many diseases.

It is clearly stated in the following mantra of the Atharvaveda (4.95) that आंजनमणि gives strength to a patient and is the medicine for हरितरोग (kind of a fever) The use of the word भेषजं {indicates

that this subject has connection with the science of medicine and not magic.

SHANKH MANI:

About शंखमणि it is stated in the Atharvaveda :

(This conch shell, with a pearl, helps one recover from many diseases. May it help overcome the misery resulting from a sin or a disease.)

The word अंह: is generally used for sin but it also means disease as evident from the following etymology or derivation of this word as given in the Unadikosa.

JANGIDMANI:

Jangidmani has been used in the Atharvaveda mainly for Soma. Commenting on Atharvaveda’s 1.9.34 Sayanacharya writes :

In Atharva Veda Brihat Sarvanukra Maní there is a reference to the herb in the following words :

It has also been described as a medicine or a herb elsewhere in the same book :

As the words चन्द्र and सोम are synonymous, all the names denoting chandra also stand for Soma.

This is conﬁrmed by such quotations as the following from शुश्रुत चिकित्सा स्थान :-

Thus we see that Jangadmani is the same medicinal herb as Soma about whose beneﬁts it is stated in the 19th chapter of the same book :

The use of words like औषधि भेषज and विश्व भेषज for this herb also gives indication of its great usefulness in curing many incurable diseases.

PARNAMANI —- — SOMA

There is a reference to पर्णमणि in Atharvaveda’s 3.5. According to Satpath (6.5.l .1), Parna is another name for ‘ सोम (सोमो वै पर्ण: ) The relation between ‘सोम and पर्ण has been made clear in the following mantra from the same hymn :

Jangdmani consists of tablets or globules of soma and Parnamani of only (soma) leave.

According to the ﬁrst mantra of the same hymn, there is also reference to W: (water) andw (juice). Thus the Pamamani taken in the form of leaves, lengthens the life of a person and removes all diseases.

In eighth mantra of this hymn, the Parnamani is also called तनुपान (protector of the body and increaser of semen) :

According to एष वै संवत्सरो य एष तपति(satpath),संवत्सर: means ‘sun° and, therefore, it has been suggested here by implication that “Parnamani’ should be taken to secure the splendor of the sun or its heat.

It is mentioned in the following mantra from the Atharva Veda (3.5.2) that regular use of Parnamani increases physical strength and makes a man very inﬂuential and wealthy :-

In Susrat Chikitsa Shastra, it is said that one who regularly takes Parnamaní, increases his life and poison, burns and wounds do not cut short his life :

SATAVARI MANI (RISHBHAK HERB)

In Atharva Veda (19.36.17), there is a reference to शतवार मणि which is described as useful for killing all germs and giving splendor to the life :

In the second mantra of the same hymn, it is said that it removes all small and big diseases :

In the ﬁfth mantra of this hymn, Rishabh ऋषभ as been given as a synonym for Satvar शतवार , a name which is mentioned in the books on Ayurveda also :-

In this very hymn, it is mentioned that rishabh or satvar mani cures such diseases as T.B. and also others connected with pregnancy. It is also good for giving strength to the reproductive organs.

In some hymns the words `रक्षांसि राक्षसो, गन्धर्व, अप्सरा do not stand for any ghost, “witch” etc. as generally misunderstood. They only denote different kinds of germs.

For instance, in the Kaushitak Brahmana, it is clearly written about रक्षांसि :-

(The genns which sip blood of a person are called `रक्षांसि)

According to satpatha (10.53.20) अप्सरा: are those which live in rose plants etc :

These almost invisible germs living in rose plants get into human body through the nose and cause many mental deseases. Says Satpath :

(The insects, which fall for beautiful objects, and consume them, are called गन्धर्वा :

In the following mantra from Atharvavads, the word पिशाचhas also been used for a deadly germ which eats away the ﬂesh of a patient and causes wounds in his body :

This usage of पिशाच’ for a deadly germ eating away the ﬂesh of a person has also been supported by the derivation of the word given in शब्द कल्पदुम :

Similar derivation of the word has also been given in vachaspatya brihadmídhana .

Thus it can be said that `राक्षस, गन्धर्व, अप्सरा etc are different varieties of gemis which can be killed through the persistent use of शतवार or ऋषभक मणि. They have no connection with the magic or charm.

VARAN MANI ( वरण मणि )

There is a description of वरणमणिin the Atharva veda’s hymn (10.3) In third mantra of this hymn the adjective used for varanmani वरणमणि is visvabhaj विश्वभेषज: which means a medicine which removes all diseases :-

In another mantra of the same hymn, it is described as वनस्पति a herb which is useful for many diseases:

The word वनस्पति has also been used for वरणमणि in the mantra of this hymn :

In the 11^th mantra of the same hymn, there is an instruction to wear this herb in the form of an armour in combination with mica. It is believed that its touch with the human body is good for all cardiac diseases :-

In the Ayurvedic books, this herb has been named as वरुण as evident from the Bhav Prakas Níghantu ( भावप्रकाश निघंटु) :

In Níghantu Ratna (निघंटु रत्न) the herb, is considered effective in many diseases related to impuriﬁcation of blood, urinary troubles.

It is believed that the use ofthis herb in the form of pills or its application on clothes is very useful.

KRITYA AND ABHICHAR

The misunderstanding about the role of sorceries and incantation, as propounded in the Vedas, is also responsible for the belief entertained by some scholars that there is magic and charm in the Vedas. The truth is that both these things have use in Warfare and armament and have nothing to do with magic. Their use is Suggested mainly for defensive rather than offensive purposes.

Kritya is of two kinds. First अंगिरस:- which consists of explosive substances used to shatter the buildings and the second is आसुरी which is made up of poisonous substances which are put in ﬁre to destroy enemies :

According to Atharvaveda, the priests are asked to help the people to Ward off the ill effects of Krítya :

(May the priests do something to ward off the ill effects of violence by the enemies.)

At another place in Atharva Veda (21 .l8.5), a priest asserts :

(I ward off the evil effects of Krítya against cows or men.)

It is evident that it is on the basis of the Vedas that Kautalya Shastra laid down that the priests should impart full knowledge of Krítya and Abhichar to kings and their kinsmen :

Use of many Manis and herbs has been suggested in this connection. For instance in Atharva Veda (19. l 4.4) जांगिडमणि, सोम are stated as effective against Kritya :

This herb destroys the ill effects of kritya कृत्या and is useful in prolonging the life span of a person.

At another place in Atharva Veda (8.7. 1 0), herbs used against poinsonous substances, are also stated to be effective against sorceries (कृत्या) :-

It is made abundantly clear in Atharva Veda that if used against innocent persons, it brings about disastrous consequences and therefore, should never be used against them :

उन्मोचन(vomiting or purging) or प्रमोचन(countering the effects of poison by the intense use of ghee, honey etc is stated in the following mantra :

In (Shusrut Kalpadum) (Chapter one Sloka 75-76) also the same remedy has been given to avert the ill effects of अभिचार :

There are many mantras in the Atharva Veda in which lie the seeds of modem therapy (including mesmerism) which is used to help patients in eliminating many mental and physical diseases. In the following mantra from Atharva Veda, a physician tells his patients about the healing power of his hand touch will cure him of the ailments :-

For curing mental diseases, the doctor ﬁrst of all, tries to capture the heart of the patient by repetition of the following mantras from Atharva Veda :

After gaining full control over the heart of the patient, the doctor suggests to him with full conﬁdence that he would fully cure him of mental diseases like insanity, perplexity or confusion of mind :

To free a person from fever, etc., the doctor also suggests to the patients:

There are also mantras in the Vedas which are repeated with will and determination to remove sin, achieve success, overcome diseases, and to increase power.

For removing thought of sin :-

For achieving success: –

For overcoming diseases :

For increasing power :

It would however, be stupid to ‘suggest’ that any of the mantras relating to Kritya and Abhíchar have anything to do with charm or magic.

There is no charm or magic in such mantras.

English, Vedic Religion

VEDAS : IS THERE MONISM OR POLYTHEISM IN THEM?

May 2, 2014 rdhoot 2 Comments

VEDAS : IS THERE MONISM OR POLYTHEISM IN THEM?

Author : Pt Dharmdev Vidyamartand

From the Book “Veda:The Myths and Reality” ( A reply to Vedic Age )

One of the subjects which has generated a lot of controversy among the scholars is whether the Vedas teach polytheism, henotheism, monism or monotheism.

Before discussing this question, however, let us discuss what these terms really mean. Polytheism means belief in the plurality of gods, each with a sphere of his own in the governance of the this universe. “In simple words, it means Worship of many gods or Gods.

By monism is meant “development of the universe from a monad or from a single element.

lt corresponds to what is generally called as the principle that nothing else except Brahma (God) or the Absolute exists.

The Henotheism denotes that each of several divinities is regarded as the Supreme-each in its sphere.

And monotheism is belief in the existence of only One God.

Westem scholars like Clayton have said that there is polytheism in the Vedas. Even Max Muller who saw in Rigveda”s hymn 10.121 an expression of One God, “expressed with such power and decision, that it will make us hesitate before we deny to the Aryans, an instinctive monotheism which, however, comes out with a rider : “This is one of the hymns which has always been suspected as modem by European interpreters”

Even while commenting on Rigveda’s “प्रजापते न त्व दे तानन्यो विश्वा जातानि परी ता बभूव” he says, “This is the last verse, into my mind, most suspicious of all.”

lt is obvious that this suspicion has been raised deliberately by Max Muller and other western scholars as their study of the Vedas was biased and they were not willing to accept monotheism in the Vedas.

This is the reason why they have also created confusion while translating “कस्मै देवाय हविषा विधेम” as “to which God shall we offer worship”. ln fact they want to show that there are many gods and the devotee is wondering as to whom to Worship. (ln fact कस्मै देवाय is answered by “प्रजापति” as “क” stands for “प्रजापति” as clear from Satpath : “को हि प्रजापति अथवा प्रजापतिर्वक ”

Max Muller has, in fact, coined a new word “Hen0theism” to show the worship of many “single Gods” or a number of independent deities in the Vedas.

For instance in his book “Ancient Sanskrit Literature ” Max Muller writes :” Each Vedic poet seems to exalt the particular god to whom he happens to be singing, to a position of supremacy. It would be easy to ﬁnd, in the numerous hymns of the Veda, passages in which almost every single god is represented as Supreme and Absolute. ln the first hymn of the Second Book of the Rigveda, Agni is called the Ruler of the universe, the Lord of men, the Wise King, the Father, the Brother, the Son, the friend of men, nay all the powers, and names of others are distinctly ascribed to Agni. Indra is celebrated as the strongest in the hymns as well as in the Brahmnas, and the burden of one of the songs of the Tenth book is ” विश्वस्मादिन्द्र उत्तर “. (Indra is greater than all.) Of soma it is said that he was born great, and that he conquers everyone. He is called the king of the world, he has the power to prolong the life of men

and is the maker of heaven and earth; of Agni, of Surya, of lndra and Vishnu. ln the very next hymn, addressed to Varuna, it is the Varuna who is, to the mind of the poet, Supreme and Almighty.”

Clarifying this concept hynotheism A.C Clayton writes in the “Rigveda and Vedic Religion :-

“In his Writings Max Muller constantly referred to this and coined the word Hynotheism or Kathenotheism to express what he re-garded as a ‘peculiar character’ of the ancient Vedic religion.

It denotes that each of several divinities is regarded as highest. The one that was worshipped and that they, therefore, treated him as if he were absolutely being independent and Supreme, alone present to the mind of the worshipper.”

In effect, as pointed out by Dwij Das in his book “Rigveda Unveiled”, the Rishis have been reduced to the position of “sycophants or cowardly liars, who could call each single god, as the one Supreme Being, only to avert the wrath of that God. Knowing at the same time, that they are not telling the Truth.”

Clayton and a few other scholars, though denying monotheism in the Vedas, say that they regard this practice of glorifying one God exclusively as “a species of poetic licence by which a singer magnified the god whom he was invoking, rather than an evidence that the poet actually claimed that the god to whom he was at the moment referring was the superior of all others”

We, however, do not agree with Clayton and other scholars that such descriptions are due to poetic license either. We are not prepared to believe that there is any scope for such poetic licence in view of overwhelming evidence of monotheism in the Vedas. The Vedas teach monotheism or the Worship of one God in the purest form . They teach that God is Omnipresent, Omniscient and Omnipotent Lord of the universe. He is absolutely formless and perfect.

The vedas declare :

Monotheism in the Vedas has not been stated more forcefully than in the following mantras from the Atharvaveda where God has been described as One and the only One. :

(He (God) is called neither the second, nor the third, nor yet the fourth. He is called neither the ﬁfth, nor the sixth, nor yet the seventh. He is neither the eighth, nor the ninth, nor yet the tenth.)

He takes care of all that breathes and of all that does not breathe. He has got all this conquering power, He is the one, one and the only one.

All these luminous forces of nature become one in Him. How emphatically the oneness of God has been asserted in such passages and how absurd and false is the view advocated by some prejudiced Western scholars that the Vedas teach polytheism.

We will give some more evidence of the Oneness of God in the Vedas.

In the हिरण्यगर्भ hymn, (in Regveda) consisting of 10 mantras, God has been described as प्रजापति and more than four times it is clearly stated that.

He is One and the only One.

Following mantras from this hymn may be quoted to clarify this point :-

(God who possesses all the luminous Worlds within Himself and exists from the very eternity, He is only One Manifest Lord of the created creatures. He is supporting this earth and this heaven. Unto that All-Blissful Divinity, we offer our humble worship.”)

(He who is the Giver of physical vigour and spiritual power, He whose order is carried out by all the luminous objects and by the enlightened beings, whose shelter is immortality and turning away from whom is death, unto that all blissful Divinity, we offer our humble Worship.)

(He who by the greatness of His power, is the Sole Ruler of living and lifeless objects existing in this world, He, who is the Lord of these bipeds and quadrupeds unto that All-Blissful Divinity, we offer our humble Worship.)

(When water in its subtler form, possessing mighty force within itself, became manifest, therein was held the Universal life force which of heat and energy, it was then the One Universal life force of all the luminous objects became manifest, unto that All blissful Divinity, we offer our humble Worship.)

Atharvaveda says. He, the only One is the Giver of joy, and should be worshipped: “एक एव नमस्य: सुशवा:”

Samveda also describes God as One एक इत्”:

The Oneness of God has been poetically described in the following mantra from the Rigveda :-

(He whose eyes go every where, who faces all sides, whose arms are here, there all around and whose feet in all directions–is the Only One Divine Being who has created all these heavens.)

God is proclaimed as ‘एक (one) and अन्तमानुष: (unparalled) in the following mantra from the Rigveda:-

Addressing God as “अग्नि” Rigveda in the following mantras in its ﬁrst hymn of the Second Mandela says:

Just as a person is called brother, father, uncle, husband etc because of different relationships he bears to other members of the same family, so also God is described differently because of his different attributes.

He is called (Agni) when we remember him as an embodiment of knowledge and इन्द्र: (Indra) when we want to denote His vast wealth.

To denote his Omnipresence, we call him विष्णु(Vishnu) and to give an idea of His greatness, we described His as ब्रह्मा (Brahma).

By virtue of his Supremacy in knowledge, He is known as ब्रह्मणस्पति (Brahmanaspati). His purifying power entitles Him to be called वरुण (Varuna).

As he loves everyone He मित्र(Mitra) and as He isjust, He is अर्यमा (Aryaman).

He is रूद्र (Rudra) because He comes harsh on the wicked, द्रविणोद (Dravinoda) because He is Giver of wealth and strength, सोम: (Soma) because He has created roots and herbs etc. God is also described as ‘सोम (Soma), पुष(Pushan) and भग (Bhaga) as evident from the following mantras from Rigveda;

(O, Soma,Thou, “who hast created these herbs, this water and these cows”, Thou who art present in the entire firmament and removeth all darkness by Thy illumination, Thou, who art Creator of good intellect, Thou who art also Creator of firmament, sky, earth, fire, sun and air etc. Thou art (“Pusan”) because of Thy powers to strengthen and revive because Thou art worthy of our Worship. Thou art the Master of the whole universe and art present in all the Worlds.)

Several other mantras, can be quoted to show that अग्नि (Agni) ,आदित्य (Aditya) , वायु (Vayu) ,चन्द्रमा(Chandrama), शुक्र(Shukra) , आप (Aap) , प्रजापति (Prajapati) are all different names of the same One God and only denote His verious attributes.

For instance, take the following mantra from Yajurveda (32.1)

(Here God has been described differently because of His different attributes : अग्नि(Agni) because He is embodiment of knowledge, आदित्य (Aditya) because. He is Eternal, वायु(Vayu) because He is the cause of all movement in the world (वा गति गन्धनयो: )-“चन्द्रमा” (Chandrama) because He is pleasing to everybody, ( चदी आल्हादे ) -“शुक्र (Shukra) because He is pure (शुनिरपूर्ति मावे) (ब्रह्मा) because He is the Greatest of all, CNN: (Apa) because He is Omnipresent and प्रजापति (Prajapati) because He looks after His subjects).

The mantras published by Max Muller from Rigveda’s 2.1 under the caption “Agni”, in fact, sing the glory of One God who has been described here as अग्नि (Agni)

Can anyone believe that these adjectives have been used for simple fire? Thus Max Muller and his followers only betrayed their bias and partiality when without probing deep into the meaning of

these words, they played havoc with them.

Now the question arises 1 how can we reconcile the idea of One God with several references to 33 devas (gods) in the Vedas ?

A lot of misunderstanding results from the Western scholars who have taken ‘ ‘देव’ ‘ as “God” everywhere.

देव, according to Yaskacharya, the celebrated author of Nirukta (Vedic Philology) means one who confers some advantage upon us, can illumine things i.e. explain or throw light upon them, and one who is the source of light :-

The word देव (Deva) with its root a comprehensive term covering brave men, devotees of God, learned persons, Brahmins, objects like sun, moon, ﬁre, electricity.

Following are some of the meanings of देव occuring in the Satpath Brahman :

THE 33 DEVAS

There is reference to 33 devas in the Vedas at several place. For instance, a clear reference has been made to them in Rigveda’s 1.45/27, 8/28/1,88/30/2 and Yajurveda’s 20/26 etc.

There is also reference to the 33 devas in Satpath and other Brahmins (which are commentaries on the Vedas).

Satpata says that : there are 33 Devas which manifest the glory of God. Of them are 8 Vasus, 11 Rudras, 12 Aditya, lndra and Prajapati. The eight Vasus are (1) Agni or ﬁre (2) earth (3) air (4) superterrestrial space (5) sun (6) moon (7) atmosphere (8) stars.

These are called Vasus (abodes) because in them resides all that lives, moves or exists.

The eleven Rudras are the ten pranas (vital forces) enlivening the human frame and the eleventh is the Atma or the soul. lndra is all pervading. Prajapati is Yajna.

The 12 Adityas are the twelve solar months making the course of time. They are called Adityas as, by their cyclic motion, they produce changes in all objects.

Thus it is clear that calling sun, moon, earth, ﬁre earth etc as ‘devas ‘, the Vedic religion cannot be described as Polytheistic.

It is, however, clearly stated in Rigveda that God is the Supreme Lord of all the devas :

(God is the One Life and Lord of all devas and, therefore, we worship Him, who is Giver of all happiness, peace and bliss.)

Dependence of devas on God has been brought out by the Vedas in several mantras.

For instance in Atharvaveda, after describing God as महद यक्षम(the Most Venerable Supreme Being), it is Stated that devas live around God as the creepers around a tree :

ARE DEVAS IMMORTAL ?

ARE THEY PROOF OF POLYTHEISM

Some of the western scholars, on the basis of the portrayal of 33 devas in satpath, assert that it is a clear cut evidence of polytheism in the Vedas.

To contradict this view, first of all, let us be clear that ‘devas’ as described in the Vedas, do not necessarily only stand for gods.

The word देव(deva) which has its root as दिनु (Dinu) is a comprehensive term covering the attributes of God; sometimes they stand for devotees of God and also learned persons; they also denote objects of Nature like Sun, Moon, Fire etc.

While Devas have been described as immortal in the Vedas; it has been clarified that they derive this immortality from God. This idea also occurs in Brahmanas and Upnishadas. ln Rigveda, for instance, it is stated that God alone bestows immortality on the devas :

In Yajurveda (32.l0) also, it is said that the devas live in the protection of God :

To God turn all devas after emancipation to enjoy the everlasting bliss.

lt has been clearly stated in the Rigveda that the learned and the wise describe the One existing God in many ways.

But despite this truth, Agni, Indra, Mitra, Varuna etc have come to be considered as separate gods. It will, therefore, be fruitful to know the signiﬁcance of these words to remove the mist surrounding them. We will also discuss what have come to be known as dual gods like मरुत: etc.

From the spiritual point of view, अग्नि stands for God who is also called as यमा, मातरिश्वा,इन्द्र, वरुण as stated in the following mantra from the Rigveda :

From the social point of view, the word अग्नि (‘Agni”) denotes

There are many mantras in the Vedas in which Agni has been used in the sense of an enlightened leader,

For instance, in the following mantra from the Rigveda, अग्नि: (for whom the adjectives used are ऋषि (seer), पवमान: (purifier) पांचजन्य: (dedicated to the welfare of the society) is requested to dispel all ignorance by his discourse :

The adjectives used as होता, पुरोहित(Knower of the rites of the Yajnas (priest), in the following mantra from the also leaves us in no doubt that the word अग्नि: has been used for an enlightened leader :

The same impression is conﬁnned by the use of such adjectives as शुचिव्रतत (who firmly observes the sacred vow) कवि: (sage or poet) for ‘Agni’ in the following mantra :

INDRA :-

The word इन्द्र primarily stands for God as it has been derived from the root “इदी परमैश्वर्य”.

It also stands for “soul° as it possesses great power being the master of the sages.

From the social point of view, the word ‘E’ stands for the king or president, or the commander in-chief-of the Anny (सेना इन्द्राणी-इन्द्र:-सेनापति: ).

There is no room for doubt that the word Ef: has been used for God in several mantras in the Vedas in which He has been described as the Creator of the Universe and Bestower of happiness.

ln the following mantra, for instance, which occurs in Samaveda, Rigveda and Atharvaveda, God, described as “Indra” has been requested to ﬁll us with knowledge in the same way as a father does to his son :

In the following mantra from Rigveda, God addressing Indra (soul) tells about the power inherent in it :

(March forward and use your power, None can stop Thy thunderbolt. Everyone is subdued by Thy strength.)

lndra (soul) is made to describe its own power in the following mantra from Rigveda:

(I can face one enemy (lust) and anger), I can also face three enemies (lust, anger and greed) etc.; I will crush all my enemies like husk in the granery.)

The use of word इन्द्र for king is undeniable in the following mantras from the Rigvedic Sukta in which इन्द्र has been described as स्वस्तिदा(engaged in welfare of others), वृषा(showerer of happiness on others) अभयं कर: (inspirer of fearless in others) :

Likewise रूद्र according to Swami Dayanand, stands for the just God who makes the wicked persons weep (रोदयति दुष्टान दंड प्रदानेनेति न्यायकारी परमेश्वर: ), a great hero who makes the enemies cry (रोदयति शत्रून इति रुद्रो महावीर:) the judge who inflicts heavy penalty on the wicked (रोदयति दुष्टान इति रुद्रो न्यायधीश:), the preceptor who imparts knowledge to others (रुत ज्ञानं राति-ददातिती रूद्र: उपदेशक: ), the germ which generates diseases (राति-ददातिती रुद्रो रोगुत्पादक: कृमि:) a doctor who removes the sufferings of others (रुत दुखं द्रावयतिती रुद्रो वैद्य: ).

Referring to Swami Dayanad”s view that all the gods mentioned in the Rigveda are simply variant names for one God, Dr. Griesward in his book “The Religion ofthe Rigveda” says : “This process of reduction from multiplicity to unity would have been easier if there had been no dual gods or group gods mentioned in the Rigveda”

But the correct study of What he has described as the dual gods or group gods like अग्नोजिमौ, अश्विनौ, मरुत: will reveal that these words, like other devas, have several meanings and do not stand for any particular god or gods as such.

Dr. Griesward’s remark that monotheistic interpretation of the Rigveda on the part of Swami Dayanand is “wild” and “unscientiﬁc” is also very surprising in view of the massive evidence we have given to support monotheism in the Vedas.

The quotations given earlier in this chapter are enough to support the existence of monotheism in the Vedas. Swami Dayananda, therefore, did nothing which was purely imaginative or unscientiﬁc.

Let us examine some words which have been mistaken by westem scholars as dual gods.

The similar meanings of अग्नीषोमौ are also found in Aitteriya, Satpath Brahamanas etc. For instance:

Following are some of the meanings of “इन्द्राग्नी” :-

Some of the meanings of अश्विनौ are given below-

Swami Dayanand has at several places interpreted अश्विनौ as . This deﬁnition of अध्यापकोउपदेशकौ is substantiated by the second and third mantra of Rigveda”s I-120 in which the adjective विद्वांसौ has been used for अश्विनौwho have been requested to impart knowledge.

As मरुत ﬁgures prominently among the so- called group gods, examination of this word is very necessary. HW: does not denote God.

In ताण्डय महाब्राह्मण, मरुत: has been described as मरुत रश्मय: (l.4.l25) and in Aitareya as ( आपो वा मरुत: )(6.2O)

In Nighantu मरुत: reads as पदनामसु which stands for monsoons.

Swami Dayanand has given the following meanings of the word मरुत: in course of his commentary on the Vedas:-

No scholar can dismiss Swami Dayanand”s interpretations of the word मरुत: to be a pure fabrication of his mind. As it is clear from the above, the word has not been used for God. Some of the synonyms used for this word in the Vedas, are =नर:, मर्या, मानुष: etc. .

In Rigveda for instance, at many places (particularly l.39.3,8.20.lO,l.64.l0,10.86.8,8.552, the word नर: has been used for मरुत:

ln the following mantra, for example, words नर: and मर्य: have been used for मरुतो देवता :-

The word गृहमेघास: (householder) has been used for TRE: in the following mantra from Rigveda (7.59.l0) :-

The synonym for मरुत: in this mantra from Atharvaveda given below (7.773) is मनुषास: (thoughtful men) :-

ln a number of mantras in the Rigveda (see for instance 5.53.3,5.59.6,5.6,4,7.56.l,l.77.l)the word मर्या: has been used for मरुत: which means the ‘mortal men’. Sayanacharya has also, at some places, in his Commentary written मनुषरूपा वा मरुत: (see Rig. 10.83) While commenting on the two mantras from the Rigveda (8.89) Sayanacharya has described ITR-T: as persons who speak less ( मित भाषिण:)and who Worship God( स्तोतार: ).

Much before Sayanacharya, Samveda commentator Madhava, who belongs to the Sixth century, has also while explaining (प्र व इन्द्राय बृहते) say हे ( मरुत:) मदोया ऋत्विज:).

Bharata Swami while explaining बृहदिन्द्रय गायत मरुतो वृत्रहन्तमम writes मरुत:- स्तोतर: महत रुवन्तिती मरुत: The mantras बृहदिन्द्राय गायत also occurs in Yajurveda (20.30) Both Bharat Swami and Mahidhara give the same meaning of the Word मरुत:

MAXMULLER AND MARUTA

While Maxmuller has given the meaning ofमरुत: as (Storm gods) in his translation of hymns relating to them, at places he deviates from his usual meaning and uses the word in the sense of नरा: (men).

For instance, while translating the following mantra from the Rigveda (1.393), he uses “O ye men” for Maruti :

(When Ye overthrow what is ﬁrm, O ye men)

In the following mantra from Rigveda (1 .85.8), also Maxmuller describes Maruta as “men terible to behold”

The word “men” has also been used for Maruta in his translation of the following mantra from Rigveda

(He, oh men, whose libations ye want to enjoy, that mighty one, O shakers, will obtain your favour with brilliant riches etc.)

Thus it is clear from the above that though there is description of many devas in the Vedas and they denote different meanings there is only One God who is Omniscient, Omnipresent and Omnipotent.

The existence of many devas in other words, does not interfere with the concept of One God.

THE VEDAS AND THE MONISTIC PHILOSOPHY

We must, however, clarify that though there is monotheism in the Vedas, there is no enunciation of monistic philosophy in them.

The whole relationship between God and soul has been clearly defined in the following mantra from the Rigveda (where both of them have been described as two birds sitting on the same tree):

In the above mantra, it is stated that जीवात्मा (soul) and परमात्मा (God) are two birds who are friendly to each other. Both of them are enternal and are sitting, as though on the tree of matter. One of them (soul) is to reap the fruits ofpast action and the other just looks on. Elaborating this, says Mundakakopanishad :-

On the same tree sits जीवात्मा (soul) immersed and deluded account of his ignorance and helplessness. But, when he sees the other, the Lord, who is worshipped by all and His glory, he becomes freed from sorrow. This shows the difference between God and soul.

While God is all-pervading, the soul is not, while God is Onmiscient, the Soul is not, and therefore, the soul is a prey to grief and sorrow. While God is Omnnipotent, the soul ‘s power is limited. Their relationship is that of the father and the son, the master and the servant, the King and his subject, the adorable and the adored.

Says the Taitteriya Upanishada :

(God is the embodiment of Bliss. The soul enjoys Bliss only by attaining Him.)

The above quotations from the Upanishadas (which are at many places only the Explanation of the Vedic mantras or expression in different words of what is contained in the Vedas) show that in the mantra “हा सुपर्णा” the reference is to God and soul and not (intellect) and जीवात्मा (soul)

That God and soul are different is also evident from the following mantra which occurs in Rigveda and Yajurveda :

God, who is Creater of all Worlds, is different from them and yet within them. People do not know about it because their mind is clouded by ignorance.

The same idea finds expression in Satpath Brahmana :-

God is one who is present in the soul and yet who is different. It is God which controls the soul)

The same supremacy of God over soul has been established in the mantra given below in which God has been described as अद्भुत(wonderful) प्रियम( very loving) and काम्भम्(worthy of the soul’s adulation) :

In the following mantra, God has been described as भुज्य: सखा(a worthy friend) of soul thus clearly establishing their mutual relationship.

ln the following mantra, it is stated that the only way (soul) to seek salvation is to know God who is (Full of lustre) (Great) and (Beyond darkness) :-

We may also quote another mantra from the Rigveda (8. l 6.6) which totally contradicts the monistic philosophy whose basic tenet is:-

Brahma alone is सत्य (true) and the whole creation is मिथ्या(false) and that the जीवात्मा (soul) is not different from Brahma.

The true relationship between the (soul) and (God) and (matter) indicated in the following mantra falsiﬁes the dictum (God alone is real, the world is illusory)

In this mantra it is stated that :

(a) We should offer our prayers only to God

(b) All objects like sun, moon etc are inferior to God because they are all inanimate and lifeless.

lt would also be wrong to presume that though the attributes of the world are visible, they appear to be so out of ignorance. This would be quite contrary to the teachings of the Vedas. For instance, in the following mantra from the Rigveda (2.15.1) not only God has been described as महतासत्यस्य: (true) but even His करणानि(Creations) are stated as महानि सत्या: (true)

The same idea has been clariﬁed in Rigveda”s 4.17.6 :

lt is stated here that all objects created by विश्वे सोमा: (God) are सत्रा अभवन: (true)

Even in Rigveda’s 10.55.6., it is stated that all the objects are सत्यम इत् (true) न मोघम (not false or useless) :-

In Yajurveda’s 40.8 also, it is clearly stated that God created this universe for the beneﬁt of the mankind with truthfulness or reality :

“This universe is not only true but it is different from Him.”

This idea occurs at several places in the vedas. For instance, it is stated in the following mantra from the Rigveda (1.4.14) that God is only One (11:63: ) and He has created this world (विश्वम) separately from Him (अन्यत) But because He is Omnipresent (मानुषक्), all this Creation is permeated by Him. There is no place where He is not present :-

The existence of God, separate from His creation, has also been mentioned in the following mantra from Rigveda (1.151.1) (which is also repeated in Samveda) :-

(i.e. God created this Universe which is separate from Him.)

|| इति ||

English, Vedic Religion, वेद, हिन्दी

Griha Pravesh Based on Paraskar Griha Sutra and Vedas

April 28, 2014 rdhoot 1 Comment

Author: Subodh Kumar

Griha Pravesh (Entry to NEW HOME ) Based on Paraskar Griha Sutra and Vedas.

पारस्कर गृह्सूत्र 3.4 के अनुसार

Announce entry in to the new HOME by entering through the decorated main door, carrying flower bouquets, gifts of fruits and sweets.
And carry in a bronze/Copper vessel mixed in water, milk, curd, honey, leaves of गूलर-Ficus Racemosa, पलाश टेसु – Butea Monosperma,कुशा Cyanodon Dactylon and Barley seeds. (Modern science has confirmed that all these ingredients are natural organic sanitizers and have fungicidal and bacticidal properties.)

While entering recite:

धर्मस्तूणा राजँ श्रीस्तूपमहोरात्रे द्वारफलके । इन्द्रस्य गृहा

वसुमन्तो वरूथिनस्तानहं प्रपद्ये सह प्रजाया पशुभि: सह ॥पागृ3.4.18.1

धर्म के आधार पर बने इस सुन्दर भवन में लक्ष्मी का निवास हो. ,दरवाज़े

खिड़कियों पर दिन रात सुरक्षा के लिए देवता उपस्थित रहें जिस से सारी धन

सम्पदा की सुरक्षा से मेरे आश्रित पुत्र पौत्र सुरक्षित रहें.

This house achieved by honest means should always ensure a prosperous living for the inmates. Gods may provide full protection and safety on all entrances –doors and windows to ensure wellbeing of all young children and dependants here.

यन्मे किञ्चि दस्त्युपहूत: सर्वगण्सखायसाधुसंवृत: ।

तां त्वा शाले sरिष्ट्वीरा गृहान्न: सन्तु सर्वत इति॥ पागृ 3.4.18.2

हम प्रार्थना करते हैं कि हमारा यह भवन हमारे परिवार जनों को सदा रोग मुक्त

सुरक्षा प्रदान करे.

We also pray that this house may always be free from any infections that may cause ill health or disease to the inmates.

Arrange to sit down and perform jointly with all the family a PUJA and HAWAN (if it can be done).

For Hawan/ Puja consider the following for reciting.

घी की आहुती

ओ३म् वास्तोष्पदे प्रति जानीह्यस्मान्‌ त्स्वावेशो अनमीवो भवा न: ।

यत्वेमहे प्रति तन्नो जुषस्व शं नो भव द्विपदे शं चतुष्पदे स्वाहा ॥ ऋग्वेद

7.54.1.पा गृ 3.4.7.1

मैं इस नये भवन में प्रवेश करता हूं। मेरा यह प्रवेश मंगलमय हो । हमारी रक्षा का भार तुम पर है। इस के लिए तुम आशीर्वाद दो कि मेरी देह, श्रेष्ठ, नीरोगी और स्वस्थ रहे। जिस किसी वस्तु की हमें अभिलाषा हो वह यथाशीघ्र प्राप्त हों । यह निवास हम सब के लिए कल्याणकारी हो.

I occupy this house to bring me good luck. This house may provide to me with healthy ambience to ensure good health. All my needs for this house may get fulfilled at appropriate times. .

2. ओ३म् वास्तोष्पदे प्रतरणोन एधि गयस्फानो गोभिरश्वेभिरन्दो ।

अजरासस्ते सख्ये स्याम पितेव पुत्रान्‌ प्रति नो जुषस्व ।

शं नो भव द्विपदे शं चतुष्पदे स्वाहा ।। ऋग्वेद 7.54.2,पागृ 3.4.7.2

हमारी चल सम्पत्ति की रक्षा करो । दुर्घटनाओं से सुरक्षा प्रदान करो । मित्र भाव से हमारे स्वास्थ्य और सम्पत्ति की वृद्धि करो । हम चिर तरुण बने रहें । इस घर से हम प्रेम की डोर से बंधे रहें ।

This house should provide complete safety to all fixtures, furnishings, fittings and movable property safety against thefts and accidents to ensure for us a relaxed carefree living, to make us feel always young and cheerful and to be attached to this place.

3 . ओ३म् वास्तोष्पदे शग्मया संसदा ते सक्षीमहि रण्वया गातुमत्या ।

पाहि क्षेम उत योगे वरं नो यूयं पात स्वस्तिभि: सदा न: ॥ ऋग्वेद7.54.3,

पागृ3.4.7..3

अति रमणीय और सुखदायक उत्तम वाणी, सहवास , और सभा पड़ोस से सदा

सुख सम्बंध बनाए रखें । हमारे प्राप्त धन और भविष्य में हमारी आय की रक्षा

करो । इस प्रकार हमारे कल्याण के सब साधनों की रक्षा करो ।

This house should ensure for us a very pleasant happy homely family and sweet atmosphere. We should be relaxed and on friendly terms with all our neighbors, that ensures complete safety and protection for our entire wellbeing and living here.

ओ३म् अमीवहा वास्तोष्पते विश्वा रूपाण्याविशन्‌ ।

सखा सुशेव एधि न: स्वाहेति ॥ ऋग्वेद 7.55.1 पागृ3.4.7.4

इस भवन में हमें रोगादि सुक्ष्माणुओ से सुरक्षा प्राप्त हो। सुंदर स्वास्थ्य दायक

वातावरण प्रदान करो ।

This house may always have disease free, healthy ambience of positive energy.

स्थालीपाक से आहुतियां खीर मिठाइ से हवन

(These are addressed to all different Devtas that have a role in our wellbeing.)

ओ३म् अग्निमिन्द्रं बृहस्पतिं विश्वाँश्च देवानुपह्वये ।सरस्वतीञ्च वाजीञ्चवास्तु मे दत्त वाजिन: स्वाहा ॥ पागृ3.4.8.1

This offering of food in to fire is to symbolize my wish that food in this house may promote the wisdom to lead an active life in welfare of the entire community.

ओ३म् सर्प देवजनान्त्सर्वान् हिमवन्तं सुदर्शनम्‌ । वसूँश्च रुद्रानादित्यानीशानं जगदै: सह । एतान्त्सर्वान्‌ प्रपद्येSहं वास्तु मे दत्त वाजिन: स्वाहा ॥ पागृ 3.4.8.2

This offering of food in to fire is to symbolize my wish that food in this house is to welcome the presence of health promoting, and disease (pollutants) removing agents in this house.

ओ३म् पूवह्णणमपराहणं चोभे मध्यन्दिना सह । प्रदोष्मर्धरात्रं चव्युष्टां देवीं महापथाम्‌ । एतांत्सर्वान्‌ प्रपद्येSहं वास्तु मे दत्त वाजिन: स्वाहा ॥ पागृ 3.4.8.3

This offering of food in to fire is to symbolize my wish that food in this house that the availability of Nature’s gift to ensure the living of our physical body along with our mental faculties to remain fully awake even during our sleep in the nocturnal 24 hours cycle.

ओ३म् कर्तारञ्च विकर्तारं विष्वकर्माणमोषधींश्च वनस्पतीन्‌ । प्रपद्येSहं वास्तु मे दत्त वाजिन: स्वाहा ॥ पागृ 3.4.8.4

This offering of food in to fire is to symbolize my wish that our life style in this house should ensure that the entire environment – ecosystem provides us complete welfare.

ओ३म् धातारं विधातारं निधीनांचपति सह । प्रपद्येSहं वास्तु मे दत्त वाजिन: स्वाहा ॥ पागृ 3.4.8.5

This offering of food in to fire is to symbolize my wish that Nature is our guardian angel to shower all its bounties for us to live happily and with peace in this house.

ओ३म् स्योनं शिवमिदं वास्तु दत्तंव्वब्रह्मप्रजापती। सर्वाश्च देवताश्च स्वाहा ॥पागृ 3.4.8.6

This offering of food in to fire is to symbolize my wish that my guardian angels ensure that I progress in life to reach highest levels of fame, prestige and prosperity.

After the hawan/Puja visit the entire house starting from the main entrance anoint all the walls on the four directions East-West- South-North with the sanitizing water mixture brought in the bronze/copper vessel , while reciting the following:

On the East side; श्रीश्च त्वा यशश्च पूर्वे सन्धौ गोपायेतामिति । पागृ 3.4.10

तुम्हारा यश (समाज में सम्मान) और धन सामर्थ्य तुम्हारी पूर्व दिशा की रक्षा करें

Your reputation and financial strength may provide protection from Eastern side.

On the South side; यज्ञश्च त्वा च दक्षिणे सन्धौ गोपायेतामिति । पागृ 3.4.11

तुम्हारे समाजिक कार्य और दान तुम्हारी तुम्हारी दक्षिण दिशा से रक्षा करें

Your social work and charities may provide you protection from South side.

On the West side; अन्नञ्च त्वा ब्राह्मणाश्च पश्चिमे सन्धौ गोपायेतामिति । पागृ 3.4.12

तुम्हारा अन्न और सुमति तुम्हारी पश्चिम दिशा से रक्षा करें

The wisdom in your living and your food may provide protection from West side.

On the North side; ऊर्क्‌च त्वा सूनृता चोत्तरे सन्धौ गोपायेतामिति । पागृ 3.4.13

तुम्हारा तेज और सत्याचरण तुम्हारी उत्तर दिशा से रक्षा करें

Your image in community as supporter of just causes may provide protection from North side.

(Perhaps too much should not be read in mention of specific directions East West South North. Symbolically it is only reminder as to the type of your life style that provides protection from all the four sides)

After these ceremonies and a community meal, and thanking every one, while departing the elderly persons may bless the house holder by reciting following;

इमे गृहा मयोभुव ऊर्जस्वन्त: पयस्वन्त: ।

सर्व भवन्तोsत्राssनन्दिता: सदा भूयासु ॥ अ‍थर्व 7.60.2

तुम्हारा जीवन सुख समृद्धि दूध से पूर्ण हो. (दूधो नहाओ पूतो फलो)

Departing guests wish the householder a living full of prosperity and love.

ओ३म् सस्तु माता सस्तु पिता सस्तु श्वा सस्तु विश्पति: ।

ससन्तु सर्वे ज्ञातय: सस्त्वयमभितो जन: ॥ ऋग्वेद 7.55.5

इस घर के माता पिता, घर की रक्षा करने वाले बुज़ुर्ग , सब सम्बन्धी अड़ोस पड़ोस के जन सुख चैन से रहें।

Departing guests also wish the householder a carefree happy living in the entire neighborhood.

वैदिक दर्शन, हिन्दी

Making of Bharat Desh

April 12, 2014 rdhoot Leave a comment

वेदों के अनुसार भारत देश.

राजा द्वारा भारत देश निर्माण

गौ ,शिक्षा और राजा के आचरण, इन तीन का राष्ट्र निर्माण मे महत्व

RV5.27

ऋषि:- त्रैवृष्ण्याष्ययरुण:,पौरुकुत्सस्त्रसदस्यु:, भारतोश्वमेधश्च राजान: ।

अग्नि:, 6 इन्द्राग्नी। त्रिष्टुप्, 4-6 अनुष्टुप्।

ऋषि: = 1. त्रैवृष्णा:= जिस के उपदेश तीनों मन शरीर व आत्मा के सुखों को शक्तिशाली बनाते हैं

2. त्र्यरुण:= वह तीन जो मन शरीर व आत्मा के सुखों को प्राप्त कराते हैं

3.पौरुकुत्स त्रसदस्य: = जो राजा सज्जनों का पालक व तीन (दुराचारी,भ्रष्ट , समाज द्रोही)

दस्युओं को दूर करने वाला

4. राजान भारतो अश्वमेध: ;

भारतो राजान: – राजा जो स्वयं की यज्ञमय आदर्श जीवनशैलि से प्रजा को भी यज्ञीय

मनोवृत्ति वाला बना कर राष्ट्र का उत्तम भरण करता है .

अश्वमेध: – अश्व- ऊर्जा और मेधा- यथा योग्य मनन युक्त आत्म ज्ञान को धारण करने वाली

परम बुद्धि

इन्द्राग्नी = इन्द्राग्नि: = उत्साह और ऊर्जा से पूर्ण सदैव अपने लक्ष्य को प्राप्त करने मे विजयी व्यक्ति Have fire in their belly to be ultimate Doers

COWS’ role in Vision for Bharat varsh Nation

1. अनस्वन्ता सत्पतिर्मामहे मे गावा चेतिष्ठो असुरो मघोन: ।

त्रैवृष्णो अग्ने दशभि: सहस्रैर्वैश्वानर ष्ययरुणश्चिकेत ।।RV5.27.1

(गावा चेतिष्ठ:) गौओं से प्राप्त उत्तम चेतना द्वारा (सत्पति: ) सज्जनों के पालन के लिए भूत काल की उपलब्धियों के अनुभव के आधार पर वर्तमान और भविष्य के लिए (तीनों काल )(त्रैवृष्ण:)में शरीर, मन, बुद्धि तीनों को शक्तिशाली बनाने वाली (असुरो मघोन:) ऐश्वर्यशाली प्राण ( जीवन शैलि ) को (त्र्यरुण:) शरीर , मन और बुद्धि के लिए ज्ञान ,कर्म और उपासना द्वारा (दशभि: सहस्रैर्वैश्वानर) समस्त प्रजा की प्रवृत्तियों की धर्म अर्थ और काम की उन्नति के लिए (अनस्वन्ता) उत्तम वाहनों से युक्त समाज, (मामहे) उपलब्ध कराओ.

Excellent cows should be ensured to build physically healthy, peaceful and high intellectual society. Current and Future planning should be based on experience of past working results, to obtain excellent Health, Mentality and Intellect in the nation to provide for a prosperous life style. Such a nation is self motivated in following the path of righteous behavior, charitable disposition and God loving conduct in their daily life.

Among other things excellent infrastructure of communication, transport should be provided.

Hundreds of well fed cows

2.यो मे शता च विंशतिं च गोनां हरी च युक्ता सुधुरा ददाति ।

वैश्वानर सुष्टुतो वावृधानोऽग्ने यच्छ त्र्युरुणाय शर्म ।। RV 5.27.2

(वैश्वानर) धर्म अर्थ और काम को प्राप्त कराने वाली ऊर्जा और (वावृधान: अग्नि:) निरन्तर प्रगति देने वाले यज्ञ (त्र्यरुणाय) शरीर, मन और बुद्धि के लिए सेंकड़ों गौओं और बीसियों उत्तम शकटों से (हरी:) जितेंद्रिय पुरुषों से –भौतिक साधनों और श्रेष्ठ समाज से युक्त हो कर (शर्म यच्छ) विश्व का कल्याण प्राप्त करो

Urge for continuous strong positive motivation based activities in individuals creates a prosperous, peace loving, healthy, self disciplined sustainable society with hundreds of cows and dozens of carts loaded with green fodder for cows for a organic food, and good infrastructure base. Nation provided with such infrastructure has a society that is rich in physical resources, and has well behaved people for welfare of the world.

Planning in Nation

3. एवा ते अग्ने सुमतिं चकानो नविष्ठाय नवमं त्रसदस्यु: ।

यो मे गिरस्तुविजातस्य पूर्वीर्युक्तेनाभि ष्ययरुणो गृणाति ।।RV 5.27.3

तेजस्वी विद्वान प्रकृति के विधान और अनुभव से प्राप्त ज्ञान के उपदेशों की कामना करता हुआ सब वासनाओं से मुक्त समाज के निर्माण द्वारा भविष्य के लिए उत्तम नवीन समाज की आवश्यकताओं की पूर्ती और तीनो प्रकार तन , मन और आत्मा से सुखी समाज का निर्माण करता है और सब से ऐसी विचार धारा का सम्मान करने को कहता है.

Bright enlightened intellectual leadership seeks guidance from Nature the environment friendly and traditional empirical wisdom to build a hedonism free culture for the growing needs and aspirations of future generations. By honoring and propagating such wisdom only an ideal and happy society is evolved.

Education in Nation

4. यो म इति प्रवोचत्यश्वमेधाय सूरये ।

दददृचा सनिं यते ददन्मेधामृतायते ।।RV 5.27.4

(राजा का दायित्व है कि ) जो विद्वद्जन (राष्ट्र की उन्नति के लिए) समाज में ऊर्जा (भौतिक और आत्मबल ) के विस्तार और सत्य असत्य के निर्णय करने मे समाज को सक्षम करने के वेद विद्यानुसार उपदेश करते हैं,उन को सम्माननीय पद दे और उन का सत्कार करे.

For growth of the nation it is responsibility of King recognize, honor and promote intelligent teachers that develop the society by educating it in growth conservation of physical energies and their mental energies, with ability to discern truth from untruth.

Bulls make excellent Nation

5. यस्य मा परुषा: शतमुध्दर्षयन्त्युक्षण: ।

अश्वमेधस्य दाना: सोमा इव त्र्याशिर: ।। RV5.27.5

(यस्य मा शतम्‌ उक्षण: परुषा:) जो मेरे लिए , सेंकड़ो क्रोध से रहित सधे हुए वीर्य सेचन में समर्थ उत्तम वृषभ और कठिन परिश्रम साध्य बैल, (त्रयाशिर:) तीनों – बालक, युवा, वृद्ध तीनों प्रजाजनों के लिए – राष्ट्र में (अश्वमेध-ऊर्जा और मेधा) – तीनों वसु (भौतिक सुख के साधन) रुद्र रोगादि से मुक्त,आदित्य सौर ऊर्जा के द्वारा, तीनों दूध,दही और अन्न (सोमा: इव) श्रेष्ठ मानसिकता तीन प्रकार से शरीर को नीरोग,मन को निर्मल बुद्धि को तीव्र बनाते और (दाना:)इन दानों से (उद्धर्ष्यन्ति ) उत्कृष्ट उल्लास का कारण बनते हैं .

Bulls that have excellent breeding soundness for providing excellent cows and oxen that are strong and mild mannered to provide power to the nation

Provide excellent health nutrition and intellect to all the three ie. infants youth and old persons with three bounties of happiness ie. Healthy environments, cheerfulness and solar energy by the three items of cows milk, curds and organic food to provide the three bounties of healthy disease free life, positive attitudes in life and sharp intellect to spread happiness all round.

6. इन्द्राग्नी शतदाव्न्यश्वमेधे सुवीर्यम् ।

क्षत्रं धारयतं बृहद् दिवि सूर्यमिवाजरम् ।।RV 5.27.6

उत्साह और ऊर्जा से पूर्ण सदैव अपने लक्ष्य को प्राप्त करने मे विजयी, योग्य मनन युक्त आत्मज्ञान को धारण करने वाली परम बुद्धि से युक्त समाज, असङ्ख्य पदार्थों से सूर्य के सदृश उत्तम पराक्रम तथा बलयुक्त नाश से रहित महान राष्ट्र का निर्माण होता है.

Thus is created a Nation that is strong to protect itself from all destructive internal and external enemies, where the society consists of a prosperous, self motivated well behaved intelligent people.

English, Uncategorized, Vedic Religion

VEDAS & Interpolation

March 28, 2014 rdhoot 4 Comments

VEDAS & Interpolation

Author : Pt Dharmadev Vidyamartand

Authors of the Vedic Age have asserted that several parts of Vedas are no more than later additions or interpolations.

Asserting that the tenth Mandala is manifestly an earlier addition, they argue in favor of their contention that: (1) the language of this mandala is different from that of other mandalas. (2) the content of this mandala with such philosophic hymns as श्रद्धा,दान and नासदीय is also different from that of others.

Some western scholars also hold the view that the entire Kandas 15,17,18,19 and 20 have been interpolated in Atharva Veda. Even the whole of Atharva Veda was composed leter and added to the Vedas.

They say in Yajurveda also, only तैतिरीय सहिंता or कृष्ण यजुर्वेद is ancient, the वाजसनेय सहिंता which is also known as शुक्ल यजुर्वेद is comparatively modern.

In their opinion the whole of Samaveda has been stolen from the Rigveda; there is nothing original or new in it. Likewise there are many other parts of the Vedas which the authors of the “Vedic Age” have tried to show as later additions or interpolations.

IS 10th MANDALA AN INTERPOLATION?

Describing the 10th Mandala as “Atharvedic in character” the authors of the Vedic Age claim:

“That the Tenth mandala is later in origin than the ﬁrst nine, is, however, perfectly certain from the evidence of the language”

But illustrations given by these authors to prove their contention are highly illogical and irrational.

It is a common observation that at times one and the same author uses two different styles on two occasions in accordance with the subject he is dealing with. Sometime his language appears to be difﬁcult and at the other very simple. Vedas were revealed for the beneﬁt of the mankind including both the intellectuals and ordinary persons. This is the reason why in some mantras like the विश्वानि देव सवितर्दुरितानि परासुव, the language is so lucid and simple while in others, it is so abstruse and difﬁcult.

The modernity or antiquity of a passage cannot be determined by the presence or absence of particular words. But the authors of the Vedic Age have asserted that some of the words used in the 10^th mandala of Rigveda such as लोक, मोघ, विसर्ग, गुप् do not occur in the Vedas except in the interpolated portions or Balhilya Hymns. They have no evidence to show what is interpolated and what is not. The distinction made by them is imaginary.

THE WORD “लोक “

Besides in the previous Mandals, the word ‘लोक” occurs at several places in the Rigveda; for instance, it is there in 1.93.6, 2.30.6; 3.2.9; 4.17.17; 5.4.11; 6.23.3; 7; 6.47.8; 6.73.2; 7.20.2; 7.33.5; 7.60.9; 7.84.2; 7.99.4; 8.100.12; 9.92.6; ‘लोका:’ Rig. 9.113.9; ‘लोके’ Rig. 329.8; 5.1.6; 9113.72;

Even the authors of the “Vedic Age’ do not consider these portions to be interpolated and, therefore, it is surprising how they included this word among those which, according to them, occur only in the 10^th Mandala or the interpolated portions.

The word मोघम also occurs, (besides the l0th Mandala,) in the following mantras from the Seventh Mandala :-

The word `विसर्ग also occurs in the 103th hymn of the seventh Mandala of Rigveda तप्ता धर्मा अश्नुवते विसर्गम ln the 10th Mandala also, this word occurs though only once.

Proving modernity of l0th Mandala on the basis of the occurrence of the word विजय as done by the authors of the “Vedic Age`, is simply absurd as the word, in its various forms, occurs many a time in Rigveda.

For instance the word विजय has been used in Rigveda 2. 1 9.9 in यस्मान्न ऋते विजयन्ते जनास:

lt occurs in other forms in the following places :-

About the word सोम the authors of the Vedic Age say that while it occurs 50 times in the Ninth Mandala, it is used only once in the 1Oth Mandala.

ls it important for this word to occur many times there even if it be not needed in the context? We fail to understand how the existence of separate subjects in different Mandalas and use of different words accordingly go to prove modernity? The authors of the “Vedic Age” have said that the words सर्व, भगवान, प्राण, हृदय etc. mostly, though not exclusively, occur in the Tenth Mandala. If they also occur in the other Mandalas, how do they, even according to their theory, show the modernity of the Tenth Mandala ?

We consider Vedas to be the Voice of God and therefore, the words used there are inevitable and indispensable:

We have absolutely no business to ask why particular words did not occur in this or that Mandala. It will be only impertinence on our part to raise this question. Even the ordinary writers know that the use of words changes in harmony with the content of a write up.

We can give many illustrations to show how one writer has resorted to different styles in different books in keeping with the spirit, the temper and the mood of their content.

For instance, it is well-known that the language of Panini`s अष्टाध्यायी is different from his जाम्बवती विजय महाकाव्य. There is also a lot of difference between the language of Jaimini”s Mimansa and his “Brahmana”.

The language of Katyana’s श्रौतसूत्र and स्मृति also varies widely.

Among the modem writers also Sri Aurobindo’s ‘Life Divíne ‘ differs very much from his “Basis of Yaga ” in respect of language.

We do not think that it matters very much if words like पृत्सु, गिवर्ण:, विचर्षनि:, वीती do not occur in the Tenth Mandala even when they are frequent in the preceding Mandalas. As we have pointed out earlier, it is not at all important to use the same words everywhere. What great difference does it make after all if instead of ` विचर्षनि the word प्रचेता or विश्ववेदा: has been used in the Tenth Mandala ?

The word ‘ विचर्षनि is also not to be found in the Seventh Mandala. Does it prove the modernity of this Mandala also on this count?

In fact the whole bogey of interpolation in the Vedas was raised by Western scholars like Macdonald. They raised this issue because they could not imagine that ”barbarous” people could express their thoughts so clearly on the spiritual, philosophical and psychological subjects as found in such hymns as हिरण्यगर्भ सूक्त,नासदीय सूक्त,श्रद्धा सूक्त, मन्युसुक्तादी.

The Western scholars, in fact, stressed the distinction of language to prove that the l0th mandala is an appendix of the Rigveda. They have contended that the language and the content of the mantras contained in the mandala are different from those of preceding mandala. We, however, beg to differ with their view.

The seers of many hymns of the Tenth mandala and those of the ﬁrst and several others are the same. Only the scholars who are impartial and objective can decide on how is this in keeping with the belief of those who advocate the theory of appendix?

As pointed out earlier, the Western evolutionists and the Christian scholars, were greatly surprised to note enunciation of the theory of monotheism and other philosophical concepts in such hymns as हिरण्यगर्भ सूक्त.

In their perception the entire hymns containing such concept was “modem.”

But they fail to see that the idea of the oneness of God occurs in many other mandalas. For instance, this idea of monotheism is also expressed in the ﬁrst, second and the fourth manandalas.

Even the concept of monotheism found in the Tenth Mandala has been earlier expressed in the Second mandala. Dr. Macdonald, who is one of the advocates of the theory of interpolation of the l0th mandala in Rigveda, has contradicted himself in regard to this issue.

For instance, while, on the one hand, he has tried to show that the Tenth mandala was added later and, therefore, considered it to be modern comparatively, on the other, he maintains “Nevertheless, the supplements collected in it (Tenth mandala) appear for the most part to be older than the additions which occur in earlier books.”

Thus he demolishes his own argument regarding interpolation (in the Tenth mandala) on the basis of the distinctions in language. We may also mention here that some of the Rishis of the Tenth Mandala as for instance, Aditi…. Janshayane, Vaivastan, Yama Vaivaswat, Yami Vaivaswat Yama Yami etc. are very ancient-almost contemporaries of Manu Vaivasta.

ls it not ridiculous to call a hymn to be of recent origin or modem when its Rishis who revealed them are so ancient?

The word नत्युoccurs three times in the First mandala, two times in the Fourth, two times in the Fifth and Sixth, four times in the Seventh and one time in the Ninth mandala.

विश्वदेवा: is the ‘devata’ (subject matter) of three hymns of the First Mandala, two of the Sixth and Ninth mandalas, and of three hymns of the Tenth Mandala.

The word उषसalso occurs 32 times in the First mandala, nine times in the Second mandala, 16 times in the Third, 27 times in the Fourth, 9 times in the Fifth, 14 times in the Sixth, 29 times in 14, two times in the Eighth mandala, 8 times in the Ninth and 23 times in the Tenth mandala.

lt is, therefore, illogical to prove the modernity of 10^th mandala on the basis of such words.

In अनुवाकानुक्रमणी and चरण व्यूह it is stated :-

(There are 64 chapters and 18 Mandalas in Rigveda)

It is because of its comprising 10 mandalas that Rigveda has been described as दाशतयी by Yaskaracharya in his Nirukta.

We will now discuss the Balkhilya hymns.

ARE BALKHILYA HYMN S INTERPOLATED?

Eleven hymns in the Eighth mandale of Rigveda– from 49 to 59-are called बालखिल्य सूक्त named after their preacher Balkhilya.

Some Western scholars and their followers like the authors of the Vedic Age hold the opinion that these hymns were later added in the Eighth Mandala. Not only that, they have even made some contradictory statements in regard to theses hymns.

After showing its distinction from other mandalas, the authors of the “Vedic Age” write about the Eight mandala:-

“This peculiarity of the Eighth mandala does suggest-by no means proves, that the Eighth mandala was subjoined at a later date to the kernal constituted by the family mandalas. But there is positive reason to believe that there was a time when the Eighth mandala was actually considered to be the last in the Samhita, for why else, should the Balkhilya hymns be thrust into the Eigth mandala and not added after the Tenth.”

This whole chain of arguments seems to be incongruous. First of all, the authors themselves have given only suggestion or indication but no proof that this mandala was added later. Then why to state this uncertain thing as a fact? Moreover to say that the Rigveda ended definitely with the Eighth mandala demolishes the argument that it was added later on – and it also presupposes that the Balkhilya hymns were interpolated, the fact which itself has not been proved by any strong evidence.

One of the arguments advanced in support of the theory of interpolation of Balkhilya Sukta is the existence of the following in the Aiterya Brahmana :-

Explaining it, writes Sayanacharya:-

(i.e. there was a Rishi called Balakhilya whose 8 hymns were compiled in a book called “बालखिल्य”.

It appears that some of the hymns, which Rishi Balkilya popularized, were compiled and were available in the form of a booklet, possibly with explanation just as some such hymns of the Rigveda संगठन सूक्त ( Rig. 10.191) स्वराज्य सूक्त (1.80),शिवसंकल्पमंड ( Yaju. 34.10 ) were separately available. This does not show any evidence of any interpolation but only popularity of these particular hymns.

lt may be stressed here that the portion, from which the above sentence has been quoted from Taittireya Brahmana, is itself considered interpolated as stated in the chapter on “AncientSanskrít

literature ” in the Encyclopaedia Britannica. Therefore, a doubtful and interpolated statement cannot be given as evidence of interpolation of the Balkhilya Hymns.

These hymns which are not different from others in respect of their language or content were also included by Max Muller in his European edition of the Rigveda.

Referring to the antiquity of these hymns, Wintenitz writes in his book “A History of Indian Literature :-

“The word khilya means ‘supplement’ and this name in itself indicated that there are texts which were collected and added to the Samhita only after the latter had already been concluded; this does not exclude the possibility that some of these khilyas are of no less antiquity than the hymns of the Rigveda Samhita, but for some reason unknown to us, were not included in the collection.”

While we do not agree even with the sentiments expressed by Wintenitz (because we do not see any difference in these hymns from 49^th and others in Rigveda), his remark on their antiquity, however, deserves the attention of the readers.

Winternitz has also acknowledged that these hymns, available in the form of a hand written manuscript, are found at the end of the book.

lt was very improper on the part of Grifﬁth to take out these hymns from the middle of the Eighth mandala and to publish them at its end. He had no right to do so. lt will not be proper to call them

interpolations only because they are preceded with अथ and ended with इति. It seems that “अथ “, “इति” were added to them when they were compiled separately for the beneﬁt of the the common man.

The Aryas had made arrangements since the beginning to preserve the Vedas in their purest form leaving no scope for interpolations. One of such arrangements was devising eight forms of their recitation known as :-

जटा पाठ (Jata path), माला पाठ (Mala path), शिक्षा पाठ (Shiksha path), लेखा पाठ (Lekha path), ध्वजा पाठ (Dhwaja path),दंड पाठ (Dand path), रथ पाठ (Rath path), धन पाठ(Dhan path) I

In view of the prevalance of these different modes of recitation, it was difficult to make any addition without their immediate detection.

Another devise to preserve the accuracy of the text of the Vedic mantras was to prepare many indices of the number of metres, of words and the seers and devatas (subject matter) of different mantras.

KRISHANA YAJURVEDA VS SHUKLA YAJUREDA

The authors of the Vedic Age have advanced the view that कृष्ण यजुर्वेद{ (Black Yajurveda) is more ancient than than शुक्ल यजुर्वेद(White Yajuweda.)

The Black Yajurveda consists of the original mantras and the Brahmanas (which consist of explanatory notes and commentaries of the text of the mantras).

The Vedic Age authors are of the view that the mantras and the Brahmanas (which were separate in the White Yajurveda) were mixed up in the Black Yajurveda at a later date.

These authors say that listing the ﬁrst words of the White Yajurveda in the Black Yajurveda might give the impression that the White Yajurveda represents the original tradition of which the Black Yajurveda (with all its variation) is a later version.

But, they assert, “Truth should rather be just the opposite, it is hardly possible that the mantras and Brahmnas kept separate in the white Yajurveda tradition, should have got mixed up at a later date.”

They hold the view therefore, that the Black Yajurveda is older than the White Yajurveda.

Despite whatever these authors might say, we are clear that Brahmanas (which are explanatory data and commentaries on the text) cannot come before the text.

The very deﬁnition of the Brahmana (given below), presupposes the existence of the text before the commentaty.

Vedic commentator Patanjali’s assertion along with Swami Dayananda’s explanation go to prove beyond doubt that the Brahmanas were written and added afterwards:

(The explanatory notes by learned Brahamins and Risis, added to the Vedas for elucidation of the Vedic hymns, are called Brahrnanas. Because of the mixture of the mantras and the explanatory notes, the Taitteriya Samhita is considered of later origin. To consider a Brahmana to be more ancient than the original text, is illogical.

It is a matter of great regret that the authors of the Vedic Age failed to see this small matter and committed the blunder of imagining the White Yajurveda as of later date than the Black Yajurveda.

ATHARVAVEDA : WAS IT WRITTEN AFTERWARDS?

Western scholars like Bloomfield hold the view that Atharvaveda was composed much later than the other three Vedas. ln fact, they do not regard it as a Veda at all.

Perhaps such scholars formed this view on the basis of the use of the word त्रयीविद्या, which they thought denoted the existence of three Vedas.

But the fact is that this word actually denotes three subjects that the Vedas deal with – knowledge, action and devotion and the three styles ‘साम (musical) ऋक्(metrical) and यजु (prose).

Says Mimansa Shastra :

(i.e., where there is metrical composition, it is called ऋक्where there is music, it is साम and the rest is यजु. (prose)

In his introduction to `सर्वानुक्रमणी’, Sadguru Darshan, following Mimansa, has rightly observcd :-

(Though there are four Vedas, they have been divided into three categories on the basis of metre, music and prose.)

Bloomfield and many other Western scholars believe Rigveda to be the original Veda. Other Vedas are supposed by them to have been composed with mantras from the Rigveda with a few more additions. But this belief is also wrong. Many mantras from this Veda (which is considered to be the most ancient) give evidence of the existence of the four Vedas.

In the following mantra from Rigveda itself, it is clear that there are four and not three Vedas :-

ln this mantra a devotee offers prayers for his protection through एकया (Rigveda) द्वितियया (Yajurveda), तिस्रूभि: (Samveda) चतुस्रुभि: (Atharveda).

This mantra is repeated in Yajurveda (20,43) and also in Samaveda (mantra 36 and 1554). The word अथर्वा means a person with equilibrium of mind who is well-versed in the knowledge of the Atharvaveda .

The word अथर्वा or अंगिरा occurs in many mantras in the Rigveda.

For instance :

Thus there is no doubt that Atharvaveda is as ancient and authentic as Rigveda.

The same is also true of the Yajurveda and the Samveda because they have also been mentioned in the above mantras.

Besides Vedas, there is also clear reference to the Atharvaveda in other Scriptures.

For instance, the importance of the repetition of the mantras from the Atharvaveda has been stressed in Kanva Samhita :

Many such quotations can be given from scriptures to prove the authenticity and antiquity of the Atharvaveda. However those given above are, for the time being, sufﬁcient to show how absurd are the views of Bloomﬁeld and others on this subject.

INTERPOLATIONS IN ATI-IARVA VEDA

On the one hand Bloomﬁeld and his followers like the authors of the ‘Vedic Age”, regard Atharva Veda to be modem and on the other, they try to show that l5th , 17^th , l9th and 2Oth Kandas were later additions. They have advanced very strange arguments in support of their contention, Their main argument is that some of these Kandas are absent in the Paíppalada recension. But their argument becomes weak in view of the fact that some of these kandas (which they say were interpolated) are present in this recension. Only a few mantras have been omitted.

Absence of some mantras in these recensions does not go to prove that they were added later or are unauthentic.

But without taking this into account, the authors of the “Vedic Age” blindly follow Bloomﬁeld when they write :-

“Of the 20 Kandas of the Atharva Veda, the last one is manifestly a later addition manufactured almost wholly out of the borrowings from the Rigveda to serve as a manual for the priest called Brahmanacchamsin who had a definite though minor role to play at the Soma sacriﬁce. Moreover, the Kuntapa Suktas of this kanda are without any Pada Patha and nothing parallel to them can be found in the Paíppalada recension – showing that they had been given a place in this late kanda of the Samhita at a very late date.

“In fact, the 19’“ Kanda ends with signiﬁcant prayer which strongly suggests that the Samhita, at one time, was considered to end with it.”

But how can the fact that many mantras in the 20^th Kanda of the Atharva Veda had been taken from the Rigveda, prove the modernity of the former? On the other hand, it should only show antiquity of these mantras because the authors regard Rigveda to be oldest of all the Vedas!

lt is also wrong to presume that the 20” Kanda was added only to emphasise the role of a priest because the kanda contains many other important hymns such as इन्द्र सूक्त and स्वराज्य सूक्त. etc.

Even where there is repetition of some mantras from other Vedas in this Kanda, they serve some definite purpose.

On the repetition of mantras in different Vedas, Swami Dayananda writes in his “Introduction to Rígveda: ”

“By the Rig verses, we deﬁne objects, by the Yaju verses we apply them to use and by the same verses in Sama, we sing them.”

What Swami Dayanand observes becomes clear when we examine the following mantra which occurs in all the four Vedas :

When the mantra occurs in the Rigveda, it deals particularly with the properties of water; In Yajurveda, its application is for achmana (sipping of water). It is to be taken for God in Samaveda, which mainly deals with devotion and contemplation.

In Atharvaveda the utility of water for different technical purposes is stressed. lt also symbolises peace of which women are embodiment.

The last mantra of the 19″‘ kanda (which the authors of the Vedic Age consider to be indicative of the end of the Atharvaveda) is as follows :-

(We are putting the veda in the bag from which we had taken it out for preservation and safety etc.)

There is nothing to indicate the end of this Veda in the above mantra. This can as well denote the end of a particular chapter or a Kanda, in this case, of the conclusion of the 19” Kanda.

But most ridiculous is their remark which again seems to have been influenced by Bloomﬁeld.

“But there are reasons to believe that the 19^th kanda itself is a late compilation, for its hymns, though found in the Paippalada recension, are scattered throughout that text.”

This cuts at the root of their presumption that the Atharvaveda ends at the 19^th kanda. If it is a late compilation, how could it be taken to mark the end of Atharva Veda?

Then it also falsiﬁes their assumption that this hymn is not present in the Paippalada recension because they have themselves admitted that “these hymns, though found in the Paippalada recension, are scattered throught that text.”

As we have pointed out that in such recension, it is quite natural to ﬁnd change in the order of the mantras. The new order is guided by the special purpose of such compilations.

SAMA VEDA : ITS SEPARATE EXISTENCE

The authors of the Vedic Age hold the wrong notion that most of the mantras contained in Samaveda had been taken from Rigveda and that it has no separate existence. If it were so, there would have been no specific reference of Samaveds and its psalms at many places in Rigveda itself as for instances, in the following mantras-

(In these mantras, there is a clear mention of one who sings the songs of the Sama Veda.)

The following mantra, mentions the hymns of the Sama Veda side by side with Rigveda :-

ln the mantra given below the word सामगा has been used for one who sings the hymns of the Sama Veda and separately for the knower

of the Atharva Veda thus clearly pointing out to the separate existence of the two :

There is an injunction for singing the hymns of Sama Veda to glorify God in the following mantras :

इति

English, Vedic Religion, वेद

NO VIOLENCE IN YAJNAS

March 22, 2014 rdhoot 47 Comments

NO VIOLENCE IN YAJNAS

Writer : Pt Dharmadev Vidyamartand

Importance of Yajnas has been stressed in several places in the Vedas. Yajna is even considered a way to Worship and realise God :-

(When truthful and enlightened persons worship God through Yajnas, they attain salvation which is freedom from sorrow.)

The Word “यज्ञ” has its origin in the root (“Yaj”) ”यज” which means :

(1) Worship of God by enlightened persons (Devapuja)

(2) Unity (Sangatikarana)

(3) Charity (Dana)

Thus, “Yajna” epitomises all our duties towards God, to our superiors, equals and inferiors. This is the reason why Yajna is considered the noblest of all human acts. How a man, who does not perform Yajna, goes on degrading himself, is mentioned in Rigveda (l0.94.6)-and Atharvaveda (20.94.6) :

(Those who do not ride the boat of Yajna, become abominable and impure and their character keeps on deteriorating.)

It is matter of great shame that such yajnas, which are the means of worshipping God and attaining salvation, have been misinterpreted and misconceived by our own, medieval masters, no less by western scholars and, their modern followers who assert in their commentaries of the vedas that there are references here to sacriﬁce of sheep, goats, horses, buffaloes in the course of such yajnas.

For instance, one of the contributors to the Vedic Age, writes while discussing Apri Hymns,

“Scarcely less debased than the Dana Stutís are the Apri hymns, manufactured artiﬁcially for employment in animal sacrifices …. . . There is no reason to doubt that these hymns were actually used at the animal sacriﬁces as the tradition maintains”

Another contributor referring to the Kausika Sutra (XIII,I-6) says that it prescribes a magic rite in which portions of the bodies of some animals and human beings, such as of a lion and a tiger, a ksatriya and a Brahmacharin are to be eaten to acquire certain power ; not totemism but same sacramental communion, is hinted at.”

While detailed discussion on this issue will form a huge treatise, it will sufﬁce here to suggest a few points to remove such misconceived notions about the yajnas.

To begin with, we must stress that the word ‘अध्वर’ (Adhvara) occurs as a synonym or as an adjective for “यज्ञ ” (Yajna) at several places in all the four Vedas.

The author of the Nirukta, a book on philology, Yaskaracharya, gives the etymology of the word “Adhvara ” thus :- mantra

(“Adhvara” is the name of Yajna which means free from any violence).

Given below are some of the mantras from all the four Vedas in which the word “Adhvara” has been used in relation to Yajnas :-

RIGVEDA :-

(1)

-Rig. 1.1.4

(Thou, O Lord, art present only in the Yajnas, which are free from violence. Only such Yajnas are acceptable to the truthful learned persons).

(2)

-Rig. 1.1.8

(In this mantra also God’s presence only in violence-free actions is stressed)

(3)

-Rig. 1.14.21

(Using the word “Adhvara” for Yajna, the Wise have been requested to keep the Yajna “violence-free”.)

(4)

-Rig. 1.128.4

(It is stated in this mantra that God and the wise enjoin upon people to perform Yajnas free from violence.,)

(5)

-Rig. 1.19.1

(The blessings of God and the priests have been invoked in this mantra for the success of a Yajna free from violence, always.)

YAJURVEDA :-

Yajurveda is also full of mantras where not only the adjective “Adhvara” has been used for Yajnas, but also we are taught against violence of all kind including the violence against animals. For instance, this mantra indirectly rules out all violence in our dealings with the outside world:-

(Oh God, the Dispeller of darkness, may everyone look upon me with friendly eyes, may I look upon everyone (not human beings alone) with love and friendship, may we look upon each other with love and friendship.)

Describing Yajna as the noblest of acts in Yajurveda (101), people have been asked to protect the animals (पशुन्पाही) In Yajurveda (6-1 1) also there is a teaching for the married couple-pashun paai; pasun trayetham.

In Yajurveda 14.8 it is said ….. द्विपादव चतुष्पात पाहि l (O man thou protect bipeds and quadrupeds)

‘ Likewise in more than 43 mantras in this Veda, the word Adhvara has been used either as an adjective of yajna or its synonym.

SAMAVEDA:

There are also many references to Yajna as “Adhvara” in Samaveda.

Note for instances the followings :-

(In this mantra scholars have been invited to attend the Yajna which is ‘चारु'(beautiﬁ-because it is adhvara (non-violent).

(Using the word Agní(अग्नि) for God, it is said that He encourages non-violent Yajnas “adhvaranam”.

In this mantra also describing Yajna as “adhvara” people are enjoined to Worship God.

There is clear instruction against violence, particularly animal sacriﬁce, in the following mantra :-

It is prayed in this mantra: May we not indulge in any violent act, nor others tempt us to do so.

ATHARVAVEDA :-

Likewise in Atharvaveda, there are many mantras in which the word “adhvara” has been used for Yajnas. For instance :-

In fact the misconception about the injunction of animal sacrifice in the Vedas takes its root from the misinterpretation of the word medha ( मेधा ); a synonym of यज्ञ which is used as a sufﬁx to many words such as अजमेध(Ajmedha),गोमेध (Gomedha) , पुरूषमेध (Purushmedha), अश्वमेध (Aswamedha) etc,

These words, however, do not stand for sacriﬁces of horses, cows, human beings etc as will be shown in the following pages.

The Sanskrit root of the word मेधMedha is मेध्रुमMedhra which means :

(1) to sharpen the intellectual faculty

(2) to promote unity or love among people

(3) or to practice violence.

There is no reason why it should be taken only in the last sense, particularly in relation to Yajnas, in which there is strong emphasis on non-violence in all the Vedas.

It may be noted here that Purush Medha (पुरूषमेध ), Purush Yajna ( पुरूषमेध ) and nriyajna (नृयज्ञ ) are synonyms.

In Manusmriti, नृयज्ञ nriyajna has been explained as hospitality नृयज्ञोSतिथिपूजनम (Manu 3-70).

Taking the second meaning of the root Medhra. ( मेधृ )the word नृमेध (nrimedha) would mean uniting people for noble deeds and inspiring love and unity among them.

Nriyajna (नृयज्ञ ), Purush medha (पुरूषमेध ), are also Rishis of the following mantra from the Samveda :-

That the meaning of such words as अजमेध, and अश्वमेध are different from what they are understood by western scholars is also clear from their references in Brahmanas and Mahabharata etc.

For instance in Shatpath it is stated that the word Asva अश्व: also stands for the seminal energy :

“राष्ट्रं वा अश्वमेध:| वीर्यं वा अश्व||”

Increasing the energy or power of the citizens of the nation or proper administration of the state)

अज is also the name of a kind of paddy which at one time as a rule was poured into the Yajnas.

For instance, we read in Mahabharata (Santiparva):-

When in ancient literature people are asked to offer Aja ( अज ) in the Yajnas, it does not mean they should sactiﬁce a goat, but pour seeds of lentil of the same name.

The similar sentiment has been expressed by Vishnu Sharma in his Panchatantra (Kakoliyam):

Those who perform animal sacriﬁce for Yajnas are fools. They do not understand the proper meaning of the Vedas. ln “अजैर्यज्ञेशुयष्टव्यम” in the Vedas, the word Aja should be understood to mean “ Vrthi”, a particular variety of old paddy and not sacriﬁce of goats.

In “स्याद्वादमंजरी ”, a famous book in Jain literature, the word अज been taken to mean only paddy and never a goat.

(While the ignorant misinterpret the word अज as a goat, the learned understand by it only different varieties of paddy.)

lt has been clearly stated at several places in the Mahabharata that there is no mention in the Vedas of meat eating drinking, or animal sacriﬁces. The Yajnas marred by violence are contrary to the spirit of the Vedas and against the human laws of Manu. The yajnas with animal sacriﬁce were propagated by rogues, atheists, grabbers, usurpurs. Such Yajnas, in fact, are sinful and against religion.

Given below are two slokas from Mahabharata (Shantiparva) which will drive home this point :-

(It is stated in these verses that persons, who have spoken of animal sacriﬁce in Yajnas are stupid, atheists and are devoid of all knowledge about the injunctions of the shastras.)

Manu, the law giver, had stressed the importance of non- violence in all actions. Those who indulge in violence, do so on their own accord. Their actions have no sanction of Manu. Nor do their actions have the approval of the Vedas. All the religions preach non-violence and give it the highest priority in life. Only wicked persons started the tradition of meat eating, drinking and using other intoxicants. They were motivated by egoism, attachment and greed in starting this tradition. The Brahmans see the Omnipresent God in the Yajnas and offer oblations of milk or milk products in the sacriﬁcial ﬁre.

It is clear from the above that animal sacriﬁce in the Yajnas was started only by the wicked. And since it is not in harmony with the spirit of the vedas, any reference to it in Sravsutras, Grthyaasutras, Brahmanas, Smrítis or other religious books should be taken as an interpolation.

That the import of such material in the original ancient literature was not a new phenomenon has been stated by the famous dualist Acharya Madhvacharya in the following words in Mahabharata :

(Some wicked ones import foreign material into original books, some hide a few portions, others alter due to the laziness or do it deliberately. Thus even when these ancient books are not destroyed, they are distorted beyond measure)

The ancient Rishis were totally against animal sacriﬁce in the Yajnas. For instance, it is stated in Mahabharata (Aswamedha parva) that:

(When the Rishis saw the poor animals (brought for sacrifice in the Yajnas,) they were deeply touched, “There is no mention of animal sacriﬁce anywhere. This will only destroy your religion. You should perform Yajnas in accordance with the instruction, given in the Vedas for greater beneﬁt.)”, they told the priest.

No wonder Risis, who have been described in Nirukta as “those who realise the real spirit of Dharma”, considered animal sacriﬁce contrary to the spirit of the Vedas.

At another place in the Shantiparava in Mahabharata, it is said :-

Certainly animal sacriﬁce is not sanctioned by the Vedas. The Yajna is always non-violent and should be performed that way. If one goes to heaven by killing animals or shedding their blood, what is then the way to hell?

ASVAMEDHA YAJ NAS AND NON-VIOLENCE

lt is generally held by Western Scholars and their zealous followers that horses were sacriﬁced in Asvamedha Yajna.

But the description of such a Yajna performed by king Vasu as found in the Mahabharata, does not bear out testemony to this abominable practice.

तस्य यज्ञो महानासीदश्वमेधो महात्मन: |

(lt is stated in these verses that the Yajna was ofﬁciated by great sages and saints including three sons of the Prajapati and Kapila, Katha, Titeri and Kanva etc. This Yajna was very pious and sacred and no animal was sacriﬁced in it a all. The priests of this Yajna, who included authors of the Katha Samhita, Taittiriya Samhita, and Kanva Samhita, performed it in the non-violent way.

There seems to be some reference to animal sacrifice in “Taitteriya Samhita” which were added or interpolated to it only later.

EXHIBITION OF ANIMALS IN THE YAJ NAS

The root Medhra ( मेध्रू ) from which the Sanskrit word Medha (मेध )has been made also means Sangalnana(संगमन) This is borne out by the description of Asvamedh Yajna recorded in Mahabharata

(Aswamedha parva). For instance, in the following description, there is clear indication of an exhibition of different varieties of birds and animals being organised at the time of the Asvamedha :-

The misinterpretation of the words Alambha( आल्मभ ), Sanjapana (संज्ञपन) and Avadana ( अवदान ) was also responsible for creating confusion relating to the issue of animal sacrifiee in the Yajnas.

The following mantra from Yajurveda, is often quoted to suggest the evidence of the animal sacriﬁce :

The word alambha ( आलंभ ) in this mantra has been wrongly interpreted to mean sacriﬁce here of elephants for the Welfare of the Prajapati ( प्रजापति ) ; in fact, alambhana does not mean “to kill” but “to acquire”.

(The word Alambha आलंभ has its root in आंगपूर्वक लाभ which means to acquire, to embrace etc.)

For instance, see the use of this Word in the second sense in the following mantra :

(Here it is prohibited for the Brahmacharins to look or to embrace women (स्त्रीणां च प्रेक्षणालम्भम ).

In the second chapter ofपारस्कर गृह्सुत्र word occurs in this sense where the Acharya touching the heart of a Brahmacharin says :

(The bridegroom should lift his hand above the right shoulder of the bride and touch her heart.)

Here the commentators like Jai Rama and Hari Rama have interpreted the Word आलभते as सप्रूशति (touches)

ln the following injunction again from Paraskara Grihsutra the word alabhate has been used for “touching” :

ln Yajurveda there is a reference to acquire particular birds for specialized study and not for any wayward killing :

THE CORRECT MEANING OF SANGYAPANA( संज्ञापन )

The word संज्ञापन (Sanjyapanam) used at many places in Brahmanas and Shraut Sutras is generally taken to mean “killing instantaneously”. But this is grossly incorrect and only betrays the ignorance leading to its misinterpretation.

lt is clear from the use of this word in the following mantra that it means “to inculcate knowledge” or “to unite” :-

(The mantra means that your bodies should be united, you should take physical exercises unitedly, your minds and your souls should be united. May God, the Repository of Knowledge, always keep you united etc.)

In Satpath also there is a passage where the word has been used in the second sense of making one realise or making it known to others :-

(In this mantra, the power of the tongue, to make the other one know what is in the mind, is stressed.)

MISINTERPRETATION OF THE WORD ASWAMEDHA

It is assened in the Vedic Age that “Animal sacrifices” are indicated in the Apri Suktas and the horse sacriﬁce (Asva Medha) was undoubtedly performed”.

But the fact is that there is not the slightest reference to the animal sacriﬁces in these hymns. This is only the result of their ignorance and illusion.

The word अश्वमेध during the Vedic period was used in the sense of “administration of the state” or “increasing the strength of the state” as clear from ‘राष्ट्रं वे अश्वमेध: (Satpath 13- 1-6) or वीर्यं वा अश्व: But there is no evidence whatsoever of the sacriﬁce of horses in the Yajnas performed during that period.

In the following mantra which used to be recited at the time of the Asvamedha Yajna, there is no reference to animal sacriﬁce at all :

(It is mentioned in these mantras that the horses should be properly trained and full knowledge acquired about their behavior, food and drinking habits etc. People have also been asked in these mantras to look after the horses property.)

In all the mantras of this hymn, there are similar instructions. In the end also, prayers are offered for giving us cows, horses, strong progeny and wealth :-

No doubt some of the Indian scholars like Sayanancharya, Uvvate and Mahidhar and foreign scholars following them like Prof Max Muller, Grifﬁth and Wilson, have misinterpreted some of the Vedic mantras occurring in this hymn to suggest that there is a mention rather an injunction of animal sacriﬁce in the Vedas. While in reality, it is only the ﬁgment of their own mind with no truth in it at all. There is not only complete absence of any instruction for animal sacriﬁce in the Vedas, but there is clear provision for punishment of those who indulge in this practice even negligence, towards these dumb creatures.

Two of the mantras have been thoroughly misunderstood in this regard, the first one being as follows :

Sayanacharya, along with his Indian and foreign follower has given a very absurd meaning of this mantra. According to him the mantra means as follows :-

“Those who see the boiled ﬂesh of horses and praise the smell of their bodies, let the labour of such persons be ours”.

According to Swami Dayanand, however, the mantra means :

“Drive away from us those who beg the ﬂesh or horses or consider them worthy of sacrifice.”

The word Vajinam(वाजिनम) also means a “brave person”. Thus the mantra can also mean that the brave person, who is also well- versed in the art of cooking protects his country and brings wealth to it.

The second mantra, which is oﬁen misunderstood by scholars, is given below :

Saynacharya, and Mahidhar have played havoc while interpreting this mantra in the following way:

“Let not an iota of thy ﬂesh may fall to the ground, O horse, may the gods, desirous of it, receive it.”

Compare it with the rendering of this mantra with the one given by Dayanand in the following words :

“O Ye men, you should get the affected limbs cured by doctors because the medicine given by them is beneﬁcial for health.”

Killing of animals has been prohibited in many mantras in the Vedas. For instance, take the following :

(Don’t kill the horses.)

In Yajurveda’s 25.43 also, the words, ‘मा स्वाधितिस्तन्त्र आतिष्ठिपत् ‘ clearly instruct against killing of animals :

Some orthodox scholars went to the extent of imagining that those animals, which are sacriﬁced in fire, go to heaven. The misconceptions in this regard seemed to have sprung from the following mantra from the Rigveda (1 .162.21) (which also occurs in Yajurveda (25.44) :

Commenting on this Sayanachalya writes :

(Those shall not die O horse, because offered to gods, thou must achieve the divinity and thus share their immortality.)

The correct meaning of this mantra, however, is “Just as a man travels comfortably in a chariot moved by ﬁre, water and air, so the soul, which is fully enlightened through self-knowledge and free from the fear of death or violence, attains the divine bliss)”

Misinterpretation of such Vedic mantras was usually motivated by self-interest greed and ignorance.

Now we will critically examine some of the misconceptions about the sacriﬁce of cows and beef-eating’s.

Clayton, in his book, “The Rigveda and Vedic Religion” writes:

“At one sacriﬁce, probably a very unusual sacriﬁce, performed once in ﬁve years, called the “Pancha Sharadiya Sava, seventeen young cows were offered. Bullocks, buffaloes and deer were also sacrificed, sometime in large numbers. The White Yajurveda mentions 327 domestic animals, including oxen, milch cows, that are to be offered along with the horse at the greater Horse- Sacrifice”

The basis of Clyton’s conclusion seems to be “Rajendra Pal’s book entitled “lndo Aryans ate meat and drank wine”.

Most of the foreign writers have upheld this view and authors of the Vedic Age have almost copied it.

While describing the customs and traditions of the marriage ceremonies during the Vedic Age, they have written:

“The guests are entertained with the ﬂesh of cows killed on the occasion (of marriage).”

This statement made by them is highly erroneous because cows have been described in the Vedas at several places as ‘Aghnya’ (अघ्नया ) and Aditi( अदिति ) which means “not to be killed under any circumstances” Some of the mantras in which the word Aghnya (अघ्नया ) has been used for the cow are as follows :

(hi this mantra cows, addressed as Aghnya अघ्न्या have been enjoined to keep themselves healthy by use of pure water and green grass so that we, who drink their milk, may be endowed with Dharma, knowledge and wealth”

(In this mantra also, where again the word अघ्न्या has been used for cows, it is stated that this animal is responsible for our health and prosperity.)

(In this mantra, the milk of the cow has been compared with the ﬁght of God.)

(Describing the devotee, who is a man of action, it is stated that he gets up before the dawn, entertains noble thoughts and drinks the milk of the cow which should never be killed.)

(In this mantra also the adjective for Dhenunaam (धेनूनाम) is Aghnyanam अघ्न्यानाम [which is very signiﬁcant)

There is also clear instruction in Rigveda. 101.15 against the slaughter of cow which has been described as a mother :-

(Don”t kill the cow which is like the mother, the daughter, and the sister to the learned Brahmacharins.)

The word Aghnya अघ्न्या has also been used for the cow in the Atharvaveda :-

(I remove all your jealousies and prejudices and unite your hearts. May you love each other as a cow loves her new born calf.)

The following mantra from the Atharvaveda also extols the qualities for which the cow is universally loved and revered :

(In this mantra, the milk of the cow, for whom again the adjective Aghnya(अघ्न्या) has been used, is considered of special beneﬁt to the children.)

(In this mantra use of the milk of the cow, has been suggested for the learned persons endowed with great intellects.)

(In this mantra, the Veda has gone to the extent of suggesting the use of cow’s milk for removal of sins :

The penalty of death has been suggested for those who kill the cows :

Also the similar punishment is suggested for even stealing her milk :

In accordance with the spirit of these mantras, Manu, the law giver, has said :

The Vedic Age tries to reconcile the epithet “Aghnya” used for cows with the eating of bullock’s beef saying that (I) the ﬂesh of the ox, rather than that of the cow, was eaten. (ii) the ﬂesh of the cow (if at all) was eaten on special occasions like a sacriﬁce or at a reception of guests. (m) only barren cows ( वशा:) were sacriﬁced.

But this explanation given by them is unacceptable. We must make it clear that the epithet aghnya (अघ्न्या) repeatedly used for cows is also used for the oxen.

For instance Aghnya has been used for the oxen in the following mantras :

(While commenting on this Sayanacharya has written in his Kanvasamhita (chapter-13) :

(In this mantra an ox has been described as “not to be killed” (अघ्न्य:).

The suggestion that the ﬂesh of the cow was eaten on special occasions is also ridiculous.

We have earlier shown that in the entire Vedic literature the word “Adhvara” (non-violent) has been used for the Yajnas. To imagine that meat eating was pennitted on such occasions is beyond our apprehension.

The Brahmanas have clearly stated that meat eating is one of the things which renders the Y ajnas ineffective and, therefore, should be avoided at least during their performance :

(Eat not the meat nor thou indulge in sexual gratiﬁcation during the performance of the Yajna.)

Similar injunction has been given in Tandaya Maha Brahmana :

(A person performing Yajna should neither eat meat nor indulge in sexual intercouse. lf he does, Yajna becomes fruitless and yields no results.)

lt has also been stated in Vedic Age that the cows were killed and their ﬂesh served to please the guests. The following mantra is quoted to prove this practice :

It is also stated in the Vedic Age that the beef was served to guests on the occasion of marriages.

Late K.L. Munshi in his book “Lopamudra” says that guests अतिथिग्व (atithigva) was considered a respectable term which stood for a person who served beef to his guests. It is important to remove the misconception about such words as अतिथिग्व (atithigva) and अतिथिनिर्गा: (atithi-nirga) for गा: in Rigveda

(10.86.3) has been explained by commentators like Sayanacharya as सततं गच्छन्ती: (the root: अत-सातत्य) i.e., ever on the move.

Even the word गा: has been defined as water (साधुनयनादिगुणयुक्ता: अप:). Even if we take the word अतिथि instead of (अतिथिनी ) it means the cows which are brought near to the guests (अतिथिभ्यो नीयन्ते)and are ﬁnally offered to them. There is no reference to their killing which would be in direct violation of the

spirit of the Vedas in which the words Agnya अघ्न्या, and Aditi अदिति have been used. The word अतिथिग्न Atithi-gna does not mean a person who offers beef to the guests as wrongly misunderstood by K.L. Munshi. It stands for a person who goes close to the guests for their service as pointed by Saynacharya and Maharshi Dayanand. Even the famous Sanskrit English Dictionary by Monior Williams gives the meaning of this word अतिथिग्न (atithigna) as: “To whom guests should go.”

Bloomﬁeld has also deﬁned this word as “presenting cows to the guests”

It is pointed by some authors that the word “गोघ्न (Goghna) is used for guests in accordance with the aphorism of Astadhyayi “दाशगोघ्नौ सप्रदाने”. Actually, the word ` गोघ्न (goghna) is nowhere used in the Vedas for guests. When it is used as in the following mantra from Rigveda, it is used in the sense of “keep off ”:

( The killer of the cow is a mean fellow; keep away from him.)

Even in ancient literature, when this word occurs in regard to a guest, it means “A person to whom a cow is offered” and “for whom sweet words are spoken.”

The word गोघ्न’goghna’ is derived from the हन्(Han) which means ‘हिंसा (violence) and गति (movement). The word Stands for ज्ञान (knowledge) `गमन (movement) and (acceptance). Thus goghna गोघ्न is one who is requested to accept the cow. In Atharvaveda, husband is given the instruction :-

(Strengthing your body with the semen, O husband, go to your Wife.)

In this Saynacharya and other Vedic commentators have interpreted the word जा as गच्छ because no sane person can take it to mean to kill.

In Shatpath (1.4.1.2.1) it is stated :-

In this also, the performer of the Yajnas is stated to be desirous of meeting or accepting God and not killing Him.

Therefore Sayanacharya has rightly explained the word “जिघान्सति’ ‘ as ‘प्राप्तुमिच्छति ” _ Many such examples can be multiplied.

Therefore, the word गोघ्न means गौ: हन्यते प्राप्यते यस्मै’. (who is made to accept the cow.)

It is also wrong to say that there is a provision for the killing of the barren cows vasa( वशा: ) in the Vedas.

The word उक्षा and वशा in the following mantra, in particular, stand for oxen and barren cows :-

Actually उक्षा stands for the medicinal herb which is also known as सोम, or “सूर्य`ऋषममetc.

Famous Vedic commentator Sayanacharya has at several places used the word उक्षा to denote सोम. For instance while commenting on Rigveda’s he writes :

Monior Williams has given the similar meaning in his Sanskrit- English Dictionary :-

Uksa, name of Soma (as sprinkling or scattering small drops) name of the Maruts-of the sun and Agni-one of eight medicaments Risbhak.” Some scholars hold the view that the word ETSTT (vasa) in the Vedas stands for the barren cow who was sacriﬁsed in the Yajnas. lt is a very erroneous and misleading statement. Actually this word, used in wider context, means the controlling power of God, the controlling power of the soul which holds under its sway the mind, the intellect and the senses. There are many other meanings of this word, but surely it cannot be interpreted as “barren cows`. We thoroughly studies the hymn where this word occurs but nowhere did we ﬁnd anything to support the above contention, It is, therefore, quite ridiculous to hold the view that in Atharvaveda 10/10, there is

a reference to the sacriﬁce of the barren cows. Take for instance the following mantra from this hymn :

The word सहस्त्रधारांcannot be used in regard to a barren cow or any cow, for that matter.

The word apparently applies to the controlling power of God about whom, it is said in the Atharvaveda (10.190) :

वशा has been used here in the following mantra from the Atharvaveda as the “law of God” or “the controlling power” :

Besides the controlling power of God, the word also stands for earth or a piece of land as in :

In both the hymns (10.10.2 and 10.10.30) of Athaiyaverda, there is reference to giving or taking of “वशा” :

This word also means a good housewife who keeps her children well under control:-

Though the Word has been thus used in different contexts, its principal usage is in medicine. lt is also called “भेदा”.

The beneﬁts of taking this medicament have been described thus in ‘गुणनिघंटु” :

(It means that Meda is useful for cold, bite, heat, pain, cough etc.)

In Sanskrit-English Dictionary by Monior Williams also the words like एकड, वशा, अष्टपदिका, भेद been used for herbs or drugs :-

वशा-Premna Spinosa and Lorgibolia

अष्टपादिका-The plant Vallaiis Dichotoman Wall.

भेद:-A species of Medicinal plant.

Thus we have seen that it is incongrous and ridiculous to see in Atharvaveda hymns any reference to the barren cows and their sacriﬁce in the fire. About the word Go-megha गोमेघ it may be said that the word गौ has many meanings. When it is used in the context of speech गो मेघ will mean application of mind with speech, i.e. uttering words with great discretion or using words with accuracy in accordance with the rules of the grammar etc.)

In one of the passages Vedic Age wrongly assumes that there is an instruction to the couple to eat rice mixed with meat or the meat of oxen if they desired the birth of a child well-versed in the scriptures. As shown earlier, the word has been deﬁned in the Sanskrit English Dictionary by Apte and Monior Williams, both as सोम and ऋषभक as the Tishabha. Thus the couple here have been instructed to take medicaments like सोम and ऋषभक and not meat of the oxen etc. as misunderstood.

In सुश्रुत (Chapter two) meat has been totally prohibited for a pregnant woman. It is even believed that its consumption may lead to abortion :

When meat has been thus prohibited for a pregnant woman, it appears to be highly improbable that there could be any such instruction as supposedly given to the couple.

There is also a reference in the Vedas to consumption of क्षीरौदन,दध्योदन,उदौदन etc for the pregnant woman. Therefore the view expressed by some scholars that an instruction for the couple to take rice mixed with a particular variety of pulse known as UN, seems quite in harmony with the spirit of the Vedas.

There is also a suggestion for taking this particular variety of pulse for women in the following passage from शुश्रुत:

( Here husband has been advised to take ghee and rice with a glass of milk and the wife to take the above mentioned variety of ‘माष (pulse) (before going to bed.)

At another place it is written :-

For healthy child the husband should take ghee with milk and the wife oil and माष (a variety of pulse)

lt is clear from the above that the correct reading in the text is `मांषौदनम Some self-interested persons wrongly misspelt it as and it became popular that way gradually.

However, if one insists on its correct reading as ` मांषौदनम may be mentioned that, according to the derivation of the word given in Nirukat, it means anything which one likes to take with relish and taste :

Thus it will be seen that any milk preparation like “kheer”, “rabaree` etc. will also fall in the category of the word’मांस.

In Charak Samhita, a standard book of Aurvedic medicines, the pith of a mango has been described as HTH and its stone as अस्थि.

The soft eatable portion of date has been named at some places in this ancient book as खर्जूरमांस Therefore it is erroneous to interpret the word मांस as “meat” wherever it occurs because of its wider usage as shown above. ‘

In Shatpat Brahmana the word ‘मांस orपरमान्न for instance, has been used for milk and rice preparation called ‘खीर.

Taitteriya Samhita indicates wider usage of the word मांस to cover curd, honey and com etc. (see 232.8)

In Taitteriya Samhita मांस has been used even for गुग्गुलु(which has been prescribed in the Vedas for killing germs of such fatal diseases as tuberculois.

In the mantra given below, the word `मांस should be taken as “milk” and not meat :-

In this mantra, it is stated the couple should not take cow’s milk and delicious things like खीर until and the unless venerable guest has been served ﬁrst.

A reputed scholar of Sanskrit Sampurand has said in his Commentary on Rigveda’s Purush Sukta that Yajna is not complete without a sacriﬁce but this sacriﬁce is to be not of animals but animal passions like falsehood, greed, sex ego, attachment etc. We full agree with him.

English, Vedic Religion

WHEN WERE THE VEDAS WRITTEN ?

March 4, 2014 rdhoot 2 Comments

WHEN WERE THE VEDAS WRITTEN ?

From Book : Vedas-The Myth and Reality ( A reply to Vedic Age )

Author : Pt Dharmadev Vidyamartand

We have tried to establish in the preceding chapters that Vedas contain Divine knowledge and were revealed by God through four Risis-Agni, Vayu, Aditya and Angira.

This traditional belief is quite logical and there is nothing superstitious when we realise that man would have remained Completely ignorant if such a knowledge had not been revealed to him through the Vedas.

The knowledge of the Vedas was revealed to man at the time of creation and to the question how old are the Vedas, our answer is: “as old as the human creation.”

The scholars from the East and the West have expressed contradictory statements about the time when Vedas were handed down to the humanity.

There is hardly any substance in their arguments in favour of different dates which are all purely conjectural.

We will, in the following pages give a bird’s-eye view of their conjectures.

Prof. Max Muller comes ﬁrst and foremost among the Western scholars who tried to determine the age of the Vedas.

In his book “History ofAncient Sanskrit Literature ” (1859) he writes :-

“Buddhism is nothing else than a reaction against Brahmanism, and it presupposes the existence of the entire Veda i.e., of the literature emodied in the Samhitas, the Brahmnas, the Aranyakas and the Upanishads. The whole of this literature must have, therefore, been Pre-Budhistic i.e., it must have arisen before 500 B.C. The Vedanga and the Sutra literature could be approximately simultaneous with the origin and the expansion of Buddhism in its initial stages. These Sutra works, whose origin might be attributed to the period from 600 to 200 B.C., are, however, so constructed that, they, of necessity, presuppose all Brahmana literature. The Brahmanas, however, of which there are older and new ones,

containing as they do, long lists of preceptors who handed down the more ancient Brahmanas, could not possibly be compressed within less than two hundred years. We must, therefore, regard the period 800 to 600 B.C. as that required for the growth of these prose works. The Brahmanas, however, presuppose, further in their turn, the Vedic Samhitas. At least two hundred years were now necessary in order that all these collections of songs and prayers could be put together. Therefore, the period circa 1000 to 800 B.C. would be regarded as the period in which these samhitas (or collections) which were already regarded as holy sacriﬁcial songs and authoritative prayer-books, must have been made and they must have preceded a time in which the hymns and the songs contained in them should have arisen as popular or religious compositions. This period must lie before 1000 B.C. Two hundred years more e and we arrive at 1200 to 1000 B.C. as the initial period of the Vedic poetry.”

lt should be stressed here that period of 200 years which Prof. Maxmuller has set apart for various epochs for development of the Vedic literature is the minimum in his view. He never wanted this period to be treated as final.

In his “Gifford Lectures”(1 890), he clearly stated : “We could not hope to be able to lay down any terminus a quo. Whether the Vedic hymns were composed in 1000 or 1500 or 2000 or 3000 years B.C.-no power on earth could ever fix.”

It is very unfortunate that despite his above statement, the Western scholars thought that Prof. Max Muller scientiﬁcally ﬁxed the date of the composition of the Vedas as 1200 to 1000 B.C. Some German scholars, however, showed the courage to oppose this view. When Schroeder and Heiman extended the date of the Vedas to 2000 B.C. and 4,500 B.C. respectively, they had to face a lot of criticism for holding their conjecture against MaxMuller’s approved date of 1500 to 1000 B.C. (which in reality he had not.)

Another German scholar Winternitz has also contradicted Prof Max Muller’s view in his book “Geshcikte Indischen Literamre”.

He says, “It is now evident that the presumption of exactly two hundred years for the various literary epochs in the development of the Veda is purely arbitrary. And MaxMuller himself would not properly say such period and that our Rigveda Samhita had indeed been completed at least about 1000 B.C. He had always understood his date for Vedas of 1200 to 1000 B.C. only as the terminus a quo and in his lectures on Physical Religion that appeared in 1890, he had distinctively said, “We could not hope to be able to lay down any terminus a quo. Whether the Vedic hymns were composed in 1000 or 1500 or 2000 or 3000 years B.C., no power on earth could ever ﬁx.”

“This purely hypothetical-and in itself entirely arbitrary- chronological fixing ofthe Vedic epochs by MaxMuller, attained in course of years, the respectability of a scientiﬁcally proved fact and everybody said that no arguments or substantial proofs were thought necessary on the score.

W.D. Whitney in his book “Oriental and Linguistic Studies” (1872) has, however, reproved this habit of thinking that Max Muller had proved the period 1200 to 1000 B.C. as the date of the Rigveda.

“Only with timidity could some scholars like Von Schroeder go back to 1500 or at most to 2000 years B.C.”

Dr. Winternitz, while quoting Weber’s words in this regard that “Any such attempt of defining the Vedic antiquity is absolutely fruitless”, goes on to add:- “In reality nothing more has been known

than that the Vedic period extends from an altogether undeﬁned past to the Fifth century before Christ. Neither the ﬁgures 1200 to 500 nor 1500 to S00 nor 2000 to 500 which are often met with approval in the popular account about the age of the Vedic literature, have any justiﬁcation. The only date justiﬁable is X to 500 B.C.; and as a result of the investigation of the last ten years, it could be said that it was more probable in place of 500 B.C. …… ..” We must however, guard against giving any deﬁnite ﬁgures, Where such a possibility is, by the nature of the case, excluded.”

Morris Bloomﬁeld, the author of “ Vedic Concordance ” after making some conjectures about the age of Vedas, candidly admits: “More frankly, we do not know’

He further explains : “l, for my part, am and-l think I voice many scholars-are now much more inclined to listen to an early date-say 2,000 B.C. for the beginning of Vedic literary production, and to a much earlier date for the beginning of the institution, and of the religious concepts which the Veda has derived from those pre-historic times-which cast their shadows forward into the records that are in our hands. Anyhow, we must not be beguiled by that kind of conservatism which merely shoves Conscience into thinking that there is better proof for any later date such as 1500, 1,200 or 1,000 B.C. rather than their earlier date of 2000 B.C. “Once mere frankly, we do not know.”

Clayton, in his book “The Rígveda and Vedic Religion “- writes “From what has already been said, it will be evident that no dates can be assigned to the origin of the hymns that make up the Vedas. lndeed it is necessary to go further and to say that there is not sufficient evidence to show with any precision when the four Vedas were collected together and the Vedas themselves, as we have them, formed.

We are very much surprised to see the self-contradictory statements of the authors of the “Vedic Age” on this subject.

On the one hand, they admit that the date of the Vedas cannot be ﬁxed and, on the other, they fix up the date as about 1000 B.C. For instance, they write at one place in their book,” The Age of the Rigveda is not known with even an approximate degree of certainty.” (Vedic Age)

“And at another place (Tenth chapter), they say :-

From a purely linguistic point of view, the Rigveda in its present form cannot be dated much earlier than 1000 B.C. The language of the Rigveda is certainly no more different from that of the Avestan Gathas than is old English from old High German and, therefore, they must be assigned to approximately the same age ……. ..Thus from general linguistic considerations, we get (for the Rigvedic language, as known to us,) an approximate date of 1000 B.C. Although the culture represented by it must be considerably older, it can hardly be pushed back considerably before 1500 B.C.” (Vedic Age)

“On linguistic grounds, the language of the Rigveda, the oldest Veda-may be said to be about 1000 B.C; but its contents may be and are certainly in the oldest parts of a much more ancient date and, its latest parts, resembling Atharvanic charms, are as surely of much later origin.” (Vedic Age)

One of the greatest Indian scholars, who wrote about the age of the Vedas, is Bal GangadharTilak.

In his book “Orion”, he has collected astronomical data in the Vedas and adduced evidence of recollection “of the Vernal Equinox falling at a time when the sun was in Orion.”

That must have been about 5000 years prior to the time when the present Indian calendar was ﬁxed with the Venial Equinox falling at the time when the sun was in Aries, and this was in the beginning of the Christian Era. So, according to Tilak, the Vedas must be assigned to about 5,000 B.C.

Later however, Tilak noted that there were recollections traceable in the Vedas to a period when the Vernal Equinox fell at a time when the Sun in the Tisya grah. On this basis he concluded that the Vedas may be pushed back even to about 10,000 B.C. This was not generally accepted by scholars who did not believe that the calculations of these positions of the Sun could be accurate enough in these primitive times to form a basis for fixing dates.

In fact at the end of his book, Tilak himself observed :-

“Though I have ventured to write on the subject, I cannot claim to have finally solved this important problem in its bearings.”

Another Indian scholar, Dina Nath Shastri, has on the basis of the astronomical dates, expressed the view that Vedas are about 300,000 years old.

MAHABHARATA AND THE VEDAS

Not only there is a reference to the four Vedas in the Mahabharat but also to its Angas and Upangas.

In the Sabha Parva for instance, Bhishma Pitamaha says about Shri Krishan that he was well-versed in the Vedas and the Vedangas:-

In Adiparva there is another shloka in which there is again a reference to the Vedas and its upangas:-

(i.e. that person can not be considered areal Scholar who may have the knowledge of the Vedas and Angas and Upanishad; but is ignorant of Mahabharata.)

The following verse gives clear evidence of the existence of the Vedas and its Angus and Upanishads at the time of Mahabharata:-

In the following lines from Mahabharata, it is statcd that God, through Vedas, gives knowledge to the mankind about different forms and actions of such elements as earth, water, air, ﬁre and light and goads man to acts of goodness :-

The authors of the Vedic Age have described the Mahabharata period as Circa 1400 B.C. while they regard the date of composition of Rigveda as 1000 B.C. The fallacy in their conjecture is proved by the reference to the Vedas and their Angas in Mahabharata itself. Well if Vedas were written at that time, they could not have been described as eternal.

The authors of the Vedic Age mention the Mahabharat period between 1400 and 1000 BC but put 1400 B.C. in bracket after the caption I “The Bharat War”‘undcrsection 8 (Historical Traditions) At other places also, they have given the same date for the Mahabharata period though the word “Probably” has been unsparingly used.

For example, they write :-

“Though the Mahabharata, in its present form, is a late production, the kernel of the story takes us back to the period between 1400 and 1000 B.C. when, as noted above, the battle was probably fought”

The following inscription however of Maharaja Pulakesin (of Chalukyas) family, found in a Jain temple, gives a deﬁnite proof that South Indian scholars believed that Mahabharata war took place around 3,000 years B.C. :-

In his book entitled Brihat-Sanhita, Varamihira, a well-known Indian astrologer, writes (13 .3) :-

“At the time of the reign of Maharaja Yudhisther, Saptarishis were in the Magha planet and by adding 2,526 years to Yudhistra`s period, there is beginning of the Shak era “.(13.3)

Al-Beruni, an Arabian historian, writes on the subject :

“According to Brahmagupta and other astronomers 4,131 years have elapsed since the commencement of Kalyuga upto 1,031 A.D. and the Mahabharata war took place about 3,479 years upto 1,03 1 A.D.

This means, according to the thought held by Indian scholars at the time of al-Beruni, the Mahabharata war took place about 2,448 B.C.

Acharya Rama Deva writes in Bharatavarsa ka itihas (1991) that in 1999 (Vikrama Era) all the Indian astrologers had unanimously calculated that Mahabharata war took place 5000 years ago. Magesthenes, who travelled India during the period of Chandragupta, writes :

“From the time of Dionysuis to Sandrokottos the lndians count 153 kings and a period of 6042 years. (When among them a republic had been thrice established.) Then these lndians also tell us that Dionysuis had been here earlier than Heracles by 15 generations.”

“This Heracles is held in special honour by the Saurasent, Indian tribe, who possesses two large cities, Mothora and Cleisobra.” and Mothora. (Mc Crinde’s Ancient India)

REFERENCE TO VEDAS IN THE RAMAYANA

Shri Rama was born in “Treta`s end ” and Mahabharata was written at the end of Dwapar. The Mahabharata war took place at the end of Dwapar. Now if it is proved that there are references to

Vedas and their Angas in Ramayanas their antiquity is antomatically

established.

While writing about Rama Balmiki says in his Ramayana :

(Rama was well-versed in the Vedas and Vedangas and also in the Dhanurveda (the science of archery).

Again in the Ayodhya Kand (1.20), it is written :-

Shri Ram was steeped in the knowledge of the Vedas etc.

In Kiskíndha Kanda (3.28.29) of Balmiki Ramayana, Rama says about Hanuman: One who has not studied Rigveda, Yajurveda and Samveda, cannot speak such fluent and ﬂawless language :-

These references clearly show that Vedas, Upvedas and Vedangas existed much before the Ramayana period.

Bloomfield, in his introduction to the “Hymns of the Atharvaveda,” writes :-

“In the Ramayana, the Vedas in general, are mentioned very frequently; special Vedic names appear to be rare in the Sama Veda(सामगा:) being mentioned at IV. 27.10; The Taitteriya (आचार्य:तैतिरियानाम)

at 11-32-7; the Atharvaveda ( मन्त्राश्चाथवरणा:) at 11.32,26.21.

The authors of “The Vedic age” have described 2,350-1,950 B.C. as the period of Rama. This whole attempt has been made to put the whole Indian history within a compass of 5000 or 6000 years as the Christians generally do.

Describing Vaivatsava Manu as the first King, they say about his age :- “The year 3102 B.C. thus represents the age of Manu, the ﬁrst traditional King in India.”

They have futher said :- “The ﬂood in Mesopotamia is generally held to have occurred about 3100 B.C. The ﬂood in India probably also occurred at the same time, and the date 3102 B.C. supposed to be the beginning of the Kali era, may therefore, commemorate this event.”

This is all pure fabrication of the mind of the authors. There is nothing to support the view that the deluge in Mesopotania coincided with a diluge in India.It is wrong to accept year 3,100 B.C _ which they regard to be the beginning of the Kalyug as the age of Satyug Era (of Vaivasvata Manu.)

Elaborating their point of view, the authors add :-

“Yayati who is fifth in descent from Manu and ﬁgures also in the Rigveda, thus flourished (18*5)=90 years after Manu or in (3100-90 3010 B.C.) ……….. Rama ﬂourished 65 generations after Manu, i.e. 3100-652×18-1930 B.C. These dates will, of course, have to be lowered by 400 years if the Bharata war is placed in 1000 B.C.”

It is apparent from the close look at their Writings that they have no deﬁnite knowledge about the date of the Mahabharata war.

At time they say it occurred in 1,400 B.C. and at other places, they say it was 1000 years ago.

They base their assumption about Yayati as the ﬁfth in descent from Manu on the basis of following mantra of the Rigveda :-

In this mantra Yayati has been taken to mean by the authors of the Vedic Age as a king who Was ﬁfth in descent from Manu. But in reality it is not a proper noun but a common noun as discussed earlier in case of such characters.

The deravative meaning of the word Yayati (ययाति)is industrious. The word “ययाति” is derived from the root यति प्रयत्ने.

The mantra, as explained by Swami Dayanand, is as follows :-

i.e. A leader should emulate the deeds of an industrious person,

About Rigveda period, Dr. Avinash Chandra Das writes in his book “Rigvedic India” :-

“The Rigveda must be held to be as old as the Miocine or the Pliocene Epoch whose age is to be computed by some hundreds of thousands, if not Millions of years. This at ﬁrst sight would seem

to be extremely incredible. But it may be mentioned here in passing that the lndo-Aiyans believe the Rigveda to be as old as the creation of man, in other words, to have emanated ﬁom Brahman, the Creator Himself, and is regarded as Apauruseya i.e, not ascribable to any human agency, though the Risis or seers might have clothed the revealed truths and etemal ven`ties in language of their own from

time to time. This bereft of all exaggerations, would mean that the Rigveda has existed from time immemorial. To this belief of the Indo-Aryans, however, absured it might seem, the results of geological investigations, undoubtedly lend some strong colour.”

The three yugas-Sat, Dwapar and Treta, cover a period of four million three hundred twenty thousand years-(i.e. reckoned as one cycle.) Seventy one such cycles make up a period of time called mavantar( मन्वंतर” ) “Fourteen such manwantaras make up the life of a universe. Uptil now six manvantras have passed. And of the present Age, which is “Kaliyug“ only about 5,068 years have elapsed. That brings the age of this universe to about one hundred eighty six million two hundred thousand years.

According to the “Surya Siddhanta “, a famous work on astronomy and Manusmriti etc. in the seventh mantra it is said near 27 chaturyugis have passed and 28^th is in progress.

The years of each of the yuga are described thus:

SATYUGA = 1726000

TRETAYUGA = 1296000

DWAPAR = 864000

KALIYUGA = 432000

This calculation is corroborated by the “Sankalpa” read out by the priests at the commencement of every Yagna :-

Works on modem science almost corroborate this oriental view about the age of the earth :-

“Some good evidence that the real age of the earth is two or three thousand million years has, been supplied by the study of the traces of Uranium and an isotope of lead (into which it slowly changes) in the layers of rocks.

The weight of scientific evidence is against an inﬁnitely extended past, but the past which we formerly reckoned as six thousand years, cannot be shorter than 1800 million years and may be far longer”

In “The Outline of Modem knowledge” edited by William Rose, it is stated :-

“Our globe must be about two thousand million years old and can in no case be much older”.

H.G. Wells writes in the “Outline of History”:-

“Astronomers and Mathematicians give us 200 million years as the age of the earth (as a body separate from the sun.)”

We would like to conclude this chapter with a quotation from one of the Nobel Prize Winner Scientists in his book “Great Secret“:-

“As for the source of the primary source, it is almost impossible to re-discover them. Here we have only the assertions of the occultist tradition, which seem, here and there, to be confirmed by historical discoveries. This tradition attributes to the vast reservoir of the Wisdom that somewhere took shape simultaneously with the origin of man ….. .., entities, to beings less entangled in matter”

It is regrettable that ignoring all this latest scientific evidence of corroborating the age of the earth and the Vedas, the authors of the Vedic age have tried to compass the whole history of ancient India within a period of above 6000 years in accordance with the general Christian belief.

As we have shown earlier, the Vedas were revealed in the beginning of human Creation and, therefore, their age is the same as that of this earth.

English, Vedic Religion

RISHIS : AUTHORS OR SEERS?

March 3, 2014 rdhoot 1 Comment

RISHIS: AUTHORS OR SEERS?

FROM BOOK : Veda-The Myth and Reality ( A reply to Vedic Age )

Author : Pt Dharmdev Vidyamartand

We have tried in the earlier chapter to establish that Vedas, which are eternal, have been revealed by God Himself. We have also stressed their importance from different points of view. But Western scholars like Prof. Max Muller, Weber and Macdonell hold the view that Risis were the authors of Vedas. The mantras contained in the Vedas had been written by them from time to time, How can the Vedas then be etemal and Divinely revealed? Some of these scholars and authors even quote from Vedas and Sutras to support their contention. They say that Vasishtha, Jaamdagni, Angira, Kava, Bharadwaj, Gautam, Atri (whose names occur in the Vedas) were some of these authors. They also attempt to

reinforce their view by showing names of some countries and their kings extant in the Vedic “ballads”. Their detailed list is compiled by Prof. Macdonell and Dr. Keith. This list is entitled “ Vedic Index of Names and Subjects. ”

But the fact is that Risis are “seers’ and not the “authors” of the Vedas. The following is the definition of Risis given by Yaskacharya in Nirukta :

Also Acharya Upmanyu has stated that, those who have realised the true meaning and import of the mantras, are regarded as Risis. They were called Risis because they came to such realisation during the course of meditation and through penance. The realisation of the true meaning of the mantras, with all their mysteries, constitutes their seerhood.

Something similar to Acharya Upumanyu”s assertion is also found in Taittiríya Aranyaka (2.9.l):-

The following from the Satpath Brahman also denotes the similar meaning: –

In Taittiriya Samhita, Aitareya Brahmana, Kanva Samhita,Satpatha Brahmana and Sarvanukramni etc, seers have been described as the Risis. lt is speciﬁed which mantras, suktas and the mandals were revealed to each :-

Though it is true that such names as Viswamitra, Jamadagni, Bharadwaja, Atri, Angiras, Priyamedha occur in the Vedas but it might be stressed here that they are epithets cannoting certain attributes and not proper nouns standing for particular individuals.

Again it is stated in Aitereya Brahmana that words like Grtsamada, Vísvamitra, Vamdeva, Atri, Bharadwaja, Vasistha, Pragatha, generally denote vital energy :

As these words denote common attributes in accordance with the derivations given in the above passages, they can be used for men and places having such attributes. For example, one who considers everyone as his friend and whom everyone considers his friend, will be called “Visvamitra” ; One who prevents others from committing sins, will be known as Atri.

A man endowed with strength and knowledge will be called “Bharadawaja”. One who is well-versed in the science of respiration (प्राणविद्या)and is a true devotee of God will be named “Vasistha”. A person, who keeps his senses and intellect under control, will also be known by the same name.

One who develops good qualities or lives in God and is shining through His glory, is “ Vamadeva”. The same is true of other words occurring elsewhere in the Vedas.

In Satpath Brahmana, which is an authentic exposition of Yajurveda, it is said, that Vasishta stands for vital energy Bharadwaja for intellect, Vishwamítra means ears, Angirasa for spiritual energy, and Visvarkamian for speech.

In Brhadaranyaka also, the words like “Gautam”, “Bharadwaja” are meant to denote senses :-

Here the two ears, two eyes, two nostrils and one speech have been called respectively Gautama, Bharadwaja, Jamadagní, Vasistha etc.

Words including Vasístha, Viswamitra, Jamadagni are not proper nouns denoting certain attributes as evident from the following:

Words like Kathaka, Kalapaka, Paippalada are- (missionaries of style) ( ).

Those who try to prove history in the Vedas are mistaken. For instance, when “Bhoj” occurs in Rigveda :-

Surely it is not a particular name of the King bom in 11^th or 12^th century A D, but refers to any king or any person who is charitable or who protects others.

In mantras like :

“Kanva” is not the name of a Risi or his progeny, but according to Nighantu, refers to all those who are endowed with sublime wisdom.

In the following mantra from Atharvaveda (18-3-16)

“Viswamitra ” is not the son of Gadhi; Jamadagni‘ is not the father of Parasurama, “Vasistha” is not the priest of he Suryavansis, as erroneously understood by a few scholars.

As pointed out earlier, Viswamitra stands for a man who looks upon everyone as his friend, Jamadagni for one who sees through the reality by his intellect or whose sight is pure; Vasistha is one who is Well-versed in the science of breath or who is the noblest of all by virtue of his inherent qualities; Bharawaja is one who is endowed with knowledge or purity of mind. One who is agile is Gautama, one who is constantly occupied in the devotion of God is Vamdeva. Atri is one who is free from all sufferings-spiritual, or material.

Sayanacharya has asserted that not only in the Vedas but even in Brahmanas, there is no human history. We, however, do not are the living expositions of the Vedas by Risis. So, there is human history even in the Brahmans as evident from the following from Taittiriya

Aranyaka (2.9):

But what can be more regrettable than this that the same Sayanacharya, who asserts that there is no human history even in the Brahmanas, gives historical interpretation of the following mantras from Rigveda (1-126-6) :

“When seduced for an intercourse by his child-wife Romasa, Rishi Bhavahavya said to her jokingly: “And you are most worthy of enjoyment! You embrace me with arms outwardly and join your reproductive organ inwardly. What a wonderful woman you are! You’re so much attached to me! You’re like Nakuli, who never deserted her husband. There is a lot of vital energy in you. You are capable of providing one with sexual delight in more than hundred and one ways”

In fact, there is not a single word in the mantra denoting request by Romasa for an intercourse; nor is there any indication of any ridicule by Risi Bhavahavya.

ln his commentary Swami Dayanand has given the following explanation of the above mantra :-

i.e. (A man should follow that policy which gives manifold pleasures).

Thoughtful readers can compare the two explanations (given by Sayanacharya and Swami Dayananda respectively) objectively and decide for themselves which of them is more in keeping with the spirit of the Vedas as a whole and which is only strained and forced and based on fantasy. The next mantra of the same hymn is as follows (Rig. 1-126-7) :-

Commenting on it says Sayanacharya :

Replying to Risi Bhavayaya, Romasa, daughter of Brihaspati and herself, a Brahmavadini, says :-

“Don’t think that I”m not fully matured and, therefore, not ripe for your enjoyment.

“My hair have fully grown. If you have any doubt, touch my hidden reproductive organ and discover it for yourself if I can give you pleasures of a paradise or not.”

Thus we see self-contradiction in Sayanacharya ‘s commentary : on the one hand he denies existence of any human history in the Vedas, nay even in Brahmanas, and on the other, he does not hesitate in giving obscene meaning of the so-called narration in the vedas relating to Bhavavaya-Romasa, Agastya–

Lopamudra, Pururavas-Urvasi, Indra-Indrani etc.

Those who regard Risis to be authors of the mantras will have to face very strong objections which they will ﬁnd difficult to rebut.

There are many mantras which are supposed to have more than hundred Risis. as for example in the following mantra from the Rigveda :-

Are we going to believe that this mantra in Gayatri Chhanda (containin g only 24 letters), was written jointly by 100 Risis? Can any impartial scholar accept this absurd assumption?

In fact, instead of writing the mantra, the 100 Risis only realized the true spirit of the mantra and revealed its secret to others. There is nothing incongruous or absurd in this interpretation.

There are supposed to be 1,000 Risis of the three mantras of the 34^th hymn of Rigveda’s 8^th Mandal :

It would be highly absurd and ridiculous to believe that 1,000 Risis authored these three mantras.But there is nothing irrational in believing that they were the interpreters of the same. Another objection that can be raised against believing that Risis were the authors of the Vedas is: how is it that there are different Risis of not only the same mantras in different Vedas but of the

same mantras at different places in the same Vedas? For example :-

(1) In Rigvedas (4.4.83) the Risi of the mantra

is Vamadeva, but in Yajurveda (17-91), it is Sadhyah.

The Risi of the following mantra is “Bharadwaja“ when it occurs in Atharveda (1.20.4)

but not so in Rigveda.

The Risi of the following mantra is Yakasma-Nasana Prajapati in Rigveda (l0.l6l.l) and Brahman in Atharvaveda (3.11.1)

In Rigveda, the Risi of the following mantra is Agastya but when it occurs again in the Sama Veda (40.l6), its Rishi is Dadhyan Atharvana.

We can produce hundreds of examples in which Risis of the same mantras differ from mandala to mandala in a particular Veda.

lt is very difficult to explain away the change in the names of the Risi if we attribute to them their authorship. while no such difﬁculty arises if we take these Risis as only their seers and not their authors. How can we, otherwise, save these Risis from the allegation of plagiarism. But such a charge becomes incongiuous with the concept of the Risi as deﬁned in the Scriptures.

WHO ARE RISIS?

In Yajurveda’s 34-49 Rishis have been described as follows-

(Those who study together the religious yore, who read together the Vedas and enjoy happiness, who retum from the Gurukula after observing Brahmacharya and completing their studies, who are together advanced in knowledge, who are masters of seven Divine forces, are veritable Risis, the knowers of the Vedas. Such calm, wise persons, viewing the path of ancient sages, take up the reins of noble deeds, as on a highway, a chariot driver does.

Deﬁning Risis, it is stated in Mundaka :-

(i.e. Risis are those who, realising the Omniscience of God, are ﬁlled with knowledge and lead a contented, satisfied and peaceful life.)

Yaskaracharya in Nirukta deﬁnes Risis as :

साक्षात्कृतधर्माण ऋषयो बभूवु: |

(Risis are those who realise the true religion)

It is unfortunate that the late Kanhaya Lal Munshí attributed to them the authority of mantras (which he did not even understand) and wrote thus about them in the preface to “Lopamudra “ :-“Risis who had ﬂat noses were black in colour and lived on the charity of presents of Das and Dasis. They were usually intoxicated throughout the day and night and often betrayed a ﬁt of anger. They praised those who made the offering of cows. They were sometimes extremely jealous of each other and in anger, tried to invoke the gods for their wrath on their adversaries.

“The young among them tried to attraet the opposite sex by their gesticulations and exhibitionism. They wrote mantras with a motive to captivate the hearts of the young maidens.”

When our readers compare the description of the Risis given in Lopamudra with that which emerges from the Vedas, Upanishads and Nirukta, they will themselves know the reality. lt will be evident then that the Risis, as described in the Vedas and the Upanishads cannot be “greedy, full of anger, and lustful” as depicted in Lopamudra. The picture of the Risis delineated in this book is highly condemnable.

The allegation that “the Risis used to compose mantras to allure the beautiful women is highly insulting, particularly as it has not been substantiated by the text of the Scriptures. How can the allegation be accepted when it is not in harmony with the true concept of the Risis?

We have already given a number of quotations from ancient literature deﬁning the true character of the Rishis. The Risis picked up such names from the Vedas as appealed to them because of their deravative meaning. lt was just like followers of a religious faith choosing from their Scriptures, names for their spiritual heads. Or their new borns as being witnessed at all times. Besides, there are hundreds of examples to show that these names are generally imaginative or are just nick names.

It is generally observed that if a person is devoted to some

cause or a mission he becomes so much indentiﬁed with it that he

is sometimes named after it. For example, Mahatma Munshi Ram ji, who sacriﬁced his life for the Gurukula Kangri (which he had founded), had come to be known as Gurukula himself. “Here comes

the Gurukula”, people used to say when he arrived at any place.

A man had come to be known as .JayantiPrasad for he was working for the golden jubilee celebrations of the Gurukula.

The same is true of how the Risis came to be known by the names occurring in the Vedas.

The names ofthe Risis also had similar origin in many cases. Hundreds of examples can be given to prove the above contention leaving no scope for any misunderstanding.

Rigveda’s 10.90 is called “Purush Sukta “ which begins with:-

This sukta, which gives a description of God and his creation has appropriately “Narayana ” as its Risi.

The word Naryan is synonym for God. The root of this word has been given thus in Manusmriti :–

Rigveda’s 10.97 is devoted to praise of medical science and its Risi accordingly is “Bhishaq ” (i.e. a doctor)

Rigveda”s 10.101 has its theme as विश्वे देवा ऋत्विजो वा I lt is, therefore, quite appropriate, that its Risi is बुध: सौम्य: (an intellectual and sober person).

The risi of Rigveda`s 10.106 is दिव्यो दक्षिणा वा (giver of charity) which is quite in keeping with the spirit of its content which deals with the importance of donations.

Rigvedafs 10.117 is in praise of charity of money and food grains and its Risi is भिक्षु:I

It is quite logical that Rigveda’s 10-121 which has Hiranyagarbha as its Risi, should deal with God, the Giver of happiness.

Likewise अग्नि: (Fire) is both the theme and the Risi of RigVeda’s l0-124.

In Rigveda’s 10-125 also, the subject matter and Rishi are the same. ( वागामभ्रूणी )

The famous hymn of Rigveda`s 10.190 which begins with ऋतं च सत्यं चाभीध्दात तपसोSध्यजायत | gives an account of the creation and its order and teaches us to refrain from committing sins. Its Rishi is ‘अघमर्षण’ because the way to save oneself from sins is meditation on God.

Another well-known hymn of Ri gveda’ s 10.191 contains such mantras as ‘संगच्छध्वं, संवद्ध्वम सं वो मनांसि जानताम etc, calling for unity and friendship among all. The Rishi of this hymn is ‘संवनन: ‘(one who is friendly to all).

In his introduction to Rigveda’s commentary, Swami Dayanand raises the question : Why should we not believe that Rishis, whose names occur at the top of mantras, or hymns in the Vedas, were their authors and replies :

(lt is not correct to believe so. Even Brahma listened to the Vedas and studied them. Brahma possessed the Vedas even before the Rishis were born.

Swami Dayanand’s view, given above, has been endorsed by Svetasvatra upanishad(6-18) :

||इति||

———————————————————————————————————————————————————————-

English, Vedic Religion

Vedas-the Divine Revelation

March 2, 2014 rdhoot 1 Comment

Vedas-the Divine Revelation

From the Book- The Veda-Myth and Reality( A reply to Vedic Age )

Author – Pt Dharmadev Vidyamartand

Are Vedas the manifestation of Divine revelation?

And is it necessary to believe in Divine revelation at all?

According to the evolution theory, man went on gaining knowledge gradually. Why then to believe in the Divine revelation?

One cannot attain knowledge unless there is someone to impart it. If it were not so, there would have been no need to open schools and colleges. People would have attained the knowledge themselves.

But it is evident that we cannot gain knowledge until and unless we are taught by our teachers, parents or by others.

Some experiments have been carried out from time to time in this connection. Worth mentioning among them are those carried out by King Asurvant of Syria, King James (lIVth) of Scotland, King

Semetical of Greece, King Fredrick IInd of Germany and by Emperor Akbar of India. During these experiments newly born children were kept in forests and brought up by nurses who were ,deaf and dumb. Consequently the children could not learn any language and their behaviour came to resemble that of animals.

There has been one instance of a child born in Gandhi Hospital Lucknow, who brought up by a Wolf, walked, talked and ate like animals.

It is quite logical to believe that as a father instructs his child in the beginning, so also does God. He is our ﬁrst Benefactor who gave instructions in the form of the Vedas to all human beings at the time of creation to help them achieve physical, mental and spiritual progress. They were told about the ultimate aim of existence and also what was right and wrong.

Even a materialist like Haickel has acknowledges the possibility of Divine revelation when he says :-

“They may or they may not receive such information, but there is no scientific ground for dogmatism on the subject, nor any reason for asserting the inconceivability of such a thing”

Stressing the need for Divine revelation, Dr. Fleming, famous scientist of Europe, said :

“If we are to obtain more solid assurances, it cannot come to the mind of man groping feebly in the dim light of un-assisted reason, but only by a communication made directly from this Supreme to the ﬁnite mind of man. (Religion and Science by Seven men of Science.)

Just as it is absolutely necessary to frame laws and regulations to run an institution or a govemment or a factory, it is quite rational that God should give us in the form of Vedas, the enteral laws for our benefit. lt will be considered unjust to punish people for theft, drinking or corruption in a country where there are no laws prohibiting such practices. This is why God gave us the set of laws, which in the words of Vedas, are “Rita and Satya” at the dawn of creation.

Eminent philosophers like Plato and Kant have also spoken of

Divine revelation for guidance in religious and moral matters. Plato, in his book “Phaedo” says,

“We will wait for one, be he a God or an inspired man, to instruct us in religious duties and to dispel dankness.

“We must seize upon best human views in navigating the dangerous sea of life, if there is no safer or less perilous way, no stouter vessel of Divine revelation for making this Voyage”

The following dialogue of Plato-translated into English by Jowett-also emphasise the need for the Divine revelation:-

“A man should persevere until he has achieved one of two things : either he should discover, or be taught the Truth about them or, if this is impossible, I would have him take the best and most

irrefragable of human theories, and let this be the raft upon which he sails through life-though not without risk, as I admit, if he cannot ﬁnd some word of God which will more surely and safely carry

him through.”

Socrates of Greece also expressed similar sentiments :

“You may resign yourself to sleep, and give yourself up to despair, unless God in His goodness, shall vouchsafe to send you instruction”

Says the German philosopher Kant : “We may well cancede that if the Gospel had not previously taught the universal moral laws in their full purity, reason would not yet have attained so perfect an insight of them.” These lines accept the limitation of a human mind and the need for Divine revelation for the knowledge of the moral laws.

Those who do not recognise the need for the Divine revelation hold the view that being endowed with intelligence, they can discriminate between the right and the wrong, the good and the bad, the religious or the irreligious. Though we do not underscore the role of Conscience in such matters, we must emphasise that it cannot be taken as a final authority in regard to morality which is, to a great extent, determined by environment, social conditions and education and vary from person to person and place to place.

A child who is bom in a family of Aryans, Vaisyas or Jains, by nature, generally begins to hate meat; but a child who is born in a Kshatriya or Kayastha families (where meat is genarally considered normal part of food) is not prompted by his Conscience to abstain from animal food.

Kant has rightly said in his book “Metaphysics of Morals“ :

“Feelings which naturally differ in degree cannot furnish uniform standards of good and evil, nor has anyone a right to form judgment for others by his own feelings.”

Some people reject the need for Divine Revelation at the time of creation on the ground that such revelations have dawned front time to time on the devotees of God. They should, however,

remember that belief in such revelations has led to a great deal of exploitation of human weakness by those who were believed to be the incarnations of God.

Even if some persons were able to rely on Conscience, intelligence or inspiration for what is right or wrong, it is difﬁcult to acquire the knowledge of the Ultimate end, of the true nature of “Jiva”, (soul), “Brahma” (God), Prakriti” (Matter) and the way to achieve emancipation etc.

Materialists hold the view that a man knows about his duties and obligations by merely observing Nature. If this were the case. no race would have been found in barbarious state. The book of Nature is open to everybody. But to read this book and to understand its mysteries, is not everybody’s business.

lf others (not knowing fully what Nature truly reveals to us) begin to follow such aspects of Nature as “Survival of the fittest”, morality and universal brotherhood will be simply wiped out from the world. Therefore it will be a great blunder to consider Nature as the only source of ethical education.

Before directly answering the question why we should regard Vedas as Divine revelation and not the Bible, the Quaran, Zind Avasta, we would like to present before the readers some of the tribute paid to the Vedas by impartial scholars belonging to different faiths.

Farzoon Dadachanji. a Farsi scholar, in his book Philosophy of Zorozstrianism and Comparative Study of Relígions writes:-

“Veda is Book of Knowledge and Wisdom comprising the Book of Nature, the Book of Religion, the Book of Prayers, the Book of Morals and so on. The word ‘Veda’ means” wit, wisdom. Knowledge; and truly, Veda is condensed Book of Wit, Wisdom and knowledge.”

Akhtab’s son and Turfa’s grandson Lavy, an Arabian poet, who ﬂourished 2, 500 years before Mohammed. wrote n beautiful poem in praise of the Vedas which throws light on the esteem in which

the people of Samatic race, held the Vedas till 1800 B.C.

(The poem is included in Asmai’s Anthology named Malaltus-shara (siral Ukul):

(“Oh, blessed land of Hind (India) Thou art worthy of rever- ence for in Thee has God revealed True knowledge of Himself.)

“What e pure light do these four revealed books afford to our mind’s eyes like the (charming and cool) lustre of the down? These four, God revealed to His prophets (Risis) in Hind.

“And he thus teaches ell races of mankind that inhabit His earth: “Observe (in your lives) the knowledge I have revealed in the vedas for surely God has revealed them.

“Those treasures and the “Sama” and “Yajur” which God has published. O my brothers! Revere these, for they tell us the good news of salvation.

“The two next, of these four, Rig and Atharva teach us lessons of (universal) brotherhood. These two (Vedas) are the beacons that show us the path of universal brotherhood.”)

Aurangzeb”s elder brother, Darashikoh, who was a great scholar, read scriptures of different faiths which were supposed to be Divine revelations. Among the books he studied besides Quran were old

Testament, New Testament and the Book of Psalms. But none of them satisﬁed him as did the Vedas about which he writes :

“After gradual research, I have come to the conclusion that long before all heavenly books, God had revealed to the Hindus, through the Risis of Yore (of whom Brahma was the Chief) His four books of knowledge, the Rigveda, the Yajurveda, the Samveda, the Atharva Veda.” Darashikoh was conﬁdent that these Vedas which enunciated the oneness of God existed in the ancient time and that Upanishads

were based on them. He studied Sanskrit and had acquired so much knowledge that he could understand the true meaning of the Vedic mantras and Upanishads.

He also found reference to the Vedas (being revealed by God) in Quran. In his opinion, some verses in Quran were just the reproduction of the teachings of the Upanishads which have

ultimately been derived from the Vedas.

Though most of the Western Vedic scholars were not impartial as their main motive was to establish the superiority of Chrstianity over Hindu religion, yet there were a few in Europe who sang the glory of the Vedas.

Co-discoveror of the evolution theory in the material world, Dr. Alfred R. Wallace, writes in his famous book “Social Environment and Moral Progress: ” :

“In the earliest records which have come down to us from the past, we find ample indications that accepted standard of morality and the conduct resulting from these were in no degree inferior to

those which prevail today, though in some respects they differed from ours. The wonderful collection of hymns known as the Vedas is a vast system of religious teachings as pure and lofty as those of the ﬁnest portions of the Hebrew Scriptures. lts authors were fully our equals in their conception of universe and the Deity expressed in finest poetic language”

“In it we find many of the essential teachings of the most advanced religious thinkers.”

“We must admit that the mind which conceived and expressed in appropriate language such ideas, as are everywhere present in those Vedic hymns, could not have been inferior to those of the best of our religious teachers and poets, to our Milton, Shakespeare and Tennyson.”

What could be a better criticism of social evolution theory than this? Where is the scope for social evolution if the teachings of Vedas, which, in the famous words of Max Muller, are the “oldest books in the library of mankind and” are as lofty and pure as the finest portions of Bible ?

This belief expressed by one of the discoverers to the evolution theory himself will force others, who deny the existence of revealed knowledge on the basis of this theory, to change their mind.

Rev. Morris Philip in his book “The Teachings of the Vedas “ has in the following words, accepted the revealed nature of the Vedas-

“After the latest researches into the history and chronology of books of Old Testament, we may safely now call the Rigveda as the oldest book, not only of the Aryan humanity, but of the whole worlds.

“It is evident then (I) that the higher up towards the source of the Vedic religion we push our enquiries, the purer, simpler do we come to ﬁnd the conception of God, and that (II) in proportion as we come down the stream of time, the more corrupt and complex we ﬁnd it. We conclude, therefore, that the Vedic Aryans did not acquire their knowledge of the divine attributes and functions empirically, in that case, we should find at the end what we now find in the beginning. Hence we must seek for a theory which will account alike for the acquisition of that knowledge, the God-like conception of Varuna, and for that gradual depravation in which (it eventually) culminated.”

“We have pushed our enquiries as far back in time as the records would permit, and we have found that the religious and speculative thought of the people was far purer, simpler and more rational at the farthest point we reached, than at the nearest and the latest in the Vedic age.

“The conclusion, therefore, is inevitable viz, that the development of religious thought in India has been uniformly downwards, and not upward, deterioration and not evolution. We are justified, therefore, in concluding that higher and purer conceptions of the Vedic Aryans were the results of a primitive

Divine revelation.”

It can’t be said about Rev. Morris that he had fully understood the principles of the Vedic Dharma. There are many errors in his book which will be pointed out later. But his faith in monotheism in Vedas is very signiﬁcant.

A well-known scholar, poet and philosopher -James Cousins writes in “Path to Peace”: “To love, to think, to do-are in the Vedic conception, no transitory futurities touched with melancholy, but simulations of the cosmic dancing shadows cast by the Light of lights. But they are cast by the Light, not by Darkness and in that light, that vision of the Eternal, shining through the temporal, humanity can find an ideal which would replace a periodical sanctimoniousness by a perpetual sense of the sanctity of all life.

On that (Vedic) ideal alone, with its inclusiveness, which weans hatred away from itself, it is possible to rear a new earth in the image and likeness of the eternal Heavens.”

Cousins was so impressed by the Indian Scriptures that he changed his name to “Kulapati Jaya Ram” and passed his remaining life with his wife in the pursuit of the Vedic ideals.

Prof. J. Moscaro of the University of Barcelone, has described the Vedas, the Upanishads and the Gita, as the highest summit of the Wisdom :-

“If a Bible of India were compiled, if Sanskrit could find a group of translators with the same feeling for the sacred texts in the original as the Bible has found in England, eternal treasures of old Wisdom and poetry would enrich the times of today.

Among those compositions-some of them living words before writing was introduced -the Vedas, the Upanishads and the Bhagavad-Gita would rise above the rest like the Himalayas of the

spirit of man.”

What Mr. W.D. Brown, an English scholar, has stated about Vedas in his book “Superiority of the Vedic Religion” is worth writing in golden letters :

“lt (Vedic Religion) recognises but One God. lt is a thoroughly scientific religion where religion and science meet hand in hand. Here theology is based upon science and philosophy.” This is how well-known German philosopher Schopenhauer, expressed in the following words, his sentiments about the

Ishopanishad (which is the 40″‘ chapter of Yajurveda):-

“In the whole world, there is no study so beneﬁcial and elevating as the Upanishad. lt has been the solace of my life. lt will be the solace at my death”

Ragozin in his book “Vedíc India ” also ackowleged the sublime nature of Vedas (though some of his ideas about Yajnas are erroneous). He writes :-

“Vedic hymns greatly confirm us in the impression that the Aryan moral code, as mirrored in the Rigveda, bore on the whole, a singularly pure and elevated character. So nothing can be more

beautiful in feeling and wording than on alms giving or rather on

the duty of giving or helping generally.”

French author Jacolliot, who made a comparative study of

different religions in his book “The Bible in India “, writes :- “Astonishing fact! The Hindu revelation (Veda) is of all revelations the only one whose ideas are in perfect harmony with Modern Science, as it proclaims the slow and gradual formation of the world.”

Jacolliot’s statement that among the revealed books, only the Veda teachings are in harmony with scientific thoughts is very significant. Take for example, what the Bible says about the creation of the world.

God said, let there be light and there was light. (Genesis-3) According to chapter 1^st of Genesis, it took God six days to create the world and according to the next chapter, He took rest on the seventh day :-

“And on the Seventh day, God ended his work which he had made, and he rested on the Seventh day from all his work which he had made.”

Whatever God did afterwards was like an ordinary man with all human weakness which philosophy, testifies as the “Anthropomorphic conception of God.”

It is stated in the third chapter of Genesis :-

“Adam and Eve heard the voice of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the day and they hid themselves from the presence of the Lord God amongst the trees of the garden”

Then, God repented after creating this world, according to the sixth chapter of Genesis :-

“And it repented the Lord that He had made man on the earth and it grieved Him at his heart, And the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth for it repented

me that I have made him.”

The eleventh chapter of Genesis betrays his jealousies:

“Lord came down to see the city and the tower, and the Lord said, “Behold, the people is one and they have all one language and this they have begun to do and now, nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do.

“Go to, let us go down and there confound their language that they may not understand one another’s speech”

“So the Lord scattered them abroad and they left off to build the city.”

And then there are descriptions of God Wrestling with Jacob- taking beef at Abraham” s house….

Scientiﬁc and rational scholars can never be satisﬁed with this anthropomorphic conception of God. C.S. Middleman writes :-

“Such anthropomorphism is childish.”

In reply to the question, “Do you think that science negates the idea of a Personal God? Prof. J .B. Kohn, a well-known scientist, said,” I think it does assume the Personal God to have human attributes”

Replying to the same question, Physicist C.C. Farr, another scientist, said :-

“The idea of a Personal God as taught by Jesus Christ would seem to be very different from the conception of scientific men. I see no realisation of studendous magniﬁcance which must be ascribed to the power behind the universe in Jesus’s teaching and the teaching of the church today.”

One of the main objections of scientists against the Biblical conception of creation is that the existence came out of nothing. But according to the Vedic religion, it took its birth from the matter.

God is only its efﬁcient cause like potter, a blacksmith or a goldsmith. There can be no objection to this conception of creation from the philosophical or scientiﬁc point of view.

Another objection against the Biblical conception of creation is regarding the division of day and night before the sun or moon were born.

On the ﬁrst day, the day and the night were made as evident from the ﬁrst chapter of Genesis :-

“God saw the light, that it was good and God divided the light from the darkness.

“And called the light day and darkness He called the night. And the evening and the morning were the ﬁrst day.”

But the sun and moon were created on the fourth day as stated in the 4^th chapter of the Genesis :-

“And God made two great lights, the greater light to rule the- day and the lesser light to rule the night, he made the stars also.”

“And God set them in the ﬁrmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth.

“And to rule over the day and over the night and to divide the light from the darkness, and God saw that it was good.

“And the evening and the morning were made on the fourth day.”

Moreover there are many things in the Bible which are against intellect, reason and science such as :-

(i) That Christ was born of Virgin Mary.

(ii) That earth is ﬂat and not round.

(m) That Christ turned water into wine.

(iv) That Christ satisfied hunger of 4,000 people from just 4 leaves.

(v) That Christ raised Lazarus from the grave after three days.

Galileo, a scientist from Spain, was brought before Inquistion Court and punished for his statement that the earth is round and that it revolves round the sun.

The following was the verdict of the court :-

“The first proposition that the sun is the center and does not revolve about the earth is foolish, absured, false in theology and heretical because expressly contrary to the Holy Scriptures… And the second proposition that the earth is not the center but revolves about the sun is absurd, false in philosophy and from a theological point of view, at least, opposed to the true faith.”

Many atrocities had been committed on Galileo for stating the scientific truth that the earth is round. He was sentenced to 4 year rigorous imprisonment. He died in jail.

Bruno, another scientist, had been meted out the worst treatment for stating that the earth is round and proving that there are many worlds. On Feb. l6 1600, he was burnt to death. While dying he said smilingly :-

“It is with greater fear that you pass sentence upon me rather than I receive it.” Reader may refer to the well-known book “The History of the Conﬂict Between Religion and Science” by William Draper for

the injustice done to scientists and philosphers like Hypatia, Nester, Arius etc for expressing minor differences of opinion on the Christian principles. Dr. Barnes, Bishop of Birmingham, in his

broadcast (reproduced on “The Religion and Science”) maintained that where there is a conﬂict between religion and science, the latter is to prevail :

“Now before I speak of such possibility of conflict, I wish to make it quite clear that many beliefs associated With religious faith in the past must be abandoned. They have had to meet the direct

challenge of Science and I believe, it is true to say, that in every such direct battle since the Renaissance, science has been the victor.

Let me give definite instances :-

(i) First, the earth is not the fixed center of the universe; it is merely the moving satellite of a sun which resembles innumerable other suns.

(ii) Secondly, man was not especially created.

(iii) Thirdly, no priest, by ritual or formula, can attribute spiritual properties to inanimate matter.

(iv) Fourthly, if by miracles, we mean large-scale breaches in the uniformity of nature, such miracles do not occur in human experience. Here are four typical results of scientific investigations which at length all must accept”

Dr. Mazley in the course of his Bampton lectures had said, “If miracles are denied, all Christianity, so far as it has any title to that name, so far as it has any special relation to Christ, is overthrown.”

There is nothing against the laws of Nature of Science in the Vedas. God has been described in the Vedas at several places as ‘Satya Dharma ‘, one whose laws are etemal. These laws are called “ऋत” (Rit) which means true and eternal.

Not only that, Vedic religion and science are in absolute harmony with each other, Vedas are also the origin of all sciences and the religions. “Veda” means knowledge, both material and spiritual, for the benefit of the mankind. The fundamentals of aeronautics, astrology, art, medicine and electricity are present in the Vedas.

DIVINE REVELATION AND ITS MEDIUM

Even while some scholars consider the knowledge contained in the Vedas to be Divinely revealed, they hold the view that the language in which it is expressed is that of Risis. But if we go deep into this matter, we will ﬁnd it fallacious.

The basic issue is : What was the form in which this Divine knowledge was revealed to the Risis?

What is the proof that the Risis presented that knowledge in its pure form without allowing it to be tampered with their own imagination?

Is it believable at all that the Vedic Language which is so perfect and is the mother of all languages, should be the result of any human effort?

Moreover if we concur with the philologists that thought and language are interdependent, we cannot but reach the conclusion that even the language of the Vedas was Divine.

Herder, a philosogist, for instance, says,

“Without language, it is impossible to concieve philosophical nay, even any human consciousness.”

In the words of Herdcr: “We think in names.”

Says, Sir William Hamilton, “Words are the fortress of thoughts, unless thought be accompanied at each point of its evolution by a corresponding evolution of language, its further development is arrested.”

German scholar Von Humolt has rightly observed:

“If we separate intellect and language, such a seperation does not exist in reality.”

Says another scholar Shleel Maker : “Thinking and speaking are so entirely one that one can only distinguish them as internal and extemal, every thought is already a word.”

In his famous book “The Science 0fLanguage,” Max Muller has expressed the view that this relationship is the basis of all exact philosophy :- “We think in words; so words must become the character of all exact philosophy in future” “We never meet with articulate sounds except as wedded to determinate ideas nor do we ever, I believe, meet with determinate ideas; except as embodied in articulate sounds. I, therefore, declare my conviction as explicitly as possible that thought in the sense of reasoning is not possible.”

This theory is fully supported by our ancient literature. For instance, the following aphorism, in the “Mimansa” bears testimony to this thought-language relationship :

Poet Kalidas also writes in Raghuvansh :-

Maharshi Vyas, in his commentary of the Yogsutras (I. 27),

also fully supports this view in the following words :-

On comparison of languages it will appear that the Vedic language is not only the mother of Indian but also of all foreign languages.

Baron Cuvier, for instance, writes :-

“It (Sanskrit) is the most regular language known and is especially remarkable, as containing the roots of the various languages of Europe like Greek, Latin, German, Slavonic.” Yaska, the author of the Nirukta, has also given multi meanings of several mantras.

This magic, with which the mantras in the Vedas, have been endowed with the spiritual, cosmic and social meaning puzzles even the minds of the greatest scholars and commentators of the Vedas, he says. As per Visvamitra where the names of these Rishis do not fall into a category as in the Atharvaveda, they should be taken as characters or spokesmen in a great epic as in a Panchtantra story, specially coined to convey certain complicated ideas in a simple form. In the Panchtantra, great truths have been revealed through such characters as a lion, a Jackal, monkey etc. Everybody knows that these creatures cannot otherwise speak

आर्य वीर और वीरांगनाएँ, पुस्तकालय, समाज सुधार, हिन्दी