Tag Archives: Arya Samaj

Vedic Religion

Vedas For Beginners : Why be devoted to God?

Leave a comment

K:  Sister! Please reply to yesterday’s question.

 

V:  Why to remain devoted to God? And why should we praise and pray Him was your yesterday’s question.

Well.  All things in the world aspire to get drawn towards its Primary source or centre of Power. This is applicable equally to both Conscious [chetan] and non-conscious or inert [Jada] bodies. Fire moves up and up for the reason that the Sun is the primary source of heat or Fire. Now consider another example. Throw a mud ball towards the Sky and however high it is thrown up ultimately it lands on the earth because Earth is the prime source of mud. Water gets evaporated from sea, because of Sun and the water so evaporated becomes a cloud. It starts raining and the water enters the rivers which ultimately join the sea, because sea is the prime source of water. So is the case of other materials also. Every material has its prime source.

Ocean is the Prime centre of water

Sun is the treasure house/ source of Fire

Sky is the Prime centre of Wind

Earth is the source of soil

 

Similarly Knowledge also has its prime source in the world. That is god. All the knowledge that man has acquired has been got from God. If a man could acquire the knowledge by himself without others assistance there was no necessity for schools, colleges, universities etc. Teachers were also found then not necessary. But this is not the case. Parents teach their children to talk and make them aware of so many things that surround them. They teach their children, how to eat, drink, dress etc. Behavior, etiquettes, inter-personal relationships etc are also taught. When these children enter schools they learn many other things. Here it should be also noted that what the teachers teach is also not theirs but what they would have learnt while at home, Schools and colleges before becoming teachers. Here a question arises. When the knowledge the men acquire is thru others who taught the human beings or the primary man at the time of Creation when there were no people before them? The answer is they got the knowledge from God only. Then how the Knowledge was given? How he taught them since He had no body? Here it may be clarified, that there exists a difference between revealing the knowledge and imparting them.  Teaching is done through sound and knowledge is revealed in heart. Since God is all pervading He is present in the human beings created at the time of Creation. Accordingly, God reveals the Knowledge in the souls of chosen Rishis Viz, Agni, Vayu, Aditya and Angira. These Rishis in turn teach the knowledge for others through the medium of Sound. Then starts the mechanism of teaching, i.e. reading and hear them reading, reciting etc.

If God had not given the knowledge, the tradition of transmission of knowledge would not have come off. It is therefore clear that whatever knowledge that man has acquired is thru the process of transmission only and whatever enlightenment he has obtained has become possible thru god given intelligence and by observing the nature of world created by god. Man can enhance the boundaries of knowledge but so long he is not administered knowledge he cannot obtain himself. In the beginning of Creation God has revealed the knowledge in the hearts and minds of Rishis in seed form. Subsequent growth of knowledge in expanded form [Tree form] is rendered possible thru the efforts of Rishis   and intelligent men. This is the rule from time immemorial and the same will continue in future also. When all things in the world are aspiring to get drawn to its prime source and still at it, why the soul with finite knowledge would not wish to move towards God who is the repository and source of infinite knowledge? This is because his evolution is not at all possible sans God. Conscious bodies evolve with conscious bodies and unconscious [inert] bodies with inert bodies.

 

The welfare of conscious soul is not possible by any inert things in the world. It is true however, that by intelligently utilizing the inert matters the well being of body is definitely ensured. The soul however, bound as it is by limited knowledge [i.e. remaining Alpagna] seeks improvement in the worldly things but fails.  Hence he remains restless. Ignorance is the reason for unhappiness in the world. If soul were to understand the true nature of materials obtaining in the world, he will not experience unhappiness or sorrow. The soul becomes enmeshed in sorrow and shackles so long it keeps equating untruth to truth, ignorance to knowledge and conscious to inanimate. God who is the source of knowledge is the real source of happiness. Removed from God happiness does not lie in worldly things. If happiness could be found in worldly things then the entire world should have looked happy and cheerful. But the actual position is different. Every conscious being in the world seeks happiness, because it is not with him.  Why he should seek happiness if he already had?  He becomes  liberated with worldly sorrows and bondages and attains eternal happiness called Bliss[Ananda] in the end when while remaining devoted  keeps on doing praise[ Stuti] prayer[ Prarthana]and communion[ Upaasana]

 

K: It is wrong to say that there is no pleasure or happiness in the worldly things. If there were to be no happiness in them, then why they should be much sought after by men? If money were not to bring happiness why people would have struggled to accumulate it? If food were not cause happiness why they would have consumed it? Why wear clothes if they were not to cause happiness? Why construct Homes if they were not to bring in pleasure and happiness?  All this indicate that there is happiness in worldly things. Hence, people desire to have them and do not want to give them up. He finds happiness in their acquisition and feels unhappy at its loss. Then how to believe that happiness is not found in material things?

 

V:  Sister! What you find happiness in worldly objects is not real happiness but illusion of it. Happiness is in the minds of men. When a man makes use of things he feels comforted and comes to believe that happiness is obtained from them only. But frankly speaking, happiness is not obtained from a particular thing. He feels happy so because of

mind’s concentration. When a dog bites a dry bone, its gums starts bleeding and the dog [unaware of the fact that dry bone cannot have a blood] keeps on sucking the blood oozing from its own gums! Similarly where is the happiness in the worldly things outside? Happiness lies inside. This is known. If money were to spell happiness, then no rich man would have been unhappy. But the extent of worries that the rich man has is not there with the poor man. A rich man down with diseases could buy medicines but not health. That rich man   could employ teachers, workers, buy books but can he earn knowledge? No. He can earn knowledge and wisdom only thru hard intensified study. Likewise he may buy food but cannot buy hunger.

 

There are millionaires in the world who are unable to digest even one meal a day. Now tell me whether there is happiness inherent in money. If food were to bring happiness the quantum of happiness one derives by eating four chapattis should be four times by eating 16 chapattis. This is because happiness should be proportionate to the quantum of food eaten. But does this happen? By eating more than that satisfies his hunger he becomes sick requiring medication. Dry, tasteless food tastes like nectar when one is hungry, whereas, nectar tastes bitter when not hungry. Similar is the position about clothes. If clothes were to cause comfort, the same cloths that are comfortable  in winter should continue to be so in summer also and vice versa. If causing comfort were to be the nature of clothes then it should cause comfort in all seasons. Why warm clothes are not suited in summer and winter clothes are not suited for winter? The nature and character of a thing should remain constant under all circumstances. For ex, to burn a thing is the nature of Fire. This nature will not undergo change. Sweetness is the quality of sugar. Eat sugar at any time. You taste sweet only. Likewise, if causing happiness is the nature of worldly things, then people would not have sought happiness even after their possession. They should be feeling happy every second. Now be clear!  Will the problem of a person running high temperature could be overcome by putting him on a soft, silky bed? Never. Hence I tell you, that happiness does not lie in the worldly things. God is the source of Happiness and that is obtained by being nearer to Him.

 

K: If happiness were to be within, and real joy does not rest with the worldly things, then why a person derives happiness in eating sweets? Why he does not derive happiness by eating Mud? There is joy in eating Rotis but not sand. Sugar tastes but not grass. What is the reason for this?

 

V:  The feeling of happiness which we derive in eating sugar candy etc is because of the character of the latter and this does not constitute real happiness. The sweetness is felt when this is concentrated in mind. Then only he experiences joy in it. If sugar candy were to cause happiness then it should cause same happiness during fever also whereas sugar tastes bitter during fever. Similar is the case of chillies. Persons not habituated to taking chillies find it as poison. So is the case of other worldly things. Now about person not finding happiness in eating mud. If mind is concentrated in it then eating mud also becomes enjoyable. We might have seen some women eating mud balls. Some animals eat sand stones also. Leave this matter aside. We find people taking liquor which is awfully smelling, astringent and bitter. Opium is highly bitter but some people consume

it. People find happiness in these things. Does joy lie in these things? No. Man derives happiness in these things as long as his mind gets concentrated in them. A question may arise as to how the mind gets concentrated in an object. When a man becomes used to a thing he starts concentrating therein albeit temporarily is the answer. Because of habit, the inherent culture or the sanskars of that object leaves a strong impression on the mind. The sanskars of a particular thing instigates a person to use them often and often. Similar is the case of beautiful scenario. Man in order to see his mind gets relaxed goes to forests, Sea, Parks, mountains etc. But when he is entangled in a criminal case he does not derive joy in these places of interest. Strikingly good places appear to be drab, worthless places for him for the reason his mind is restless resulting in lack of concentration. A person goes to a music concert, Film show etc to enjoy. But if he finds his son being sick he does enjoy the show even though present. This is because the sickness of son has disturbed him. At times when our mind is busy roaming elsewhere, we are unaware of taste of food being eaten. Hence it is clear that happiness rests with when accompanied by concentrated mind and not in objects.

 

K: First you said that God is a prime source of all Happiness and now you are telling that happiness lie in concentrated mind. Why this dichotomy?

 

V: Only in the concentrated mind the blissful God is felt. The ignorant finds that happiness lie in the external things. This is not dichotomy. What is important to be known here is, because of habit man obtains   transient concentration in worldly things. Hence transient happiness is obtained. We may ultimately realize God if we start concentrating mind in comprehensive form in worship. This is the ultimate aim of life. Precisely for this reason, praise [Stuti] prayer [Prathana] and communion [Upaasana] is necessary, the object being let mind gets concentrated and thereby derive more and more happiness.

 

K: What is the proof that the more the mind is concentrated, the more happiness is derived?

 

V: I give a proof based on state of being while in wakeful {Jagrit] state and in deep slumber [Sushupthi] state. During wakeful position man’s transactions [vrithis] are spread over towards worldly things. Hence concentration is not attained. The mind rushes to one object or the other. But in sleep condition his mind’s activities are in concentrated, restful mode, and he feels happy after a good sleep. Getting up in the morning he says that he is happy because he got a good sleep overnight. The happiness he got in sleep was due to the mind’s concentration. The soul is relieved off the connection with worldly objects and rapprochement is done with God. The soul is attached either to worldly things or with God. The more he is attached to worldly things the more sorrow he experiences. The more he cultivates relationship with God he derives more happiness. This becomes clearer from the example. A person is in jail. He is ailing. He is pained at the loss of his wife and children. He is having lot of other worries.  He is disturbed but till when? These things drag him to restlessness as long he is in wakeful state.  Once he manages to get sleep all the troubles disappear and he enjoys the same amount of happiness that a king

enjoys. Even animals enjoy happiness in sleep. This is because that in Sleep his mind’s transactions are not scattered over, but remain concentrated. Control of mind’s transactions is called “YOGA” i.e. communion with God. When an intelligent communion is established with God thru Stuti, Prarthana, and Upaasana it is said that there is spiritual elevation. This spiritual upliftment reaches its zenith thru Samadhi where Soul becomes immersed with God. This is the ultimate aim of life.

 

K:  Which is called Stuthi, Prathana and Upaasana?

 

V:  Praising the God with full devotion and faith is called Stuthi. Seeking God’s help for the removal of his foibles or weaknesses from those Godly qualities is called Prarthana. Keeping away from the worldly things that involves his pride in self called Ahankar and strongly invoking a feeling that he is nearer to God is called Upaasana.

 

K: You believe that God has no Form. But large number of people in the world thinks otherwise and offer prayer to the Form. What is wrong in understanding that God has a Form or having a Body?

 

V: You will get answer to this question tomorrow.

 

Vedic Religion

Vedas For Beginners : Is the God the Creator?

Leave a comment

K:  Sister!  Give reply to yesterday’s question

 

V:  Your yesterday’s question was how God could protect the world when he was devoid of body for the reason that there could be no activity without body being present. But  I say that  your understanding of the matter is wrong. Conscious being can do functions any where it resides. It can give momentum. Where it is not there, then only the requirement of body is needed. For ex, now I have lifted this book. From which?

K: By hands of course.

 

V: If hands were not to be there would it be possible to lift the books?

 

K: Not possible.

 

V: Good!  The hands have lifted the book.  Now tell me which lifted the hands?

 

K: You have lifted the Books with your strength.

 

V: Look! I am shaking my entire body. From which the body is being shaken?

 

K: From your strength. It is obvious.

 

V: You were just telling that no activity was possible without Body. Now how the body got its activity without a Body?  The answer to this question is wherever the conscious entity and its strength is present there remains no necessity for the agency like the body. The Soul that resides inside the body gives mobility for the entire body, and for those things that reside outside the mobility is given thru the body. This is because He [Soul] is not found outside. God resides both inside and outside and he is omnipresent. Hence He does not require a body. Since he is present in the entire universe he gives momentum for the entire universe.

 

K:  I see, Pot makers, Cooks etc, who are having a Form, alone could create objects having Form. Then how formless God could create this world having a Form?

 

V: Creators who have a visible Form could create things that are external to their bodies. They cannot create things within their bodies. For the creation of things that are external to their bodies the help of limbs like hands and legs are necessary. However these are not necessary for creation of things that are inside. There are no materials which are external to god. He pervades all.  He is omnipresent. Hence no body is necessary for Him to create. A cook prepares food that is outside his body. Supposing if he prepares the food inside his body then who would eat the food? In such case why hands and legs are needed? The blood, bone, and marrow are formed inside the body without the help of hands and legs. Now think over. Sense organs create and watch external things. In case they were to watch what goes inside the body the life becomes miserable. How things will be if one were to smell inside body things, were to watch the flesh, blood, stools etc present inside the body? It is awful experience indeed! It is god’s grace that we see things that are external to the body.

 

K: Does the Creator pervade the created? Clock maker makes the clock. Clock is different from that of clock maker. The sweet maker makes the sweet. The sweet and sweet maker is different from each other. It is a universal principle that the maker is different from what is made. How it is possible that the God creates all and pervades all? Secondly it is not understood how things are created without the aid of hands and legs.

 

V:  The clock makers, sweet maker, are all creative men with finite abilities further bound by the limitation of space and time. They are together with the object created to the extent of action involved for creation.  If they were not to be there the corresponding action would not have taken place. When we say that clock-maker made the watch it would mean that he assembled the machine parts. A clock-maker makes the watch but does not create it. The machine parts maker is with the clock when the machine parts are being assembled. If he was not present, the machine parts would not have joined together to become a clock. Similarly the machine maker is present with machine parts with action. If that was not the case the machine parts would not have been made. Similarly, the people who made steel [out of iron ore] used to make machine parts were with the steel and this would not have come off had they not been with steel. This goes to prove that behind making a clock many hands of creation are involved. The Creator is present with the every corresponding action. Similar is the case of Goldsmith, and others. They are the creators of their action. Many hands are involved before making a final product.

 

So it is clear that while making an object, apart from the maker, the help of many people are involved. Then only an object could be created. Why this is so?  This is so because man has limited knowledge and limited abilities and he could create things with the coordinated efforts of others. Those Creators are with the created by their action. When they could associate with gross objects as such,why god is not present in the subtlest of the subtle, grossest of the gross Creation? Think for yourself. Creation does not mean just Sun, Moon, Stars, Mountains, Tress, Rivers, Human beings, Animals, Birds etc, There are many things which are endless subtle and beyond imagination. The Creation includes or a combination of all these things.

 

          Creation is made by an intelligent combination of atoms. Five gross elements, five principles of subtle entities called Panchatanmatras [speech, touch, vision, taste, and smell] five great elements called Panch-Mahabhootas [ether, air, water, fire and earth] are all created out of these atoms. The creation is made of out of these things. If the assembler of atoms is not with them how they can take shapes? There is no machinery in the world which can hold atoms together and bring out things out of them. The elements which are indivisible are called Atoms. God is immanent in all the atoms. Hence is able to form the grossest and subtlest things in the world. The atoms are the subtlest things in insensate [Jada] matters and God is more subtle than them. Hence he could pervade them. If this was not the case, he had to seek the help of outside agency similar to man taking the help of others for creating things. Hence it is clear that everyone is present to the extent of action involved for creation. Now the question how could things be created without hands and legs? Granting that these parts are necessary, a question that arises here as to who could have created these limbs? Here it should be understood, Hands and legs are the product of creation. When hands and legs could be created without the help of the latter is it not then possible for other parts of Creation to be had without the assistance of hands and legs?  Are the hands and legs of a child in mother’s view being formed with any hands or legs? Seeds grow into plants and trees. And are they so made with hands and legs? It should be made clear here, that hands and legs could manufacture things that are related it.  Is it possible to create mosquitoes and other minute creatures out of legs and hands? The circumference of the Earth where human beings reside is about 25000miles. There are planets like Mars, Uranus and stars like Sun in the Universe which are million times bigger than the Earth. Is it possible to create these objects with hands and legs? Only the omnipresent and omnipotent God has created these bodies in a purposeful manner.

 

K:  Sister!  Some how you initiate new subjects for discussion.  Where is the Rule being observed here? Are the things created as per Rule? Where is the method here?  We see tall mountains, deep valleys, on the one side! And on the other side there exist dense forests, deserts, bushes, shrubs etc. Where is the method/order here? Like wise the world is formed haphazardly. Normally a system is followed. When a man builds a house, he provides for a living room, well, lavatory etc so as to make it hospitable. An agriculturist builds an agricultural farm, provides for a farm house, canals, varieties of plants and trees etc in a methodical manner. A shopkeeper arranges goods in order in the shop. So a Rule or method is followed by man, whereas I find Creation to be reckless and bizarre. As per my assessment no Rule or method is found to be in Creation.

 

V: It is utter foolish to say that no Rule or method is found in Creation. Why Sun should rise in East and set in west? Why not the other way round? Is there no Rule here? Even the best made human watch shows slight variation in being either fast or slow. But do you find a variation by a second in the movement of Sun and the Moon? How perfect are their movements? Based on the movements of Sun and Moon the eclipses occurring at a distant future could be predicted accurately. Similar is the state of things in respect of other cosmic bodies also. Now tell me why mango seed is obtained from Mango tree only. Why we cannot get oranges from Mango tree? Why man is born a baby, grows into adult and gets old. Why not he gets old first, youth later and baby there afterwards?  Why see with eyes only and not heard from them? Why nose smells only but cannot taste?  Are these not indicative of the presence of Rule here?

 

Mountains are found to be somewhere and so the rivers. Oceans, bushes, Forests are found to be at some other place. And to say that there is no Rule in creation because of this diversity is reflective of your ignorance. With what petty yardstick you are measuring the Creation? Normally people find fault in things they do not understand. This is universal phenomenon. This sort of reasoning could be likened to an ant which started climbing the body of man and telling that the head is like a forest, eyebrows as thorny fences, nose as a hillock with nostrils as tunnels, moustaches to bushy forests, etc and felt that man indeed  should be awful creature. The ant bound by its limited intelligence assumes that body has been formed haphazardly.

 

Supposing, for the convenience of ant, if the eyes, face, nose and other parts are removed and body is made flat then the ant might feel that the body had been constructed in orderly fashion. Now my point is body shaped to the requirement of an ant could satisfy the whims and fancies of an ant and it might even say that the human body was in order. But the body shaped to the ant’s requirement could ever remain human?  Will the aesthetic intelligent transaction between the organs of perception and action occur there?  Not at all. Take another example. An Engineer constructs a machine having hundreds of parts inside it. The shape and size of each part might be round, curved, square, big or small. The parts are made to the requirement of the machine. An ignorant person not aware of the importance of machine might think that the parts are too big or curved and he may even say that the parts have been assembled haphazardly.  It is natural for an ignorant to think this way. But the machine maker knows well and he has assembled the parts as ought to have been done for the machine to work satisfactorily. If the machinery parts had been made either round or straight only the Machine would not have worked at all.

 

Similar is the position of Creation effected by God. The machinery called Creation has many parts. It has mountains, rivers, ocean, valleys, forests etc, etc. The Creation has a purpose and an object, i.e. welfare of human beings. For the ignorant, the parts of Creation appear as uncouth, useless and lacking in order, the reason being they are unaware of purpose of Creation. The usefulness of parts of Creation i.e., oceans, rivers, mountains etc is not understood. The examples of shopkeeper, agriculturist, etc that were given are too small and could be understood easily, whereas the laws of Creation are too subtle and complex to be understood. Just think over of the Brain thru which man makes laws. Even this brain is made by god who has formulated innumerable laws of Creation. If no laws were to be there who would have believed God? The existence of immutable laws provides the proof of existence of God.

 

K: O.K. God has made the Creation. Who has created the God?

 

V:  Created matter is the effect. It [created matter] requires a material cause [base material] and the Maker is called Efficient cause. God is not a created-matter. He is Eternal and has No origin. Hence, the question, as to who created God does not therefore arise. Who could be creator for who is self-created? If the Creator were to have a creator then he cannot be called a Creator. He becomes a Cause then. He is alone a Creator who is self-independent. The matter- created, cannot be termed as Creator. The human bodies deemed as Creators are not Creators in the real sense. They are instruments or agencies that bring about Creation. The Soul is the Creator. 

 

K: O.K.  Granting, that Creator has no Creator as such, then please tell me as to why should we accept the God? Why should we praise [stuthi] pray [prarthana] and communion [Upaasana] Him?  How is He related to our lives?

 

————————————————————————————————————————————————–

Note : This is the the translated version of the original  ” Do bahinonke bathe” written by  late Siddagopal “kaviratna”.

Translated by Vasudev Rao.

Vedic Religion

Vedas For Beginners : IS GOD IS THERE OR NOT?

1 Comment

K; Sister! You have been telling me to pray daily. I am asking you to whom we should pray? And where is that God?

 

V: God is everywhere. There is no place which is free from God.

 

K: You have told the wonderful. If god were to be everywhere then where are other things? All space  are occupied by God and if there is no place free from God then there is no place for other things. Were the other things  remaining  without a space ?

 

V: It is not that way sister! When it is said that there is no place free from God, it means that God is everywhere. This is my opinion and that is how it is told in a common language. God being there  is not dependent on space. It is the   physical  elements that occupy the space.

Earth, water, air, fire and their atoms, are those things that occupy space. But God pervades them all. Hence it is said that God is everywhere.

 

K: O.K. If God were to everywhere  why He is not seen? When  not seen, where is the proof of  his presence?

 

V: Are there are no objects present which are not seen? There are so many things in the world which are not seen. cold, hot,  happiness, sorrow, time, direction, hunger, thirst, itching, pain, etc are there which are not seen. There may be many reasons for a thing not to be seen.  Like far off places say, like  Europe, America etc, many things are not seen. Are we able to see the kite or a bird flying at  a far off distance? Because of closeness of proximity also, eye is not able to see a thing. There are hundred of subtle things like atoms. Some like  bacteria or virus could be seen only thru microscope. Water being covered with  algae is not seen because of algae  and like wise there are so many unseen because separated by cover.  Because of dirt, a mirror is not seen and because of presence of a wall the man sitting across the wall is also not seen. Milk and water are both liquids and because of this water in milk is not seen. If there were to be trouble in the eye many things are not seen. A man affected with jaundice cannot see white objects. Hence it is not correct to say that  things are not present  just  because they are un seen.

 

K:  For me, I don’t believe in anything without seeing.

 

V: This shows your obduracy. I have already said that there are many things which are not seen and yet   we have to believe them.  Good! Now,  are you listening to  what I am telling?

 

K: Yes listening.

 

V: By which?

 

K: By ears of course

 

V: Are you sure that what I am telling?

 

K: Yes. Why not?

 

V:Are you seeing my words thru your eyes? Okay. Look here, I am having a flower in my hands. Which is that flower?

 

K: It is Rose.

 

V: Does  the flower has a fragrance  or not?

 

K: Yes. It has a fragrance.

 

V: How did you come to  know about  this?

 

K:  Through my nose.

 

V:  Tell me one thing. Did sugar was there in the milk that  you drank overnight?

 

K:  Yes. It was there.

 

V:  How did you come to know about  it?

 

K: Thru My tongue.

 

V:  Now I point out, that the sound was perceived thru ears,  fragrance thru nose, and sugar thru tongue. Why this way? Why not did eyes perceive sound,  ears the fragrance and nose the sugar?  Even though the smell and fragrance was present why not the same was seen by eyes?

 

K;  The senses perceive its subjects only and grasp knowledge. God is not perceivable by any sense organs. How could we believe that He  is present at all?

 

V: God is not seen and therefore he is not present  was your initial argument. Now you have turned over.  You have agreed that there could be things not seen. It is separate  issue that the knowledge of such unseen things  could be had by  other sense  organs. Now, you are asking how the presence of   God could be accepted when he is not perceivable by any sense organ. If you believe that God could not  exist as He is not understood by senses, then how you understand these senses? If you believe that sense organs are understood by sense  organs only then it constitutes what is known as Atmashrya Dosha. This is because thru what is seen is not seen by itself. When their subjects are different by themselves how sense organs could understand the  sense  organs? The subject matter of eye is sight; ears sound;  nose smell; tongue taste; skin touch. Nose cannot understand the eyes nor the  tongue can understand the ears.

 

 

 

K:  How it cannot be  understood? When I hold mirror before me,  the eyes, ears, nose , tongue etc are forthcoming. The eyes are more forthcoming about knowledge of other organs.

 

V:  Sister! This is your wrong understanding. What you see from your eyes is only a form or sight not the subjects. Will you see the subjects of other sense organs in the mirror? The eyeballs can see places of  sense organs which have a form. The strength of these senses are present in that places.  Can eyes disclose  the entire knowledge about other sense organs? Eyes cannot see by itself. You are of the opinion that  eyes are seen in a mirror. Now, I put a question. Tell me  what is in my hand?

 

K:  Mirror.

 

V:  How did you see that there is a mirror in my hand?

 

K; Thru eyes of course.

 

V: When you said  that you saw mirror thru eyes , it means before seeing a mirror eyes  had a knowledge. In other words it means to say that without eyes mirror would not have seen. Now tell me, whether thru  eyes mirror is understood or vice versa?  If eyes are understood thru mirror, even when eyes are dried up, the mirror should have caused  the knowledge of the dried up eyes. When eyes are dried up , let alone causing the knowledge of eyes, mirror  cannot cause the knowledge of itself. If you think deeply, even eyes see the others with the help of other aids and not independently. It is however  true that sight cannot be seen without eyes  but the knowledge of  sight  cannot be made  by eyes themselves.

 

K; What other  aids are required for eyes? Eyes sees the Forms independently. The subject matter of eyes are sight. How do you say that eyes don’t see independently?

 

V: Yes.  Now I am seeing all objects. But  if there  is a thick darkness surrounding can I see things?

 

K:  No, It cannot be seen.

 

V: Hence it is clear that eyes are not just enough to see. It requires light. If there were to be no light  eyes are helpless. And even if both light and eyes were to remain present  and the object is not stationary then also we cannot see. If you place the book too close to your eyes you cannot read. Similarly also we cannot read letters in a book held at a distance. Therefore to read letters  book is to be held at a definite distance and place. Further, even the object at a place and light were to be there and  if eyes were removed from the mind, in that event also we cannot see. There are many occasions where mind is involved in some work, the objects are not seen by the eyes even though they  may pass thru our front. In such circumstances, if you were to ask a person whether he observed certain things he would say “ no, I did not watch”. Now you would have understood what are the aids that are required to see a particular object.

 

K:  What do you mean by all this?

 

V: Have you not understood as yet?  If you cannot perceive God thru sense organs, you cannot understand sense organs thru sense organs. But even then we have to accept the sense organs. Then why doubt about  the  acceptance of existence of God.

 

K: How we can understand the senses?

 

V: Sense organs are understood by the Soul thru experience. When he perceives sound, smell, Form,etc he understands  “ That there are aids within me and I am getting the benefit thru them”

 

K: And how we could understand the God?

 

V: God could be understood by experience.

 

K: How the experience is got?

 

V: God is felt thru Soul.

 

K: When  this feeling is felt?

 

V: When mind is got rid of three faults.

 

K: What are these faults?

 

V:  Mala,  Vikshepa, and Avarana

 

K: What are its characteristics?

 

V: The thinking of doing bad to others and  the effects of  Sins fallen on Soul [sanskars] is called Mala.  Constantly thinking over  the worldly objects[materialism] and lack of firmness in mind is referred to as Vikshepa. The impact formed on mind about the pride of temporary worldly things is referred to as Avarana.

 

K: How can we overcome the above three faults?

 

V:  There are three ways thru which we can overcome these three hurdles.

 

K: What are they?

 

V: Knowledge, [Jnana]  Action[Karma] and Communion [ Upaasana]

 

K: What you mean by Knowledge, Action and worship?

 

V:  Understanding the matter as it is,  i.e. to treat inert matter  as inert[Jada] Conscious entities [ Chetan] as Conscious[Chetan] and transitory things  as transitory  things marks the  Knowledge.  To work for the welfare of  Soul, Body and  Society and to try for the acquisition of ennobling things  is referred to as Action. To approach  a material  and  overcoming his shortcomings based on the strength of that  material   is referred to as Communion.  Consider for a while, that  a person is down with cold. If he approaches water for the removal of cold it betrays  his ignorance, not knowledge. If he is aware of fire and  tries to obtain fire thru Action and approaches fire for the removal of cold then  only he gets rid of cold. From Knowledge, the Mala is overcome, from Action, Vikshepa, is got rid of and finally thru Communion  the effect of Avarana is kept away. Then only God is felt.

 

K: Make this point more clear. How the faults of Mala, Vikshepa, and Avarana are removed respectively by Knowledge, Action, andCommunion respectively?

 

V: With the help of  Knowledge, it should be understood that all worldly things, all living beings are not permanent. For this reason, not entertaining the  feeling of  snatching away  the rights of others is a step in the direction of removal of evil  of Mala. By  thinking that worldly things are the end all and be all  and appropriating them with that spirit  would cause infirmity of mind  or Vikshepa. It is true that materials in the world are means to an end. But they are not end by themselves nor they could be life ideals. According to this principle, the action of man should be dispassionate, like a lotus in a water pond. This is type of  Karma which drives away Vikshepa. Looking upon the God gifted things as something his own is the thing that makes a deep imprint on the mind of man and this prompts him to treat money, women, land as his own which   causes self-pride and this cast spell over his  mind. Further with the strength of these material possessions  he starts tormenting  the others. He thinks there are no superior to him. But instead, when  he does Action with full Knowledge then he withdraws all forces inside  and with concentration thinks that “ God is with me and I am with God” in his heart  then he gets away from the evil ofAvarana. Hence by constant efforts and resorting to Knowledge, Action and Communion he is able to drive away the three evils Mala, Vikshepa and Avarana. Then only he can the feel the presence of God.

 

K; Sister, you are very clever and good at logic. Now tell me why God is necessary to this world at all?

 

V: Why God is  necessary to the world? Very good question. If God were not to be there then how is the world is created?. Who can create Sun, Moon, mountains, rivers, Air, water, ether, stars, forests, Trees, fruits, Milk, honey animals, birds, water creatures, snakes, etc. Who else can create these things and species?

 

K: Why God is necessary for the creation of these things? They are self-formed and has been there always.

 

V: If  things in the world could form themselves without the help of creator, then food should  have there without a cook, pot without a potter, ornaments without a goldsmith, sweet without sweet maker, dress without a tailor etc.  Secondly any thing in the world does not remain permanently. Every thing in the world has a origin, growth, decay, and ultimately destruction. All big to very big things have been created and gets destroyed in the end..

 

K:  I don’t see that God creates things. It does not appear as such. All things are formed by themselves and this order is there from time immemorial. Earth, water, Air, Fire, and their atoms are in existence in the world. These elements keep on joining  themselves in the creation of new and newer things and getting destroyed separately. Where is the work of God involved  here?

 

V:  Your opinion does not stand  to facts. The Earth and the other elements  and their atoms are inert matters. They don’t join themselves without joining them and do not disintegrate without getting disintegrated. Joining and Unjoining  are mutually hostile qualities. These qualities do not stay together. There may any number of qualities in a matter but not mutually  hostile qualities. If the nature of a thing  is to associate they keep on associating. and on the other hand disintegrating is their quality they keep on disintegrating. They do not join with mutually hostile qualities. If you were to say that joining and disintegrating  are the nature of a matter,  those qualities which are  predominant will have a say over the other. For ex, if joining is the  predominant quality, it never allows the world to disintegrate. If disintegrating is the nature of a matter and remains predominant it never allows the world  to stay together. If both qualities are held to be  equal then no object can be formed in the world. But we are seeing where an object is formed, remains for a while and gets destroyed. You may imagine any number of qualities in physical matters, but without God, Creation, sustenance, and dissolution is not possible in the matter called Prakrithi. There is difference in Conscious[ Chetan] and Non-Conscious[ Jada}forces. The Non-Conscious cannot do anything on their own. It keeps working with the help of Conscious forces only. The Conscious being  is capable of doing, not doing or undoing anything. This is the natural qualities of  Conscious beings.

 

K: The person who creates a thing in the world is directly  visible. The goldsmith, potter, the sweet maker,  the bird which builds the nests are  all seen. If God were to be creator of this world he would have been visible.

 

V: Believe me. The maker in the world is not at all visible. It is totally false to say that the goldsmith, Sweet maker, potter are visible. You may ask how? Listen. People like Potter, Goldsmith etc are creators who are made of twin elements, Body and Soul, The body to a soul is an instrument to do a function. Only when soul uses the  instrument called body a material  is formed. Without the instrument called body a material cannot come off. The goldsmith, potter etc are  physical bodies which are visible and are made of five elements called earth, water, fire, air and sky. But the soul who makes use of this body is not at all visible. The body without the soul cannot create things. Likewise without body, a soul cannot do anything either. His strength is of limited character. Hence God grants him a body which is visible. But God is of  limitless potentialities, omnipresent and omniscient. He does things without a body. The soul is also a creator like God, albeit with a limited strength and abilities . God is a creator of all. Both God and Soul  are not visible.

 

K: If God  is without Body then how is that  He can create the world. No function is ever possible without an instrument called  body.

 

V: Now the time is over. Tomorrow morning answer to this question will be given.

 

K: Okay. Let it be on tomorrow.
————————————————————————————————————————————————–

Note : This is the the translated version of the original  ” Do bahinonke bathe” written by  late Siddagopal “kaviratna”.

Translated by Vasudev Rao.

आर्य समाज, हिन्दी

आर्यसमाज क्या है ? पण्डित मनसाराम वैदिक तोप

6 Comments

imagesCA3C1VWL

वेद ने तमाम लोगो को आज्ञा दी हैकी तुम सारे संसार को आर्य बनाओ ,आर्य का अर्थ है नेक,पवित्र व् धर्मात्मा | नेक ,पवित्र धर्मात्मा वह है जो ईश्वरीय ज्ञान वेद के अनुकूल अपना चाल चलन बनावे , चूँकि सृष्टि के आरम्भ से हि हमारे पूर्वजो ने अपना जीवन वेद के अनुकूल व्यतीत करते थे | इसलिए उनका नाम आर्य हुआ और… चूँकि हमारे पूर्वजो ने हि सबसे पहले देश को बसाया था | इस लिए इस देश का नाम आर्यवर्त हुआ | इसलिए वेदों ,स्मृतियों ,शास्त्रों ,रामायण ,माहाभारत और संस्कृत की सारी पुराणी पुस्तकों में हमारा नाम आर्य है हमारे देश का नाम आर्यवर्त आता है | आज से लगभग पांच हजार साल पहले सारी दुनिया में एक हि धर्म था और वह वैदिक धर्म था | और सारी दुनिया में एक हि जाती थी और वह आर्य जाती थी |इस आर्यजाति के दुर्भाग्य से माहाभारत का युद्ध हुआ, जिसमे अच्छे अच्छे वेदों के ज्ञाता और वेद प्रचार का प्रबंध करने वाले राजा और माहाराजा मारे गए|
तत्पश्चात स्वार्थी और पाखंडी लोगो की बन आई इन लोगो ने मधपान , मांसभक्षण और परस्त्रीभोग को हि धर्म बतलाया और संस्कृत में इस प्रकार की पुस्तके बनाई | जिनमे मधपान , मांसभक्षण और परस्त्रीभोग को धर्म कहा गया और कोई ऋषि, कोई मुनि या माहात्मा ऐसा नहीं छोड़ा की जिस पर मधपान ,मांसभक्षण और  परस्त्रीगमन का आरोप न लगाया हो , इन लोगो ने वेद के विरुद्ध बनाई किताबो के नाम पुराण और इनका लेखक महर्षि व्यास जी को बताया , इन लोगो ने यज्ञो के बहाने से पशुओ को मार कर इनके मांस का हवं करना ,खाना तथा शराब पीना आरम्भ कर दिया | और वेदों की बजाए आर्यजाति में इन्ही पुराणों को धर्मग्रंथकहा गया |
लोग वेदों को भूल गए और इन्ही वेद के विरुद्ध अष्टादश पुराणों को अपना धर्मग्रन्थ मानकर धर्म से भटक गए | समय समय पर माहात्मा बुद्ध, स्वामी शंकराचार्य , गुरु नानक देव और गुरु गोबिंद सिंह आदि महात्माओ ने इस जाती को कुमार्ग से हटा कर सुमार्ग पर लाने का प्रयास किया और वे किसी हद तक इस जाति को सुमार्ग पर लाने में सफल भी हुए , परन्तु यौगिक अवस्था में इस जाति की शारीरिक आत्मिक और आर्थिक अवस्था गिरती चली गयी |
आखिरकार विदेशी ईसाई तथा मुसलमानों ने इस देश में प्रविष्ट होकर पुराणों की बुरी शिक्षाओ का खंडन आरम्भ किया जिससे आर्यजाति के युवक इस पौराणिक हिंदू धर्म से घृणित होकर धड़ा धड ईसाई और मुसलमान बनने लगे | निकट था की यह पौराणिक धर्म को मानने वाली हिन्दूजाति संसार से मटियामेट हो जाती किन्तु – काठियावाड गुजरात के मौरवी राज्य के टंकारा शहर के एक औदीच्य ब्राहमण पण्डित कर्षण लाल जी तिवारी सर्राफ जमींदार के घर माता अमृतबाई के पेट से विक्रमी संवत् १८८१ में एक बालक का जन्म हुआ जिसका नाम मूलशंकर दयाल रखा | एक बार जब उनकी आयु केवल १४ वर्ष की थी , शिवरात्रि के अवसर पर इनके पिता ने इनका शिवरात्रि का व्रत रखने पर आग्रह किया , व्रत रखा गया |
रात को जब उनके पिता दूसरे पुजारियों के साथ शिव  की पूजा करके चडावा चड़ा चुके तो वह शिव का गुणगान करने के लिए दूसरे साथियों के साथ मूर्ति के सामने बैठ गए तो वे निंद्रा से उंघने लगे ,लेकिन बालक मूलशंकर जी जागते रहे | इसी बीच में एक चूहा आया और शिव की मूर्ति पर चड मजे से च्डावित चीजों को खाने लगा |बालक मूलशंकर इस दृश्य को देख कर हैरान रह गए की कैसा शिव है जो चूहे से भी अपनी रक्षा नहीं कर सकता |पिता को जगाकर अपनी शंका प्रकट की परन्तु उत्तर में डांट डपट के सिवाय कुछ नहीं मिला | इस दृश्य ने मूलशंकर की आँखे खोल दी | उनको वर्तमान मूर्तिपूजा के गलत होने का ज्ञान हो गया | इस चूहे वाले दृश्य के कुछ दिन पश्चात मूलशंकर की बहिन और इसके पश्चात इनके चाचा की भी मृत्यु हो गयी | ये दोनों हि मूलशंकर
को प्यारे थे , इन दोनों दृश्यों ने मौत का प्रश्न लाकर इनके सम्मुख खड़ा कर दिया और वे सोचने लगे की मृत्यु क्या वस्तु है और किस तरह मनुष्य मृत्यु पर विजय पा सकता है |
इन प्रश्नों को हल करने की इतनी तीव्र इच्छा हुयी की उन्होंने बाप की जायदाद को ठोकर मारकर जंगल की राह ली | सन्यास धारण किया और मूलशंकर जी से स्वामी दयानंद जी बन गए और योगाभ्यास करते हुए ताप का जीवन बिताना आरम्भ किया |
विद्या की खोज में पर्वतों ,जंगलो ,नदियों के तटो पर चक्कर लगाना आरम्भ कर किया | इस तरह तप की आयु व्यतीत करते हुए और योगाभ्यास करते हुए समाधि तक योग की विद्या प्राप्त की | अंत में अपने आखिरी गुरु स्वामी विरजानंद जी के पास मथुरा में पहुंचे और तीन वर्ष में वेदों और शास्त्रों की पूर्ण विद्या प्राप्त करके वेद के अर्थ करने की कुंजी गुरु से प्राप्त की | पुनः गुरु से विदा होने का समय आया | गुरु विरजानंद ने अपने शिष्य दयानंद से माँग की कि बेटा इस समय मत मतान्तरो का अन्धकार छाया हुआ है लोग वेद कि शिक्षा के विरुद्ध चल रहे है तुम्हारे से यह गुरुदक्षिणा मांगता हूँ कि मत मतान्तरो का खंडन करके वैदिक धर्म का प्रचार करो |
महर्षि स्वामी दयानंद जी ने अपने गुरु कि इस आगया में अपना पूरा जीवन बलिदान कर दिया |
स्वामी दयानंद ने अपने जीवन कि दो विचारधाराएं ठहराई वैदिक धर्म का प्रचार और ईसाई,मुसलमानों के हाथो से पौराणिक हिंदू जाती की रक्षा की | महर्षि दयानंद जी ने अपने दोनों विचारधाराओं को पूरा करने के लिए सहस्त्र मीलो की यात्रा की | हजारों भाषण दिए |सैकड़ो शाश्त्रार्थ किये और दर्जनों पुस्तके लिखी और वेद का सरल हिंदी में अनुवाद किया और अपने अनथक प्रयास से सोये हुए आर्यवर्त देश को जगा दिया और वेद की पुस्तक हाथ में लेकर ईसाई और मुसलमानों आदि एनी मतवालो को शाश्त्रार्थ के लिए ललकारा और सेकडो स्थानों पर उनको पराजय दी और पौराणिक हिन्दुजाती को मृत्यु के मुख से बचा लिया | भविष्य में वैदिक धर्म का प्रचार और पौराणिक हिन्दुजाति की रक्षा के लिए एक संस्था की स्थापना की जिसका नाम “आर्यसमाज“रखा |
आखिरकार वेद के शत्रुओ ने षड्यंत्र रच कर स्वामी जी के रसोइये द्वारा दुष् में पिसा हुआ कांच और विष मिलाकर महर्षि स्वामी दयानंद जी को पिला दिया जिससे इनका शरीर फुट पड़ा और वे अजमेर में दीपावली की शाम को संवत १९४० में परलोक सिधार गए |स्वामी जी की मृत्यु के पश्चात आर्यसमाज ने अपने पुरे प्रयत्नों द्वारा वैदिक धर्म का प्रचार और पौराणिक हिन्दुजाति की रक्षा की , करता है और करता रहेगा

| इस कार्य को करते हुए कुछ स्वार्थी लोगो ने आर्य समाज का विरोध शुरू कर दिया और भिन्न भिन्न प्रकार के दोष लगाकर आर्य समाज को बदनाम करने के प्रयत्न किये |

किसी ने कहा कि – १.) आर्य समाज एक अवैध समाज है जो वर्तमान सरकार के तख्ताये हुकूमत को उलटना चाहता है |
२.) किसी ने कहा कि आर्य समाज एक दिल को ठेस पहुँचाने वाली संस्था है जो भिन्न भिन्न मतो का खंडन करके
उनके दिलो को ठेस लगाती है |
३.) किसी ने कहा कि आर्य समाज एक फसादी टोला है | जब तक भारत वर्ष में समाज का नाम था , लोग प्रीति और प्रेम के साथ रहते थे | जब से आर्यसमाज का जन्म हुआ तब से लोगो में लड़ाई और झगडे फ़ैल गए,इसलिए आर्य समाज एक फसादी टोला है |अतः प्रत्येक मनुष्य ने आर्यसमाज के बारे में अपने अपने दृष्टिकोण से अनुमान लगाया उदाहरणार्थ कहते है कि एक जंगल में पाँच मनुष्य इकट्ठे बैठे थे | जंगल में तीतर कि बोली के बारे में सोचने लगे कि बताओ भाई यह तीतर क्या कहता है | उन पांचो ने अपने विचारानुसार तीतर कि बोली का अनुमान लगाया |
१.) मियाँ साहिब ने कहा कि तीतर कहता है – “ सुबहान तेरी कुदरत “
२.) पंडित जी ने कहा कि तीतर कहता है – “सीता राम दशरथ “
३.) दूकानदार ने कहा – “ नून तेल अदरक “
४.) पहलवान ने कहा –“ खाओ पियो करो कसरत “
५.) जेंटलमैन ने खा – “ पीओ बीड़ी सिगरट “
अब आपने देखा कि तीतर ने अपनी बोली में बोला और पाँच मनुष्यों ने अपने अपने विचारानुसार तीतर कि बोली का अनुमान लगाया लेकिन तीतर क्या कहता है इसको या टो तीतर जानता है या तीतर कि बोली समझने
वाला | इसी प्रकार लोग आर्य समाज के बारे में अपनी अपनी बुद्धि के अनुसार अनुमान लगाते है |
१.) कोई कहता है कि आर्य समाज एक अवैध समाज है |
२.) कई कहता है कि आर्य समाज एक दिल को ठेस पहुचानें वाली संस्था है |
३.) कोई कहता है कि आर्य समाज एक फसादी टोला है |
लेकिन आर्य समाज क्या है ? इसको या आर्य समाज जानता है या आर्य समाज के सिद्धांतों को समझने वाला | हाँ इससे पहले आपको यह बताए कि आर्य समाज क्या है तीन प्रकार के लोगो के भ्रम को दूर करना आवश्यक समझते है |
१.) पहले प्रकार के वे लोग है जो कहते है कि आर्य समाज एक अवैध समाज है | मै यह बताना चाहता हूँ कि जो लोग आर्य समाज को ऐसा समझते है वे भ्रम में है | वे नहीं जानते कि आर्यसमाज क्या चीज है ? आर्य समाज वेद का प्रचारक है और वेद ईश्वरीय गया है और ईश्वर एक देश का नहीं बल्कि संसार का है | इसलिए आर्य समाज भी किसी एक देश के लिए नहीं ,बल्कि सारे विश्व के लिए है | आर्य समाज जो कुछ भी बताता है वह सारे संसार के लिए नियम कि बाते बताता है | इस से जो देश भी चाहे लाभ उठा सकता है |
उदाहरणार्थ आर्य समाज राज्य प्रबंध के बारे में यह नियम बताता है कि प्रत्येक देश में राज करने का अधिकार उस देश के वासियों का है , दूसरे देश के लोगो का यह अधिकार नहीं है कि वे किसी देश पर राज्य करे | जैसे चीन पर राज्य करने का अधिकार चीनियों को है जापानियों का यह अधिकार नहीं कि वे चीन पर राज्य करे | बस इसी तरह आर्य समाज कहता है कि भारत पर राज्य करने का अधिकार केवल भारतीयों का है इटली वालो का यह अधिकार नहीं |
यह एक नियम कि बात है जिसे आर्य समाज डंके कि चोट पर कहता है और इस प्रकार कहने में आर्य समाज को किसी का भय नहीं | अब रहा आर्य समाज के सभासद बनने का प्रश्न सो आर्य समाज के दस नियम है
जो मनुष्य इन नियमों को समझ कर इन पर चले कि प्रतिज्ञा करता है वह आर्य समाज का सभासद बन सकता है | एक क्रन्तिकारी मनुष्य जो रिवाल्वर और बम चलाना अपना धर्म समझता है यदि वो आर्य समाज के दस नियम का विचार कर उनके अनुसार चलने कि प्रतिज्ञा करता है वह आर्यसमाज का सभासद बन सकता है | आर्य समाज का सभासद बनने में उसे किसी प्रकार कि बाधा नहीं है और एक सरकारी कर्मचारी भी जो सर्कार कि आज्ञा को निभाना अपना धर्म समझता है वह भी आर्य समाज के नियमों का पालन करके आर्यसमाज का अभासाद बन सकता है | आर्य समाज कि स्टेज आर्य समाज के नियमों के प्रचार के लिए है इसलिए जो लोग यह कहते है कि आर्य समाज एक अवैध समाज है वे भ्रम में है | वे नहीं जानते कि आर्य समाज क्या है |
२.) दूसरी प्रकार के लोग है जो कहते है कि आर्य समाज एक दिल को ठेस पहुचने वाली संस्था है | हम यह बतलाना चाहते हाउ ये लोग पहले कि अपेक्षा अधिक भ्रम में है | ये नहीं जानते कि आर्य समाज क्या चीज है ? दिल को ठेस लगाना दो प्रकार का होता है एक नेकनीयती से बदनीयती से | जो दिल को ठेस नेकनीयती से लगाई जाती है वह उस मनुष्य कि हानि के लिए नहीं,  बल्कि लाभ के लिए होती है | उदाहरणार्थ एक आदमी कि टांग पर फोड़ा निकल आया | फोड़े में पीप पड़ गयी , पीप में कीड़े पड़ गएग | वह आदमी औषधालय में गया | औषद्यालय के डाक्टर ने उसकी टांग का निरीक्षण किया और निरिक्षण करने के पश्चात डाक्टर नेकनीयती से इस परिणाम पर पहुंचा कि अगर इसकी टांग का ओप्रेसन करके इसके अंदर से पीप न निकाल दी गयी टो संभवतः इसकी टांग काटनी पड़े और काटने के साथ साथ इसका जीवन भी समाप्त हो सकता है | अब डाक्टर नेकनीयती से इसका जीवन बचाने के लिए ओप्रेसन करना शुरू कर देता है | जहां डाक्टर ने ओप्रेसन करना आरम्भ किया उधर रोगी ने चीखना शुरू कर दिया कि यह डाक्टर टो बड़ा डीठ है निर्दयी है बेरहम है और दिल दुखाने वाला है |और लगे हाथो दस बीस गालिय भी डाक्टर को दे डाली |

अब आप बताइए कि इस अवस्था में उस डाक्टर का क्या कर्तव्य है ,क्या डाक्टर का यह कर्तव्य है कि वह रोगी कि गालियों से क्रोधित होकर नश्तर को अनुचित चला कर रोगी को हानि पहुचाएं ? कदाचित नहीं !  यदि डाक्टर रोगी कि गालियों से क्रोधित होकर नश्तर को अनुचित चलाकर रोगी को हानि पहुंचाता है तो डाक्टर अपने कर्तव्य से गिर जाता है | वह अपने कर्तव्य को पूरा नहीं करता और क्या डाक्टर का यह कर्तव्य है कि वह रोगी कि गालियों से निराश होकर इलाज करना छोड दे तो भी वह अपने कर्तव्य से गिर जाता है | डाक्टर का तो यह कर्तव्य है कि वह रोगी कि गालियों कि तरफ ध्यान न देकर नेकनीयत से इसके जीवन बचाने के लिए निरंतर ओप्रेसन करता चला जाए |एक समय ऐसा आएगा जब ओप्रेसन सफल हो जाएगा और रोगी कि टांग
कि सारी पीप निकल जायेगी और डाक्टर इस पर मरहम रखेगा और रोगी को आराम आ जावेगा तो वही रोगी जो डाक्टर को गालिय देता था वह डाक्टर को आशीर्वाद देगा कि इसने मेरा जीवन नष्ट होने से बचा दिया | बस यही हालत आर्य समाज कि है | आर्य समाज के प्रवर्तक महर्षि दयानंद जी ने अनुभव किया कि पोरानिक हिन्दुजाति के अंदर बहुत से बुरे रीती रिवाज और बुरे नियम विद्यमान है | अगर इनको न निकल दिया गया तो संभव् है कि इस हिन्दुजाति का नामोनिशान भी इस संसार में न रहे | इस बात को विचार करते हुए महर्षि दयानंद ने अपनी आयु में और इनकी मृत्यु के बाद आर्य समाज ने नेकनीयत के साथ हिन्दुजाति के जीवन को संसार में स्थापित करने के लिए उसके बुरे नियमों और बुरे रीती रिवाज का खंडन आरम्भ किया | खंडन आरम्भ होने के बात हिन्दुजाति ने महर्षि दयानंद जी के जीवन में उनके साथ और उनकी मृत्यु के बाद आर्य समाज के साथ बुरा व्यव्हार किया | गाली गलोच दी ,ईंट और पत्थर बरसाए और अब भी कई स्थानों पर आर्य समाज के साथ ऐसा व्यवहार हिन्दुजाति कि तरफ से हो रहा है |
अब ऐसी अवस्था में आर्य समाज का क्या कर्तव्य है ? क्या आर्य समाज का यह कर्तव्य है कि वह पोरानिक हिन्दुजाति कि गाली गलोच और बुरे व्यव्हार से क्रोधित होकर अनुचित भाव से हिन्दुजाति को चिडाने के लिए या उसे हानि पंहुचाने के लिए इसका खंडन करे | कदापि नहीं अगर आर्य समाज ऐसा करता है तो वह अपने कर्तव्य से गिर जाएगा | क्या आर्य समाज का यह कर्तव्य है कि वह गाली गलोच और बुरे व्यव्हार से
निराश होकर ठीक तरह से बुरे रश्मो रिवाज और बुरे नियमों का खंडन करना छोड दे ? कदापि नहीं , अगर आर्य समाज ऐसा करता है तो वह अपने कर्तव्य से गिर जाता है | वह अपने कर्तव्य को पूरा नहीं करता | आर्य समाज का यह कर्तव्य है कि वह हिन्दुजाति कि गाली गलोच और बुरे व्यवहार कि कुछ भी परवाह न करते हुए नेकनीयती से हिन्दुजाति के सुधर और उसके जीवन को स्थिर रखने के लिए निरंतर इसके बुरे नियमों और रीती रिवाज का खंडन करता हुआ चले | वह समय अति निकट होगा जब हिन्दुजाति के अंदर से बुरे रस्मो रिवाज और बुरे नियम निकल जायेंगे और यह हिंदू जाति एकता में संयुक्त हो जायेगी | तब यह हिंदू जाति आर्य समाज को आशीर्वाद देगी कि इसने मेरे जीवन को नष्ट होने से बचा लिया |
इस लिए जो लोग कहते है कि आर्य समाज एक दिल दुखाने वाली संस्था है ,वे भ्रम में है | वे नहीं जानते कि आर्य समाज क्या है ? अब मै आपकी सेवा में यह बतलाना चाहता हूँ कि आर्य समाज क्या है ? अगर कोई आदमी मेरे से पूछे तो मै उसे थोड़े शब्दों में बताना चाहूँ कि आर्यसमाज क्या चीज है तो मै कहूँगा कि –
१.) आर्य समाज पीडितों का सहायक है |
२.) आर्य समाज रोगियों का डॉक्टर है |
३.) आर्य समाज सोते हुयो का चोंकिदार है |
१.) पीडितों का सहायक आर्य समाज – आर्य समाज पीडितों का सहायक है ,आर्य समाज निर्धनों का मददगार है |
जिनके अधिकारों को दुष्ट और कुटिल लोगो ने अपने पाँव के निचे कुचल दिया था उनके अधिकारों को वापस दिलाने वाली संस्था है |आर्य समाज ने अपने जीवन में किस किस कि सहायता कि है और किस किस के दबे हुए अधिकारों को वापिस दिलाया है इसकी एक लंबी सूचि बन जायेगी जिसके इस छोटे से लेख के अंदर लिखा नहीं जा सकता , फिर भी आर्य समाज ने जिन जिनकी सहायता कि है इसमें से कुछ एक का नमूने के तोर पर वर्णन करना आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है:
क) गाय आदि पशु- आर्य समाज ने सबसे पहली वकालत गाय आदि पशुओ की की | महर्षि दयानंद जी और आर्य समाज से पूर्व लोग यह मानते थे की यज्ञ में गाय आदि पशुओ को मारकर इस्नके मांस से हवन करना और बचे हुए मांस का खाना उचित है ,इस से वह पशु और यज्ञ करने वाला दोनों हि स्वर्ग में जाते है |
स्वामी दयानंद और आर्य समाज ने इस बारे में गाय आदि पशुओ की वकालत की और बताया की यज्ञ तो कहते हि उसे है जिसमे विद्वानों की प्रतिष्ठा की जावे | अच्छी संगत और दान आदि नेक काम किये जाए , फिर वेद में यह आता है  की यज्ञ उसे कहते है जिसमे किसी भी जीव का दिल ना दुखाया जाए और फिर वेद में स्थान स्थान पर यह लिखा है की यजमान के पशुओ की रक्षा की जाए | इन सब बातो से सिद्ध होता है की यज्ञ में किसी भी पशु का मारना पाप है क्योंकि किसी भी जीव का दिल दुखाये बिना मांस प्राप्त नहीं हो सकता और धार्मिक दृष्टिकोण से भी मांस खाना पाप है | और किसी भी निर्दोष जीव की हत्या करना पाप है | आर्य समाज की यह वकालत फल लायी , और सबसे पहली गोशाला रिवाड़ी में खोली गयी जिसकी आधारशिला महर्षि दयानंद जी ने अपने कर कमलों से रखी और आर्य समाज के प्रयत्नों से लाखो आदमियों ने मांसभक्षण छोड दिया | आज गो आदि पशुओ की रक्षा का विचार और मांस भक्षण न करने के प्रति विचार जो देश में उन्नति कर रहा है यह आर्य समाज की वकालत का परिणाम है |
ख) स्त्रियों की शिक्षा – स्वामी दयानंद और आर्य समाज से पूर्व स्त्रियो को शिक्षित बनाना पाप समझा जाता था , आर्य समाज ने इस विषय में स्त्रियों की वकालत की और बताया की जैसे परमात्मा की पैदा की हुयी जमीन पानी हवा, आग सूर्य आदि के प्रयोग का अधिकार पुरुषों और स्त्रियो को एक समान है और परमात्मा की बनाई हुई चीजे दोनों को लाभ पहुंचाती है वैसे हि परमात्मा में सृष्टि के आरम्भ में जो ज्ञान दिया इसको प्राप्त करने का अधिकार भी स्त्रियों और पुरुषों को समान है | आर्य समाज की यह वकालत फल लायी और इसका परिणाम यह निकला की जो लोग स्त्रियों की शिक्षा के विरुद्ध थे सैकडो कन्या पाठशालाए इन लोगो की और से खुली हुई है | आज स्त्रियां न्यायालय विभाग, वकालत, डॉक्टरी और शिक्षा में पुरुषों के समान कार्य करती हुई दृष्टिगोचर हो रही है |
वे म्युनसिपल कमेटियो ,डिस्ट्रिक्ट बोर्डो लेजिस्लेटिव असेम्बलियो और गोलमेज कांफ्रेंसो में भी पुरुषों के समा कार्य कर रही है | बल्कि भारत की प्रधानमंत्री भी स्त्री रही है | यह किसका फल है ? यह आर्य समाज की वकालत का हि परिणाम है |

३.)अनाथो की रक्षा  स्वामी दयानंद और आर्य समाज के पूर्व पौराणिक हिन्दुजाती में अनाथ बच्चो के पाले का कोई प्रबंध नहीं था जिससे हिन्दू बच्चे इसाई और मुसलमानों के अधिकार में जाकर हिन्दुजाती के शत्रु बनते थे |आर्य समाज और मह्रिषी दयानंद जी महाराज ने इस विषय में अनाथ बच्चो की वकालत की और इनके पालन पोषण के लिए सर्वप्रथम अनाथालय अजमेर में स्थापित किया | जिसकी आधार शिला मह्रिषी स्वामी दयानंद
जी महाराज ने स्वंय अपने करकमलो से राखी | आज दर्जनों अनाथालय आर्य समाज के निचे काम कर रहे है |जिनमे हजारो संख्या में हिन्दुजाती के अनाथ बच्चे सम्मिलित होकर हिन्दुजाती का अंग बन रहे है | आज अनाथो की पालना का विचार जो देश में उन्नत है यह भी आर्य समाज की वकालत का फल है |
४.)विधवा विवाह स्वामी दयानंद और आर्य समाज से पहले पौराणिक हिन्दुजाती में यह रीती थी की यदि किसी पुरुष की स्त्री मर जाती थी तो इसको दूसरी स्त्री के साथ विवाह कराने का अधिकार प्राप्त था , परन्तु यदि किसी स्त्री का पति मृत्यु का ग्रास बन जाता था तो उस स्त्री को दुसरे पुरुष से विवाह का अधिकार प्राप्त न था | इसका परिणाम यह होता था की हजारो विधवाए व्यभिचार , गर्भपात के पापो में फंस जाती थी और बहुत सी विधवाएं ईसाई और मुसलमानों के घरो को बसाकर गोघातक संतान पैदा करती थी |इस बारे में आर्य समाज ने विधवाओ की वकालत की और बतायाकि जब पुरुषो को रंडवा होने पर दुसरे विवाह का अधिकार प्राप्त है तो कोई कारण प्रतीत नहीं होता की विधवा स्त्री को दुसरे पति से विवाह करने का अधिकार क्यों प्राप्त न हो | आर्य समाज ने बतलाया यदि कोई स्त्री पति के मरने के पश्चात् ब्रह्मचारिणी रहना चाहे और ईश्वर की अराधना में अपना जीवन बितावे तो उसके लिए पुनः विवाह करना जरुरी नहीं |हाँ यदि कोई स्त्री पति के मर जाने के बाद ब्रह्मचारिणी न रहना चाहे या न रह सकती हो तो उसको दुसरे पति के साथ पुनर्विवाह करने का अधिकार प्राप्त है | आर्य समाज की यह वकालत फल लाई | इसका परिणाम यह हुआ की आज विधवाओं के विवाह के लिए कोई बाधा नहीं है |
५.)अछूतोद्धार महर्षि स्वामी दयानंद और आर्य समाज से पहले अछूतों की क्या दशा थी ? लोग इनको मनुष्य न समझते थे | लोग इनको दारियो पर बैठ कर उपदेश सुनने , कुएं पानी भरने , पाठशालाओ में शिक्षा पाने और मदिर में अराधना करने की भी आज्ञा न देते थे | इस से लाचार होकर अछूत लोग इसाई और मुसलमानों की शरण लेते थे | आर्य समाज ने इस बारे में अछूतों की वकालत की और बतलाया की मनुष्य के रूप में सब बराबर है | जन्म से न कोई छोटा है न कोई बड़ा है | प्रत्येक आदमी अपने नेक कार्यो से बड़ा बनता है | आर्य समाज की यह वकालत रंग लाइ और इसका परिणाम यह है की आज अछूतों पर से सारी बाधाएं दूर हो गयी है |और अछूत लोग शारीरिक , आत्मिक , समाजिक और आर्थिक उन्नति में दिन दुगुनी रात चौगुनी उन्नति कर रहे है | यह सब आर्य समाज की वकालत का ही फल है |
ख ) रोगियों का डॉक्टर आर्य समाज –यदि आप आर्य समाज का औषधालय देखना चाहे तो सत्यार्थ प्रकाश के अंतिम चार समुल्लासो का अध्ययन करे |इन चार समुल्लासो में आर्य समाज के प्रवर्तक ऋषि दयानंद जी ने वेद के प्रतिकूल अनेक मत मतान्तरो का ऑपरेशन किया है और वह पूर्ण रूप से सफल हुआ है |इसका प्रमाण यह है की आज भारत के सारे मत मतान्तर अपने नियमो को वेदानुकुल बनाने की चिंता में है | पौराणिक हिन्दुजाती में अनेक रोग उपस्थित थे जिनकी आर्य समाज ने चिकित्सा की | नमूने के लिए कुछ ऐसे रोगों का वर्णन करना जरुरी है |
१> अज्ञानता आर्य समाज से इस पौराणिक हिन्दुजाती में घोर अविद्या ने घर कर रखा था | लोग वेदों के नाम से भी अनभिज्ञ थे | आर्य समाज ने इन रोगों की चिकित्सा की और देश के अन्दर कन्या गुरुकुल , कन्या पाठशाला , प्राइमरी स्कूल , हाई स्कूल और विश्वविद्यालयो का जाल बिछा दिया और वेद प्रचार के लिए जगह जगह सभाए स्थापित कर दी और आर्य समाज की देखा देखि दुसरे लोगो ने जो विद्यालय खोले है वे अलग ! आज लोगो में जो संस्कृत और वेदविद्या पढने का चाव दिन प्रतिदिन बढ़ रहा है यह आर्य समाज रूपी डॉक्टर की कृपा का परिणाम है |
२) बाल विवाह , वृद्ध विवाह , बेजोड़ विवाह आर्य समाज के प्रचार से पहले छोटे छोटे बच्चो का विवाह , बुढ़ापे का विवाह और बेजोड़ विवाह इस पौराणिक हिन्दुजाती को घुन की भाँती खा रहे थे लोग छोटे छोटे बच्चो का विवाह कर देते थे | साठ वर्ष के बूढ़े के साथ चौदह वर्ष की लड़की का विवाह कर देते थे और अठारह वर्ष की लड़की का विवाह आठ वर्ष के लड़के के साथ कर देते थे | इस से ब्रह्मचर्य का नाश होकर दिन प्रतिदिन हिन्दुजाती की शारीरिक अवस्था बिगडती जा रही थी | इस रोग की चिकत्सा आर्य समाज ने की और यह नियम वेद से बतलाया की नवयुवती लड़की का विवाह नवयुवक लड़के से करना चाहिए | लड़की की आयु कम से कम सोलह वर्ष और लड़के की आयु कम से कम पच्चीस वर्ष होनी चाहिए इस बारे में लोगो ने आर्य समाज का बड़ा विरोध किया , परन्तु आर्य समाज दृढ़ संकल्प से इस कार्य में लगा रहा | अंत में आर्य समाज का प्रयत्न फल लाया और इसका पता लोगो को तब लगा सब राज्य शासन में सर्वसम्मति से शारदा बिल पास हो गया | शारदा एक्ट के आधीन चौदह वर्ष से कम आयु की लड़की और अठारह वर्ष से कम आयु के लड़के का विवाह करना कानूनी अपराध था | इसमें बदलाव होते होते लड़के और लड़की की न्यूनतम आयु अठारह कर दी गयी विवाह के लिए | यह सब आर्य समाज रूपी चिकित्सक की ही कृपा का फल है | अब बाल और वृद्धोके विवाह बहुत कम हो गये है और बेजोड़ विवाह की तो रीती ही समाप्त हो गई है |

३)अन्धविश्वास आर्य समाज के प्रचार से पूर्व यह पौराणिक हिन्दू जाति भूतपुजा , प्रेतपूजा , डाकिनी शाकिनी पूजा , पीर मदार पूजा ,गण्डा ताबीज पूजा ,बुत पूजा , इन्सान पूजा , मकान पूजा ,पानी पूजा , पशु पूजा , आग पूजा , मिट्टी पूजा , वृक्ष पूजा , श्मशान पूजा , मुसलमान पूजा , मृतक पूजा , सूर्य पूजा , चाँद पूजा इत्यादि अनेक रोगों में फंसी हुई थी | और निकट था की इन रोगों के कारण यह हमेशा के लिए मिट जाती की महर्षि दयानंद और आर्य समाज रूपी चिकित्सक ने इसकी चिकित्सा की और वेद अमृत पिला कर इसके रोगों को दूर करके इसको एक परमात्मा का पुजारी बनाकर इस जाती को अमर कर दिया | यह भी आर्य समाज रूपी चिकित्सक की कृपा का फल है |
अतः आर्यसमाज पीडितो का वकील है ,रोगियों का डॉक्टर है और सोते हुओ का चौकीदार है |इस लिए आप सबका कर्तव्य बनता है की आर्य समाज केछृथृ साथ मिल कर देश और जाति का उद्धार करने में सहायक बने |
ओउम्

Editorial, English

In Modi’s Victory is India’s Victory! Dr. Dharmveer

Leave a comment

modi

!
It is ludicrous to see people in the country debating on the capabilities required for the
position of India’s Prime Minister. In a country where Manmohan Singh could remain
the Prime Minister for 10 years, this discussion is a sheer waste of time and energy.
During his tenure, capabilities of the Prime Minister became a popular subject of
mockery and ridicule in media. As an example, a journalist once asked Manmohan
Singh, “What is two plus two?” He answered, “It should be four but let me first confirm it
with Sonia ji”. When a person like him can become India’s Prime Minister, then surely
there should be no doubt on the candidature of Narendra Modi. The only requirement
here is a majority in Parliament, capability is immaterial.! !
If someone thinks being an economist justifies Manmohan Singh’s capability to be the
Prime Minister, it is naiveté. This economist has only contributed in further ruining our
economy. There are scores of people who, in name, are the officers of the Government
of India but actually serve the American interests. Having worked earlier for them in
Institutions like the World Bank etc., they still take pride in taking orders from them.
Whether it is Mr. Manmohan Singh or Mr. Ahluwalia of the Planning Commission or our
Finance Minister, Mr. P Chindambaram, their loyalties lie with America rather than
India. Manmohan Singh left no stone unturned to achieve the Nuclear deal with the US.
He went so far as to bribe for the vote but ultimately fulfilled the US desire to accomplish
the deal. Similarly for FDI, the government bent over backwards to ensure that it was in
accordance with America’s wishes, completely neglecting Indian interests. All regional
Governments, belonging to the Opposition parties, opposed this decision, but Mr. Singh
did not heed anyone and went ahead with it. Is this the eligibility and qualification we are
talking about?! !
In India, normally, the President is a nominal head, but for the first time, India’s Prime
Minister became one. Mr. Manmohan Singh held the office but the real power remained
with Sonia Gandhi. The country in reality was being run from 10, Janpath. The decisions
taken there were released from the PMO. To be a part of Sonia Gandhi’s Council (as is
now revealed in Mr. Baru’s book: The Accidental Prime Minister), one did not have to
contest an election or be a Cabinet Minister. Being her loyalist was good enough. This
membership however had one clause – one needed to hate India and everything Indian.
If one’s heart filled with hatred on hearing the word “Hindu”, then no other qualification
was required. The greater your efforts to disintegrate India and Hindus, the more points
you gained. The perfect example of this is the “Communal violence Bill”. Sonia Gandhi
and her team would forever regret not being able to pass this bill. Efforts to shut all
Hindu Institutions and organizations, spending the offerings made to the temples for
spreading Islam and Christianity, treasury of the temples being spent on Madarsas and
missionaries, these have been the major contributions of this Government. Maligning
the image of Hindu saints and Institutions, putting Hindu reformers in jail in the name of
“Hindu Terrorism” and charging them with false accusations is what the Government has
done in the last ten years. Is this the qualification required for India’s top job?! !
“Minorities have the first right to this country’s resources” – This ideal statement by
India’s Prime Minister is the result of the policies implemented by his Government.
Never before in the history of India, were the terrorists and traitors bestowed with so
much honor and wealth as has been done by this Government, all in the name of being
from a minority community. It was only possible in Sonia’s and Manmohan’s
Government for a nation to declare its majority population as terrorists and the actual
terrorists as innocent. In a recent interview, Mr. RN Singh, who was until very recently
an officer of RAW (India’s external intelligence Agency), made a most startling
revelation on Mumbai’s 26/11 attacks: the Manmohan Singh Government and Sonia
Gandhi had planned to declare the Mumbai attack as a Hindu Terrorist Attack.
According to this plan, Ajmal Kasab was to commit suicide, then there would have been
no proof of who was behind the attack and it could have been easily termed as an
attack by the Hindu Terrorists. It would have had two advantages: Islamic Terrorism
would have been spared from another act of disgrace and all Muslim votes would have
come to the Congress. The Hindus would have borne the brunt of the incident and could
have easily been put at par with Islamic Terrorism. Shri RN Singh also revealed that
there is an ongoing conspiracy to create a history of Hindu terrorism. The Malegaon
blasts and then the Samajhauta Express accident were both declared as Hindu terrorist
acts. Some army officials were accused of being co-conspirators. It was said that they
stole RDX from the army. This is a baseless allegation, as RDX is not even used by the
army. However these people were and are still being arrested, jailed and tortured. Is
this the qualification and eligibility of Manmohan Singh that we are talking about?! !
Criticizing the Indian Army and lowering its morale, restricting and interfering with the
Army actions on the borders, unprecedented corruption and nepotism in the purchase of
Aircrafts, submarines and helicopters – They did everything in their power to weaken the
army. Humiliating its own Army General on some random issue and appointing corrupt
officials in his place is dishonesty and treason towards one’s own country. Being a
traitor is the sole qualification that he has. ! !
Manmohan Singh’s government conveniently ignored the attacks and tortures on our
soldiers by China, Pakistan and Bangladesh. China has been repeatedly encroaching
our borders. Forget about retaliation, the government did not even register a token
protest. Only those who have no respect and love for their country can behave like that. ! !
Under their skewed policies of Muslim appeasement at all cost, the Government
destroyed the entire security structure of the country. With fake encounters and a pro
terrorist policy, it made the Intelligence Bureau (India’s internal security agency) fight
with RAW (Research Analysis Wing, External security agency of India) and with the CBI.
It not only undermined the reputation and prestige of these services, but lowered the
morale of the officers working in them, making India even more vulnerable. It had no
scruples in humiliating those who sacrificed their lives for the country. They were not
even spared posthumously. The terrorism in Punjab could not have been tackled without
a brave and dedicated officer like Mr. Gill. Even he was not spared. A low level officer
was instigated to accuse him of the death of innocent people in fake encounters. There
is no security apparatus that has not been systematically destroyed and no department
whose officers have not been left disenchanted. On various international fora, in the
parliament, foreign missions and other platforms, they talked again and again about
saffron terror, Hindu Terror and RSS terror. Hindus have been made synonymous with
terrorism and RSS has been portrayed as the training ground for Hindu terrorists. This
is the game plan through which they plan to rule this nation. ! !
Whilst patriots were being punished for doing their duties, the traitors were being
showered with awards and honors. Dr. Binayak Sen, a known Maoist sympathizer and
activist, was arrested on account of his anti-national activities. Human Rights agencies
worked over-night to get him released and even came to India to inspect our justice
system. Finally when released on bail, it was celebrated as justice having prevailed. On
his release, Dr. Binayak Sen was promplty made a member of the Planning
Commission. He is now working towards punishing the people who work for the country.! !
India is being attacked by terrorists and they are being protected by the Government
and the NGOs. This is a strange country where its own Government first invites
terrorists, then provides them protection by standing between the terrorists and
judiciary. Our forces are sent on the borders with their hands tied. The terrorists decide
the number of soldiers and army posts for different areas. For instance, though the
armed forces have been successful in crushing the terrorist movement in Kashmir, the
only credit they ever got was that of destroying innocent lives. The Armed Forces
Special Act, which has helped in nabbing terrorists, is seen as a violation of Human
Rights. Nowadays we hear voices saying that the number of army men in Kashmir
needs to be reduced and the Armed Forces Special Act to be expunged. Kashmir being
a part of India is being contested by those organizations which are funded by terrorist
organizations. Prashant Bhushan, a known terrorist sympathizer, has no qualms in
declaring Kashmir a part of Pakistan. His political organization “AAP” shows Kashmir as
a part of Pakistan. Is providing patronage to anti nationals the only qualification to be
India’s Prime Minister?!
!
The Government forbids our soldiers from opening fire. It says if you have to fire, fire
slowly. Army is still to understand what is meant by that. It is a gross misfortune and
injustice to our soldiers that if they act under the instructions of the Government,
innocent people lose their lives and they are termed inefficient. If they do their duty and
kill terrorists, they face legal action for causing fake encounters. This Government
naturally considers the life of a single terrorist far more valuable than the lives of
hundreds of innocent men and women.! !
During Punjab insurgency about 20,000–25,000 people lost their lives. In Kashmir,
40,000 people died due to terror attacks. Naxalites have killed thousands in different
parts of India. No Government, no NGO or Human Rights Group talks about them, their
rights and our duty towards them. When a terrorist is killed in an encounter, NGOs,
Human Rights Groups and even foreign Governments come forward to his defense. Not
to mention the Government of India being the front runner. Laws are normally there to
protect the citizens of the country; the only law that is an exception is the “Human
Rights Law”. No other law has been abused the way this law has been. The primary
purpose of this law is to protect the terrorists. It is safe to say that it has become the first
and the last refuge of the scoundrels masquerading as the Government of India and
Non-Governmental Organizations. They get funding for providing protection to terrorists.
People of India don’t mean anything to these self-serving groups. We need a law that
protects India and the Indians who fight for the country and this certainly cannot be
done by this Government. ! !
Today, using these laws we have been enslaved by these organizations and people,
who are keen on breaking India into fragments. Today more than ever we need
someone who calls this country as his own, who stands for this country, represents this
country and believes in it. We need someone who can become a symbol of a capable,
strong and great nation.! !
For the last 15 years there is only one person who has been fighting these anti national
forces. Yes he is not a top notch economist and doesn’t hold a foreign degree, the
degree that is awarded only by USA’s approval. He has been called harbinger of death,
a terrorist and Hitler. Muslims and Christians call him an enemy of the minority
communities. For the last 10 years, the Government of India has left no stone unturned
to demonize him. All Government agencies have been trying to prove him guilty. All
Commissions, foreign Governments, Institutions want to see him behind bars. To enable
this, the Supreme Court appointed the SIT outside of Gujarat. No Literature Fest, no
news article or program, no event is complete without denouncing him. To the pseudo
intelligentsia of this nation, his name is synonymous with evil and terrorism. Christians
don’t trust him and Muslims see him as their enemy. Politically he is a pariah. His own
party people consider him arrogant. Governments of Europe and United States, all
news channels, all newspapers, all leading politicians, foreign journals, and his own
party men have used all their might to destroy him, to defeat and demean him. The
reporters even found out his estranged wife, leveled snooping charges, and he is still
standing unfazed, undefeated and firm. He is challenging his enemies. Is this quality not
enough to be the Prime Minister of India? Narendra Modi is the Arjun of this
Mahabharat. He is heard saying like Arjuna – ‘Neither will I run away nor will I plead!!

English, Uncategorized, Vedic Religion

FROM VEDIC TO CLASSICAL SANSKRIT (DEVELOPMENT OR DECAY)

1 Comment

development or decoy

FROM VEDIC TO CLASSICAL SANSKRIT (DEVELOPMENT OR DECAY)

Author : Pt Dharmdev Vidyamartand 

Three is a word of difference between the Vedic language and the Classical Sanskrit of the epics, sastras, kavyas….. At times the meaning of a word may undergo a sea change !

IN TERMS OF WORDS

The word sachí for instance, is used in the classical Sanskrit for ‘lndra`s wife’, whereas in the Vedic Lexicon Nighantu, it is en-joined for ‘speech, wisdom, action’ (vide Nigh.)-

shachi

The words vrtra, asum are used in Sanskrit as the name of a Raksasa (and for ‘raksasa‘ in general), but in Vedic they are two epithets, usually, of ‘cloud’-

vrutra

The word ‘ahí‘ is used in Sanskrit for serpent, while in Vedic, it stands for cloud again.

ahi

The word adri, parvata, giri are used in Sanskrit for mountain, but in Vedic they again denote cloud-

varah

The word ghrta is used in Sanskrit for clarified butter, in Vedic for water-

ghrutam

In Sanskrit, the word visa is used for poison but, according to the Vedic Nighantu, it is one of the many names ofwater-

vish

ln Sanskrit, the Word varaha is used for ‘boar’, but in Vedic it is given for cloud-

varah

In Sankrit asman and gravan are used for stone, but in Vedic they are shown as denoting cloud-

ashma

The word dhara is used in Sanskrit for flow or current but in Vedic it is used for speech-

dhara

The word ghrtací is used in Sanskrit for dancing girl, but in Vedic it denotes night-

ghrut

The word gaya is used in Sanskrit for a particular place where oblations are offered, but in the Vedic Nighantu, gaya means progency, wealth, home.

gaya

IN TERMS OF GRAMMAR

On the score of grammar, Vedic naturally differs from Classical Sanskrit in extension as well as in depth. Panini’s Astadhyayi refers to this vedic freedom of scope through aphorisms like.

bahulam

bahulam 1

Quite a few among Western linguists and philosophers hold that there has always been a growth, a development and an evolution in language :

T. Burrow, for instance, says in Sanskrit Language, “Many [of the changes of meaning] occured in the natural growth of the language.”

F. Bopp, in Comparative Grammar 0f Sanskrit, Greek, Latin and Other Languages, vol. l, has used the word ‘development’, in this connection; “[Of] language in its Stages of being and march of development.”

A.B. Keith has also opted for the view ‘development’, saying: “From the language of the Rigveda one can trace a steady development to Classical Sanskrit.” (History of Sanskrit Literature.)

Some Indian philologists, too, who have followed Western Writers, have held the same view. For instance : “From the cry and onomatopoeia with their various combinations, by means of association and metaphor, we arrive at a Vocabulary, sufficient for the purpose of the primitive man”…”The small original stock is improved upon and added to by manipulation of various kinds, based upon the association of various kinds, and on metaphor”.

But, when we compare the most ancient Vedic language with the modem Classical Sanskrit, we find that, instead of ‘growth’ or ‘development’, there has been ‘decay’.

For instance : (1) in the Vedic Lexicon Nighantu, at 1.2 we find 57 synonyms of vac (speech) like-

shlok 1

shlok 2

Very few of them have survived in classical Sanskrit : Amara Kosa, for instance, gives only the following-

brahmi

lt is growth or decay ? Let the reader on his own decide.

To give yet another illustration, in Vedic 101 names are listed for ‘water’, including-

jambh

But in the Amara Kosa only 27 remain ;

 

 

aapah

There are 37 names of megha (cloud) in Nighantu, in the Amara Kosa only 15-

grava

Among the 26 names of karma (action, work), including-

ambh

-only 2 (karma and karyam) are found in the Amara Kosa.

Many more examples could be given to show how, down the centuries, it has not been a case of growth or development, but rather one of decay in language.

lt is gratifying to note that some distinguished western linguists also are opposed to this theory of growth or evolution in language. We cite four of them :

V. VENDRYES in his book Language observes :

‘Certainly, modern languages, such as English and French, rejoice in an extreme suppleness, ease and flexibility; but [accordingly] can we maintain that the classical tongues, like Greek or Latin, are inferior to [any of these] ? It [Greek] is a language whose very essence is godlike.. If we have once acquired the taste for it, all other languages seem harsh after it… The outward form of the Greek language is itself a delight to the soul. Never was a more beautiful instrument fashioned to express human thought.

WILLIAM JONES : ‘The Sanskrit language, whatever be its antiquity, is of a wonderful structure-more perfect than Greek, more copious than Latin, and more exquisitely refined than French or Spanish.’

MAX MULLER : says they have reduced the rich and powerful idiom of the poets of Veda to the meagre and impure jargon of the modem sepoy’.

He adds : “We are accustomed to call these changes ‘growth’ of language, but it would be more appropriate to call this a process of phonetic change or decay. ”

‘On the whole, the history of all the Aryan languages is nothing but a gradual process of decay.’

‘Lecures on the Science of Language, vol.l

And GRAY, lastly, has to say this (Foundations of Language) :

‘In lndo-European, we find 8 distinct case-forms in Sanskrit; Greek and Lithuanian have 7, Hittite and Old Church Slavic 5, Old French and Modem English only 2, Albanian 4. And American and Old English 3. This reduction in the number of case-forms-with  the result that some of them take over the functions of one or more others-gives rise to the linguistic phrase now known as syncretism. The reason for this seems to be phonetic decay of the characteristic case-endings.’

‘the mother of languages’

VEDIC-THE MOTHER OF ALL LANGUAGES

From the study of many of the historical languages of the world we have been driven to the inevitable conclusion that it is not Classical Sanskrit (which of course is the first daughter of the mother), but Vedic, that is the mother of all languages of the world.

A FEW EXAMPLES

1. Vasra-in Vedic and, in its slightly different or corrupt forms, in different languages of the world :

The word [vasra] has been used in the Rigveda on the following occasions-vasra 1O.119.4; vasra’iva 1.33.2, 1.28.8; 2.34.15; 7.149.4; 1.37.11, 1.96.6; 6.7.7, 9.1.37, 10.75.4.

In the other Vedas also the word is used frequently. All commentators of Veda are unanimous in holding that the word is derived from V vasr ‘sabde‘ and stands for cow (lowing, ‘making sound’.

vashra

Now, it is to be noted that there is no mention of this word in the Amara Kosa, or in any other lexicon of Sanskrit; nor do we find it generally used in the classical literature. Withal, the word is used for `cow’ in the French, Spanish, Portuguese and Italian languages in slightly different (corrupt) forms.

ln French it is vache; in Spanish vaen : in Portugese vaca ; and in Italian la vaces. [Also, likewise, in the languages of Europe the words derived from go are used for English cow : Swedish ko ; Danish ko ; Dutch koe ; German kuh].

2. To take another example, we may examine Vedic ‘irman ‘ for ‘arm’.

lt is from this (irman) alone that the word ‘arm’ is derived. With its Swedish, Danish, Dutch and German variants in COD, for Apisali states in his Siksa (as also Bharate in his Natyasatra) that ‘sarva-mukha-sthaniyan a-varnam’ ! agni : ignis (Lat.).

3. Another very common word, which may be mentioned in this connection, is dama. According to Nighantu 3.4, it is a grhanama (home)-

jaaya

But in Sanskrit literature and in classical lexicons, like the Amarakosa, dama occurs nowhere in the sense of ‘home’ or ‘wife.’

And so we should not be surprised to find the word, with slight changes, used in several languages of Europe-English, Swedish, Danish, Dutch, German in the sense of ‘lady’ : dame, dane, dem.

4. mira (ocean) ‘submarine fire’ and also vadavagni ! ; German meer ; French la mer ; Spanish and Portugese mar.

5. apa’ ítí-‘karma’-nama (Nighantu. 2.1) ; opus (Latin), operation (English).

These five exmples should suffice to show that Vedic is the most ancient-and accordingly, the mother-of all languages.

MULTIPLICATION OF LANGUAGES

lf, Vedic is the universal mother (or foster-mother as some would like to call it), the question naturally arises : how these hundreds and thousands of languages and dialects have sprung up from that one source. How to explain their multifurcation ?

The answer may be briefly given as follows (taking into consideration what native and foreign scholars have written on the subject) Some probable causes suggested are :

PROBABLE CAUSES

(l) Physiological causes– when some people cannot pronounce some difficult sounds on account of some defect in the anatomy;

(2) Geographical surroundings-sometimes making it difficult to pronounce words correctly (due to severe cold.);

(3) Communication and Correspondence (difficulties)- people of distant lands also sometimes cause pidgin-like change(s) in the language and its pronunciation ;

(4) Change of model-e.g., a new king may ascend the throne and his subjects begin copying his style ;

(5) Association-also causes change,

Examples

yasya

(6) Analogy-is defined (by Vendryes) as “the power of other words in a languages to exempt any special word from the operation of phonetic laws or to compensate it for changes which those laws may press or produce.”

0ne clear instance of this change by analogy is cows. ln Old English it was spelt (inflected) as kine ; but, as table, book, boy and other words are formed by just adding an “s” at the end, so the plural of cow also became cows-(though foot did not become foots such as.

(7) Economy of effort-with regular vagaries-

(a) varna-viparyaya or ‘metathesis’ :

budhe

(b) varna-lopa (dropping out of a letter, usually owing to inadvertence) :

chaturiya

(c) samikarana-(assimilation) :

yasya 1

cf. Edward Sturtivant (Introduction to linguistic Science : “Of great linguistic importance is the assimilation of contiguous consonants”

(d) viprakasa-(dissimilation) :

mukur

(e) svara-bhakti (hiatus) :

bhawati

(f) agro’pajana-(prothesis)

school

(g) sthana-viparyaya-(interchange) :

signal

The following verse, quoted by Durgacarya in his ‘gloss’ on the Nirukta(Ch. 1), gives in brief most of these ‘rules’ :

varno

(1)    pro/epen/post-thesis ; (2) interchange ; (3) distortion ;

(1)(4) elision; (5) ‘sense suggesting = engendering another sound!’.

(1)In various fonns of P/’akrta and in English, Greek, Latin,Russian and other languages ‘changes’ have taken place according to the above ‘rules’. It is thus that words actually become corrupt and new languages spring up. Defective and imperfect scripts also have helped in the distortion of a ‘pure` language no less :

(1)In Tamil (script) there are only k and n ; c and n ; t and n ; t and

(1)n ; p and m. [In Arabic script there is no p.]

(1)In English there is no provision for t, th, d dh, n ;

(1)In French there is no room for t, th, d, dh, n.

PASTO & SANSKRIT

Pashto is the language spoken by Pathans and allied tribals of the North-Western Frontier. The author learnt from a letter, received from the Vice-Chancellor of Peshawar University, some years back, that “here Sanskrit is compulsory for all students of languages, as it is thought here, said the letter that, abounding in Sanskrit Vocabulary as it is, Pashto cannot be mastered without a good

grounding in Sanskrit.”

Following is the list of some Sanskrit words, with their Pasto variants, to stress the point :

sanskrit

sanskrit 1

Also, for ‘grandfather’ the Pashto is Nikoh-derived from ‘niskrodha’-free from anger and, therefore., loving ; likewise, for grandmother anniya ‘anna-datri“,? But, we are just suggesting ; nothing more.

SANSKRIT & SOUTH INDIAN LANGUAGES

There are some words in the South Indian languages, which have their origin in Sanskrit.

On studying Kasakrtsna-Dhatupatha-Vrtti with the gloss of Channa-Vira Kavi, we have come to know of these ‘suspected origins’ ever more clearly-ever more surely. It should be borne in mind that Kasakrtsna had been a South-Indian grammarian centuries before Panini, recording some 800 more roots, i.e., in addition to the 2000 found in Panini !

(1) amma / avva, tayi-mother : These are the words used for ‘mother’ in different parts of the country.

Of these amma-(1) is considered by some a corruption of ‘amba’ ; but according to Kasakrtsna’s Dhatupathavrtti, it is derived from V amm ‘gatau’ (1.224) ; avva (2) from V avv-bandha-ne-palane (1-226) ;t’yt (3) from V tayr, ‘santana-palanayon’(1.493).

[In Tamil the word used for mother, tadar, too appears to have come from the same root] In Marathi, the word used for ‘mother’ is dyt V ay gat au (1.485)

(2) appa = pitar (in Kannada, Tulgu and some other South Indian languages) from V app palane !

(3) ammi-putrí from V amm gatau (Kannada).

(4) akka ‘elder sister’ (Kan.) from V akk bandane + palane.

(5) atta, mother-in-law ; attika, sister-in-law (Kan.) from V at gatau.

(6) appa-‘elder brother’ (Kan.) from V ap sabde (1.206).

(7) nathi, dog (Kan., Tam.) from V nin ‘prapane’.

(8) dana, animal (Kan.) from V dhan ‘calane’.

(9) hana = wealth, woman (Kan.) from V han sabde. (niskasya dasamo bhagah.)

(10) duddu, money (Kan.) from V duddu dharane.

(11) gíni, parrot (Kan.) from V gin sabde.

(12) gande, wall (Kan.) from V gadi bandhane.

(13) vayí, mouth (K. and Ta.) from V vay gatau.

(14) ane, hand (K., Ta.) from V an prapane.

(15) avu, cow (Tel.) from V av palane. cf. ava-ni=’gau’ (earth)!

(16) nalla, good (Tam.) from V nall palane.

(17) ganda-pati, husband (Kan.) from V gadí vadaníkadese (sahayyam karoti)-cheek-by-j owl.

(18) guli, bull (Kan.) from V gul bhaksane.

(19) gulle, bubble, foam (Kan.) from V gull bhavane(vivarte).

(20) hammu, pride (Kan.) from V hammu gatau (brain-wave)

(21) pandu, fruit (Tel.) from V padí gatau.

(22) jenu, honey (moon face ?), Kan. from V jin sambhaktau !

(23) channa, honey, fair lady (Kan. et al) from V cann sambhaktau!

(24) havu, serpent from V havva (ghost) Kan.

(25) hedi, coward (Kan) from V hedr calane ?

VEDIC AND THE REST

Comparative lists of words of different European languages clearly establish the affinity of these languages to Sanskrit. The question remains to be answered is : what relationship Sanskrit bears to the different languages of the world ? Is it Sister/aunt/mother of them? It is here that scholars widely differ. Max Muller : “Sanskrit, no doubt, has an immense advantage over all the other ancient languages of the East. lt is so attractive and has been so widely admired that it almost seems at times to excite a certain amount of feminine jealousy.. We are ourselves lndo-Europeans. In a certain sense we are still speaking and thinking Sanskrit ; or, more correctly, Sanskrit is like a dear aunt to us and [vasudhaiva kutumbakam] she [responsibly] takes the place of a mother who is no more. [Chips from a German Workshop] vol. 5.

It (Sanskrit) is the most regular language known, and is especially remarkable-as containing the roots of the various languages of Europe-Greek, Latin, German, Slavonic, says Baron Cuvier in Lectures on the Natural Sciences.”

And here is what Adelung has to say in “Sanskrit Language”. “The great number of languages, which are said to owe their origin – or bear a close affinity-to Sanskrit, is truly astonishing and-is yet another proof of the latter’s high antiquity. Rudiger avers it to be the parent of upwards of a hundred languages and dialects among which he enumerates l2 Indian, 7 Median Persic, 2 Austric Albanian, 7 Greek, 18 Latin, 14 Slavonic, and 6 Celtic Gallic. The various vocabularies, which we now possess as a result of laborious and learned investigations, render it pretty evident that Sanskrit has not only furnished words for all the languages of Europe, but forms a main feature in almost all those of the East. A host of writers have made it the immediate parent of the Greek and Latin and German families of languages [no less]

Bopp in Edinburgh Review, vol. 33, expresses his opinion that “At one time, Sanskrit was the one languages spoken all over the world.”

And lastly, to quote from W.C. Taylor’s “India in Greece” :

It was an astounding discovery that Hindustan possessed a language of unrivalled richness and variety, a language the parent of all those dialects that Europe has fondly called classical-the source alike of the Greek flexibility and the Roman strength, a philosophy compared with which lessons of Pythagoras are but of yesterday [in point of age, in point of enduring speculation], Plato’s boldest efforts [sound] tame and commonplace…a poetry more purely intellectual than any of which we had before any conception, and a system of science whose antiquity baffles all powers of astronomical calculations. This literature, with all its colossal proportions, which can scarcely be described with-out [a] semblance of bombast and exaggeration, claims of course, a place for itself-it stands alone, [has been] able to stand alone. Its literature seems exhaustless. The utmost [of] stretch-of-imagination can scarce comprehend its boundless mythology. Its philosophy, far from shunning, has touched upon every metaphysical difficulty [and has much to contribute on each and every issue].

lt is, thus, clear that many impartial linguists and philologists of the West also admit that Sanskrit is the mother (not sister or aunt) of all the important languages of the world. It is unfortunate that, even in India, not much attention is being paid to the study and spread of Sanskrit either by the people or by the Government. It is high time the study of Sanskrit is made compulsory at schools and in colleges, throughout the country.

 

English, Veda and Science

SOUL, MAGIC, GAMBLING & POLYGAMY ARE IN VEDAS ?

Leave a comment

soul_body

SOUL, MAGIC, GAMBLING & POLYGAMY

Author : Pt Dharmadev Vidyamartand

Besides discussing the notions of transmigration of soul and theory of action, we will discuss in this chapter, whether there was magic, drinking, gambling, and polygamy during the Vedic Age.

TRANSMIGRATION OF SOUL

An impression is sought to have been created by the authors of the Vedic Age that the Vedic Aryas had neither definite knowledge of the transmigration of soul nor were they interested in its theoretical aspects.

For instance it is written in this book:-

“ As the Rigvedic Aryas were full of the “Joíe de viver” (joy of life), they were not particularly interested in the life after death, much less had they any special doctrines about it. We can, therefore , glean only a few notices of life beyond, that are scattered throughout the Rigveda. In our search for any reference implicit or explicit, to rebirth or transmigration, we come across only a few doubtful passages. According to R.V.1.164.30, the soul (Jivah) of the dead one moves in its own power; the immortal one having a common origin with the mortal one (the body). But this transmigration is not certain.”

“So we may conclude that only the germs of the conception of rebirth were there, and those developed either naturally or through the influence of ideas current among the original tribes with whom the Aryans came into contact”

But careful perusal of the text will show that there are clear references to soul and its transmigration in the Vedas.

In Rigvedas it is clearly stated that the soul which inhabits this ephemeral body, is eternal, permanent and true:

rig 6.9.4

(“Behold this (individual spirit) the first being which enjoys (consequence of his actions) as it is the immortal light placed within the mortal frame. That has manifested itself. This immortal soul is staying (in the body) while it seems growing with the growth of its body.”

The theory of rebirth also finds expression in the following mantra from the Rigveda:-

rebirth in rigveda

(May I have glance at the indestructible Lord of the sense organs (i.e. the individual soul) which ever walk, through the pathways of coming (birth) and departure (death); it traverses its path with its body and even without it and having covered itself with its actions (i.e. in accordance with its good and evil actions), it comes (takes birth) again and again in the various worlds.”

GOD AND SOUL

The relation of soul with God and difference between the two have been clearly enunciated in the following mantra:-

rig 1.64.20

(Like two birds, there are two spirits i.e. the finite and the Supreme which, knit with the bonds of friendship, reside on the same tree (of the material universe). One of the twain (i.e. the finite spirit)

enjoys the sweet ripe fruit (and also the bitter one) produced by his good or bad actions, whereas the other (i.e. the Supreme Spirit) simply looks all around without enjoying its fruitage.”

THE SOUL THROUGH THE AGES

There is clear description of the soul incarnating itself in different bodies according to one’s own actions:-

soul 1

“O individual soul! in accordance with thine actions, thou assumes the form of a woman and that of a man, sometimes thou becomes a virgin, thou walkest with the help of 21 staff when thy body becomes old and frail, thou takest birth again and again as thy face is turned towards all directions (in accordance with thy actions).

soul 2

(This individual soul, sometimes it becomes their father and sometimes their son too, and sometimes becomes their elder brother and sometimes it even becomes their younger brother. Verily, the one self of luminous soul dwelling within the mind, has taken birth before and verily it again enters the womb of the mother.)

soul 3

(O God of life, please give us eyes again in our future life and give us breath, in this world and confer on us all necessary objects of enjoyment; O most Gracious Being! May we see the rising sun for  a long time, be kind upon us and give us blessings,)

In the following mantra from Yajurveda (4. 1 5), a devotee plays to God for a good life in the birth to come:

yajurveda 4.15

(May I receive, through the grace of God, my mind again in future life, may I have life again, may I get breathe again, may my soul return again and may I be the possessor of eyes and ears again in future life; may Self Refulgent God, keep us safe from misfortune and dishonor.)

In Atharva Veda, the use of स उ जायते पुन: most certainly confirms the Vedic theory of transmigration of soul:

soul 4

(The individual soul wanders within the womb of mother and takes birth again and again in bodies of intelligent persons. It exists in past, present and future; when it becomes a father, it again enters into the body of a son with the powers of his actions.)

Reproduced below are two mantras from Atharveda in this connection:-

soul 5

(May the earth give us birth again and may the shining heavenly region and the atmosphere restore the same to us; may Soma, All Creating God, give us body again (after our death) and may the All Nourishing God, lead us on the path of peace and happiness.)

And also:-

soul 6.1

soul 6.2

(May I again receive my sense organs in my future life and may I receive my spirit, together with worldly possessions and knowledge Divine so that I may perform fire-offering on the altars and may ever attain prosperity.) `

THEORY OF ACTION

In Vedas there is a great emphasis on action and industry. lt is clearly mentioned in the vedas that one cannot achieve progress and prosperity through mere performance of yajnas, singing euologies to God or offering prayers to him.

The Vedic Age, however, seeks to create an impression that devotees have been instructed in the Vedas to seek more and more gifts from God by flattering songs and ritualistic sacrifices.

But this is not true. For instance, it is clearly mentioned in the Rigveda that God never befriends a person Who avoids hard work or industry :

rig 4.33.15

ln Yujurveda, there is clear instruction to desire a long life full of action:

soul in yajur

PRAYERS FOR PURITY

In Vedic Age, very serious allegation has been made against the Rishis :-

“Absence of evil is not what they pray for. Their supreme desire is to triumph over poverty and resistance”

In the 97th  hymn of the First mandala of the Rigveda, there are 8 mantras, each of which ends with अप न: शोशुचदघम (O God destroy our sins). Some of these mantras are reproduced below:-

prayer 1

(O God, may we become yours. Destroy our sins.)

prayer 2

(May with Thy mercy, O Omnipresent Lord, all our sins be destroyed -may we never commit sins again).

prayer 3

(Just as sea is crossed through ship, may we cross this miserable world through Thy Grace – May our sins be destroyed.)

POLYGAMY AND VEDAS

Of many misconceptions about the Vedas propagated by the authors of Vedic Age, one pertains to polygamy.

It is written in the Vedic Age:-

“The Rigveda certainly permits polygamy, though monogamy may have been the rule. Whether monogamy developed from polygamy in the Rigvedic Age as Zimmer thinks in “Altindísche Leben “, or whether polygamy is secondary as Weber believes in “Indische Studeíern” cannot be decided-Probably polygamy, though allowed, was practically confined to the “Rajanya” class. Polyandry is not referred to anywhere in the Rigveda.”

It may be stressed that monogamy is considered best in the Vedas. Some of the mantras indicating this ideal have also been referred in the Vedic Age which also acknowledges that monogamy was the rule though polygamy was allowed. For instance, in Rigvedas 1.124.32 and 1O.74.4  जायेव पत्य उशती सुवासा: means knowledge reveals itself to the scholars, just as a woman draped in her best attire, presents herself before her husband. It may also be mentioned here that the words जाया and पत्या are both singular in number and, therefore, clearly indicate monogamy.

In the following mantra from the Rigveda God has been compared to a “chaste woman” of a noble character :

rigvedic god

(He who is like the sun, the supporter of the universe, who abides on earth like a king with good friends, who is like heroes at home- and who is like the irreproachable Wife, beloved of her husband.)

In the following mantra from Rigveda, one of the four comparisons which have been made to express a devotee’s desire for God to turn to him is that of a husband for wife :-

rigveda god 1

“As kine turn to the Village, as warriors to their steeds, as loving milk-giving cows to their calves, a husband to the Wife, so may the Deity, the Upholder of the heavens, Lord of all Bliss, turn towards us”.

In the hymn about marriage in Rigveda (10.85.30) a bride is enjoined to work for the happiness and pleasure of her husband :-

rig 10.85.30

(Shining like the sun, oh, bride, full of tapas, ascend this chariot and go to thy husband”s home to add to His pleasure and happiness.)

In the following mantra, the bride has been blessed to live with her husband and never be separated :

rigveda god 2

(May you always live together happily in your home-may you lead a happy, prosperous married life.)

In the following mantra both husband and wife make a declaration that their hearts will be united with each other like water which is cool and peaceful.)

rigveda god 3

ln the following mantra, the Wife says to her husband :

rigveda god 4

(Establish me firmly in your heart. May our hearts be united.)

rigveda god 5

(May you be mine entirely. May you never even praise other women in my presence.) ‘

The following mantras may also be quoted in support of this Vedic ideal of polygamy :

rig 14.2.64

In these mantras also, there is an instruction to the couples to love each other like “chakva-chakvi ” (love birds) and use sweet words for each other.)

Because of a few similies in the Rigveda, the authors of the Vedic Age have tried to establish the existence of polygamy during the Vedic period which is very erroneous. A large number of quotations against polygamy in the vedas render such interpretations infructuous.

For instance, take the following mantra, in which a person, tortured by the worldly agonies, has been compared to a person annoyed or troubled by co-wives :-

cowives

And also in the following mantra, it is written that a person, having two wives, is pressed from both sides like a neighing horse driving a chariot which is pressed between two spokes :-

two spokes

While there is provision for only one marriage in the Vedas, in exceptional cases, “Niyoga” (temporary alliance of wife with a stranger), is permitted with a limited purpose.

GAMBLING/ DRINKING IN THE VEDIC PERIOD

Vedic Age describes dice playing as one of the principal amusements of the Vedic period. It says :-

“Dice was another amusement. The number of dice, the method of dice playing and the names of the throws are all described in detail in the various texts of this (Yajur Veda) period A ritual game of dice is played at the Agnyadheya and the Rajasuya  cennonies – so gambling is probably sought to be restricted by elevating racing and dicing to the rank of religious ceremonies.”

The book has, however, failed to mention where the details of dice playing have been given in Yajurveda. We cannot believe in what they say unless they produce some evidence in support of their contention. Such an evidence is impossible to produce. (because it is not there at all.)

Moreover there is another reason for not believing them because what they have said is quite contrary to the injunctions against gambling in the hymn l 0.34 of the Rigveda (which is entirely devoted to this subject). ln some of the mantras of this hymn, it is clearly stated that gambling bums the heart of a person like the charcoal which though apparently cool from outside, is potentially destructive.

lt is also said that the family members of a gambler-his parents, Wife, brother etc, also disown him when he runs into debt because of this game :

gambling 1

In the end there is clear instruction against gambling in the most unequivocal terms : अक्षौर्या दिव्य (O man, no gambling.)

A gambler is told that he would enjoy the blessings and pleasures of the family life only when he earns money by industry, by such work as agriculture :

agriculture

It there is a provision anywhere for gambling or dice playing on the occasion of some Yajnas, it should be considered only as an interpolation without the sanction or authority of the vedas; it is, therefore, unauthentic and without merit.

One might say that even a highly religious man like Yudhistira used to gamble. But does it go to prove that gambling is a meritorious thing? We may recall what Lord Krishna had told him: if he were in Dwaraka he would never have let him indulge in this game asserting that its consequences are disasterous :

mahabharat 5

mahabharat 6

In these shlokas he counts gambling among the four vices which destroy a man’s beauty and his wealth (the other three being women, hunting and drinking).

DRINKING

Vedas have clearly instructed against drinking in the same way as against gambling.

Among the seven vices (even one of which makes a man sinner) is also drinking :

drinking 1

Yaskacharya has described these seven vices as follows in Nírukta :

drinking 2

(Theft, corruption, killing of righteous persons, abortion, falshehood, repeating a bad action and drinking.)

In Rigveda there is a mantra which described how the men who drink do not feel ashamed even in undressing themselves and looking at each other in naked bodies.

drinking 3

Drinking and gambling have been described in Rigveda as actions which lead to अधर्म (unrighteousness).

drinking 4

In Atharva Veda (6.7O. 1) meat eating, drinking and gambling have been placed in the same category and described as condemnable and prohibited :-

drinking 5

It is alleged in the “Vedic Age” that the risis remained intoxicated under the influence of “soma” which was misunderstood as a kind of a liquor.

In fact, the word Soma सोम: which occurs in the following mantras stands for God, who is described as the producer of all herbs, water, firmament, earth, sky, fire, sun and air illuminator and Master of the whole universe and Omnipresent.

Addressing God a devotee says; “King of this entire Universe, O Lord, Thou who art, Omniscient and Knower of everything and Repository of all virtues and Father of all “devas° purify me :

drinking 6

Can even an idiot take the word “Soma ” for a herb or a medicine in this context? There is not an iota of doubt that this word has been used only for God because He alone is and can be Omnipresent, Omniscient and the Master of the universe.

While the word ‘Soma ‘ has been used for God, at times it is also meant to denote affectionate devotion to God which is coupled with the true knowledge of His attributes. For instance, in Rigveda’s 9.108.1, it is stated:

rig 9.108.1

Here ‘soma ` is described as spiritual intoxication induced by true devotion(इन्द्राय क्रतु वितभो ).

This spiritual intoxication is naturally different from the intoxication induced by liquor or drinks.

In Rigveda and Samveda, the word soma has been described thus :-

drinking 7

(This soma which is full of sweetness ( मधुमान) is purifier( पावक: ) inducer of virtues ( देवावी ) and destroyer of all impure sentiment’s ( अधं शंसहा )

lt is clear from the above that this soma is not used for simple liquor but Spiritual intoxication which results from devotion, knowledge and purification.

In the same Vedas, Soma has been invoked for purification, strength and intellects :

drinking 8

Such a description of the ordinary liquor, which pollutes the intellects, is quite incongruous.

The following mantra, which occurs both in the Rigveda as well as Samaveda, gives a very clear cut account of Soma :

drinking 9

(O, Soma, the Illuminater  and Purifier, Thou proclaim-est immortality for all.)

This mantra leaves in no doubt about the true meaning, rather nature, of Soma-which is a declaration of Conquest over death (i.e., immortality).

The following mantras, from Rigveda also confirms that besides God, the word “Soma` means spiritual intoxication :-

drinking 10

ln the above mantras the word `soma’ has been described as giver of Peace, purifier, born of Truth and embodiment of knowledge etc.

Hundreds of mantras can be quoted to prove that the meaning of the word ‘ Soma” as interpreted by contributors to the Vedic Age is completely wrong. Their contention that the Risis remained drunk all the times is, therefore, completely baseless.

||इति||

 

 

English, Veda and Science

“ARYA” AND ‘ANARYA’

4 Comments

meaning of arya

 “ARYA” AND ‘ANARYA’

Author : Pt Dharmdev Vidyamartand 

Western scholars have repeatedly said in their works that Aryas came from outside (most probably from Middle Asia) and committed a lot of atrocities on aborigins (Dravidians) who were called by Aryas as “Das “ or “Dasus ” or Anaryas.

Their view also finds its echo in the “Vedic Age” in which it is stated : “The Aryan invaders or immigrants found in India two groups of people, one whom they named the ‘Dasas ‘or ‘Dasyus ‘, and the other, ‘Nishadas ‘.”

Who are Aryans? Do Aryans form any race? First of all we will try to find out the real meaning of the word Arya. This word has been defined thus in Rigveda’s 10.65.11 :

rig 10.65.11

(Aryans are those, who practice on this earth, the vows of truth, non-violence, purity etc.) The word आर्य comes from the root ऋ which means गति प्रापणयो. According to this root, Aryas are those who have acquired knowledge, who are ever marching towards the path of progress and properity and who are actively engaged in God realisation.

sanskrit dictionary

(i.e. Arya means one who is respectable, revered, religious minded, a generous person, who is above the considerations of caste, creed and colour, who is self-poised and quiet because of implicit faith in God, who always follows the righteous path and never swerves from what is just and right, who is conscientious in performance of his duty and who avoids all that is sinful and unethical or immoral.)

Mahabharat has thus defined the “Arya”:

mahabharat arya

(He is Arya who does not inflame the hatred or jealousy once subsided, who is neither egoistic nor depressed, who does not commit sin even in misery, who does not show too much happiness even in prosperity or gets out of control; who never takes delight in others” troubles and who never regrets after giving anything in charity.)

It is clear that anybody who embodies these qualities is, आर्य irrespective of what family, society or country he belongs to or Whether his colour is black, white or wheatish.

According to Maharshi Vyas, an Arya manifests eight qualities which are :

vyas and arya

(That man is Arya who is a man of knowledge, ever-contented, self-controlled, truthful, disciplined, charitable, kind hearted and polite.)

In Nirukta Maharshi Yashka has defined the word आर्य as ईश्वरपुत्र (the son of God). The word आर्य means स्वामी (Master) परमेश्वर (God). (अर्य, स्वामी वैश्ययो: ) Thus, one who is the real son of God and obeys His commands, is आर्य. In Vedas, Upanishadas, Ramayana, Mahabharat and Gita, the word आर्य is used for a gentleman and dasyu दस्यु for the wicked.

ln Balmiki Ramayana, Narada uses the word Arya for Rama :

valmiki ramayan and arya

(Rama was religious minded, a man of pure living, looking at everybody with equal eyes and lovable like moon.)

Keeping all this in view Sri Aurbindo said :

“The word Arya expresses a particular ethical and social order of well-governed life, candour, courtesy, nobility, straight dealing, courage, gentleness, purity, humanity, compassion, protection of the weak, liberality, observance of social duties, eagerness for knowledge, respect for the wise and the learned and the social accomplishments.

“There is no word in human speech that has a nobler history. The Arya is he who strives and overcomes all outside him and within him that stands opposed to human advance. Self-conquest is the first law of his nature. He overcomes mind and its habits and he does not live in a shell of ignorance, inherited prejudices, customary ideas, pleasant opinion, but knows how to seek and choose, to be large and flexible in intelligence even as he is firm and strong in his will, for in everything, he seeks truth and freedom.

“The Arya is a Worker and a warrior. Always he fights for the coming of the kingdom of God within himself and the world.”

WHO IS DASYU ?

The word dasyu दस्यु has its root as दसु  उपक्षये Giving its deravative meaning Yaskaracharya writes in Nirukta (7.23) :

nirukta 7.23

(He is Dasyu who has very few virtues and who causes obstruction to good actions like the performance of the Yajnas)

In the Vedas, Dasyu has been described as follows :

veda and dasyu

(Dasyu is one who is cruel, hard,selfish, and who entertains thoughts of falsehood, violence, theft, deception etc.)

In Rigveda 10.65 .11  Dasyu has been stated as one who has no faith in the existence of God; but is dacoit, a thief, on betrayer of confidence, foolish, licentious, aggressor, obstructor of good deeds, selfish etc :

veda and dasyu 1

There is a great emphasis in the Vedas on the elimination of such Dasyus as they are a great threat to the society.

In Rigveda l.ll7.3 the adjective used for Dasyus is आशिवस्व (who creates trouble and causes misery). In Rigveda 4.l 6.9) दस्यु, has been described as मायावान अब्रह्मा दस्यु: (who indulges in deception and self-deception) who has no faith in the teachings of the Vedas and who is narrow-minded.

It is clearly stated in the Vedas that the difference between the Aryas and Dasyus is mainly because of their respective actions. No discrimination is, otherwise, made on the ground of caste or creed etc.

There is also instruction इन्द्र (or a king) to purify the Dasyu and uplift him forgiving his past sins.

In the followqing mantra from Rigveda (6.22. lO) for instance, it is clearly stated :

rig 6.22.10

(O. Indra, you have the power to uplift the Dasyus engaged in obstructing the religious acts and make them Arya i.e. noble, religious minded, dutiful and men of noble character.)

In the Vedas the idea of uplifting of the impure and converting all the people of the world into Aryas occurs repeatedly at several places, Here are three mantras embodying this idea :-

veda and dasyu 2

(In the first mantra righteous truthful scholars have been asked to uplift( उन्नयथ) those who are fallen

( अवहितम) and to inject new life ( पुनःजीवयथ ) in those who have committed sins or crimes ( आग: चक्रुषम् ) In the second mantra, God ordains the righteous to convert the whole universe into Arya by increasing their own will power and acquiring knowledge and wealth, by being active and freeing themselves from all selfishness and narrowness. कृण्वन्तोविश्वमार्यम is the motto of all the Aryas.

In accordance with this motto, it is the duty of all Aryas to make every effort to tum Dasyus into Aryas.

In the third mantra, a devotee prays to God, “O the preserver of noble persons, either you keep away from us those who are वृजिनम (sinners), स्तेनम(thieves) or let them also tread the righteous path.”

From these instructions and prayers, it is clear that Aryas tried to bring even Dasyus into their fold, but if they found them to be too wicked and harmful for the society as a whole, they considered it to be their duty to eliminate them. while defining Arya or Dasyus Vedas never took into consideration the lineage of a person as is clear from the following mantra :-

veda and dasyu 3

(O, the noble among the people, Indra, you destroy both the types of enemies- first, who by nature, put obstruction to performance of good deeds or those who, though born in good families, deviate from the righteous path and start indulging in low actions.

It has been rightly observed in Mahabharata that Dayus belong to all Varnas and Ashramas:-

mahabharat and dasyu

lt is thus clear that to regard Dasyus, Dasas and Panins to be of different race from Aryas and to believe that they were the original inhabitants of India, is absolutely without foundation. There is also no truth in the contention that Vedas express any feeling of animosity towards them.

If at some places such words as असिक्नीत्वचम्  have been used for them, they are not meant to be taken literally. If we take them in their proper context, they would be found to have a figurative meaning.

Even when the word “black” has been used for Dasyus the  reference is to those who are पाणी (पणव्यवहारे) selfish, अक्रतून (who have no faith) and अयज्यून(who do not perform Yajna (Rjgvedas 7.6.3).

Zardushta says in Ustavaiti :-

“That I will ask thee, tell me it right, thou living God, who is religious and who the impious, after who l wish to inquire, who of the two has the black spirit and who the bright one? Is it not right to consider the impious man who attacks me and thee, to be a black one.”

Now in the above quotation, the wicked persons have been firstly described as ‘black spirit’ and later indentified as black. Such figurative use of the word “black” “convinces us that it does not always denote colour of one’s skin rather his character.

The difference between the “Aryas` and the “Dasyus” was based on their qualities, actions and temperament and not on “racial differences”. Even Dasyus could become Aryas by reforming themselves.

Such admission has also been made atleast once in Vedic Age” itself:

“Atleast one Dasa Chief, however, named Balbuth had adopted Aryan culture and even patronised Brahmín singers and risis.”

We do not agree with the historical aspect of this episode. We have given this quotation only to drive home the point that Aryans had not come from outside.

In this context the authors of the Vedic Age comment :

“It is significant that as a rule, Indra himself has been made to combat the Dasa priest on his own initiative and not in the course of rendering merely routine assistance to Aryan chiefs. For it shows

that even in the heyday of Rigvedic culture, there was no longer a living memory of the first encounter with the aboriginal races”

The truth of the matter is that there were no such racial wars between India and dasyus or dasas. Aryans had not come from outside. They were the inhabitants of this country.

Says Swami Dayanand in his book “The Light of Truth.”

“No name had been given to this country (India) before and no one lived in it till the Aryas came to it from Tibet soon after the creation”

Dealing with the beliefthatflryas had come from Iran and the Rakshas lived in jungles before and that Aryas used to consider themselves as Devatas and there were battles between Aryas and Asuras (known as “Devasur Sangram), he further asserts :

“This is absolutely incorrect because Aryas and Asuras have been depicted in the Rigveda as :-

rig 1.51.8

(i.e. Aryas are those who are religious minded, learned and noble while Asuras or Dasas are those who are wicked, irreligious and ignorant.)

P.T. Srinivas, a well-known South Indian scholar, has also maintained in his book “Dravídian Studies ” that the “Difference between the ”Aryas” and “Dasyus’ is not racial out based on their respective qualities, actions and temperament”

He writes :-

“The Aryas and Dasyus or Dasas are referred to not as indicating different races ……… ..The words refer not to race but to cult ……. . .The Dasyus are without rites, fireless, non-sacrificers, without prayers, without rites, haters of prayers. Thus the difference between Aryas and Dasyus was not one of race, but ofcult.”

V.R. Ramachandra Dikshitar, another South Indian scholar, says :

“The fact is that the Dasyus were not non-Aryans. The theory that the Dasyus – Dravidians inhabited the Panj ab and the Ganges valley at the time of the so-called Aryan invasion of India, and overcome by the latter, they fled to South India and adopted it as their home cannot stand. To say that all India was a wild country once, and that it was civilized by the invading Dravidians first and by the invading Aryans next, cannot carry conviction home ……….. .

“In the same way we have to took upon the theory of the Dravidian race. If the Aryan race theory is a myth, the theory of the Dravidian race is a greater myth. The word Dravida is the name for the speakers of a group of South Indian languages, Tamil, Malayalam, Kanarese and Telugu.”

Muir is among the Western Scholars who have written quite a lot on “Aryas” “Dasyus” or Dravidians.

In Original Sanskrit Texts (Vol. II p. 387) Muir writes :

“I have gone over the names of Dasyus orAsuras mentioned in the Rigveda with the view of discovering whether any of them could be regarded as of non-Aryan or indigenous origin, but I have not observed anything that may appear to be of this character.”

German scholar Max Muller writes about Dasyus :-

“Dasyu simply means enemy; for instance, Indra is praised because he destroyed the “Dasyu” and protected the Aryan colour.”

At another place writing about मातुधान and राक्षस he writes :-

“They (the epithets) are too general to allow us the inference of any etymological conclusions.”

The expression “Aryan” was also given currency by him but in the later years of his life in 1888, he writes :-

“I have declared again and again that if I say Aryan, I mean neither blood nor bones, nor hair nor skull; I mean simply those who speak an Aryan language ………… . To me an ethnologist who speaks of Aryan race, Aryan blood, Aryan eyes and hair, is as great a sinner as a linguist who speaks of a dolichocephalic dictionary or a brachycephalic grammar”

Famous compiler of the Sanskrit Dictionary Roth says :-

“lt is but seldom, if at all, that the explanation of ‘Dasyu’ as referring to the non-Aryans, the barbarians, is advisable.”

In his book “Brief View of the Caste System of the North West Provinces and Oudh”, another Western scholar Nesfield clearly writes :-

“There is no division of the people as the Aryan conquerors of India and the aborigines of the country; that division is modem and that there is essential unity of the Indian races. The great majority of

the Brahmins are not of lighter complexion or of finer or better red features than any other caste or distinct in race and blood from the scavangers who swept the roads.”

Likewise many other quotations can be given to prove that some Western scholars themselves have contradicted the theory of racial differences between the Aryas and the Dravidians.

ARYAN AND DRAVIDIAN LANGUAGES

Most people hold the view that South Indian languages like Tamil, Kannda, Malyalam, and Telugu, which are collectively known as Dravidian languages, have no genetic connection with the Sanskrit language; that they are completely two sets of independent languages. This view supported and encouraged by many Western scholars for extraneous reasons, is not true. This view in fact had been mostly propagated by those who wanted to create misunderstanding and animosity among the people of the North and the South, between Dravidians and the Aryas.

For instance, South Indian scholar Tamby Pillai quoting Dr. Taylor, writes in “Tamilían Antíquary” (Vol. II No. 2)

“It was proved years ago by Dr. Taylor that a TAMILIAN Language now represented by its most cultivated branch in the South Tamil constituted the original staple of all the languages of India. The existence of a Tamilian substratum in all the modem dialects of India and of the profound influence, which the classical Tamil has exercised on the forrnation and development of both the Vedic and classical Sanskrit, is gradually coming to be recognised by students of Indian philosophy.”

Almost similar view has been expressed by Dr. Gundert and other Western scholars like Rhys Davids.

T.S. Shesh Iyangar, writes in his book “The Ancient Dravidians”:-

“Prof. Rhys Davids in his book “Buddhist India” commenting on the evolution of the Aryan languages of India maintains that the Vedic Sanskrit is largely mixed up With primitive Dravidían.”

But we consider such views to be thoroughly incorrect and ridiculous. With so many Sanskrit words to be found in Bangla, Gujarati, Marathi, Panjabi and Pali, we think it is unnecessary to prove that the mother of all these languages is Sanskrit. It is no less blasphemous to consider any of the South Indian languages, even Tamil, to be the origin of these languages.

I had the opportunity of living in South for over 20 years.

During the course of my stay there, I applied myself to the learning of these languages.

On the basis of my study I have no hesitation in saying that so many words in these languages have their origin in Sanskrit.

KANNAD AND SANSKRIT

Some of the Kannad words which are purely Sanskrit words are :-

kannad and sanskrit

There would be no exaggeration in saying that 75% of words in Telugu version of the Mahabharata are originally Sanskrit words. Some of the Telugu words which have actually been taken from Sanskrit are :

telagu and sanskrit

To call such a language (which is full of Sanskrit words) as an independent Dravidian language and to say it has no links with Sanskrit, is very erroneous. Unfortunately people in North India,

who are not acquainted with South Indian languages, are easily misled by such false notions.

MALAYALAIVI AND SANSKRIT :-

In Malyalam language there are more Sanskrit words than even in Kannad and Talugu.

Former speaker of the Lok Sabha the late Anant Shayanam Ayanger, had once rightly obseved :-

“The Sanskrit was the fountain head of all Indian languages. All Indian languages were offshoots of Sanskrit. Bengali and Telugu have about 75% Sanskrit words, while Malayalam about 90 percent. The only change was that the Sanskrit words have been absorbed with slight changes here and there.”

Some of the Malyalam words, which have their origin in Sanskrit, are :-

malyalam and sanskrit

It is also said that Tamil has an independent language having no relation with Sanskrit. To illustrate this, reference been has been Kamban Ramayana.” But it is merely an illusion. Not only in modem but also in old Tamil literature, there are many Sanskrit words. The colloquial Tamil language is also full of Sanskrit words. If we read “Kamban Ramayan ” carefully, we will find that there are many Sanskrit words in their distorted form.

In the ancient Tamil Sastra “विरूधवे”, there are many Sanskrit words like नीराह (which means to take bath etc) In नालार तिरुवाम भाषी which is considered to be Tamil Veda, there are many Sanskrit words like नैटटेकरने तिरुवाम माषी etc.

प्रकाश (light) आनंद (happiness) पूर्ति (fulfilment) are all pure Sanskrit words. In daily language also जलम{(for water) and आम(for yes) are actually Sanskrit words. Likewise many more such words can be added.

Because of shortage of alphabets in the Tamil language, Sanskrit words which find their place it it, cannot be written. This is why separate script has come into existence for Sanskrit words.

In Tamil words like नगर (town) शिव धनुष (Shiva’s arrow) अतिशोध्र(very fast)  जनकपुत्री(Janak’s daughter)  विवाह(marriage) प्रजा (subject) दम्पोती  (couple) संतोष (contenment) have their origin in Sanskrit.

These illustration sufficc to contradict the view that Tamil has nothing to do with Sanskrit. According to some Tamil as well as Sanskrit scholars, at least 50% words in Tamil have been taken from Sanskrit.

Thus we see that क is made to serve the purpose of

This is the reason why some purely Sanskritised words are found in their corrupted form in Tamil.

For instance अग्निम{cannot be pronounced in Tamil because it does not occur among the alphabets o this language as क serves the purpose क, ख, ग,घ | “अग्नि” therefore, will be written and pronounced in Tamil as आवनि.

Even भगवान is spoken in Tamil as पकवान because प  is used for प,फ,व,ग,घ . EI’ and E5 for H-7, E, ’11, U. Those who know little Sanskrit can easily find the Sanskrit origin of such Tamil words.

Likewise Sanskrit word मंडलमis Written and pronounced in Tamil as मण्डलं and अग्रजन्मन as आक्कर जन्मन  (It is because in Tamil ट is used for ट,ठ,ड, ढ  and च for च, छ,ज,झ |

The main ancient grammar of Tamil was written by Telkappíyanar, a son of Jamadagni and a disciple of Agastya. His contemporary पनम्वनार I has made it clear in the introduction to his grammar book that Telkappiyanar (whose second name was Trinadhaymagni, has full command over lndia’s Sanskrit grammar.

T.R. Shesh Ayyangar, has written in his book “The Ancient Dravidians” that this grammar was written not later than 4th century B.C. German scholar B.C. Burnell writes in his book the “Aindra school of Sanskrit Grammaríans “published in 1875, that this Tamil Grammar was based on the tradition set by Sanskrit grammar by lndra.

Telkappiyanar”s grammar Was translated by Dr. P.S. Subrahmaniam Sastri. In his introduction, he says about this ancient scholar :- “Telkappiyanar was conversant with Vedas, Dharma Sastras, Kama Sutra, early Alankara literature, the source book of Natya Sastra, Pratisakhya works and Nirukta in Sanskrit literature and made use of them in planning his grammar book.”

Thus we see that it is not because of a few sanskrit words in Tamil but because of similarly in Sanskrit and Tamil in respect of grammar, sound, sentence structure etc. that a close relationship exists between the two.

The author of Kannad a Grammar, Naga Varma “belonging to l2th century) has described Tamil, Telugu and Kannada languages as the daughters of Mother Sanskrit. The author of the Telugu grammar (belonging the 13th century), Ketana, has stated that Sanskrit is the Mother of all languages. The author of the Malayalam grammar belonging to the 14th century writes :-

kannad grammer and sanskrit

(Sanskrit is eternal and all other languages have their beginning and an end. Sometimes, the words in other languages can be easily traced to their Sanskrit origin and sometimes it is difficult to find out their origin. Examples of this have been given by the author of Malayalam Grammar in “Sanskrit Lilatilakam”

The authors of “A history of Telugu Literature” in the “Heritage of India” series have stated :-

“An analysis of Telugu, as it has been for centuries, confirms the traditional view that Telugu is derived from Sanskrit”

Dr. Narayan Rao has also expressed the same view in “History of the Telugu Language” :-

“Telugu is one of the descendants of a main Aryan Dialect.”

L. Ravi Venna has, in his book “आर्य द्रविड़ भाषा कलूटे परक्पर संबंधम” given a list of 700 Malayalam words with their Sanskrit origin.

This relationship between Sanskrit and other Dravidian languages shows how ridiculous is the view of the authors of the Vedic Age and others, who have tried to depict these languages as completely independent.

In this context it will not be out of place, to stress relation between Tamil Veda with Vedic Scriptures. It is not known with any certainty as to when The Tamil Veda was written. It is, however, believed that it was written by a Tamil Saint Tiruvalluvar in the First Century. It contains teachings on spiritual, social, political matters which appear to have been drawn from Vedic Scriptures.

We are bound to be reminded of many Sanskrit verses and passages while reading Tamil Veda. We are sure that the author of the Tamil scripture would have certainly known and read the Indian scriptures and derived inspiration from them”

In the “Vedic Age” attempt has been made at several places to establish the superiority of Dravidian civilization over the Vedic civilization. For instance, it says that Dravidian speaking mediterranean people in India were responsible for cities and city culture for a real civilisation in the true sense of the word including international trade.”

First of all, it is still doubtful that the Harappa and Mohenjodaro civilisation was influenced by Dravidians, because their script is still difficult to decipher and even these authors themselves are not sure about it.

This is a very controversial subject. Several scholars are of the view that Aryas themselves were responsible for building these cities. We, who consider Dravidians as the offshoots of Aryas, consider this whole controversy to be meaningless.

Moreover it should not be forgotten that even people in the Ramayana era were very competent in building big houses and cities. There are descriptions of big and palatial bungalows and palaces in Vedas too.

rig 2.4.3

Here there is mention of thousand pillared places in which the King and Prime Minister took their seat along with the ministers of the assembly.

ath 9.3.21

(Here there is reference to the ten roomed dwelling houses.)

Those who have read about the cities in Ramayana with their big expansive broadways, palatial storeys pirched with jewels, and fitted with thousands of canons, big gardens and trees etc., find it impossible to believe in the theory that Aryans learnt the architecture or building houses from the Dravidians. lt is mentioned that ambassadors and traders from different countries used to live there. There were also theatre houses exclusively for women.

Even description of Indraprastha falsifies the contention of the authors of the ‘Vedic Age” that the art of city building and civilisation were the contributions of the Dravidians. It is claimed that Dravidians were so advanced that they used to undertake Voyages on the ship and do trade transactions with others.

Description of such ships already exists in the vedas :-

veda and ship

As pointed out by Dr. Radha Kamud Mukaerjee in his book “Shipping in Ancient lndia”, “Aryas used to travel by ships and transact business with people from other countries”

||इति||