Tag Archives: veda

पण्डित ब्रह्मदत्तजी जिज्ञासु, महर्षि दयानंद सरस्वती, वेद, वेद विशेष, हिन्दी

ऋषिभाष्य की अध्ययनविधि । ✍🏻 पण्डित ब्रह्मदत्त जिज्ञासु

Leave a comment

      अब हम यहाँ ऋषिभाष्य के अध्ययन विषयक कुछ विशेष निर्देश[१] कर देना भी आवश्यक समझते हैं, जिससे इस भाष्य का अध्ययन करनेवालों की बाधायें पर्याप्त दूर हो सकती हैं। 

[📎पाद टिप्पणी १. सामान्य निर्देश यह है कि श्री स्वामी जी महाराज अग्नि-वायु-इन्द्र आदि शब्दों से अभिधा (मुख्य) वृत्ति से ही परमेश्वर अर्थ लेते हैं, गौणीवृत्ति से नहीं। यह बात समझकर ही वेदभाष्य का अध्ययन करना चाहिये। जैसा कि हम पूर्व भी दर्शा चुके हैं।]

◼️(१) ऋषि दयानन्दकृत वेदभाष्य का अध्ययन करनेवाले अनेक सज्जनों की एक ही जैसी शङ्कायें हमारे सम्मुख समय-समय पर आती रही हैं –

      ◾️(क) बिना ऋग्वेदादिभाष्यभूमिका का सम्यक् अनुशीलन किये वेदभाष्य समझ में नहीं आ सकता। सर्वप्रथम इस पर अधिकार होना आवश्यक है। 

      ◾️(ख) संस्कृतपदार्थ देखने से मन्त्र का अभिप्राय कुछ भी समझ में नहीं आता। 

      ◾️(ग) संस्कृत और भाषा मेल नहीं खाती। 

      जिन महानुभावों को ऐसी शङ्का होती है, वह उनका भ्रममात्र है। मन्त्र का अभिप्राय अन्वय से ही ज्ञात हो सकता है। इसलिये मन्त्रोच्चारण के पश्चात् अर्थ समझने के लिए सब से प्रथम अन्वय को ही देखना चाहिए। तत्पश्चात् ही संस्कृतपदार्थ को देखने से ज्ञात होगा कि आचार्य ने उक्त अभिप्राय मन्त्र के किन-किन शब्दों से और कैसे-कैसे निकाला। इसका रहस्य आर्षशैली से संस्कृत पढ़े लिखे ही यथावत् रीति से अनुभव कर सकते हैं। 

      इस प्रक्रिया को न समझकर बहुत से संस्कृत पढ़े लिखे भी भूल करते देखे गये हैं। यह भी ज्ञात रहे कि भाषार्थ भाषा जाननेवालों की सुगमता को लक्ष्य में रखकर अन्वय के अनुसार ही किया गया है। “भ्रान्ति निवारण” पृ०६ में ऋषि का लेख निम्न प्रकार है –

      “भाषा में संस्कृत का अभिप्रायमात्र लिखा है। केवल शब्दार्थ ही नहीं, क्योंकि भाषा करने का तो यह तात्पर्य है कि जिन लोगों को संस्कृत का बोध नहीं, उनको बिना भाषार्थ के यथार्थ वेदज्ञान नहीं हो सकता”। 

      इस भाषार्थ को संस्कृत के पढ़े-लिखे अपनी संस्कृत के अभिमान में नही देखते, वास्तव में मन्त्र का अभिप्राय ‘अन्वय’ से याथातथ्य ज्ञात हो जाता है। भाषार्थ देखने से वह और भी स्पष्ट विदित हो जाता है, कुछ भी सन्देह नहीं रह जाता। श्री स्वामी जी महाराज के उक्त अर्थ में प्रमाण क्या हैं, तथा सब प्रक्रियाओं को लक्ष्य में रखते हुए तत्तद पद का अर्थ क्या होगा, बस इसके लिये संस्कृत पदार्थ है। ऋषिभाष्य में यह विशेष रहस्य की बात है, जिसको साधारण संस्कृत पढ़े-लिखे समझ नहीं सकते। वास्तव में संस्कृतपदार्थ ही ऋषि दयानन्द का मुख्य वेदार्थ है, अन्वय उसका एक अंश है, इसी में आचार्य की अपूर्व योग्यता और अगाध पाण्डित्य का परिचय मिलता है। 

      आशा है विज्ञ पाठक इतने से समझ लेंगे कि संस्कृतपदार्थ और भाषार्थ के मेल न मिलने की बात सर्वथा अज्ञतापूर्ण है, तथा संस्कृत में पदार्थ देखने का क्या प्रकार है, यह भी उनकी समझ में आ जायेगा। जिनको इस विषय में सन्देह हो, वे सज्जन मिलकर समझ सकते हैं। 

◼️(२) श्री स्वामीजी के संस्कृतपदार्थ में सब प्रक्रियाओं का अर्थ विद्यमान है, यह समझना चाहिये। जहाँ दो प्रकार का अन्वय है, वहाँ भी कहीं तो अन्वय सबका सब समान है, केवल अर्थभेद दिखा दिया है। जैसे यजु० १।८ पृ० ५७, ५८। कहीं-कहीं तीन प्रकार का अन्वय दिखाया है जेसे १।११ पृ० ६६, ६७। यहाँ तीनों अन्वय भिन्न हैं।

◼️(३) महर्षिकृतभाष्य में जड़पदार्थों के सम्बोधन में सर्वत्र व्यत्यय मानकर विकल्प में प्रथमान्त में अर्थ किया गया है, यह बात प्रत्येक पाठक को ध्यान में रखनी चाहिये। वर्तमान भ्रान्त संसार को जड़पदार्थों की पूजा वा उपासना से अभीष्ट कामनायों की प्राप्ति होती है, इस मिथ्याविचार को दूर करने की भावना से ऋषि दयानन्द ने जड़पदार्थों के सम्बोधन में उपर्युक्त प्रकार वर्ता है, जो वर्तमान अवस्था में तो सर्वोत्कृष्ट प्रकार ही कहा जायगा। हाँ, वेदार्थ का सच्चा ज्ञान होने पर सम्बोधन मान कर भी अर्थ किया जा सकता है। जब हम वेदमन्त्रों का मुख्य अर्थ आध्यात्मिक मानते हैं (जो वास्तव में मुख्य ही है), तो आधिभौतिक अर्थ में स्वभावतः सम्बोधन पदों को प्रथमा में ही समझने से हमें वेद में सब सत्यविद्याओं का ज्ञान उपलब्ध हो सकता है। नहीं तो जैसे विदेशी विद्वान् कहते हैं कि वेद जङ्गलियों की भौतिकपदार्थ सम्बन्धी प्रार्थना मात्र है, यही मानना पड़ेगा, चाहे इसके लिये उन्हें विग्रहवती (शरीरधारी) देवताओं की कल्पना ही करनी पड़ी, जैसा कि पिछले लगभग दो तीन सहस्र वर्ष से की जा रही है, जिन विग्रहवती देवताओं का मीमांसाशास्त्र के आचार्य कुमारिल भट्टादि ने भी स्पष्ट खण्डन किया है (देखो मीमांसा ९।१।५)। 

◼️(४) यजु० १।२ पृ० ३६ आदि में जहाँ-जहाँ “यज्ञो वै वसु” इत्यादि शतपथ तथा अन्य ब्राह्मणों के प्रमाणों में ‘व’ शब्द का प्रयोग है, वहां कोई कोई सज्जन शङ्का उठाया करते हैं कि यह ‘वै’ शब्द अर्थबोधक नहीं है। उनकी जानकारी के लिए हम यहाँ केवल एक ही स्थल उपस्थित करते हैं। लोगाक्षिगृह्यसूत्र का भाषयकार देवपाल पृ० -३२ में लिखता है ‘वैशब्दोऽवधारणार्थः’। 

◼️(५) ◾️(क) पाठकों को विदित होगा कि हमने भाषापदार्थ की सङ्गति, जो पूर्व संस्कृतसङ्गति के साथ ही थी, पाठकों की सुगमता के लिए भाषा पदार्थ से पहिले रखी है। इस विषय में यह विदित रहे कि तीन अध्याय तक की ‘क’ हस्तलेख कापी में भी भाषासङ्गति भाषा पदार्थ से पूर्व में ही है।

      ◾️(ख) भाषार्थ (पदार्थ) के स्थान में ‘पदार्थान्वय भाषा’ ऐसे बहुत से मन्त्रों में उपलब्ध होता है। अर्थात् भाषा ‘पदार्थ’ अन्वय के आधार पर है।

      ◾️(ग) संस्कृतपदार्थ में प्रत्येक व्याख्येय पद के अन्त में [।] इस प्रकार के विराम हैं। सो वे यजु० ५।३४ तक तो हैं, आगे ४०वें अध्याय के अन्त तक नहीं। हाँ, जहाँ प्रमाण पा जाता है, वहाँ तो प्रमाण के अन्त में विराम है। ऋग्वेदभाष्य के आरम्भ-आरम्भ में विराम हैं, आगे अन्त तक प्रमाणमात्र में हैं। भाषापदार्थ में भी यजु० ५।३५ से आगे विराम नहीं हैं। पाठकों को इसका ध्यान रहे। 

     ◾️(घ) द्वितीय अध्याय ६वें मन्त्र से लेकर २०वें मन्त्र तक आचार्य प्रदर्शित मन्त्र की सङ्गति विशेष देखने योग्य है।

◼️(६) वेदमन्त्रों में एक ही मन्त्र के अनेक अर्थ होने में यह हेतु है कि यह सृष्टि जीव के ज्ञान की अपेक्षा अनन्त है। कोई भी एक जीव इसका पारावार नहीं पा सकता, क्योंकि यह उसकी शक्ति से बाहिर है। इस अनन्त सृष्टि में अनन्त पदार्थ हैं, उनमें से यदि एक-एक का वर्णन होने लगे तो एक-एक ग्रन्थ बन जावे। केवल अग्नि, वायु, जल, मिट्टी, तुलसी की पत्ती वा आक (मदार) का ही वर्णन करने लगें तो एक-एक पृथक ग्रन्थ की रचना करनी पड़े। परमात्मा ने जीवों को ऐसा ज्ञान दिया कि एक ही मन्त्र में जिस ऋषि को जिस विषय की प्रौढ़ता प्राप्त थी, उस उस ने उस-उस विषय का ज्ञान उस-उस मन्त्र से उपलब्ध किया। इन्हीं से वेदाङ्ग तथा उपाङ्गों की रचना पृथक्-पृथक् हुई। 

      इस प्रकार ही ज्ञान देने से विश्वभूमण्डल का ज्ञान जीवों को दिया जा सकता था। यह बात तभी हो सकती है, जब एक-एक शब्द के अनेक अर्थ हों। अन्यथा “सर्वज्ञानमयो हि सः” मनु के इस वचनानुसार सम्पूर्ण विद्यानों का समावेश वेद में हो ही कैसे सकता है। सब व्यवहार तथा सर्वविध ज्ञान का भण्डार तो वेद ही है। वेद का स्वाध्याय करने वालों को यह बात अवश्य ध्यान में रखनी चाहिए। 

◼️(७) वेद के प्रत्येक मन्त्र का अर्थ आध्यात्मिक, आधिदैविक और अधियज्ञपरक होता है, यह हम पृ० ४८-५० तथा ६७, ६८ पर सविस्तर निरूपण कर चुके हैं। याज्ञिक अर्थ मुख्य अर्थ नहीं, यह भी कह चुके हैं। यहाँ इतनी बात ध्यान में रखने योग्य है कि महर्षि दयानन्द ने “यज्ञ” शब्द से देवपूजा, संगतिकरण और दान इन तीनों अर्थों के आधार पर अति विस्तृत अर्थ लिये हैं। संसार के समस्त शुभकार्य “यज्ञ” शब्द के अन्तर्गत आ जाते हैं। इस भाष्य का स्वाध्याय करते हुये यह बात ध्यान में रखनी अनिवार्य है, तभी इस भाष्य का स्वरूप समझ में आ सकता 

◼️(८) भविष्य में वेदार्थगवेषण का कार्य बहुत ही योग्यता और गम्भीरता से होने की आवश्यकता है। इसके लिए विपुल सामग्री और प्रौढ़ पाण्डित्य चाहिये, तथा अनेक श्रद्धापूर्ण विद्वानों द्वारा निरन्तर परिश्रम से ही यह कार्य हो सकता है। भावी वेदार्थ की खोज में ऋषि का भाष्य प्रकाश का काम देगा, यह हमें पूर्ण विश्वास है। हमारा यह विवरण[२] इस ओर एक छोटा सा यत्न है। विज्ञ पाठक महानुभाव हमारे इस विवरण[२] को इसी दृष्टि से देखने का कष्ट करें, तभी इसकी उपयोगिता का ज्ञान हो सकता है। 

[📎पाद टिप्पणी २. यजुर्वेदभाष्य-विवरण की भूमिका]

      आशा है पाठक ऋषि भाष्य का अध्ययन करते समय हमारे इन निर्देशों पर अवश्य ध्यान देंगे और उनसे अवश्य लाभ उठावेंगे। 

✍🏻 लेखक – पदवाक्यप्रमाणज्ञ पण्डित ब्रह्मदत्त जिज्ञासु 

[ 📖 साभार ग्रन्थ – जिज्ञासु रचना मञ्जरी ]

प्रस्तुति – 🌺 ‘अवत्सार’

॥ओ३म्॥

वेद विशेष, हिन्दी

‘धर्म प्रवतर्कों व प्रचारकों के लिए वेद-ज्ञानी होना अपरिहार्य’

Leave a comment

veda knower

ओ३म्

‘धर्म प्रवतर्कों व प्रचारकों के लिए वेद–ज्ञानी होना अपरिहार्य’


देश व विदेशों में नाना मत मतान्तर, जो स्वयं को धर्म कहते हैं, सम्प्रति प्रचलित हैं। इनमें से कोई भी वेदों को या तो जानता ही नहीं है और यदि वेदों का नाम आदि जानता भी है तो वेदों के यथार्थ महत्व से वह सर्वथा अपरिचित होने के कारण वेदों का उपयोग नहीं कर सकता। क्या बिना वेदों का ज्ञान प्राप्त किए किसी सत्य मत की स्थापना की जा सकती है? हमारा अध्ययन कहता है कि बिना वेदों के यथार्थ ज्ञान के धर्म की स्थापना नहीं की जा सकती। यदि की गई है व की जायेगी तो वह धर्म न होकर मत व मजहब होगा और वह पूर्ण सत्य मान्यताओं पर आधारित नहीं हो सकता है। यह बात सभी मतों व सम्प्रदायों पर पर समान रूप से लागू होती है। वेद के ज्ञान से विहीन मत पूर्ण सत्य क्यों नहीं होंगे, इसका कारण यह है कि ईश्वर ने इस ब्रह्माण्ड तथा मनुष्यों को बनाया है। ईश्वर सर्वव्यापक व सर्वज्ञ है और मनुष्य एकदेशी, ससीम व अल्पज्ञ है। ईश्वर के सर्वव्यापक और सर्वज्ञ होने तथा मनुष्यों व अन्य सभी प्राणियों को उत्पन्न करने से केवल वह ही जानता है कि जीवात्मा को क्या करना चाहिये और क्या नहीं? कोई भी मनुष्य, विद्वान या महापुरूष जो भी पूर्ण सत्य धर्म को जानने का प्रयास करेगा उसमें वह पूर्णतः सफल नहीं हो सकता। अल्पज्ञ होने के कारण वह ईश्वर की सहायता के बिना सत्य ज्ञान प्राप्त नहीं कर सकता। अतः उसे ईश्वर की शरण में जाना ही होगा और उससे पूछना पड़ेगा कि मनुष्यों के कर्तव्य और अकर्तव्य क्या हैं? ईश्वर से पूछने पर उसे पहले ईश्वर में एकाकार अर्थात् समाधिस्थ होना पड़ेगा। सभी के लिए यह सम्भव नहीं होता। अतः वह स्वयं, अपने आचार्यों व विद्वानों से ईश्वर के प्रति मनुष्यों के कर्तव्यों के विषय में ज्ञान प्राप्त करेंगे जो कि कुछ व अधिकांश सत्य हो सकता है परन्तु उसका कुछ या बड़ा भाग असत्य या अर्धसत्य भी हो सकता है।

 

इस कारण मनुष्य सत्य धर्म का निर्धारण नहीं कर सकता। ऐसी स्थिति में मनुष्य के सामने क्या विकल्प बचता है? इसका एक ही विकल्प है कि संसार में सबसे प्राचीनतम ज्ञान क्या है, इसे जानने का प्रयास करे। ऐसा करने पर उसे वेद, उपनिषद, दर्शन, मनुस्मृति, बाल्मिकी रामायण, महाभारत, जेन्दावस्था, बाइबिल, कुरआन, बौद्धों और जैनियों के मत वा धर्म की पुस्तकें व 18 पुराण आदि प्राप्त होती है। अब उसका कर्तव्य है कि वह एक-एक करके सभी ग्रन्थों का पूर्ण निष्पक्षता, सूक्ष्मता व गम्भीरता से  अध्ययन करे। इसमें वह अनेक विद्वानों की सहायता भी ले सकता है। इस अध्ययन के बाद जो बातें सब पुस्तकों में निर्विवाद हैं उन्हें धर्म माना जा सकता है या कहें कि वह मान्यतायें व सिद्धान्त निर्विवाद रूप से संसार के प्रत्येक व्यक्ति का धर्म हैं। अब जिन विषयों में एक से अधिक मत या विचार सामने आते हैं, उन्हें लेकर गोष्ठी व चर्चा की जानी चाहिये। पहली कसौटी तो यह हो सकती हैं कि क्या वह मान्यतायें तर्क व युक्ति से सिद्ध होती हैं। यदि वह तर्क संगत हैं तो तर्क संगत को स्वीकार कर उनका संग्रह करना चाहिये और तर्कहीन, युक्ति विरूद्ध एवं सृष्टि कर्म के विरूद्ध मान्यताओं को त्याग देना चाहिये। इस प्रकार तर्क व युक्ति आदि की कसौटी पर जो बाते सिद्ध हैं, वह स्वीकार्य और उसके विपरीत बातें अज्ञान, अन्धविश्वास, पाखण्ड व अकर्तव्य होती हैं। उन बातों को जो तर्क संगत व युक्ति संगत हैं, उन्हें वेद के साथ तुलना कर देखना होगा कि क्या इनमें कोई मान्यता या सिद्धान्त वा बात वेद विरूद्ध तो नहीं है? वेद विरूद्ध मान्यताओं और वेद की मान्यताओं को तर्क, युक्ति व सृष्टि कर्म के अनुकूल होने पर अथवा निभ्र्रान्त होने पर ही स्वीकार किया जा सकता है। यह कार्य महर्षि दयानन्द ने सन् 1836 से आरम्भ कर सन् 1860 तक किया और उसके बाद 30 अक्तूबर, 1883 को अपने देहावसान तक जारी रखा। उन्होंने पाया कि वेदों की कोई भी बात तर्क विरूद्ध या युक्ति विरूद्ध नहीं है। वेदों की सभी बातें सृष्टिक्रम के अनुकुल हैं व सिद्ध योगी उनके निभ्र्रान्त होने का अनुभव अपनी समाधि अवस्था में करता है। यह भी रोचक तथ्य है कि असम्प्रज्ञात समाधि की अवस्था केवल वैदिक व सनातन मत के कुछ थोड़े से ही लोगों को प्राप्त होती है, अन्य मत वालों को इसका लाभ नहीं मिलता। इस कारण उन्होंने वेदों में विहित मान्यताओं को धर्म स्वीकार किया है। अन्य सभी मत-मतान्तरों की बातें जो वेदों के सिद्धान्तों के विपरीत या विरूद्ध न हों उन्हें भी उन्होंने ग्राह्य व धर्म स्वीकार किया जाना चाहिये या वह धर्म के अन्तर्गत आयेंगी। इस प्रकार से जो मनुष्यों के कर्तव्य व मान्यतायें सत्य सिद्ध होती हैं वही सारे संसार का धर्म कहलाती हैं व हो सकती हैं। इस प्रकार से यह धर्म सारे संसार के लोगों के लिए एक ही सिद्ध होता है।

 

यदि हम ऐसा नहीं करते तो फिर हमें अन्य-अन्य मत का अनुयायी बनना पड़ेगा जैसे कि हम वर्तमान में हैं। इससे हम मनुष्य जन्म के उद्देश्य, जो इस संसार को बनाने वाला ईश्वर हमसे अपेक्षा करता है और जिससे जीवन की इस जन्म व परजन्म में उन्नति व मोक्ष आदि की प्राप्ति होती है, उस करूणासिन्धु व दयानिधान ईश्वर के निकट जाने के स्थान पर हम उससे दूर होते जायेंगे। इससे हानि हमारी ही होनी है, इसे सभी मनुष्यों को समझना है। ईश्वर क्योंकि अनादि, अजंन्मा, नित्य और सर्वज्ञ है और इस सृष्टि का रचयिता, पालक और इसका नियंत्रक है, समस्त प्राणी जगत का वह आधार व रचयिता एवं पालक है, अतः उसके द्वारा प्रवर्तित धर्म ही मनुष्य धर्म हो सकता है।

 

अब हम इस प्रश्न पर विचार कर लेते है कि क्या ईश्वर धर्म प्रचार के लिाए सृष्टि के आदि काल के बाद शेष अवधि में किसी मनुष्य को अपने पुत्र, मत-धर्म-प्रवर्तक, प्रचारक आदि के रूप में भेजता है? इसका उत्तर यह मिलता है कि ईश्वर ने सृष्टि की आदि में चार ऋषियों अग्नि, वायु, आदित्य अंगिरा के द्वारा चार वेदों ऋग्वेद, यजुर्वेद, सामवेद और अथर्ववेद का ज्ञान दिया जो यथार्थ मनुष्य धर्म है। यह धर्म किसी एक जाति या समूह, सम्प्रदाय आदि के लिए नहीं अपितु संसार के सभी लोगों के लिए है। वेदों पर किसी एक जाति, मत या सम्प्रदाय के मनुष्यों का ही अधिकार नहीं है अपितु यह ज्ञान प्रत्येक मनुष्य के लिए है और वह इसको जानने, समझने व आचरण करने के पूर्ण अधिकारी हैं। यदि कोई यह समझता या मानता है कि वेदों पर किसी एक जाति, धर्म या सम्प्रदाय के लोगों का ही अधिकार है, इतर मतों के अनुयायियों व अन्यों को अधिकार नहीं है तो ऐसे लोग पहले भी अज्ञान ग्रस्त थे और आज भी अज्ञान ग्रस्त हैं। वेदों पर मानवमात्र व सभी जातियों, मतवादियों वा धर्मानुयायियों का समान अधिकार है। हां कोई वेद का दुरूप्योग न करे, इसका पूरा पूरा प्रबन्ध होना चाहिये। इस चर्चा से यह सिद्ध होता है कि वेद मानव धर्म है और इसके सत्य स्वरूप को जानकर इसका प्रचार करना ही उचित है। इससे इतर अन्य किसी धर्म की मनुष्यों को किंचित आवश्यकता नहीं है। जो वेद ज्ञान के पूर्ण अधिकारी या ज्ञानी नहीं है, उन्हें धर्म का प्रचार करने का अधिकार नहीं है जबकि आजकल इसके विपरीत हो रहा है। यदि वह ऐसा करेंगे या कर रहे हैं तो उनके अज्ञान व स्वार्थ के कारण देश व समाज पर इसका बुरा प्रभाव पड़ना अनिवार्य है। चूंकि वेद स्वयं में सर्वांगीण व पूर्ण मानव धर्म है, वेद सब सत्य विद्याओं वा धर्म की प्रथम व अन्तिम पुस्तकें है, इसमें कोई कमी या त्रुटि नहीं है, अतः ईश्वर सृष्टि उत्पत्ति के बाद वेदों का ही ज्ञान देता है और उसके बाद वह किसी को मत-धर्म स्थापना के लिए नहीं भेजता है।

 

आज कल हम देश भर में अनेक धर्म गुरुओं को प्रवचन आदि के द्वारा प्रचार करते हुए देख रहे हैं। यद्यपि वह प्रचार तो कर रहे हैं परन्तु उसे धर्म प्रचार की संज्ञा नहीं दी सकती। यह भी कहा जा सकता है कि गुरूडमों को बढ़वा दे रहे हैं। अभी पिछले दिनों हमने कई धर्म गुरूओं व गुरूडमों का कच्चा चिट्ठा जाना है। उनके व अन्य धर्म गुरुओं के प्रवचनों व उपदेशों में बहुत सा भाग वेदों के विरूद्ध होता है। बहुत कुछ उनकी अपनी मान्यतायें होती हैं जिसके पीछे उनके अज्ञान व स्वार्थ भी होते हैं। हमारे भोले व धर्म-अज्ञानी बन्धु अल्पज्ञ होने के कारण उनके निहित स्वार्थों को जान नहीं पाते और उनका अन्धानुकरण करते वह कर रहे हैं। उनका यह कार्य देश में एक सामाजिक समस्या को भी उत्पन्न कर रहा है। सबसे श्रेष्ठ समाज वही हो सकता है कि जहां सभी लोग एक मत व एक विचारधारा के मानने वाले हों। परमात्मा एक है, सत्य एक है अतः धर्म भी एक ही होना चाहिये जो कि ईश्वर की आज्ञा के पालन को कहते हैं। क्या ईश्वर की आज्ञायें अनेक मत संस्थापकों या प्रचारकों के अनुयायियों के लिए अलग-अलग हो सकती हैं? कदापि नहीं। वेद ‘समानो मन्त्रः समितिः समानी समानं मनः सह चित्तमेषाम्। समानं मन्त्रमभि मन्त्रये वः समानेन वो हविषा जुहोमि।। तथा समानी व आकूतिः समाना हृदयानि वः। समानमस्तु वो मनो यथा वः सुसहासति।।’कहकर संसार के सभी मनुष्यों के लिए एक धर्म, एक मत का उदघोष करते हैं। अतः सभी को अज्ञानी व स्वार्थी गुरूओं के अन्धभक्त बनने से बचना चाहिये और स्वयं स्वाध्याय वा अध्ययन कर तथा सत्पुरूषों की शरण में जाकर ईश्वर के द्वारा सृष्टि के आरम्भ में दिये गये वेद ज्ञान को अपनाना, मानना व पालन करना चाहिये। इसी से उनके इस जीवन का और परजन्म का कल्याण होगा, यह सुनिश्चित है। धर्म जिज्ञासुओं को हम सत्यार्थ प्रकाश पढ़ने का भी सुझाव देंगे। वेदों का यह भी शाश्वत व विशिष्ट सन्देश है कि संसार के सभी लोग एवं प्राणी परस्पर भाई-बहिन हैं और ईश्वर हमारा माता-पिता, आचार्य, राजा व न्यायाधीश है।

 –मनमोहन कुमार आर्य

पताः 196 चुक्खूवाला-2

देहरादून-248001

फोनः 09412985121

वैदिक दर्शन, वैदिक धर्म, हिन्दी

‘पुनर्जन्म व त्रैतवाद के सिद्धांत पर एक आर्य विद्वान के नए तर्क व युक्तियाँ ‘

10 Comments

rebirth

ओ३म्

‘पुनर्जन्म व त्रैतवाद के सिद्धांत पर एक आर्य विद्वान के नए तर्क व युक्तियाँ ‘

वैदिक सनातन धर्म पुनर्जन्म के सिद्धान्त को सृष्टि के आरम्भ से ही मानता चला आ रहा है। इसका प्रमाण है कि सृष्टि के आरम्भ में ईश्वर ने प्रथम चार ऋषियों और स्त्री-पुरूषों को उत्पन्न किया। अग्नि, वायु, आदित्य और अंगिरा नाम के चार ऋषियों को परमात्मा ने चार वेदों का ज्ञान दिया। वेदों में पुनर्जन्म का सिद्धान्त ईश्वर द्वारा बताया गया है। इसलिए इस सिद्धान्त पर शंका करने का कोई कारण नहीं है। तथापि अनेक तर्कों से इस सिद्धान्त को सिद्ध भी किया जा सकता है। वैसे सिद्धान्त कहते ही उसे हैं जो स्वयं सिद्ध हो व जिसे तर्क व युक्तियों से सिद्ध किया जा सके। असिद्ध बातों को सिद्धान्त नहीं कहा जा सकता। एक प्रसिद्ध सिद्धान्त है कि अभाव से भाव उत्पन्न नहीं हो सकता और भाव का अभाव नहीं हो सकता। गीता में भी इस आशय का श्लोक है कि जिस वस्तु का अस्तित्व होता है उसका अभाव अर्थात् उसका विनाश कभी नहीं होता। जो सत्ता है ही नहीं वह कभी अस्तित्व में नहीं आ सकती। ईश्वर भी अभाव से भाव की उत्पत्ति नहीं कर सकता। वह भाव से भाव को उत्पन्न करता है अर्थात् कारण प्रकृति से संसार बनाता है और जीवात्माओं को मनुष्यादि जन्म देता  है। सृष्टि में कारण प्रकृति व जीव का अस्तित्व नित्य व शाश्वत् है और नित्य पदार्थ सदा अविनाशी होता है।

 

आर्य जगत के प्रसिद्ध विद्वान प्राध्यापक राजेन्द्र जिज्ञासु एक बार नागपुर के हंसापुरी आर्य समाज के कार्यक्रम में भाग लेने पहुंचे। वहां उनकी प्रेरणा से हुतात्मा पं. लेखराम जी की स्मृति में कुछ समय पूर्व वैदिक साहित्य की बिक्री का केन्द्र आरम्भ किया गया था। इस पुस्तक बिक्री केन्द्र में प्रा. जिज्ञासु जी की स्वसम्पादित पुस्तक “कुरान वेद की ठण्डी छाओं में” उपलब्ध थी। संयोगवश एक मुस्लिम युवक अपने एक हिन्दू मित्र के साथ घूमता हुआ आर्य समाज मन्दिर आ गया। इस समाज के अधिकारी श्री उमेश राठी इन युवकों को वहां मिल गये। उन्होंने इन दोनों युवकों को पुस्तक बिक्री केन्द्र कक्ष में ही बैठाया। यह मुस्लिम युतक जमायते इस्लामी की तबलीग के लिए एक वर्ष में एक मास का समय दिया करता था।

 

युवक ने वहां विद्यमान पुस्तक ‘कुरान वेद की ठण्डी छाओं में’ को देखा तो उसे लेकर उसके पन्ने पलटने कर देखने लगा। उसने पुस्तक को लेने के लिए राठी जी से पुस्तक का मूल्य पूछा तो उन्होंने कहा कि यह हमारी ओर से आपको भेंट है। राठी जी ने उसे बताया कि हमारे यहां इस समय इस्लाम के एक अधिकारी विद्वान प्रा. राजेन्द्र जिज्ञासु जी विद्यमान हैं। क्या वह उनसे चर्चा करना पसन्द करेगा। वह युवक इसके लिए एकदम तैयार हो गया। जिज्ञासुजी सन्ध्या कर रहे थे। उससे निवृत होकर उस मुस्लिम युवक से वार्तालाप आरम्भ करते हुए उन्होंने कहा कि आप तबलीग़ करते हुए मुख्य विचार क्या देते हैं? उस युवक ने कहा-“जो हज करे, नमाज़ पढ़े, रोज़ा रखे, वह सच्चा मुसलमान है। जो आवागमन को माने वह काफिर है।“ उसने ऐसी कुछ और बातें भी कहीं यथा “मुहम्मद अल्लाह का अन्तिम नबी और कुरान उसका अन्तिम इल्हाम है”, इस बात को विशेष बल देकर कहा। यह सब सुनकर प्रा. राजेन्द्र जिज्ञासु उस युवक से बोले – “क्या आपने बर्फ देखी है? उसने कहा, क्यों नहीं?, देखी है।“ उन्होंने पूछा बर्फ पर घूप पड़े तो क्या होगा? युवक ने उत्तर दिया कि बर्फ पिघल कर जल बन जायेगा। जिज्ञासु जी ने फिर पूछा कि उस जल पर सूर्य की किरणे पड़ने पर जल का क्या होगा? उत्तर मिला कि भाप बन जायेगी। युवक से फिर पूछा कि भाप का क्या होगा तो युवक बोला कि मेघ बनेंगे। ऐसे ही मेघ वर्षा बनकर वर्षेंगे। यह उस युवक का कथन था। अब जिज्ञासु जी ने समीक्षा करते हुए कहा कि ‘‘जड़, निर्जीव व अचेतन ज्ञान शून्य ब़र्फ का तो आप आवागमन मानते हैं और ज्ञानवान चेतन जीव के पुनर्जन्म को कु़फ्र्र बता रहे हैं। यह कैसी फि़लास्फी है?’’

 

जिज्ञासु जी ने आगे कहा कि आप आवागमन को मानने वालों को काफिर बता रहे हैं और आपका सबसे बड़ा दार्शनिक डा. इकबाल सुबह से रात व रात से सुबह, सूर्य तारों का उदय व अस्त होना, दिन व रात का एक दूसरे के बाद आना मानता है। वह जीवन का अन्त नहीं मानता। हज़रत मुहम्मद की कामना, “‘मैं अल्लाह की राह में शहीद हो जाऊं, फिर जन्मूँ–फिर शहीद हो जाऊं ……।“ को क्या कुफ्र ही मानेंगे? क्या यह आवागमन नहीं है?

 

जिज्ञासु जी युवक को बता रहे हैं – “एक मियां मर गया। उसे कबर में दबाया गया। इसके शरीर की खाद बन गई। कबर पर उगे पौधे को अच्छी खाद मिली। कब्रस्तान के मजावर की बकरी उस पौधे के पत्ते खा–खा कर पल गई। उसे कसाई ने क्रय कर लिया। उसका मांस खा–खा कर एक मियां का शरीर बन गया। वह मरा तो कबर में दबाया गया। उसका शव भी खाद बन गया फिर कब्रस्तान की बकरी ने खाया और वही चक्र चल पड़ा। क्या यह आवागमन है या नहीं?’’ वह लिखते हैं कि उस युवक के पास अब कहने के लिए कुछ था ही नहीं। उसे जो रटाया गया था वही उसने प्रकट किया। अब वह आगे क्या कहें?

 

जिज्ञासुजी ने उस युवक से एक अन्य विषय पर चर्चा आरम्भ कर कहा कि सृष्टि रचना से पूर्व क्या था? उसने कहा कि केवल अल्लाह था। उससे जिज्ञासु जी ने पूछा कि क्या आप अल्लाह को न्यायकारी, दयालु, दाता, पालक, स्रष्टा, स्वामी मानते हैं? उस युवक ने कहा – ‘क्यों नहीं? वह अल्लाह आदिल (न्यायकारी), दयालु है और यह उसका स्वभाव है।‘ उससे पूछा कि क्या अल्लाह के यह गुण सदा से, हमेशा से हैं? उस युवक ने कहा कि हां, अनादि काल से वह दयालु, न्यायकारी आदि है। इस पर जिज्ञासुजी ने उससे पूछा कि जब अल्लाह के अतिरिक्त कोई था ही नही तो वह दया किस पर करता था? न्याय किसे देता था? जब प्रकृति थी ही नहीं, वह देता क्या था? सृजन क्या करता था? जीव तो थे नहीं, वह पालक स्वामी किसका था? उस युवक से वार्ता के समय वहां आर्य समाज के विद्वान व अन्य लोग भी उपस्थित थे। उन्होंने जिज्ञासुजी से कहा कि आवागमन व त्रैतवाद के बारे में आपकी युक्तियां हमने प्रथम बार ही सुनी हैं। यह वर्णन आर्य समाज या किसी वैदिक ग्रन्थ में भी नहीं है।

 

इस युवक से संयोग का परिणाम यह हुआ कि प्रा. राजेन्द्र जिज्ञासु जी ने आवागमन सहित कुछ अन्य विषयों पर नये अन्दाज से विचार प्रस्तुत किये जिनसे वैदिक मत के सिद्धान्तों की पुष्टि हुई। वैदिक मत और आर्य समाज में पुनर्जन्म अर्थात् आवागमन पर इतनी सामग्री है कि जिसे पढ़कर पुनर्जन्म संबंधी सभी शंकाओं का निराकरण हो जाता है। इस विषय पर एक शताब्दी से कुछ अधिक पहले रक्तसाक्षी, हुतात्मा शहीद पं. लेखराम जी ने एक महत्वपूर्ण तर्क प्रमाण पुरस्सर पुस्तक लिखी थी। पुस्तक लिखने से पूर्व उन्होंने विज्ञप्तियां देकर सभी मत-मतान्तर के लोगों को पुनर्जन्म विषयक अपनी शंकायें भेजने के लिए प्रेरित किया था। उन्होने सभी प्रकार की सभी शंकाओं का निराकरण व समाधान अपनी पुस्तक में किया है। वेद और गीता पुनर्जन्म को स्वीकार करती हैं। वर्तमान में समय में कोई कुछ भी कहे व माने, परन्तु आवागमन और ईश्वर-जीव-प्रकृति के नित्य, अजन्मा व अविनाशी होने का त्रैतवाद का सिद्धान्त सर्वत्र व्यवहार में है। विज्ञान भी जड़ प्रकृति के अस्तित्व को स्वीकार करता है जो कि निभ्र्रान्त सत्य है। इसी के साथ इस चर्चा को विराम देते हैं।

–मनमोहन कुमार आर्य

पताः 196 चुक्खूवाला-2

देहरादून-248001

फोनः 09412985121 

Vedic Religion

Vedas For Beginners 7 : What is meant by ghosts and spirits[ Bhuths and pretaas]?

2 Comments

K:  Do bodies like ghosts and spirits exist?  Number of stories is told on ghosts and spirits.  Talismans, threads are tied in an attempt to ward off evils. Mantras are muttered to drive away the spirits. There are exorcists claiming similar action. Is it correct?

V:  Really speaking, ghosts and spirits do not exist. What people say on the subject are just imaginary stories. Time has three dimensions, present, past, and future. Bhoot means past i.e., what is elapsed.   A deceased does not exist anymore. He is counted to as belonging to the past (Bhoota). Therefore, Bhoot refers to the person who is dead and gone. There is nothing called pretha (spirit). A dead person is called as pretha ( pra+ ita) which would also mean as one who has already gone away. In other words Bhoot and pretha refer to that person who was there earlier but not now because he is dead. People who say that they have seen these ethereal bodies, normally also claim that they could be seen in night only. How? All phony things occur only in night. Whether these men claiming to have seen such unearthly bodies possess catty eyes or whether these airy bodies are made of radium type substance that could be seen only in dark is for anybody to guess. All the big and minute things in the world could be seen either with our naked eyes or thru specially made lenses. If Bhoots and Pretas were to be some sort of human bodies definitely they would have been visible or not visible at all. Fact however is, it is generally said to be seen by a person who normally suffers from deliriums or convulsions or whose mind is heavily influenced by stories of Bhoots and Pretas. Otherwise men who are sound, in body and mind do not claim for having seen them. As per principles of psychology when the man’s mind is subjected to certain bad influences (psychological trauma) he would be visualizing pictures of some weird objects and scenes.  What is to be seriously pondered over here is that when a man is dead his body gets merged in the five elements of nature. And the soul takes a new body as per law of Karma. Then where is the question of Bhoot or pretha? Wherefrom it can originate?

ghost

If it is said that Bhoot or prêt refers to the subtle body then it should be clarified that the soul cannot discharge any bodily functions without the medium of gross physical body.  If, talisman, black threads, mumbo-jumbo, exorcism were capable of warding off diseases, then the ward of the men indulging in such spurious practices should never succumb to any disease? Is it so? Their children also die and so also they vanish one day. If mantras or mumbo-jumbo could cure men from diseases then where is the necessicity for Doctors and Hospitals? Funnily, the cat will be out of the bag when a person who is said to be possessed of spirit is confronted with a difficult problem. Person desirous of examining them should ask for a Veda Mantra from a person possessing such spirits in case he is a Hindu or he must be asked to recite versions of Koran in case he is a Muslim. If done, these tricksters stand thoroughly exposed. Further these fraudulent men employ some smart tricks here to fool the credulous. So when the common man is unable to understand these phenomenons they tend to think that they (men of spirits) are capable of controlling the spirits. Frankly speaking there are no spirits, but these thoughts keep nagging the weak and the doubting thamases. The truth however is, every person shall reap what he sows and there is no escape from this law.  . The just God is present everywhere and his law that person is rewarded or punished as per his previous karma or sanskars stands unchanged.

 

Do planets influence men and cause pleasures and pains?

 

sonia-astro

 

K. Good! There may not be objects like spirits. But pleasures and pains are definitely caused by planets. We have to undergo the punishments inflicted by these nine planets. Astrology can never go wrong. Astrology is so perfect that it can predict the cosmic phenomenon like lunar eclipse and solar eclipse well before hand.

 

V. pains and pleasures are not due to planetary influences. They occur because of the outcome of ones deeds. The planets that are present would give neither pain nor pleasures to anybody. Planets do influence the earth each in its own way. The changes like happiness or sorrow that occur are dependent on the strength of the objects.  For ex, Sun is a star. Its light is found everywhere. Utilizing the sunlight a plant is growing tall with roots firmly embedded in the soil.  At another place there is tree which lies after being cut. The sun falls equally on the growing tree as well as on the tree that is cut. But it is only the uncut tree that is growing big and the severed tree is withering away fast due to sunlight. Whereas the sun is falling equally on both why the uncut tree is flourishing well and other is getting dried up? The same sun falls equally on iceberg and stone.  The stone becomes harder because of sunlight but the iceberg melts. A healthy eyed man enjoys the beauty of Nature made more enchanting by the shades of light whereas the man with the diseased eye shuns the sight of sun and feels unhappy. Now tell me whether this difference was caused by Sun? Did he do any mischief here?  What was the fault of Sun?  The changes, the pleasures or pains occur because of the strength of the object. Now look!  There are two parts present in Astrology.  That part which is based on mathematical calculations is called Astronomy could be called as scientific. The other which is predictive in nature and dependent on speculations on planetary movements is a pure myth. The lunar and solar eclipses are related to Astronomy. Therefore they can be predicted well in advance i.e. before months and years. The Sun, the Moon have been at work as per physical laws and the Astronomy is accordingly written. Astronomers have the knowledge of the movement of planets and they could therefore accurately predict when the eclipses could take place. Where there is certainty in the movements of the objects its influence could be known at once by mathematical calculations. There is definiteness in the movements in a clock. Any boy who is conversant with the reading of the clock could say with certainty when 12 Noon occurs. When both the needles are getting together at 12.during the day he would instantly say that it is 12 Noon.  This is possible because there is an accurate movement in a clock. Truly speaking, Astronomy is mathematics based science.  Astrology is a predictive mumbo-jumbo and Astronomy has been associated with this by default.

          

 Note :  This is the translated version of the original Hindi  ”Do bahinonke bathe” written by late Pt. Siddagopal”Kavirathna” .

 

Vedic Religion

Vedas For Beginners 6 : IS GOD JUST AND MERCIFUL?

5 Comments

V:  How the attributes of Mercy and Justice could remain together with God was your yesterday’s question. Frankly speaking, both Mercy and Justice are always remain together, the difference being whereas Mercy is from the side of God; Justice is dispensed as per the Karma of men. For ex, a farmer sows the seed in a farm. But the God instead gives him hundreds of grains in return. This is God’s mercy. About Justice it is as per the well-known adage “he reaps what he sows”. When he sows the groundnut seed he reaps the groundnut crops only, and not wheat. This is his justice. There is a father with four sons. The father gives Rs 1000/- each to his sons. This is the mercy being shown by the father on his sons. If one son snatches the portion of another son forcibly then the father punishes the erring son. This is his justice. The father gives money from his side. Hence he is merciful; punishing the erring son and restoring the rights to the entitled is the Justice of the father. A king punishes a robber. This is his Justice. By giving death sentence to the robber he protects the weak and affected. This is His mercy. If the king lets off the robber it is His “injustice”. Really speaking the meaning of both Justice and Mercy is one and the same. Where is Justice without Mercy? The unjust is selfish and never kind. God is while being Just is also Merciful. He has created the world for living beings. This is His total Mercy. He dispenses fruits according to their Karma to everybody and this is His Justice.

 

K: Does God becomes aware whenever a wicked deed is performed or not? If yes, why it is not stalled immediately?

 

V: God tries to stall everybody from doing wicked deeds instantly. The proof for this is, while about to do an  evil, the feelings of guilt, shame, crop up in the mind of the doer at the same time, whereas while doing a good deed the feelings of delight, enthusiasm springs in his mind instantly. All these things happen from the side of God. This is called the inner voice. Why human beings? Even in animals the feelings of doubt and shame crop up. When a piece of bread is thrown at a dog it eats at the same place with its tail wagging. The same dog when it steals a piece of bread it neither wags the tails not eats at an open place. It eats stealthily. Why? It knows that this is a food gained by stealing. Hence it is clear that God prevents the living beings from committing a crime. Yes. This much is certain. God does not snatch away the liberty of doing an action from any body. The Soul is beginning less and is free to do any action and this being the case how can He take away the independence of human beings? If he takes away the liberty, the Souls do not remain as Souls as such or there a longing to improve from their side. For ex, when examination is going on, the teacher would be watching the boys against copying. So many boys would be writing wrong answers and the teacher is observing them. He does not prevent boys from writing wrong answers but allows them. He is not coming in the way of their independence. If the teacher on the other hand were to dictate the correct answers to all, how could there be an improvement from the boys? What is the point then in teaching and conducting examinations to them? In that event, the students do not remain as students but become a piece of lifeless dolls. It is the duty of the teacher to teach them well. To study well and write correct answers is the duty of boys. In a similar manner it is the duty of God to provide the nature of Good and bad deeds through Vedas. It is not His job to get good or bad things done. The living beings do their Karma according to their freedom. They get happiness if they were to do good things inspired by Knowledge and suffer if they do vice versa. Apart from the knowledge given thru Vedas, God by remaining within their hearts would be prompting living beings not to do evil things.  Of course, it is up to their freedom and power to heed to this advice or not. This is called the God’s attempt to prevent the occurrence of Evil deeds. Prevention does not mean taking away the freedom. In case, God was to take away the freedom of action, the imitative and Enthusiasm for doing a Work or not gets lost and the living beings become reduced to just dolls in the hands of God. And God becomes accountable for everything.

 

K: Good! Why God does not provide the benefit [Award or Punishment] immediately?

V: How can award or punishment be given instantly? Let us think for a while. God has given a reward for the good work done by a person immediately. The duration of happiness consequent of this reward could be also visualized to last for one year. Now in the very next day he does some wicked things and that that the duration of punishment for this deed is to last for a year. Now think about this. Now the man has got a reward and consequently he should not put to any suffering for a period of a year. But if punished immediately for his bad deeds for a period of a year then the earlier order of God that he should enjoy happiness for a period of one year is defeated. Since the human being possess the work freedom, he would  keep on doing either good or  bad deeds and if God were to provide instant reward for the deeds done then the system of God  awarding  punishments or happiness and their unhindered enjoyment or suffering  overlap each other   and His own inimitable law suffers.

 

K: Do the lakhs of lives in the world are born of their Karma?

V: There are two types of lives in the world. One is called Bhogayoni and other is called Ubhaya yoni. They have got this birth because of their Karma.

K: What is meant by Bhogayoni and Ubhayayoni?

V: Those lives that enjoy happiness or sorrows but do not indulge in any action for their future are called Bhogayoni. For ex, animals and birds. Man is an Ubhayayoni. He enjoys both pain and pleasures as per predetermined Karma and also does both good and bad things for future.

K: Why man is considered as Ubhayayoni?

V: Animals and Birds have passion or concern for eating only. They don’t have the passion to produce things. They are here to enjoy as decided by God’s system. They don’t earn anything. These animals eat, wheat, grains, but they are incapable of producing them for the reason they lack thinking faculty. But the man because of thinking strength produces the crops by utilizing the animals. Because of his thinking power only he is described as Ubhayayoni. He is capable of enjoying the goods and controls all animals by his thinking power. A shepherd has thousands of sheep. A cowherd has thousands of cattle.  Man gets acrobatics done even by lions in circus. Why animals? Because of this thinking strength he manipulates fire, air, water, sky, earth to his advantage. God did not give man feathers to fly but he has got aero plane built for the purpose. God did not provide him with bodies of fish, crocodile, turtle, etc, to remain in water but he has got ships, built for the purpose. God did not give him the distant penetrating sight of an eagle but has found out Microscope, Telescope etc, to overcome the difficulty. What is the secret of this? It is because of his thinking ability. Hence he is Ubhayayoni.  He enjoys the reward of his karma of his previous births and also does action for future also

K: Does all lives get their births as per their Karma? Does not man become animal or bird in his next birth?

V:  Yes. The types of lives [Yonis] are got by their own Karma. Souls keep on moving from one lives [Yonis] or the other. The Karma done in human life are linked to merit or sin [Punya or Pap] I have already told that human being possesses the thinking ability and when he misuses this faculty he commits a sin requiring to travel in all types of lives[Yonis}. God gives birth in many lives [Yonis] according to his own Karma for his improvement. The effect of his good and bad deeds leave imprint on his subtle body. It is this Sanskars that merit him births in several types of lives [Yonis].

K: When human birth is got?

V: When the Sanskars of noble deeds outweigh the Sanskars of sin he gets a human birth. When the Sanskars of selfless life become super strong he gets a liberation i.e. Moksha. In other words, man becomes free from the worries of mundane life and enjoys Bliss.

K: How can the soul of an elephant get into the size of an ant? Because the bigger the animal the bigger the size of the soul. This could be possible. Is it not?

V: There is no big or small in Souls. All Souls are of similar type. There are big or small things in the size of bodies. For ex, in a big machine there are many parts. One part cuts, the other part separates, yet another prints and each part does its own job. But the machine provides equal power to each part. But since the machine is big it has many parts with diverse functions. Those animals which have manlike lips drink milk. A bird with its peaks gulps the milk. There is no disparity in souls. The difference is found only in bodies.

K: Does birth takes place according to Karma? If that is the case, where was Karma before birth? While there cannot be Karma without a body and when was there was no soul with body, how Karma could be done then? Then how he gets caught in the bondage of births?

V: The birth takes place because of ignorance and the bodies are got according to Karma. A boy gets admitted to a school because he is ignorant. Further standards depend upon his Karma or fitness. Similarly, the man gets entry into a School called this world i.e. his first appearance with a body, due to his finite knowledge and taking births in so many lives are due to Karma. Secondly, this is not the first time that he got a birth but has obtained body countless times before and still happening. The Soul has many Sanskars.  One may ask what the Sanskars were obtaining at the time of beginning of Creation. At the beginning of Creation Sanskars pertaining to previous Creation was already there. The Creation is flowing like a river which has no beginning or end. Creation and dissolution of the world keeps on occurring like day and night. It keeps on rotating like a Wheel.

K: Some people assert that evolution has taken place from smaller animals to man.  They say that Man is the ultimate evolution in Creation.

V: This is wrong. If that is so, when man is present the other animals should have become extinct. Whereas man and other animals, birds etc, are also there. How can it be said, that Man also has evolved as other animals went on evolving?  How a seed could remain intact after it is sprouted and grown as tree? Can the flower buds remain as such after flowering? Another important thing to be noted is, there is general knowledge found to be even in animals other than man. But Special knowledge is to be found only in man.

 

How this Special knowledge is found in man? This is due to his power of thinking. This thinking power is not found available in other animals. If this thinking power was present in other animals then man would have found it, not possible to boss over them.  A common principle to be noted here is that, “Nothing emerges out of nothing”. In case, man is evolved out of other animals, then the thinking power should have been present in other animals too. But this is not seen. The theory of evolution says that man is evolved out of monkey. If this is the case, then a just born baby would not have been drowned if thrown into water. If man is evolved out of monkey then all the powers of monkey should have been found invested in man. But this is not the position. Hence, it is clear that man, animals, birds etc have been formed as per the just system of God.

 

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

Vedic Religion

Vedas For Beginners – 4 : WHY GOD HAS NO FORM?

Leave a comment

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

 

V:   Your question was what was wrong in assuming God had a form? Okay. There are many faults that are involved in treating God as having a form. Firstly, God is known as Sachitananda.   This has three words.viz, “Sat”  “Chit” and “Anand”. The term “Sat” means being present uniformly at all times, present, past and future. In the other words, that which does not undergo change is called as “Sat”.  That which is Knowledge is known as “Chit” The term “Anand” indicates free from sorrow at all times which is known as Bliss. God is called Satchitananda because He is changeless, His knowledge is never destroyed, and who never experiences any sorrow.

 

It is in this context we should see how the objects in the world fare. All the things that have a form in the world are all subject to change and therefore they are not “Sat”. Only formless God and soul could be called under “Chit” Whoever is having a form or body cannot be away from sorrows. He does not enjoy happiness at all the times. He is afflicted with the feeling of hot and cold, hunger and thirst, fear and sorrow, sickness-ageing-death. God is distinct from these two.

 

The first fault in assuming God as having a Form, is with a form, he ceases to be Satchitananda and changeless. This is because all bodies have inbuilt qualities of birth- growth-decay and death. God is above these characteristics.

The second fault is God with a body becomes finite; Whereas God is infinite in nature. He is omnipresent.

The third fault with god having a form is He begins to cease “Beginning less and endless” This is because every thing with a form has an origin and therefore it has a beginning. It cannot be called as beginning less and endless. The thing which has an origin must have an end. That which is created is destroyed in the end.

The fourth fault is God with a body cannot be “All-Knowing” for the reason a body is limited by space and time and therefore it cannot have knowledge of all things. Because of this God cannot become “Antaryami” He cannot understand the mind of everybody.

The fifth fault is God ceases to be eternal. That which remains and has no reason for being remainant is called “Nitya” He being Nitya is not a combination of things. Whereas the things that have a form is the combination of certain elements.

The sixth fault is God instead of being supporter of all He himself becomes dependent on others. The entire world is dependent on God and He is supporter of all. He has assumed the entire world. Whereas if God is treated as having a body He is required to be dependent on some other material. Precisely, for this reason, the traditionalists have set apart places treating God with a body. Some have placed God in seventh heaven, others at Kailas, golok, etc. It is funny that God who is a supporter of the entire world have made himself dependent. If God were to remain dependent on world then how the world could support itself?  Similarly there are so many faults in treating the god with a form or body.

 

K: God is no doubt formless. However, Scholars are of the opinion that God takes shape and reincarnates from time to time. For ex, vapor is formless but when required by time it takes a gross form. We can multiply such examples. When physical things could be formless and yet could assume shape why not God who is formless, could not take a form?

 

V:  The example of water vapor and fire pointed out does not appear to be correct. Water and fire are not basic elements. Many atoms make for water vapor and this take gross shape in the form of cloud and again become water. If water vapor were to be made of one atom then it would not have taken gross form. So is the case of Fire. Many atoms make a fire ball and assume a gross form. To say that fire is all pervading and formless is totally wrong notion. Fire is subtler than earth and water elements. Hence it could be said that fire is pervading in Earth and water. But it is not pervading in air and ether. But it is true that both water and air is pervading in fire for the reason these are more subtle than fire. The subtle pervades the gross. In all things where fire is pervading they have shape and form. All the things in the world which have a form are caused because of all pervading fire. Because the quality of fire is form. Physical things become gross from subtle by the association of many atoms. God is omnipresent, and all alone. He cannot therefore assume shape and take a form. Now, about the god descending from time to time. This is only assumption and nothing else. The term Avatar means to descend and ascend. Only a finite bodies can do this and not applicable to infinite entity like God. The act of ascending, descending, Avatar, coming and going is unthinkable about an entity which is omnipresent. Wherefrom He can come and go when He is found to be everywhere?

 

K: Does not God take Avatar to vanquish Ravan, Kans, Hiranyakashipu etc? I have heard that God takes Avatar whenever Dharma is threatened?

 

V: God has not taken Avatar ever nor He will ever do so in future. From time to time great men are born who have vanquished the wicked, showed the right path and therefore people have called them with some honorific titles. Some people have named them as Nabi or son of God. Still some other has described such great men as Avatar or God personified. But the fact remains that great men remained as such. Why you don’t talk rationally? Can God not capable of destroying by remaining formless?  Hundreds of living beings are born every second and does God goes on destroying them? With one earth quake lakhs of men are killed. Epidemics wipe out hundreds of living beings. Is it sensible to believe that God takes Avatar just to kill wretched beings? Do men like Ravan, Kans ever count? Is it not ludicrous and insulting to God to assume god taking avatar to kill the wicked when He is capable of Creating, Sustaining and destroying the world? It is also not free from blame to say that God takes Avatar when Dharma is threatened. Probably those people who believe in Avatars believe this to be true. But they stand condemned by their own statement. Look! The people having belief in Avatar agree on Ten Avatars and also four Yugas. These Yugas are viz, Satyayuga, Threthayuga, Dwaparyuga and Kaliyuga. In Satyayuga, Dharma stands on four steps. In Threthayuga it stands on three steps, in Dwapara Dharma and Adharma stands equally on two steps each. In other words in Dwapara the elements of Punya [Virtue] and Papa {Non-Virtue] share equal honors. In Kaliyug it is believed that   Non-virtue {Papa} rests on three steps and Virtue [Punya] rests only on one step. Now think of the order of Avatars in all the yugas. It is said four Avatars took place in Satyayuga, three Avatars in Threthayuga and two in Dwaparayuga. And they believe one Avatar taking place at the end of Kaliyuga. Now what is to be pondered over here, why four Avatars took place in Satyayuga when Dharma was resting on all four steps and no Adharma was present. In Threthayuga when Dharma was resting on three steps why three Avatars? Why one less? When in Dwapar when both Dharma and Adharma was present in the proportion of 50:50 why only two Avatars? In Kaliyug when Dharma and Adharma is in the ratio of 25:75 why only one Avatar is outstanding and that too at the end of the Yug? Logically speaking, the number of Avatars should be more with the increase in the proportion of Non-virtue. Whereas the number of Avatars went of decreasing with the rise in the proportion of Non-Virtue. Now tell me what is the relationship between Avatars with the loss of Dharma?

 

K:  The Avatar men have shown amazing things not capable of being done by ordinary men. For ex, lifting of Govardhan Mountain with little finger, etc. Because of this we are compelled to believe that they are all Avatars of God.

 

V: First of all it is wrong to say that someone lifted a mountain with a finger. Even if we accept this could be true, this does not demonstrate anyway the greatness of God or God’s avatar. You may ask why? Before God, who has upheld Sun, planets and countless stars the lifting of Govardhan Mountain appears to be too trifle. There are hundreds of Mountains big and small in the world you live. God has upheld the world and what greatness is involved in upholding a Govardhan Mountain? What heroism is there in upholding a Govardhan Mountain? This is like a student of M.A answering a paper set for 3 rd standard. Yes. If a 3rd standard boy were to answer a paper for M.A then it deserves full praise. This is because it is unbelievable. If God’s Avatar were to lift a mountain there is nothing great or amazing here.

 

K: If God were not to take Avatar then how to believe that God is All-Powerful?  Where is his   omniscientness of God if He could not take an Avatar? He is All-Powerful who could do anything.

 

V: You are irrational. If God were to take Avatar he ceases to be All-Powerful and gets reduced to an entity with limited strength. You may wonder how? He who was doing things earlier without a body and limbs will now start doing the work with limbs. Earlier he was seeing things without eyes. Now he sees with his physical eyes. Earlier he was listening without ears. Now he listens with physical ears. The import of this is, earlier to taking Avatar he was doing everything without a body and now he is dependent on body. Where is His omniscient ness when he becomes dependent? Like the man with finite knowledge depending on Body God also becomes dependent on body. Now where is the difference between man and god? God also becomes subject to hunger and thirst, cold and hot that torment a man. Hate, Love, fever that man experience will also be felt by God. The extraordinary thing is God becomes subservient and not at all remain Independent. He requires food, water, clothes and shelter. How could you say that he is all powerful when he starts depending on his body for execution of jobs when earlier he was doing everything with no support from any side?   A person with just a blink of an eye makes a person unconscious and yet another make him unconscious with the help of a drug. Who is powerful among these two? Definitely the person who renders unconscious with a blink of an eye for the reason he does not dependent on drugs for this job.

 

Now, you would have understood that God is powerful without taking Avatar. It is totally wrong notion to believe that being All- Powerful means that He is capable of doing everything. All-Powerful means that all powers are with him. He can join subtle things and could disintegrate them. He would award the human beings based on their Karma. He could create, sustain and dissolve the world and run it as per laws. He requires nobody’s help in the execution of his jobs. That is the meaning of being all-powerful or omniscient. Rendering impossible things as possible is not the meaning of being All-Powerful.

 

 

K: Does God not make impossible the possible?  He is no God who cannot make impossible things possible.

 

V: Not making impossible things possible, not undoing the Rule [i.e. making or mending the rules] is God’s divinity. If you were to believe that God could turn impossible to possible then I would ask “can God kill himself? Or can God create another God? Please reply.

 

K: God may not kill himself. But since he is All-Powerful He could create another God as equal to himself.

 

V:  No Sister! God cannot create another God of equal standing. You may ask why? Listen. Now imagine that God has created another God. Now is this created god could be equal to the creator? No. This is because one is old God and another is Created God. One is Visible God and another is invincible God and thus there are two Gods. One is ageless because he is eternal. The age of other God has just begun for he is created. The first God is all-pervading and other is pervaded. Both cannot become all-pervading.  If you were of opinion that both are pervading 50:50 then none are omniscient and omnipresent. Hence all-Pervading does not mean that He could do everything and anything. God could do which could be done by him.

 

K: What is wrong in accepting that god could take Avatar? What is the risk here?

 

V: When God could not Avatar at all, the acceptance of God taking Avatar, would amount to twisting and killing the truth. This is the first danger. Secondly God himself gets entangled in decadence. Narayan becomes Nara. Nara becoming Narayan could be treated as growth, but the reverse is definitely a sign of downfall. If a poor becomes rich then it is his real improvement but if a rich becomes poor it is definitely a sign of retrograde progress.  Thirdly, a fraudulent declares himself as an Avatar and misleads the followers. He makes money out of them and leads a sinful life. There are umpteen examples in Bharath where some fraudulent men have declared themselves as Avatars and totally cheated the people. Fourthly, people start tolerating the injustice and fraud. People begin watching loot, murder rape and destruction of property by hooligans and don’t protest against them. They feel it is not in their hands to prevent the injustice and of the opinion that only when God takes Avatar he would put down effectively all the cases of injustice. Then only that Dharma reins and evil is vanquished. This sort of wishful thinking is due to the belief in the concept of Avatar. Communities or group of people who don’t believe in the concept of God taking Avatar stand firm against assaults  and resist firmly the cases of injustice and destruction bravely. They firmly believe that God has given those hands to protect themselves and never tolerate Adharma. They don’t look towards God for jobs that could be done by them. To be frank, the theory of Avatarvad has ruined the Aryan community and destroyed their self-confidence. This has caused untold hardships for Aryans and contributed to their prolonged slavery. Our history is a witness to this tragedy.

 

K: Your logic is fine, convincing and effective. Now tell me how to meditate on God who is said to be formless.

 

V: It is really God’s kindness that the effect of true principles have made impression on you. I will reply to your question tomorrow.

 

=====================================================================

This is the translated version of the original Hindi  “Do bahinonke bathe” written by late Pt. Siddagopal”Kavirathna”

Translated by : Vasudev Rao.

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.

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, Uncategorized, Vedic Religion

Rigveda: Industrial Management & Training By Subodh Kumar

Leave a comment

bhishma

 

 

RV1.5 Industrial Management & Training
Work place atmosphere
1.आ त्वेता निषीदतेन्द्रमभि प्रगायत |
सखाय: स्तोमवाहसः || RV 1.5.1, AV20.68.11
(स्तोमवाहसःसखाय:) आओ आप सब प्रशंसनीय गुणयुक्त कार्य करने में प्रवीण विद्वानों से मित्रभाव से सब मिल कर परस्पर प्रीति के साथ शिल्प विद्या को सिद्ध करने में, (आनिषीदत) एकत्रित हों,(इन्द्रम्‌ अभिप्रगायत) इंद्र के गुणों का उपदेश करें और सुनें कि जिस से वह अच्छी रीति से सिद्ध की हुइ शिल्प विद्या सब को प्रकट हो जाए , और उस से (तु एत) तुम सब लोग सब सुखों को प्राप्त हों .
Let all well in company of qualified competent persons gather in a harmonious friendly cooperative atmosphere, to learn and discuss for successful development of well produced products that bring comfort and welfare to everybody.
Useful & Harmful results
2. पुरूतमं पुरूणामीशानं वार्य्याणाम |
इन्द्रं सोमे सचा सुते || RV 1.5.2, AV20.68.12
(पुरुणाम्‌) आकाश से ले कर पृथिवी तक के सब असंख्य पदार्थों के साधक (वार्य्याणाम) अत्यंत उत्तम वरण करने योग्य सद्गुणों को (ईशानम्‌) रचने में समर्थ, परन्तु (पुरूतमम्‌) दुष्ट स्वभाव वाले जीवों के कर्मों के भोग के निमित्त और (इन्द्रम्‌) जीवमात्र को सुख दु:ख देने वाले पदार्थों के भौतिक गुणों का ( अभिगायत) उपदेश करो . और (तु सुते सोमे सचा) जो सब प्रकार की विद्या से प्राप्त होने योग्य पदार्थों के निमित्त कार्य्य हैं उन को उक्त विद्याओं से सब के उपकार के लिए यथायोग्य युक्त करो.
Find and learn about all physical objects from sky to earth and their properties that can be put to desirable use. And utilize the knowledge of the physical properties objects in nature for welfare of all. But also bring out and speak about the knowledge about the simultaneous harmful and cruel results.
Importance Knowledge –ज्ञान का महत्व
3. स घा नो योग आ भुवत्स राये स पुरन्ध्याम |
गमद्वाजेभिरा स नः || RV 1.5.3,AV20.69.1
सब पदार्थ विद्याओं के ज्ञान के उपयोग से निश्चय ही सुख प्रदान करने के लिए उत्तम समृद्धि के धन अन्न और आवागमन के साधन प्राप्त होते हैं.
Combination of (पुरंध्याम) multidiscipline knowledge (घा) definitely (आ भुवत) results in providing excellent bounties of food, public conveniences of travel for comfort.
सुरक्षा के नियम – Safety Code
4. यस्य संस्थे न वृण्वते हरी समत्सु शत्रवः |
तस्मा इन्द्राय गायत || RV 1.5.4,AV20.69.2
भौतिक पदार्थों और उन की प्रक्रियाओं के सम्भावित दुष्परिणामों के रोकथाम के लिए सुरक्षा के साधनों का प्रचार करो.
Explore and provide information & knowledge about the harmful properties of the physical objects and processes.
Importance of R&D अनुसंधान का महत्व
5. सुतपाव्ने सुता इमे शुचयो यन्ति वीतये |

सोमासो दध्याशिरः || RV 1.5.5,AV20.69.3
(सोमासो दध्याशिर:) अनुसंधान के ज्ञान से (सुतपाव्ने सुता) उत्पन्न हो कर सुख समृद्धि के साधनों की नदियां बह चलती हैं
(सोमासो दध्याशिर:) Results of Research and development (सुतपाव्ने सुता) creat a running stream of products & processes for wellbeing.
Make life comfortable सुखमय जीवन
6. त्वं सुतस्य पीतये सद्यो वृद्धो अजायथाः |
इन्द्र ज्येष्ठ्याय सुक्रतो || RV 1.5.6,AV20.69.4
संसार के पदार्थों के सुख को ग्रहण करने ले लिए विद्या आदि उत्तम ज्ञान से प्रेरित हो कर श्रेष्ठ अत्युत्तम कर्मों का अनुष्ठान करो
Reach the status of senior entrepreneur by utilizing the vast store of knowledge and technology to bring comfort and welfare in life of entire community. .

Aim of education शिक्षा का लक्ष्य
7. आ त्वा विशन्त्वाशवः सोमास इन्द्र गिर्वणः |
शं ते सन्तु प्रचेतसे || RV 1.5.7,AV20.69.5
जीवन को सुखदायी बनाने के लिए तुझ में उत्तम व्याख्यान के ज्ञान तथा प्रशिक्षण से अति तीक्ष्ण बुद्धि और कर्मठ प्रवृत्ति जागृत हो .
(गिर्वणः) By good lectures training (विशन्त्वाशवः सोमास इन्द्र ) fast thinking and action oriented temperament (शं ते सन्तु प्रचेतसे) should develop (आ त्वा) in you
8. त्वां स्तोमा अवीवृधन्‌ त्वामुक्था शतक्रतो |
त्वां वर्धन्तु नो गिरः || RV 1.5.8,AV20.69.6
उन्नति के लिए उत्तम ज्ञान और उपदेश की शिक्षा द्वारा तुम सेंकड़ों काम करने का यश प्राप्त करो
With excellent education, knowledge and training develop the reputation of a multitalented achiever.
Enjoy the infinite bounties of Nature
9. अक्षितोतिः सनेदिमं वाजमिन्द्रः सहस्रिणम |
यस्मिन विश्वानि पौंस्या || RV 1.5.9,AV20.69.7
संसार का समस्त भौतिक ज्ञान प्राप्त कर के प्रकृति की असन्ख्य उपलब्धियों को ग्रहण करों
(अक्षितोतिः) Based on knowledge of universal Truth (यस्मिन विश्वानि पौंस्या) by hard work in this physical world (सनेदिमं वाजमिन्द्रः सहस्रिणम ) share the infinite bounties for comfort and welfare . |

Honesty & Fair play
10. मा नो मर्त्ता अभि द्रुहन तनूनामिन्द्र गिर्वणः |
ईशानो यवया वधम्‌ || RV 1.5.10,AV20.69.8
राग द्वेष भेद भाव स्वार्थ से प्रेरित हम अपनी वाणी और व्यवहार से किसी भी जीवधारी का शोषण और अहित न करें
Motivated by greed, personal grudge and ego clash do not allow your conduct and speech to cause hurt or exploit anybody.