Let us familiarise ourselves with Rigveda

[N.R.Ranganathan]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Sir,

This is very good. You are well-read and pranams.

 

[N.R.Ranganathan]

Sir,

A small rider . Some years ago, I read an article in Dinamani kadir ( I am not sure,
it is by sri Sivaraman ), where he has explained how to do paarayanam taking a
sentence and explaining the krama, jada, gana methods of chanting it. This will
enable common people to understand this easily. Thanks.

 

[sangom]

[FONT=&quot]navagraha s[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ū[/FONT][FONT=&quot]kta - [/FONT][FONT=&quot]ś[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ani[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]adhidevat[/FONT]ā[FONT=&quot] - yama[/FONT]ḥ[FONT=&quot] | pratyadhidevat[/FONT]ā[FONT=&quot] - praj[/FONT]ā[FONT=&quot]pati[/FONT]ḥ

[FONT=&quot]ऋषिः - त्रिशिराः त्वाष्ट्रः[/FONT][FONT=&quot], सिन्धुद्वीपः आम्बरीषः वा । छन्दः - गायत्री । देवता - आपः[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]शन्नो देवीरभिष्टय आपो भवन्तु पीतयै ।[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]शंयोरभिस्रवन्तु नः ॥ ऋ. वे. १०.०९.०४[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]ருஷிஃ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] - த்ரிசிராஃ த்வாஷ்ட்ரஃ, ஸிந்துத்வீபஃ ஆம்பரீஷஃ வா | சந்தஃ - காயத்ரீ | தேவதா - ஆபஃ[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]சந்நோ தேவீரபிஷ்டய ஆபோ பவந்து பீதயை [/FONT][FONT=&quot]|[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]சம்யோரபிஸ்ரவந்து நஃ [/FONT][FONT=&quot]|| ரு. வே. ௧0.0௯.0௪[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]ṛṣiḥ - triśirāḥ tvāṣṭraḥ, sindhudvīpaḥ āmbarīṣaḥ vā | chandaḥ - gāyatrī | devatā - āpaḥ[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Note [/FONT] [FONT=&quot]: [/FONT][FONT=&quot]It will be evident from the above that even by the time the [/FONT][FONT=&quot]sarv[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ā[/FONT][FONT=&quot]nukrama[/FONT]ṇ[FONT=&quot]ī[/FONT][FONT=&quot] was prepared, there was confusion regarding the actual author of some [/FONT]ṛ[FONT=&quot]ks.[/FONT]


ś[FONT=&quot]anno dev[/FONT]ī[FONT=&quot]rabhi[/FONT]ṣṭ[FONT=&quot]aya [/FONT]ā[FONT=&quot]po bhavantu p[/FONT]ī[FONT=&quot]tayai |[/FONT]
ś[FONT=&quot]a[/FONT]ṃ[FONT=&quot]yorabhisravantu na[/FONT]ḥ[FONT=&quot] || [/FONT]ṛ[FONT=&quot]. ve. 10.09.04[/FONT]


[FONT=&quot]May the waters ([/FONT]ā[FONT=&quot]pa[/FONT]ḥ[FONT=&quot]) become removers of our sins and bestowers of comfort. May the waters, who are dev[/FONT]ī[FONT=&quot]s be for our yaj[/FONT]ñ[FONT=&quot]as. May the waters be for our drinking. May the waters cure our diseases and prevent other diseases (from troubling us). May the waters flow above us to make us ritually pure ([/FONT]ś[FONT=&quot]uddhi).[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Note[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]: The three [/FONT]ṛ[FONT=&quot]ks previous to this are chanted daily during sandhy[/FONT]ā[FONT=&quot]vandanam. Those are-[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]आपो हि ष्ठा मयो भुवस्ता न ऊर्जॆ दधातन । महॆ रणाय चक्षसे ।। १[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]यो वः शिवतमो रसस्तस्य भाजयतेह नः । उशतीरिव मातरः ॥ २[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]तस्मा अरं गमाम वॊ यस्य क्षयाय जिन्वथ । आपो जनयथा च नः ॥३[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]ஆபோ ஹி ஷ்டா மயோ புவஸ்தாந ஊர்ஜெ ததாதந [/FONT][FONT=&quot]| மஹெ ரணாய சக்ஷஸே || ௧[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]யோ வஃ சிவதமோ ரஸஸ்தஸ்ய பாஜயதேஹ நஃ [/FONT][FONT=&quot]| உசதீரிவ மாதரஃ || ௨[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]தஸ்மா அரம் கமாம வொ யஸ்ய க்ஷயாய ஜிந்வத [/FONT][FONT=&quot]| ஆபோ ஜநயதா ச நஃ ||௩[/FONT]

ā[FONT=&quot]po hi [/FONT]ṣṭ[FONT=&quot]h[/FONT]ā[FONT=&quot] mayo bhuvast[/FONT]ā[FONT=&quot] na [/FONT]ū[FONT=&quot]rje dadh[/FONT]ā[FONT=&quot]tana | mahe ra[/FONT]ṇā[FONT=&quot]ya cak[/FONT]ṣ[FONT=&quot]ase || 1[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]yo va[/FONT]ḥś[FONT=&quot]ivatamo rasastasya bh[/FONT]ā[FONT=&quot]jayateha na[/FONT]ḥ[FONT=&quot] | u[/FONT]ś[FONT=&quot]at[/FONT]ī[FONT=&quot]riva m[/FONT]ā[FONT=&quot]tara[/FONT]ḥ[FONT=&quot] || 2[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]tasm[/FONT]ā[FONT=&quot] ara[/FONT]ṃ[FONT=&quot] gam[/FONT]ā[FONT=&quot]ma vo yasya k[/FONT]ṣ[FONT=&quot]ay[/FONT]ā[FONT=&quot]ya jinvatha | [/FONT]ā[FONT=&quot]po janayath[/FONT]ā[FONT=&quot] ca na[/FONT]ḥ[FONT=&quot] ||3[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Hence there can be no doubt that the fourth [/FONT]ṛ[FONT=&quot]k starting with [/FONT]ś[FONT=&quot]a[/FONT]ṃ[FONT=&quot]nodev[/FONT]īḥ[FONT=&quot] is also a praise to the [/FONT]ā[FONT=&quot]pa[/FONT]ḥ[FONT=&quot] or waters and not to the planet saturn or its deity [/FONT]ś[FONT=&quot]ani, especially when the devata for the [/FONT]ṛ[FONT=&quot]k is "[/FONT]ā[FONT=&quot]pa[/FONT]ḥ[FONT=&quot]" only. The only possible connection is the word [/FONT]ś[FONT=&quot]a[/FONT]ṃ[FONT=&quot]no which [/FONT][FONT=&quot]somewhat resembles the sound of the word "[/FONT]ś[FONT=&quot]ani".[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]This is one more glaring example to show that the navagraha s[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]ū[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ktas are the result of attempts to sift the vedas and find out some mantras which can be given to the gullible and unquestioning believers and convince them that the vedas recognised the navagrahas.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]ऋषिः - प्राजापत्यो हिरण्यगर्भ: । छन्दः - त्रिष्टुप् । दॆवता -[/FONT][FONT=&quot]’[/FONT][FONT=&quot]क[/FONT][FONT=&quot]’[/FONT][FONT=&quot] शब्दाभिधेयः प्रजापतिः[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]प्रजापते न त्वदेतान्यन्यो विश्वा जातानि परिता बभूव ।[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]यत्कामास्ते जुहुमस्तन्नो अस्तु वयग्ग्ं स्याम पतयो रयीणाम् ॥ [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]O praj[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ā[/FONT][FONT=&quot]pate ! None except you accepts (spreads) this world of moving and immovable objects.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]May we realize whatever results (boons) we desire (from you) by giving these oblations. May we also get riches.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]ऋषिः - यमः वैवस्वतः । छन्दः - त्रिष्टुप् । देवता - यमः[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]इमं यमप्रस्तरमाहि सीदाऽङ्गिरोभिः पितृभिस्सम्विदानः।[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]आत्वा मन्त्राः कविशस्ता वहन्त्वेना राजन् हविषा मादयस्व ॥ ऋ. वे. १०.१४.४[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]ருஷிஃ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] - யமஃ வைவஸ்வதஃ | சந்தஃ - த்ரிஷ்டுப் | தேவதா - யமஃ[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]இமம் யமப்ரஸ்தரமாஹி ஸீதாங்கிரோபிஃ பித்ருபிஸ்ஸம்விதாநஃ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]|[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]ஆத்வா மந்த்ராஃ கவிசஸ்தா வஹந்த்வேநா ராஜந் ஹவிஷா மாதயஸ்வ [/FONT][FONT=&quot]|| ரு. வே. ௧0.௧௪.௪[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]ṛṣ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]i[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ḥ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] - yama[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ḥ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] vaivasvata[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ḥ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] | chanda[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ḥ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] - tri[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṣṭ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]up | devat[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ā[/FONT][FONT=&quot] - yama[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ḥ[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]ima[/FONT]ṃ[FONT=&quot] yamaprastaram[/FONT]ā[FONT=&quot]hi s[/FONT]ī[FONT=&quot]d[/FONT]ā[FONT=&quot]:'[/FONT]ṅ[FONT=&quot]girobhi[/FONT]ḥ[FONT=&quot] pit[/FONT]ṛ[FONT=&quot]bhissamvid[/FONT]ā[FONT=&quot]na[/FONT]ḥ[FONT=&quot]|[/FONT]
ā[FONT=&quot]tv[/FONT]ā[FONT=&quot] mantr[/FONT]āḥ[FONT=&quot] kavi[/FONT]ś[FONT=&quot]ast[/FONT]ā[FONT=&quot] vahantven[/FONT]ā[FONT=&quot] r[/FONT]ā[FONT=&quot]jan havi[/FONT]ṣā[FONT=&quot] m[/FONT]ā[FONT=&quot]dayasva || [/FONT]ṛ[FONT=&quot]. ve. 10.14.4[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Note[/FONT] [FONT=&quot] : [/FONT][FONT=&quot]The [/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṛṣ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]i[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ḥ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] here is yama[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ḥ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] vaivasvata[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ḥ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]; it means "yama, son of vivasv[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ā[/FONT][FONT=&quot]n", which is so as per the pur[/FONT][FONT=&quot]āṇ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]as. The devata, therefore, is the [/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṛṣ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]i[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ḥ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] himself. Thus this [/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṛ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]k is a self-praise! [/FONT]


[FONT=&quot]O king yama ! you who became one of the pit[/FONT]ṛ[FONT=&quot]s (known as) a[/FONT]ṅ[FONT=&quot]girases, welcome to this couch (made of leaves and flowers). May the mantras chanted by the learned [/FONT]ṛ[FONT=&quot]tviks carry you here. Be pleased with this havis and make the yajam[/FONT]ā[FONT=&quot]na happy.[/FONT]

Note : It may be useful to give the accounts relating to the ādityas. These are twelve in number. There is a view that these represent the twelve lunar months , in the early days of the vedic people. The account given in the viṣṇupurāṇa (aṃśa - 1, adhyāya - 15)about the ādityas is as follows:

kaśyapa prajāpati had twelve sons by his wife aditi; these twelve are known as ādityas. They are viṣṇu, śakra, aryamā, dhātā, tvaṣṭā, pūṣan, vivasvān, savitṛ, mitra, varuṇa, aṃśu and bhaga.

When aditi was pregnant, candra (the moon god) came once to kaśyapa's āśrama for alms. Due to the difficulties created by pregnancy, aditi took some time to go out and invite candra who mistook it as a mark of disrespect to him and pronounced a curse that the foetus will die. aditi was overcome with grief at this and related everything to her husband when he returned. kaśyapa assured her that the child will be unharmed by the curse and revived the dead foetus. Thus the child got the name mārttāṇḍa or one who was born out of a dead foetus (mṛta aṇḍa). On his birth the child was named as vivasvān.

vivasvān married saṃjñā , daughter of viśvakarma. vaivasvata manu, yama and yamī were their offsprings.

 

[sangom]

[FONT=&quot]aikmatya sūkta[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]This is the last sūkta (X. 191) of the rigveda consisting of 4 ṛks. It is a prayer for aikamatya or unanimity, sameness of opinion, concurrence, etc. A study of the meaning of this sūkta leads me to suspect that by the time the compilation of the ṛgveda was complete in the form in which we have inherited it, there were probably dissensions and conflicts rearing their head, within the vedic community; it appears to have been only the priestly class (brāhmaṇas), going by the import of these verses. Hence probably the compiler thought it fit to complete the work with an earnest appeal for aikamatya, as a sort of epilogue. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Now, to the sūkta.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]ऋषिः - आङ्गिरसः संवननः । छन्दः - १[/FONT][FONT=&quot],२,४-अनुष्टुप् ; ३-त्रिष्टुप् । दॆवता - अग्निः-१ ; सन्ज्ञानं च २-४[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]ṛṣiḥ - āṅgirasaḥ saṃvananaḥ | chandaḥ - 1,2,4-anuṣṭup ; 3-triṣṭup | devatā - agniḥ-1 ; sanjñānaṃ ca 2-4[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]संसमिद्युवसे वृषन्नग्ने विश्वान्यर्य आ ।[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]इळस्पदे समिध्यसे स नो वसून्या भर ॥ १[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]ஸம்ஸமித்யுவஸே[/FONT][FONT=&quot]வ்ருஷந்நக்நே[/FONT][FONT=&quot]விச்வாந்யர்ய[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ஆ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] |[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]இளஸ்பதே[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ஸமித்யஸே[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ஸ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]நோ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]வஸூந்யா[/FONT][FONT=&quot]பர[/FONT][FONT=&quot] || [/FONT][FONT=&quot]௧[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]sa[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṃ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]samidyuvase v[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṛṣ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]annagne viśvānyarya ā |[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]i[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ḷ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]aspade samidhyase sa no vasūnyā bhara || 1[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]O bountiful agni who rains what we desire ! Noble as you are, you unite all. On this earth, you are kindled by every one. May you you bring riches to us. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]The above is the simple and straight meaning of this ṛk. But sāyaṇācārya, as is his wont, has given the yājñikī interpretation, somewhat as under:[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]O! Bountiful agni who rains what we desire! īśvara that you are, you unite all that is born out of paṃcabhūtas, in the form of vaiśvānarāgni and lead them to the midst of the devas. (Here I feel the indirect reference is to burning – cremation – and leading the souls to heaven.) On this earth you are kindled by the ṛtviks in the uttaravedi of the sacrificial altars. May such an agni bring riches to us.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]सं गच्छध्वं सं वदध्वं सं वॊ मनांसि जानताम् ।[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]दॆवाभागं यथापूर्वे संजानाना उपासते ॥ २[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]ஸம் கச்சத்வம் ஸம் வதத்வம் ஸம் வோ மநாம்ஸி ஜாநதாம் [/FONT][FONT=&quot]|[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]தேவாபாகம் யதாபூர்வே ஸம்ஜாநாநா உபாஸதே [/FONT][FONT=&quot]|| ௨[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]sa[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]ṃ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] gacchadhva[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṃ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] sa[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṃ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] vadadhva[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṃ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] sa[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṃ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] vo manā[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṃ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]si jānatām |[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]devābhāga[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]ṃ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] yathāpūrve sa[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṃ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]jānānā upāsate || 2[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]O! All those who praise (stotas)! May you all walk unitedly! May you speak with one voice! May your minds have unison in thinking (i.e., no difference in views)! Just as the devas of the ancient days (or, the ancient devas) accept the share of oblations due to each of them, you also be satisfied with the share of riches for each.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot](It will be more than evident that this advice- cum – entreaty indicates that there was discontentment among the vedic priests who used to perform the various sacrifices and [/FONT] [FONT=&quot]receive dakṣiṇā in the form of cows, gold, and even the wife of the yajamāna (king) in aśvamedha sacrifices, and this is just to ensure unity among those squabbling priests.)[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]समानॊ मन्त्रः समितिः समानी समानं मनः सह चित्तमॆषाम् ।[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]समानं मन्त्रं अभिमन्त्रयॆवः[/FONT][FONT=&quot]समानॆन वॊ हविषा जुहॊमि ॥ ३[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]samāno mantra[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]ḥ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] samiti[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ḥ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] samānī [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]samāna[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]ṃ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] mana[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ḥ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] saha cittame[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṣ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ām |[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]samāna[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]ṃ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] mantra[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṃ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] abhimantrayeva[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ḥ[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]samānena vo havi[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]ṣ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ā juhomi || 3[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]ஸமானோ மந்த்ரஃ ஸமிதிஃ ஸமாநீ[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]ஸமாநம் மநஃ ஸஹ சித்தமேஷாம்[/FONT][FONT=&quot] |[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]ஸமாநம் மந்த்ரம் அபிமந்த்ரயெவஃ[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]ஸமாநெந வொ ஹவிஷா ஜுஹொமி[/FONT][FONT=&quot] || ௩[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]May the chanting or the secret talks of the worshippers (stotās, or priests) be of one tune. Let their meeting be one of unity. Let their minds, citta & antaḥkaraṇa also be in unison and with the same aim. For the sake of unity among you I recite this. Similarly I give oblations of boiled rice (“caru”[/FONT][FONT=&quot]चरु [/FONT][FONT=&quot]in Sanskrit) and sacrificial cakes (puroḍāśa [/FONT][FONT=&quot]पुरोडाश[/FONT][FONT=&quot] –which morphed into the later ‘parotta’) of similar type. (That is, there is no difference in the quality or quantity of caru or puroḍāśa in the oblations to different devas.)[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]समानी व आकूतिः समाना हृदयानि वः ।[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]समानं अस्तु वॊ मनॊ यथावः सुसहासति ॥ ४[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]samānī va ākūtiḥ samānā hṛdayāni vaḥ |[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]samānaṃ astu vo mano yathāvaḥ susahāsati || 4[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]ஸமாநீ வ ஆகூதிஃ ஸமாநா ஹ்ருதயாநி வஃ [/FONT][FONT=&quot]|[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]ஸமாநம் அஸ்து வொ மநொ யதாவஃ ஸுஸஹாஸதி [/FONT][FONT=&quot]|| [/FONT][FONT=&quot]௪[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]O! Priests ! May your ideas and resolutions (decisions) be of the same kind. May your minds be in unison. May your conscience be so united that it becomes a splendid, brilliant union of all of you.[/FONT]

 

[kahanam]

" I have heard 'Shukla' Yajurvedis and 'Krishna' Yajurvedis only in North India and again, more or less, shukla Yajurvedis are shaivites and krishna Yajurvedis are vaishnavites."

Sage Yagnavalkya has reportedly initiated the Shukla shakha of Yajur Veda and Krishna Yajur Veda continues as befopre. There is no such thing that Shukla Yajur Veda followers are Saivaites and Krishna Yajur Veda followers are Vaishnavaites. I belong to Krishna Yajur Veda and I am a Smartha!

 

[sashikala]

wonderful and very interesting. it helps us to learn and familiarise with sanskrit also. hope many will benefit.

 

[sangom]

Three ṛks from the mantras for tarpaṇa

I have posted the mantras recited in the [FONT=&quot]tarpa[FONT=&quot]ṇ[/FONT][/FONT][FONT=&quot]as as a separate thread (here), since there were mantras from texts other books also in that. But three ṛks therefrom are so appealing that I thought it fit to give them here also for those who may not be interested in the [/FONT][FONT=&quot]tarpa[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṇ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]a mantras[/FONT][FONT=&quot].

[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]The three [/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṛ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ks given below constitute the mantras for the (three) offerings (tarpa[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṇ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]a) for the prapitāmaha or great grandfathers. These are continuous [/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṛ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ks and form part of a sūkta in praise of viśvedevas.

"viśvedevas" is a special category among the [/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṛ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]gvedic deities. Unlike agni, indra, rudra, vi[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṣṇ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]u etc., it is not possible to fix their identity or the exact import of that term. It will take a separate post and, may be, I shall attempt it in future sometime. For the present let us be satisfied with the fact that our scriptures state that the pit[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṛ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]s can come - in forms invisible to human eyes, of course - only if they are accompanied by the three viśvedevas called purūrava, ārdraka and sa[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṃ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]jñaka.

In [/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṛ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]gveda the word purūru means far and wide. purūrava[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ḥ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] means crying much or loudly. There is also the famous king purūravas. Which of these is the inspiration for naming one of the viśvedevas in this way is not clear.

ārdraka means, wet, moist, born under the constellation of ārdrā([/FONT][FONT=&quot]திருவாதிரை[/FONT][FONT=&quot]), the name of a particular king in vi[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṣṇ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]upurā[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṇ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]a, and, ginger in its undried state (according to āyurveda). May be that is the reason that raw ginger ([/FONT][FONT=&quot]இஞ்சி[/FONT][FONT=&quot]) is considered an essential requirement for any śrāddha cooking!

"sa[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṃ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]jñaka" is a word which does not seem to have any meaning; the closest one can say is "one with a name", that is all.

That apart, the verses under consideration appear to me as some of the most appealing verses of the [/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṛ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]gveda, and can very well be part of one's daily prayers; these can certainly be adopted as the motto by environmentalists, the green peace foundation, etc., as well.

[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ऋषिः - गॊतमः राहूगणः । छन्दः - गायत्री । देवता - विश्वॆदेवाः ।[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]मधु वाता ऋतायतॆ मधुक्षरन्ति सिन्धवः ।[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]माध्वीः नः सन्तु ओषधीः ॥[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ऋ. वे. १.९०.६[/FONT][FONT=&quot]

[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ருஷிஃ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] - [/FONT][FONT=&quot]கோதமஃ ராஹூகணஃ [/FONT][FONT=&quot]| [/FONT][FONT=&quot]சந்தஃ - காயத்ரீ [/FONT][FONT=&quot]| [/FONT][FONT=&quot]தேவதா - விச்வேதேவாஃ [/FONT][FONT=&quot]|

[/FONT][FONT=&quot]மது வாதா ருதாயதெ மதுக்ஷரந்தி ஸிந்தவஃ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] |
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]மாத்வீஃ நஃ ஸந்து ஓஷதீஃ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] || [/FONT][FONT=&quot]ரு. வே. ௧.௯[/FONT][FONT=&quot]0.[/FONT][FONT=&quot]௬[/FONT][FONT=&quot]

[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṛṣ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]i[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ḥ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] - gotama[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ḥ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] rāhūga[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṇ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]a[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ḥ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] | chanda[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ḥ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] - gāyatrī | devatā - viśvedevā[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ḥ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] |

madhu vātā [/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṛ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]tāyate madhuk[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṣ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]aranti sindhava[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ḥ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] |
mādhvī[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ḥ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] na[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ḥ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] santu o[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṣ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]adhī[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ḥ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] || [/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṛ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]. ve. 1.90.6

[/FONT]मधु =[FONT=&quot] sweet, delicious, charming, delightful (in R.V., T.S.)
[/FONT]ऋताय =[FONT=&quot] to wish for sacrifice ([/FONT]सायण)[FONT=&quot], to wish for speech
[/FONT]ऋतय =[FONT=&quot] to observe the sacred law, be regular or proper
[/FONT]वाता =[FONT=&quot] the winds
[/FONT]क्षर् =[FONT=&quot] to flow, to stream
[/FONT]माध्वीः =[FONT=&quot] sweet (R.V.)
[/FONT]ऒषधीः =[FONT=&quot] herbs, plants

May the winds flow sweet according to the sacred law and be regular; may the rivers flow with sweet waters; may the herbs and plants become sweet (tasteful, promoting health) to us.

[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ऋषिः - गॊतमः राहूगणः । छन्दः - गायत्री । देवता - विश्वॆदेवाः ।[/FONT][FONT=&quot]

[/FONT][FONT=&quot]मधु नक्तं उतॊषसो मधुमत् पार्थिवँरजः ।[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]मधु द्यौरस्तु नः पिता ॥ ऋ. वे. १.९०.७[/FONT][FONT=&quot]

[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ருஷிஃ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] - [/FONT][FONT=&quot]கோதமஃ ராஹூகணஃ [/FONT][FONT=&quot]| [/FONT][FONT=&quot]சந்தஃ - காயத்ரீ [/FONT][FONT=&quot]| [/FONT][FONT=&quot]தேவதா - விச்வேதேவாஃ [/FONT][FONT=&quot]|

[/FONT][FONT=&quot]மது நக்தம் உதொஷஸோ மதுமத் பார்திவம்ரஜஃ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] |
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]மது த்யௌரஸ்து நஃ பிதா[/FONT][FONT=&quot] || [/FONT][FONT=&quot]ரு. வே. ௧.௯[/FONT][FONT=&quot]0.[/FONT][FONT=&quot]௭[/FONT][FONT=&quot]

[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṛṣ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]i[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ḥ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] - gotama[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ḥ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] rāhūga[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṇ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]a[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ḥ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] | chanda[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ḥ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] - gāyatrī | devatā - viśvedevā[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ḥ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] |
madhu nakta[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṃ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] uto[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṣ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]aso madhumat pārthivam[/FONT][FONT=&quot]̐[/FONT][FONT=&quot]raja[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ḥ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] |
madhu dyaurastu na[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ḥ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] pitā || [/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṛ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]. ve. 1.90.7

[/FONT]तर्पण मन्त्र[FONT=&quot] book shows [/FONT]उषसि[FONT=&quot] instead of [/FONT]उषसॊ[FONT=&quot] as seen in the [/FONT]ऋग्वेद संहिता.[FONT=&quot]

[/FONT]नक्तः =[FONT=&quot] night/s
[/FONT]उत =[FONT=&quot] and
[/FONT]उषस् =[FONT=&quot] mornings
[/FONT]मधुमत् =[FONT=&quot]sweet, honeyed, pleasant, agreeable
[/FONT]पार्थिव =[FONT=&quot] earthly, terrestrial
[/FONT]रजः =[FONT=&quot] dust, sand
[/FONT]द्यौ =[FONT=&quot] sky
[/FONT]पित् =[FONT=&quot] in [/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṛ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]gveda this means juice, drink, nourishment, food, but the usage of pitā indicates that the reference is to pit[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṛ[/FONT][FONT=&quot], father.

Make the night(s) sweet (providing good sleep) and the mornings sweet (bringing good days); may the dust of the earth (soil) be sweet (productive, rich); may the sky be sweet (favourable, by giving abundant rains - according to sāya[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṇ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]a) to us as father.

[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ऋषिः - गॊतमः राहूगणः । छन्दः - गायत्री । देवता - विश्वॆदेवाः ।[/FONT][FONT=&quot]

[/FONT][FONT=&quot]मधुमान्नो वनस्पतिः मधुमाँ अस्तु सूर्यः ।[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]माध्वीर्गावो भवन्तु नः ॥ ऋ. वे. १.९०.८[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ருஷிஃ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] - [/FONT][FONT=&quot]கோதமஃராஹூகணஃ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] | [/FONT][FONT=&quot]சந்தஃ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] - [/FONT][FONT=&quot]காயத்ரீ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] | [/FONT][FONT=&quot]தேவதா[/FONT][FONT=&quot] - [/FONT][FONT=&quot]விச்வேதேவாஃ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] |

[/FONT][FONT=&quot]மதுமாந்நோ வநஸ்பதிஃ மதுமாக்ம் அஸ்து ஸூர்யஃ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] |
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]மாத்வீர்காவோ பவந்து நஃ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] || [/FONT][FONT=&quot]ரு. வே. ௧.௯[/FONT][FONT=&quot]0.[/FONT][FONT=&quot]௮[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṛṣ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]i[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ḥ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] - gotama[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ḥ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] r[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ā[/FONT][FONT=&quot]h[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ū[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ga[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṇ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]a[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ḥ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] | chanda[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ḥ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] - g[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ā[/FONT][FONT=&quot]yatr[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ī[/FONT][FONT=&quot] | devat[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ā[/FONT][FONT=&quot] - vi[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ś[/FONT][FONT=&quot]vedev[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ā[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ḥ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] |
madhumānno vanaspati[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ḥ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] madhumām[/FONT][FONT=&quot]̐[/FONT][FONT=&quot] astu sūrya[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ḥ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] |
mādhvīrgāvo bhavantu na[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ḥ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] || [/FONT][FONT=&quot]ṛ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]. ve. 1.90.8

[/FONT]मधुमान् (मधुमत्) =[FONT=&quot] containing, possessing, sweetness : pleasant : agreeable
[/FONT]वनस्पतिः =[FONT=&quot] forest trees
[/FONT]अस्तु =[FONT=&quot] let it be, be it so
[/FONT]माध्वीः =[FONT=&quot] sweet
[/FONT]गावः ([FONT=&quot]plural nominative of [/FONT]गो) = [FONT=&quot]cows
[/FONT]भवन्तु =[FONT=&quot] become
[/FONT]नः =[FONT=&quot] to us

May the trees of the jungle be sweet (useful) to us; may the sun be sweet to us; may the cows become sweet to us. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]

 

[snehamurali]

I would like to take a print of the aikamatya suktam provided by sri. Sangom for my personal use. But the fonts are messed up when I try to copy into word. Any suggestions as to the best way to achieve this.

 

[sangom]

I would like to take a print of the aikamatya suktam provided by sri. Sangom for my personal use. But the fonts are messed up when I try to copy into word. Any suggestions as to the best way to achieve this.

Pl. take "print screen" save the images and then print out the images. You can even insert those images on to a word document and take a print out, but the background may come little greyish. Hope you are this much familiar with computers.

 

[sangom]

There is a widespread, unshakeable belief - even among some of the youngsters - that our vedas are of superhuman origin, that these "eternal truths" are for ever reverberating in space or ether, and that the ṛṣis of yore, intercepted those vibrations with their superhuman capacity, deciphered them for our sake and the eternal welfare of this world - and perhaps the entire universe, of which this speck of a planet is so insignificant - and gave us the vedas and hence they contain fundamental truths, beyond ordinary mortal comprehension. There are many hymns which betray a very opposite picture and I am giving below one such.

I have given elsewhere in this forum some verses from the vṛṣākapi sūktam which is here.

I leave it to the judgment of the readers as to whether these eternal truths are of such a type that they are forever vibrating in ether and only the divine vision (divya cakṣus) of our ṛṣis are only capable of unloading such extremely profound truths.

(In the early instance here, Shri Saidevo had brought an interpretation of Shri R.L. Kashyap which took the incident and conversation to an era before the very appearance of the human mind; another "gem" of an interpretation by Shri Kashyap was that the said sūkta, coming next after the one containing the narrative regarding the marriage of sūryā daughter of savitā, talks about causes of marital discord and its reasons, that too even before the human mind took shape in the evolution of the cosmos. Looked at this way, the eternal supra-human intellect would appear to have even foreseen the "divorces" of today! Then the question arises as to why orthodox brahmins all along put such restrictions on divorce in hindu law.)

ऋषिका - उर्वशी (ऋषिः - ऐलः पुरूरवाः) । छन्दः - त्रिष्टुप् । दॆवता - ऊर्वशी

हयॆ जायॆ मनसा तिष्ठ घोरॆ वचांसि मिश्रा कृणवावहै नु ।
ननौ मन्त्रा अनुदिता स एते मयस्करन् परतरे च न अहन् ॥ ऋ. वे. १०.९५.१

ருஷிகா - உர்வசீ (ருஷிஃ - ஐலஃ புரூரவாஃ) | சந்தஃ - த்ரிஷ்டுப் | தேவதா - ஊர்வசீ

ஹயெ ஜாயெ மநஸா திஷ்ட கோரெ வசாம்ஸி மிச்ரா க்ருணவாவஹை நு |
நநௌ மந்த்ரா அநுதிதா ஸ ஏதே மயஸ்கரன் பரதரே ச ந அஹந் || ரு. வே. ௧0.௯௫.௧

ṛṣikā - urvaśī (ṛṣiḥ - ailaḥ purūravāḥ) | chandaḥ - triṣṭup | devatā - ūrvaśī

haye jāye manasā tiṣṭha ghore vacāṃsi miśrā kṛṇavāvahai nu |
nanau mantrā anuditā sa ete mayaskaran paratare ca na ahan || ṛ. ve. 10.95.1

This sūkta has a mythical story as its backdrop as per sāyaṇācārya. It goes like this:

mitra-varuṇas, who are dīkṣitas*, had ejaculation on seeing urvaśī. They immediately cursed her saying she will become an object of enjoyment by a human being. Around that time king iḷa, alongwith the sons of manu, reached devakrīḍam, a resort of śiva and pārvati. Anyone who transgressed that area was bound to turn into woman; accordingly iḷa became a woman. iḷa then prayed to pārvati for changing him back again to a man. pārvati reduced the curse to six months of either sex alternatively. Thus during one of iḷa’s female term, budha, son of soma, got attracted to her and thus was born purūravas. urvaśī under curse, got attracted to this purūravas. However, she stipulated that she would quit (and return to heavens) if at any time she happens to see him naked, except in bed. She also wanted two goats (sheep?) to be always with her. Thus purūravas and urvaśī lived happily for four years.

Then, one night devas stole the two goats. Hearing the goats' bleating, purūravas went, naked, in pursuit of the devas; having seen him nude outside the bed, urvaśī immediately left the world. purūravas, broken-hearted, roamed about like a mad man in search of her. At last he finds her in mānasarovara (mānasasaras) along with other apsarases and, again longs for her.

This sūkta gives there conversation on that occasion.

" O, hard-hearted wife ! wait a moment. Let us converse (talk) now. We did not even have private talks for long; if we don't do it now (I) will not be able to die happily."

*dīkṣita = consecrated, initiated (as for a religious careinony); prepared for a sacrifice; prepared for, having taken a vow of, per-
formed, (as, the dīkṣa ceremony); a priest engaged in a dīkṣa; a pupil; a person who or whose ancestors, may have performed a grand sacrificial ceremony, such as jyotiṣṭoma. Here, as per the context, we may assume the last meaning as applicable to mitra-varuṇas.

urvaśī replies:

ऋषिका - उर्वशी ।छन्दः - त्रिष्टुप् ।देवता - पुरूरवः ।

किम् एता वाचा कृणवा तव अहं प्राक्रमिषं उषसां अग्रियॆव ।
पुरूरवः पुनरस्तं परॆहि दुरापना वात इवाहम् अस्मि ॥ ऋ. वे. १०.९५ .२

ருஷிகா - உர்வசீ |சந்தஃ - த்ரிஷ்டுப் |தேவதா - புரூரவஃ |

கிம் ஏதா வாசா க்ருணவா தவ அஹம் ப்ராக்ரமிஷம் உஷஸாம் அக்ரியெவ |
புரூரவஃ புநரஸ்தம் பரெஹி துராபநா வாத இவாஹம் அஸ்மி || ரு. வே. ௧0.௯௫ .௨

ṛṣikā - urvaśī |chandaḥ - triṣṭup |devatā - purūravaḥ |

kim etā vācā kṛṇavā tava ahaṃ prākramiṣaṃ uṣasāṃ agriyeva |
purūravaḥ punarastaṃ parehi durāpanā vāta ivāham asmi || ṛ. ve. 10.95 .2

What is the use of your such talk? I have passed away (from you) like the first of the dawns. purūravaḥ return to (your) dwelling. I am as hard to catch as the wind.

Then the converstion proceeds on the following lines. (I am not giving the verses or the other details because these ṛks do not have a recital value like some sūktas.):

3. [purūravaḥ :-] (After your leaving me) I do not take out arrows from the quiver for victory or glory. Though a fast runner by nature, I no longer venture for (cattle) rustling or to plunder the untold riches of the enemy. I have lost my prowess and enthusiasm. (My might) no longer flashes forth. My warriors are terrified and are unable to even shout in the battlefield.

4. [urvaśī :- Speaks as if to uṣas, (perhaps out of modesty, according to me)] O,uṣas! this urvaśī, as a food-server to her father-in-law, when passion (for her husband) overtook her, she used to repair from the dining room of her father-in-law to her husband's bed-room adjacent to it, where she used to be pierced night and day by her lover's organ.

5. Thrice a day, Pururavas, hast thou embraced me, thou hast loved me, a wife without a co-wife to take turns; thus have I lived in thy dwelling, and thou, hero, hast been the sovereign of my person (then).

6. [purūravaḥ :-] The four maids (companions) sujurṇi, śreṇi, sumnāapi, hradecakṣus, all purple-tinted and wearing ornaments with whom urvaśī came, do not come any more; they no longer show interest in calling from outside the house like milch-kine lowing for entering their cattleshed, because urvaśī is not there in the house.

7. [urvaśī :-] As soon as he was born, superhuman females (the wives of the gods?) surrounded him, spontaneously flowing rivers nourished him. For the gods reared thee, O purūravas!, for a mighty conflict, for the slaughter of the dasyus.

8. [purūravaḥ :-] When, becoming their companion, the mortal (purūravas) associated with these immortal (nymphs) who had abandoned their mortal bodies, they are fleeing from me like timid does after uniting with the dear, like horses harnessed to a chariot.

9. When a mortal mixes with these immortal nymphs through touch, words, and other actions, they become like the āti birds which hide their bodies with their feather, and like playful horses champing (the bit).

10. (urvaśī) who shone like flashing lightning, bringing me all my widespread desires, by whom a son able in act and friendly to man will be born to me, may urvaśī prolong my existence till then.

11. [urvaśī :-] You are born thus to protect the earth; thou hast deposited your vigour in me ; knowing (the future) I have told you the condition (for my living with you); you have not listened to me ; why do you now lament, neglectful (of my instruction) ?

12. [purūravaḥ:-] When shall a son (born of thee) claim me as a father, and, crying, shed a tear on recognizing (me)? What son shall sever husband and wife who are of one mind, when will that vigour shine upon your husband's parents ?

13. [urvaśī :-] Let me reply. (Thy son) will shed tears, crying out and calling aloud when the expected auspicious time arrives ; I will send thee that (child) which is thine in me, now depart to thy house, thou canst not, simpleton, obtain me (anymore).

14. [purūravaḥ :-] (Thy husband) who sported with thee may now depart, never to return, (depart) to proceed to a distant region. Either let him sleep upon the lap of nirṛti, or let the swift-moving wolves devour him.

15. [urvaśī :-] Die not, purūravas, fall not, let not the hideous wolves devour thee. Female friendships do not exist, their hearts are the hearts of jackals.

16. When changed in form and wandered amongst mortals, I dwelt (with them) for four delightful years. I ate once a day a small quantity of butter; nourished by that I now depart.

17. [purūravaḥ :-] I, vasiṣṭha, bring under subjection urvaśī who fills the firmament (with lustre) and measures out the rain. May (purūravah), the bestower of the auspicious rite, abide near thee ; come back — my heart is burning.

(In this verse sāyaṇa gives the meaning of vasiṣṭha as samānānām madhye atiśayena vāsayitāham and thus avoids reference to vasiṣṭha, the sage.)

18. [urvaśī :-] These gods said to thee, aila, since thou art destined to death, let thy progeny propitiate thy gods with oblations, thou shalt rejoice (with me) in heaven.

I have followed the translation of sāyaṇācārya's commentary.

Comments :-

I do not find any relationship or continuity for this portion of the सूक्त with even the rest of it, let alone the previous or next hymn (as Shri Kashyap tries to co-relate the वृषाकपि सूक्त). This theme - पुरूरवस् and उर्वशी - finds expression in the शतपथ ब्राह्मण also but with the background story cited by सायण given in the beginning of this post. काळिदास's विक्रमॊर्वशीयम् is based on this earliest myth.

A blog which throws some further light on this curious episode appearing all on a sudden in the ṛgveda may be found here. It will be seen that such narratives cannot be what most of our conservative members might expext to see in a text of super-human origin, eternal, the highly esoteric vibrations of which are ever circumambulating the universe and which only the ऋषिs with their highly evolved sixth or even the n-th sense were able to grasp and transmit to us.

 

[sangom]

navo navo bhavati

The purpose of my bringing in the vṛṣākapi sūkta or the urvaśī-purūrava saṃvāda is only to make the readers aware that, despite all the tall claims regarding the apauruṣeyatva, etc., of the vedas, they are just compilations of verses, some very profound and illuminating, some profane or bordering on the profane and the rest falling in between these two extremes.

Perhaps if one were to take all the Tamizh poems published during a certain period, say, the last ten or twenty years, and select some thousand and odd from among them by random selection (drawing lots) one will obtain much the same results, I feel. It therefore appears to me as if each of the "families" included in the ṛgveda family books and many other families had their memories of some verses, all of which have been compiled in a certain way as the ṛgveda saṃhitā.

Let us now consider a benedictory verse which is normally chanted by the vādhyār (priest) at the commencement of all auspicious functions in the house as also as part of āśīrvāda mantras.

ऋषिः - सावित्री सूर्या । छन्दः - त्रिष्टुप् । दॆवता - नृणाम् विवाह मन्त्राः आशीः प्रायाः * ।

नवो नवो भवति जायमानॊह्नाङ्कॆतुर् उषसां ऎत्यग्रम् ।
भागन्दॆवॆभ्योविदधात्यायन् प्रचन्द्रमा स्तिरते दीर्घम् आयुः ॥ ऋ. वॆ.१०.८५.१९

navo navo bhavati jāyamānohnāṅketur uṣasāṃ etyagram |
bhāgandevebhyovidadhātyāyan pracandramā stirate dīrgham āyuḥ || ṛ. ve.10.85.19

நவோ நவோ பவதி ஜாயமாநொஹ்நாங்கேதுர் உஷஸாம் எத்யக்ரம் |
பாகந்தேவேப்யோவிததாத்யாயந் ப்ரசந்த்ரமா ஸ்திரதே தீர்கம் ஆயுஃ || ரு. வெ.௧0.௮௫.௧௯

चन्द्रमा जायमानः = being born (daily) with a new kalā (phase) candra
नवः नवः भवति = becomes new everyday
अह्नाम् कॆतुः = flag-bearer of the day
उषसाम् अग्रम् एति = comes before the dawn
आ-यन् देवेभ्यः भागम् विदधाति = he thus conveys (creates) oblations to the devas
दीर्घम् आयुः प्रतिरते = (and) bestows long life.

Note :-

The reference to "becomes new everyday" seems to denote the waxing moon or śukḷapakṣa, while "comes before dawn as the flagbearer of the day" indicates the waning moon or kṛṣṇapakṣa. because the Newmoon and Fullmoon days (and the two next days - pratipada) are are prescribed as most suitable for devayajñas, the moon is figuratively described as providing oblations (havirbhaaga) to the devas. That candra is also considered as bestowing long life due to his innate happy disposition as well as the blessings of the devas (to the yajamāna).

* It will be observed that the idea of "devatā" is not always the deva who is extolled by a verse; here, it gives a brief account of what this verse is about.

 

[sangom]

trīṇi padā vicakrame

त्रीणि पदा विचक्रमॆ विष्णुर्गॊपा अदाभ्यः ।
अतॊ धर्माणि धारयन् । ऋ. वॆ. १.२२.१८

trīṇi padā vicakrame viṣṇurgopā adābhyaḥ |
ato dharmāṇi dhārayan | ṛ. ve. 1.22.18

த்ரீணி பதா விசக்ரமெ விஷ்ணுர்கோபா அதாப்யஃ |
அதோ தர்மாணி தாரயன் | ரு. வெ. ௧.௨௨.௧௮

This ṛk is important because it is here that we get the very first reference to viṣṇu and "trīṇi padā" which literally means "feet" (not footsteps). This is the inspiration for the ultimate वामनावतार story with which most of us are familiar.

त्रीणि = thrice
पदा = feet
विचक्रमॆ = to and fro, about, without (without wheels)
गॊपा = a protector, guardian
अदाभ्य: = free from deceit, trusty
अतः = Hence
धारयन् = made dharma to be preserved

The meaning of the ṛk thus becomes -

Thrice did viṣṇu protector, free from deceit (go, travel) about without wheels (chariot?) on feet; hence (he) caused dharma to be preserved.

In the very next verse, viṣṇu is described as "indrasya yujyassakhā", a friend suitable for indra. This and ever so many other references in the ṛgveda depict viṣṇu as a subordinate deity to indra, the supreme one. Hence there is no ground to interpret this ṛk as indicating the later, much evolved mythopoeic transformation of viṣṇu as the Supreme Godhead.

However sāyaṇācārya (14th. c. A.D.) seems influenced by the then current status of viṣṇu, and says that he (viṣṇu) roams about the earth and other places thrice.

 

[siganeswarie]

The Rig Veda is the oldest of the Vedas. All the other Vedas are based upon it and consist to a large degree of various hymns from it. It consists of a thousand such hymns of different seers, each hymn averaging around ten verses. The Rig Veda is the oldest book in Sanskrit or any Indo-European language. Its date is debatable. Many great Yogis and scholars who have understood the astronomical references in the hymns, date the Rig Veda as before 4000 B.C., perhaps as early as 12,000. Modern western scholars tend to date it around 1500 B.C., though recent archeological finds in India (like Dwaraka) now appear to require a much earlier date. While the term Vedic is often given to any layer of the Vedic teachings including the Bhagavad Gita, technically it applies primarily to the Rig Veda. The Rig Veda is the book of Mantra. It contains the oldest form of all the Sanskrit mantras. It is built around a science of sound which comprehends the meaning and power of each letter. Most aspects of Vedic science like the practice of yoga, meditation, mantra and Ayurveda can be found in the Rig Veda and still use many terms that come from it.
While originally several different versions or rescensions of the Rig Veda were said to exist, only one remains. Its form has been structured in several different ways to guarantee its authenticity and proper preservation through time.

 

[sangom]

nāsadīya sūkta

We may now consider nāsadīya sūkta, a very famous sukta from the ṛgveda. The internet provides many urls giving this sūkta, its meaning etc. I will try to give here the version which appeals to me as also the traditional interpretation of sāyaṇācārya.

I have attached a file containing the sūkta in Sanskrit, so I am giving below only the Tamizh and IAST versions.

ṛṣiḥ - parameṣṭhī prajāpatiḥ | chandaḥ - triṣṭup | devatā - bhāvavṛttam

ருஷிஃ - பரமேஷ்டீ ப்ரஜாபதிஃ | சந்தஃ - த்ரிஷ்டுப் | தேவதா - பாவவ்ருத்தம்

nāsadāsīnno sadāsīttadānīm |
nāsīdrajo no vyomā paro yat |
kim āvarīvaḥ kuhakasya śarmann |
ambhaḥ kimāsīd gahanaṃ gabhīram || ṛ. ve. 10.129.01

நாஸதாஸீந்நோ ஸதாஸீத்ததாநீம் |
நாஸீத்ரஜோ நோ வ்யோமா பரோ யத் |
கிம் ஆவரீவஃ குஹகஸ்ய சர்மந்ந் |
அம்பஃ கிமாஸீத் கஹநம் கபீரம் || ரு. வே. ௧0.௧௨௯.0௧

(The simple word meaning is given first and further elaborations and interpretations subsequently in blue.)
There was then neither "asat" (non-being) nor "sat" (being). The earth was not there, no sky and none of the regions above the sky. There was no cover, and where and for whose comfort was cover needed? Where was the unfathomable and unreachable waters?

sāyaṇa’s interpretation : This is the description of the state of the pralaya before the very creation itself. In that state, there was no concept of "asat" (non-being) or the knowledge of something not existing. But creation did not happen from this asat. (taittirīya upaniṣad also says "asadvā idam agra āsīt | tato vai sadajāyata|" - First there was 'asat', thence "sat" came into being. --sangom). "sat" also was not there. The fourteen worlds - six below the earth, the earth itself and the seven heavens above - bhuva:, suva:, maha:, jana:. tapa: and satya, were not there. The "brahmāṇḍa" itself was not there. The two characteristics vikṣepa and āvaraṇa were not there. (vikṣepa is the extension or projection of the seeming, illusory universe according to advaita and āvaraṇa refers to the characteristic of the covering of the real Brahman from this illusory universe --sangom). There was nothing and nowhere to cover up and no one for whom such cover was required. Since sukha and duḥkha were absent and since creation is for materialising (sākṣātkāra) of sukha and duḥkha, in the period of pralaya the pancabhūtas vanish. since the brahmāṇḍa’s existence has been denied, the existence of water also becomes denied; still by the question "Where was the unfathomable and unreachable waters?", a doubt about the primordial waters seems to have been expressed. (The śruti says "āpo vā idamagre salilamāsīt"- verily waving, flowing, inconstant water was here first.)

It will of interest to note that the Indian Rationalists' (Atheists') Association itself has praised this sūkta as one of the very few exceptions revealing rational thinking, found in the ṛgveda.

Erich Von Daniken in his scientific fiction (quasi-scientific?) book titled "Return to the Stars - Gods From Outer Space" writes as under about this sūkta:

"In the Indian world the Rigveda is considered to be the oldest book. The Song of Creation that it tells returns once more to the state of weightlessness and soundlessness that reigns in the infinity of the universe. I quote from Paul Frischauer's book It is written :
"In those days there was neither not-being nor being. Neither the atmosphere nor the sky was above. What flew to and from Where? In whose keeping? What was the unfathomable?... In those times there was neither death nor immortality. there was not a sign of day and night. This one breathed according to its own law without currents of air. Everything else but this was not present. In the beginning darkness was hidden in darkness ... The life-powerful that was enclosed by the void, the one, was born by the might of its hot urgency...

'Was there an above, was there a below?... Who knows for sure, who can say here whence they originated, whence this creation came?'

Daniken in that book, goes on to make use of this and other evidences to prove his hypothesis of stellar origin of life on the earth.

na mṛtyurāsīdamṛtaṃ na tar– hi |
na rātriyā ahna āsītpraketaḥ |
ānīdavātagg svadhayā tadekam |
tasmāddhānyaṃ na paraḥ kiṃ ca nāsa || ṛ. ve. 10.129.02

ந ம்ருத்யுராஸீதம்ருதம் ந தர்‌ ஹி |
ந ராத்ரியா அஹ்ந ஆஸீத்ப்ரகேதஃ |
ஆநீதவாதக்க் ஸ்வதயா ததேகம் |
தஸ்மாத்தாந்யம் ந பரஃ கிம் ச நாஸ || ரு. வே. ௧0.௧௨௯.0௨

Death was not, nor immortality therefore. No day, no night, no sight. That one existed spontaneously calm, secure. Therefore, nothing else was there.

sāyaṇa -

Death was non-existent (then) and, therefore, immortality also was non-existent. Day and night difference was non-existent; hence there was no sense of time or estimation of time in the form of pakṣa, māsa, ṛtu, varṣa, etc. The nirguṇa brahman alone existed along with māyā, unmoving, inactive. Therefore, no other thing, which is composed of the pañcabhūtas and seen after creation, was there.

 

[sangom]

tama āsīttamasā gūḷ–ham
agre praketam salilagm̐ sarvamā idam |
tucchyenābhvapihitaṃ yadāsīt |
tapasastanmahinā jāyataikam || ṛ. ve. 10.129.03

தம ஆஸீத்தமஸா கூள்‌ஹம்
அக்ரே ப்ரகேதம் ஸலிலக்ம் ஸர்வமா இதம் |
துச்ச்யேநாப்வபிஹிதம் யதாஸீத் |
தபஸஸ்தந்மஹிநா ஜாயதைகம் || ரு. வே. ௧0.௧௨௯.0௩

Darkness was covered in darkness. First, all this was unknown, waving, flowing waters. From that void, empty, covered, due to might of heat (this) arose.

sāyaṇa -

Before creation, the soul principle ātmatatva was unknowable, for, it was covered by darkness arising out of māyā. The universe, identifiable by names (nāmarūpa), remained dissolved inextricably with that darkness just as milk and water - inseparable. That inseparable darkness became this visible universe due to the tapas, (dhyāna) of the impulse or intention (paryālocanā) (which sāyaṇa identifies with brahmā) for creation. The verse, "āsīdidantamo bhūtamaprajñātam alakṣaṇam | apratarkyamanirdeśyaṃ prasuptamiva sarvataḥ", in manusmṛti describes the same.

Note:
sāyaṇa's explanation is highly abstract. Honestly, I don't understand what he means.

 

[sangom]

kāmastadagre samavartatādhi |
manaso retaḥ prathamam yadāsīt |
sato baṃdhumasati niravindann|
hṛdi pratīṣyā kavayo manīṣā | ṛ. ve. 10.129.04

காமஸ்ததக்ரே ஸமவர்ததாதி |
மநஸோ ரேதஃ ப்ரதமம் யதாஸீத் |
ஸதோ பந்துமஸதி நிரவிந்தந்ந்|
ஹ்ருதி ப்ரதீஷ்யா கவயோ மநீஷா | ரு. வே. ௧0.௧௨௯.0௪

First arose "desire" which was the first seed of mind. The wise men by their reflection in mind, discovered the connection (relation) between 'sat' (that which is) and 'asat' (that which is not).

sāyaṇa -

The impulse or desire for "creation" arose in the mind of parameśvara, in the stage before creation. The vāsanā or desire which remained unexperienced in the antaḥ karaṇa (heart, mind) of each living organism, which got dissolved in the māyā, became the 'seed' for that desire. Due to that desire parameśvara performed 'tapas' and created this entire jagat (universe).

The yogis who had knowledge of past, future and present, reflected with controlled mind and discovered that the cause for this universe and that by which it is bound, is the collective karma of the various living beings in the previous kalpa.

tiraścīno vitato raśmireṣām |
adha: svidāsīduparisvidāsīt |
retodhā āsanmahimāna āsann |
svadhā avastātprayatiḥ parastāt | ṛ. ve. 10.129.05

திரஸ்சீநோ விததோ ரச்மிரேஷாம் |
அத: ஸ்விதாஸீதுபரிஸ்விதாஸீத் |
ரேதோதா ஆஸந்மஹிமாந ஆஸந்ந் |
ஸ்வதா அவஸ்தாத்ப்ரயதிஃ பரஸ்தாத் | ரு. வே. ௧0.௧௨௯.0௫

Transverse (oblique) spread the gliding rays of this (creation?). What was below it and what was above? Some became seed-bearing (fertilizing), some great. Inherent power was below, endeavour, above.

Note :
The two words svadhā and prayati have so many meanings that a large number of interpretations are possible. Considering the import of the previous line, I feel this set of meanings fit best.

sāyaṇa -
The rays of this creation spread within a fraction of a moment like the rays of the sun, illuminating the whole jagat (universe or world?). Did these rays spread across or along? (Note: The sentence tiraścīno vitato raśmireṣāṃ does not appear to involve an interrogation; hence sāyaṇa’s interpretation - which I have taken from a Malayalam commentary, does not seem to be correct. --sangom) Did they spread downwards or upwards? Some of the creation became living beings which are creators, doers and experiencers (enjoyers) of the karma. Some others became the sky, and other mahat which are enjoyable. In the midst of these, food - the consumable was below and came later; the consumer (eater) was above, since he could rise further by his self-effort.

ko addhā veda ka iha pravocat |
kuta ājātā kuta iyaṃ visṛṣṭiḥ |
arvāgdevā asya visarjanāya |
athā ko veda yata ābabhūva || ṛ. ve. 10.129.06

கோ அத்தா வேத க இஹ ப்ரவோசத் |
குத ஆஜாதா குத இயம் விஸ்ருஷ்டிஃ |
அர்வாக்தேவா அஸ்ய விஸர்ஜநாய |
அதா கோ வேத யத ஆபபூவ || ரு. வே. ௧0.௧௨௯.0௬

Who knows and who will tell this world whence all these came (originated)? How? Why? Do the devas who came after creation or human beings, who knows how or why this creation came about?

sāyaṇa’s interpretation is also on the same lines.

iyaṃ visṛṣṭiryata ābabhūva |
yadi vā dadhe yadi vā na |
yo asyādhyakṣaḥ parame vyomann |
so aṃga veda yadi vā na veda || ṛ. ve. 10.129.07

இயம் விஸ்ருஷ்டிர்யத ஆபபூவ |
யதி வா ததே யதி வா ந |
யயோ அஸ்யாத்யக்ஷஃ பரமே வ்யோமந்ந் |
ஸோ அங்க வேத யதி வா ந வேத || ரு. வே. ௧0.௧௨௯.0௭


He from whom this creation arose, may be he upholds it or may be he does not. He who superintends it in the highest heaven definitely knows it or may be he does not.

sāyaṇa also follows more or less the same interpretation in a more verbose way.

This nāsadīya sūkta is one of the few "creation hymns" occurring in the ṛgveda; the very famous puruṣasūkta, which is known to many and for which many commentaries are easily available, is also another creation hymn. But the manner of compilation - placing the puruṣasūkta as well as the nāsadīya sūkta in the same text, seems to me to be for undoing the healthy scepticism reflected in this, by a sacerdotal eulogy which gives pre-eminence to the Brahman priests above the rest of the āryan community itself. Why the priests had to resort to such a thing? They could have merely removed the nāsadīya sūkta itself from the approved ṛgveda compilation ! But that would have meant resistance from some sections who might take credit for this sūkta which might have been their family possession. Second, by adopting the ruse of a freshly compiled puruṣasūkta (this will be evident to anyone reading the ṛgvedic hymns from different maṇḍalas; the language and style of puruṣasūkta is evidently not as abstract or archaic as, for example, even this nāsadīya sūkta - for example the line "svadhā avastātprayatiḥ parastāt" in stanza 5 above.), the priests satisfied not only the pro-nāsadīya sūkta group, but also obtained their approval for including the puruṣasūkta which is the very fundament for the caste or varna system.

That there was dispute and discord among the priests is borne out from the aikamatya sūkta which is the last one in the ṛgveda.

I am aware that the orthodox beliefs of many people will make it impossible for them to accept some or all of the above observations, but they seem to be correct to me.

 

[zebra16]

Namaste Sri Sangom,

I have been following your articles on this subject and I am impressed with your knowledge. You have expressed many of my unexpressed thoughts and I thank you for it.

I would like to know whether you have read any veda (rg, yajur etc.) of any Sakha from begining to end (as they from cover to cover these days) and if yes, is there a central theme around which the vedas revolve, and in what order or manner the rgs and yajus mantras are arranged as they are extant today. If you have not studied any veda sakha in full (here I would include the brahmana, aranyaka and upanishad of that sakha) would your knowledge constitute representative of the whole, thereby giving full purport of that veda sakha instead of some peripheral understanding. Can you or anyone independently arrive at the intepretation of the vedas without any aids such as bhashyas (even if it is by Sayana) as basing understanding on such bhashyas would tantamount to viewing through the bhashyakara's eyes, and not necessarily first-rate understanding.

As far as my understanding of human nature goes, a parent/teacher teaches what he thinks is the best to his/her student and the student accepts and practices what he feels is the best and implementable knowledge. So most of the irrelevant knowledge becomes heresay after a few generations and turns as superstitutions after further few generations and disappears alltogether after further lapse of time. So would it mean our forefathers continued to pass on rather useless knowledge for generations and we continued to accept and practice the same? Accepting 1500 BC as the vedic period and around 60 years for a generation change, we have roughly crossed 60 generations and it is rather unacceptable that it was not discovered that vedas are quite useless. What is your take on the above opinion?

Lest it be misconstrued that I am being impertinent, let me add that my knowledge of vedas is not even 5% of what you have disclosed through various messages and my knowledge of sanskrit is not even 0.5% of what you have shown in the interpretation of tarpana mantras etc.

With regards,

narayan

 

[sangom]

Namaste Sri Sangom,

I would like to know whether you have read any veda (rg, yajur etc.) of any Sakha from begining to end (as they from cover to cover these days) and if yes, is there a central theme around which the vedas revolve, and in what order or manner the rgs and yajus mantras are arranged as they are extant today. If you have not studied any veda sakha in full (here I would include the brahmana, aranyaka and upanishad of that sakha) would your knowledge constitute representative of the whole, thereby giving full purport of that veda sakha instead of some peripheral understanding. Can you or anyone independently arrive at the intepretation of the vedas without any aids such as bhashyas (even if it is by Sayana) as basing understanding on such bhashyas would tantamount to viewing through the bhashyakara's eyes, and not necessarily first-rate understanding.

Shri Narayanan,

I have a feeling that this is a loaded observation. I do not think it necessary to let you (or for that matter anyone else in this forum) about how much I have learnt and what my qualification/s is/are for starting this thread. After all this is not an employment for which I have to produce documentary evidence for my eligibility. And, if you feel that I am unfit for this, you are free to skip this thread itself. (You have adopted a "double" strategy of covering this query with good words both in the beginning and the end, but that does not help in bringing out the genuineness of your doubt, IMO.) Hence, I am not going into the rest of the queries. If you have different pov and want this thread to be stopped, please write openly in the forum or send pm to Shri Praveen and/or Shri KRS.

As far as my understanding of human nature goes, a parent/teacher teaches what he thinks is the best to his/her student and the student accepts and practices what he feels is the best and implementable knowledge. So most of the irrelevant knowledge becomes heresay after a few generations and turns as superstitutions after further few generations and disappears alltogether after further lapse of time. So would it mean our forefathers continued to pass on rather useless knowledge for generations and we continued to accept and practice the same? Accepting 1500 BC as the vedic period and around 60 years for a generation change, we have roughly crossed 60 generations and it is rather unacceptable that it was not discovered that vedas are quite useless. What is your take on the above opinion?

We may even take 30 years instead of 60 because once every 30 years a new generation of students would have gone to their guru for learning vedas. This will make 120 generations or even more who have tried meticulously to learn the vedas by rote and pass it on in the "shell" form without the substance inside. You will observe from post #42 in this thread that —

1 .This goes to show that right from such ancient (yaska's) times, eliciting the correct meaning which was intended to be conveyed by the composers of the veda, had become a difficult job.


2. Thus, while on the one hand we, today, can take credit for the efforts of the Brahmins for preserving the vedas with even their intonations intact, through the system of oral transmission, for millennia, on the other, we have to accept gross failure because this ‘intact transmission’ was mostly through the creation of ‘memorizing robots’ and hardly any emphasis or effort was put into passing on the vedic interpretation.

3. yāska’s nirukta is the oldest available ‘guide’ to understand the meaning of veda; it lists hundreds of words as those with obscure meaning. Hence even as early as yāska’s time, the continuity in transmission of the correct meaning of the vedas had been lost, it would appear.

4. yāska refers to one kautsa whose opinions, as gleaned from yāska’s work, seems to have been that the Vedas contain no meaning at all and are, therefore, worthless. From this one can see that the doubt about the importance or even relevance of the Vedas is as old as the Vedas themselves, perhaps! It is also quite likely, though there is no evidence to prove it, that such doubts, which must have been held by a limited few in the beginning, came to be expressed by increasing numbers, from which the ājīvikā sect arose - a sect of naked, wandering ascetics, who decried the vedas and rituals – founded by makkhali gosala, who was a rival to both mahāvīra and buddha in their lifetime. (gosala is also mentioned as one of the teachers of Buddha.) The lokāyata of cārvāka might owe its origin to such earlier opinions.


So, I am forced to conclude that you have just skimmed through this thread and are trying to discourage any discussion about the meaning of the contents of the veda, perhaps because the knowledge of the meaning destabilizes the widely held (but incorrect) belief that the Vedas are repositories of some eternal, esoteric, wisdom and that the Vedas have superhuman origin. These, of course, have been, and still are the claims of the orthodox Tabras, may be because we become irrelevant as Brahmans once the truth is admitted.

I doubt whether anyone could have ever learnt all the four Vedas, aranyakas, brahmanas and Upanishads in entirety as also their purport and superficial meaning. Though we have a surname “chaturvedi” for a group of Brahmins of Mathura, it looks as if this title was more a honour for their bringing Brahmanism back from Buddhism, than actual studies of all the four Vedas and attachments as per your query. (I had occasion to talk to one old Chaubey in Mathura during the sixties and when I asked him about whether some of their ancestors had mastered all the four Vedas, his innocent reply in hindi was—
“[FONT=&quot]सच तो भगवान जाने ! अभि तो एक भि बामुन नहिँ जो एक भि वेद जानत हो ।[/FONT]” (God only knows the truth ! Now not even one person may be there who knows even one veda fully.)

Hagiography usually declares that the venerated people like Sankara, Ramanuja and others mastered everything, that to at unimaginable speed, but we do not see such grasp feasible especially when the main aspect in vedic study is learning by rote which is not usually the forte of the prodigies.

 

[zebra16]

Namaste Shri Sangom,

Your points in “quotes” and mine beneath thereof in plain.

”I have a feeling that this is a loaded observation”

It is not. At least I didn’t intend it that way. May be my question can be phrased in a better manner to obviate this possible wrong interpretation.

“I do not think it necessary to let you (or for that matter anyone else in this forum) about how much I have learnt and what my qualification/s is/are for starting this thread. After all this is not an employment for which I have to produce documentary evidence for my eligibility.”

I am in complete agreement here.

“And, if you feel that I am unfit for this, you are free to skip this thread itself.”

I never said or inferred so.

“(You have adopted a "double" strategy of covering this query with good words both in the beginning and the end, but that does not help in bringing out the genuineness of your doubt, IMO.)”

The “double” strategy escapes me. Since it is your opinion, I let it rest there.

“If you have different pov and want this thread to be stopped, please write openly in the forum or send pm to Shri Praveen and/or Shri KRS.”

I have no intention of writing openly or otherwise or sending pm to Sri Praveen and/or Sri KRS, as I genuinely like this thread. If you choose to discontinue posting or if this thread is closed for other reasons, then it is a different matter.

As regards my pov, I do not have a pov at this point.

My question is primarily this:

I belong to yajurveda, taittiriya sakha. With basic limitation of my Sanskrit knowledge, I tried to know what is in the veda of my shakha, basically through translations. I could not know what is the central theme of my veda shakaha. How the mantras starting from “Ishe Tvaa, urje tvaa (in samhita) leads me to “Brahma sanDhattam tan me jinvatam” (in brahmanam) how it progresses to aruna praSnam (aaranyaka) and how it culminates in Sheekshaavalli etc. in the taittiriya upaniSad.

I presumed that one who is well grounded in Sanskrit and who has studied all the parts, as it were, of a veda Sakha would be in a position to guide me or explain the futility of searching for continuity or moving from mundane knowledge to esoteric.

I was also confused by selection of a few mantras or suktas like purusa suktam, Sri suktam, rudra praSna, aruna praSna etc. for people who cannot have a full learning of Vedas, and if study of these portions constituted a representation of the whole veda Sakhaa (wherein the parts contained the summary of the whole)

“This will make 120 generations or even more who have tried meticulously to learn the vedas by rote and pass it on in the "shell" form without the substance inside.”

My point of query was whether it was a “shell” ab-initio with no substance inside or whether the “substance” was lost mid-way. If the “substance” was lost somewhere alongwith the way, whether there is anyway, we can recover the “substance”

“1 .This goes to show that right from such ancient (yaska's) times, eliciting the correct meaning which was intended to be conveyed by the composers of the veda, had become a difficult job”

I am referring to the period even prior to yaska. When the yajurvedins “capsuled” the Rgs in yajus mantras, they must have a method and reason for doing so It cannot be said that they were unaware of Sanskrit or mantras or that the Sanskrit had became archaic then..


”2. Thus, while on the one hand we, today, can take credit for the efforts of the Brahmins for preserving the vedas with even their intonations intact, through the system of oral transmission, for millennia, on the other, we have to accept gross failure because this ‘intact transmission’ was mostly through the creation of ‘memorizing robots’ and hardly any emphasis or effort was put into passing on the vedic interpretation.”

I am in agreement with you here. But the question is how to retrieve the “lost knowledge”, if any

”4. yāska refers to one kautsa whose opinions, as gleaned from yāska’s work, seems to have been that the Vedas contain no meaning at all and are, therefore, worthless. From this one can see that the doubt about the importance or even relevance of the Vedas is as old as the Vedas themselves, perhaps! It is also quite likely, though there is no evidence to prove it, that such doubts, which must have been held by a limited few in the beginning, came to be expressed by increasing numbers, from which the ājīvikā sect arose - a sect of naked, wandering ascetics, who decried the vedas and rituals – founded by makkhali gosala, who was a rival to both mahāvīra and buddha in their lifetime. (gosala is also mentioned as one of the teachers of Buddha.) The lokāyata of cārvāka might owe its origin to such earlier opinions.”

This conjecture leads me nowhere. Either the Vedas had knowledge or was a mumbo jumbo. If it had knowledge (as Vedas are supposed to mean knowledge per se as per my very limited understanding of Sanskrit) what is the “knowledge” and if partial/complete knowledge was lost in transmission through millennium, whether it is possible to retrieve the lost knowledge. If it was a mumbo-jumbo all along, then it is incredible so many people through so many generations fell for it, not excluding the category of Max Mueller etc. and other successive indologists.


“So, I am forced to conclude that you have just skimmed through this thread and are trying to discourage any discussion about the meaning of the contents of the veda, perhaps because the knowledge of the meaning destabilizes the widely held (but incorrect) belief that the Vedas are repositories of some eternal, esoteric, wisdom and that the Vedas have superhuman origin. These, of course, have been, and still are the claims of the orthodox Tabras, may be because we become irrelevant as Brahmans once the truth is admitted.”

Your conclusions are your own and I have nothing add to or substract from it. I do not think that I am stupid enough to stop subscription to newspapers in the fond hope that my action will result in others from knowing what is happening in the society or city or country.

“I doubt whether anyone could have ever learnt all the four Vedas, aranyakas, brahmanas and Upanishads in entirety as also their purport and superficial meaning.”

My query pertained to knowledge of only one Veda Sakaa (and I meant just only one Shakaa, like taittiriya of krsna yajurveda and not even other Sakhaas of the same veda). This was based on the premise that all the veda Shakaas would contain the same knowledge clothed in different manner or colour.

“Though we have a surname “chaturvedi” for a group of Brahmins of Mathura, it looks as if this title was more a honour for their bringing Brahmanism back from Buddhism, than actual studies of all the four Vedas and attachments as per your query. (I had occasion to talk to one old Chaubey in Mathura during the sixties and when I asked him about whether some of their ancestors had mastered all the four Vedas, his innocent reply in hindi was—
“सच तो भगवान जाने ! अभि तो एक भि बामुन नहिँ जो एक भि वेद जानत हो ।” (God only knows the truth ! Now not even one person may be there who knows even one veda fully.)”

I do not have knowledge and competence to make any comment in this regard. But as against the general understanding that it takes 12 x 4 = 48 years to study the entire veda in traditional method, I would like to think that it may take considerably lesser years., for the veda-angas are common to all Vedas and sama-veda has about 75-80% of borrowed Rgs and yajurveda has considerable borrowing from Rg veda

Regards,

narayan

 

[zebra16]

"Note: In RV the sounds of Da and Dha (ड & ढ) are replaced by the sounds La & Lha (ळ & ळ्ह). Most probably the rigvEdic people had difficulty in correctly pronouncing the former set of sounds. Thus the word "eeLe" stands for the current Sanskrit "eeDe"."

May be an error has crept in unnoticed. The very next rg reads:

"अग्निः पूर्वॆभिरृषिभि-
रीड्यॊ नूतनैरुत
स दॆवान् ऎह वक्षति -- ऋ.वे. १-०१-०२

agniH pUrvEbhirRuSibhi-
reeDyO nUtanairuta
sa dEvAn Eha vakshati --RV I-01-02

indicating that the rg-vedic people had no particular difficulty in pronouncing "Da and Dha (ड & ढ)". May be their successors lost the ability to pronounce "La & Lha (ळ & ळ्ह) and substituted it with "Da and Dha".

Regards,

narayan

 

[sangom]

"Note: In RV the sounds of Da and Dha (ड & ढ) are replaced by the sounds La & Lha (ळ & ळ्ह). Most probably the rigvEdic people had difficulty in correctly pronouncing the former set of sounds. Thus the word "eeLe" stands for the current Sanskrit "eeDe"."

May be an error has crept in unnoticed. The very next rg reads:

"अग्निः पूर्वॆभिरृषिभि-
रीड्यॊ नूतनैरुत
स दॆवान् ऎह वक्षति -- ऋ.वे. १-०१-०२

agniH pUrvEbhirRuSibhi-
reeDyO nUtanairuta
sa dEvAn Eha vakshati --RV I-01-02

indicating that the rg-vedic people had no particular difficulty in pronouncing "Da and Dha (ड & ढ)". May be their successors lost the ability to pronounce "La & Lha (ळ & ळ्ह) and substituted it with "Da and Dha".

Regards,

narayan

Yes, this is a point about which I have also some doubts. The above rule applies, IMHO, only to the extent that wherever we find La & Lha (ळ & ळ्ह), we must substitute with "Da and Dha (ड & ढ)".

 

[sangom]

Namaste Shri Sangom,

Your points in “quotes” and mine beneath thereof in plain.

”I have a feeling that this is a loaded observation”

It is not. At least I didn’t intend it that way. May be my question can be phrased in a better manner to obviate this possible wrong

interpretation.

Shri Narayan,

I accept your statement.

As regards my pov, I do not have a pov at this point.

My question is primarily this:

I belong to yajurveda, taittiriya sakha. With basic limitation of my Sanskrit knowledge, I tried to know what is in the veda of my shakha, basically through translations. I could not know what is the central theme of my veda shakaha. How the mantras starting from “Ishe Tvaa, urje tvaa (in samhita) leads me to “Brahma sanDhattam tan me jinvatam” (in brahmanam) how it progresses to aruna praSnam (aaranyaka) and how it culminates in Sheekshaavalli etc. in the taittiriya upaniSad.

I presumed that one who is well grounded in Sanskrit and who has studied all the parts, as it were, of a veda Sakha would be in a position to guide me or explain the futility of searching for continuity or moving from mundane knowledge to esoteric.

Permit me to say that your words in the previous post were as follows:

"I would like to know whether you have read any veda (rg, yajur etc.) of any Sakha from begining to end (as they from cover to cover these days) and if yes, is there a central theme around which the vedas revolve, and in what order or manner the rgs and yajus mantras are arranged as they are extant today. If you have not studied any veda sakha in full (here I would include the brahmana, aranyaka and upanishad of that sakha) would your knowledge constitute representative of the whole, thereby giving full purport of that veda sakha instead of some peripheral understanding. Can you or anyone independently arrive at the intepretation of the vedas without any aids such as bhashyas (even if it is by
Sayana) as basing understanding on such bhashyas would tantamount to viewing through the bhashyakara's eyes, and not necessarily first-rate understanding."

If you kindly read it again without bias - or ask any third party to read it - it will be seen that your approach was very different from what you write now, which is a genuine enquiry.

I was also confused by selection of a few mantras or suktas like purusa suktam, Sri suktam, rudra praSna, aruna praSna etc. for people who cannot have a full learning of Vedas, and if study of these portions constituted a representation of the whole veda Sakhaa (wherein the parts contained the summary of the whole)

This is a development brought about by time and social changes, as far as my reading goes. The original zest among Brahmans throughout India, to confine themselves to the study and mastery of recitation of the vedas, performance of the various yagas/yajnas included in the Yajurveda and to live with the income earned through those activities declined with passage of time. Many reasons could have been there, some coeval, others occurring in sequence of time. The rise of Buddhism and Jainism, their slow spread and some rulers adopting those faiths, which culminated with the Ashokan empire which was predominantly Buddhist (Though Ashoka is stated to have not been against any religion, he definitely encouraged Buddhism.), the spread of the vedic society - with its 3 dvija + one sudra castes - to outside the aryaavarta, intermingling (and perhaps intermixing) with other population groups, culminating with the invasion by foreigners (importantly Mughal rule) in most of north India, etc., are probably, some of these causes.

These social and political changes must have made the Brahmans to take to other avocations as were available in each era and created a Brahman population which did not have time or inclination to study the entire vedas in the ancient way. So, for the general majority, who had to take up other jobs, it was made customary to have some "basic minimum" familiarity with whatever the erudite group felt was really easy and can be integrated with the new way of life of these people (the common Brahman folks, I mean). What you refer to — purusha suktam, rudram+chamakam, sree suktam, vishnu sahasranamam, etc. are the most common; aaruna prasna is not so commonly learnt and not used also, at least in the society I have grown. But it is pertinent to note that north Indians, including Brahmans, used to consider recital of vishnu sahasranamam inauspicious, inasmuch as it was a death-bed recital of Bheeshma and so, even today, the orthodox north Indian people recite it when a dead body is there in the house, awaiting cremation! But with the south Indian community having a "religious presence" in most north Indian cities nowadays, the city dwellers have come to accept our chanting in temples and all probably, but if we go to the rural areas and ask any Brahman and you will find my statement true. Similarly rudram & chamakam is rarely taught to vaishnavite boys by those who are orthodox vaishnavites; only when they learn the entire yajurveda, they learn these also and recite only as part of the veda. But perhaps today there may be vaishnavites learning rudram & chamakam alone and reciting these in public performances, but I doubt very much if they will use it for their daily pooja at home.

These selected portions (which you refer to) do not represent the whole veda Sakhaa, nor do these parts contain the summary of the whole of the vedas of which they form part.

“This will make 120 generations or even more who have tried meticulously to learn the vedas by rote and pass it on in the "shell" form without the substance inside.”

My point of query was whether it was a “shell” ab-initio with no substance inside or whether the “substance” was lost mid-way. If the “substance” was lost somewhere alongwith the way, whether there is anyway, we can recover the “substance”.

When we talk about "ab-initio" we can go only to the available rigveda as the most ancient compilation. Whether the rigveda itself was a larger or different and larger, collection of hymns or suktas (as its sub-parts are called) and whether crucial portions had been lost even by the time the now available collection was codified, is a question for which most probably we won't get an answer even in the future.

So, we have to necessarily base all our findings, conclusions and opinions on what we have. What we have today as rigveda, has no "central theme" in the sense ordinarily understood. It looks more like a compilation of the prayers, observations, speculations, etc., of different clans of composers (normally called rishis). More details may be found in the initial post/s under this thread.

“1 .This goes to show that right from such ancient (yaska's) times, eliciting the correct meaning which was intended to be conveyed by the composers of the veda, had become a difficult job”

I am referring to the period even prior to yaska. When the yajurvedins “capsuled” the Rgs in yajus mantras, they must have a method and reason for doing so It cannot be said that they were unaware of Sanskrit or mantras or that the Sanskrit had became archaic then..

Scholarly opinion is that the original sacrifices envisaged and referred to in the rigveda could not have been so elaborate as yajurveda has made them out to be today. There is one view that the sacrifice which started as a means of appeasing different deities, got themselves transformed into an independent "entity" of its own (yajnam) by the time the yajurvedaic priesthood continuously elaborated it (yajnam).

What existed before Yaska's time is unknown and I do not think the "capsuling" which you refer to can at best bring out the meaning of the individual riks so encapsuled and of the yajuses (with the encapsulated riks inside them), but again, this will not lead us to any central theme of the rigveda or yajurveda, IMO.

As to the method and rationale of inserting riks into the midst of yajuses, the only rationale is that the rigvedic mantras which referred to particular deities were utilised in the relevant portions. If you desire a full and comprehensive idea, it can be had only by going through the different yajnas and their details and cannot be condensed in a short write-up like a post here.

”2. Thus, while on the one hand we, today, can take credit for the efforts of the Brahmins for preserving the vedas with even their intonations intact, through the system of oral transmission, for millennia, on the other, we have to accept gross failure because this ‘intact transmission’ was mostly through the creation of ‘memorizing robots’ and hardly any emphasis or effort was put into passing on the vedic interpretation.”

I am in agreement with you here. But the question is how to retrieve the “lost knowledge”, if any.

Only learned scholars - cum - researchers can make some conjectures, but they will still be conjectures, for people like me.

This conjecture leads me nowhere. Either the Vedas had knowledge or was a mumbo jumbo. If it had knowledge (as Vedas are supposed to mean knowledge per se as per my very limited understanding of Sanskrit) what is the “knowledge” and if partial/complete knowledge was lost in transmission through millennium, whether it is possible to retrieve the lost knowledge. If it was a mumbo-jumbo all along, then it is incredible so many people through so many generations fell for it, not excluding the category of Max Mueller etc. and other successive indologists.

To categorise into very clearly marked "knowledge, or else mumbo jumbo" may not, in my opinion, be the right approach as regards the vedas. The point about which you have not said anything is what is your expectation of "knowledge". For example, can we say a novel is devoid of knowledge? In the same way, the vedas also serve to provide some knowledge. But to expect it to provide certain preconceived type of knowledge, will lead to disappointment.

Why some persons in each of the so many generations took to learning the vedas by rote is most probably that some infrastructure existed which ensured certain minimum support to such people. But the quantity of support dwindled as time passed and consequently, the number of persons devoting their life to learning of vedas also declined.

Max Mueller and, following him, many European indologists first got attracted by the similarity between Sanskrit and the classical European languages, noticed very much earlier by many but last by Sir William Jones in 1786. Then their interest grew in learning as much of the Hindu scriptures to understand how far back the language chain went. In the process they also got attracted to the other aspects of our religious lore.

“I doubt whether anyone could have ever learnt all the four Vedas, aranyakas, brahmanas and Upanishads in entirety as also their purport and superficial meaning.”

My query pertained to knowledge of only one Veda Sakaa (and I meant just only one Shakaa, like taittiriya of krsna yajurveda and not even other Sakhaas of the same veda). This was based on the premise that all the veda Shakaas would contain the same knowledge clothed in different manner or colour.

As I said earlier, this was not clear from your earlier post.

I suppose the vedapathasaalaas may even now be teaching the Taittireeya in full - samhita, brahmana, aranyaka and upanishad - because it is the one vedashaakha which is quite popular. But I am very doubtful if they also teach the purport and superficial meaning.

I do not have knowledge and competence to make any comment in this regard. But as against the general understanding that it takes 12 x 4 = 48 years to study the entire veda in traditional method, I would like to think that it may take considerably lesser years., for the veda-angas are common to all Vedas and sama-veda has about 75-80% of borrowed Rgs and yajurveda has considerable borrowing from Rg veda

Regards,

narayan

"vedaanga" means Siksha, Kalpa, Vyakarana, Nirukta, Chandas and Jyotisha. Of these only two, vyaakarana and nirukta are held to be common to all four vedas; each veda has its own Siksha, Kalpa, Chandas and Jyotisha texts. samaveda contains 75 % or so of riks but we may not be correct in saying "borrowed", because saman is only riks set to music which are to be sung (saama gaayana) at prescribed stages of the somayajnas. Since the riks have been set to tunes, it appears to me that this must have been a development subsequent to the rigveda and must have originated as the soma rituals grew in their elaborateness.

 

[sangom]

इन्द्रवायू बृहस्पतिम्
मित्राग्निं पूषणं भगम्
आदित्यान्मारुतं गणम् । ऋ. वे. १-१४-०३

indravāyū bṛhaspatim
mitrāgniṃ pūṣaṇaṃ bhagam
ādityānmārutaṃ gaṇam | ṛ. ve. 1-14-03

இந்த்ரவாயூ ப்ருஹஸ்பதிம்
மித்ராக்னிம் பூஷணம் பகம்
ஆதித்யான்மாருதம் கணம் | ரிக்வே. ௧-௧௪-0௩

This is a ṛk which has no predicate. It just lists indra, vāyu, bṛhaspati, mitra, agni, pūṣan, bhaga, the ādityas, mārutaṃ gaṇam (the group of maruts). So, the intention of the composer of this hymn is to be determined by context only. The previous ṛk invites agni to come and be present, along with all the devas, on the occasion of the yajña. This "list" does not fit in there grammatically. The next one goes like this :—

प्रवॊ भ्रियन्त इन्दवो
मथ्सरा मादयिष्णवः
द्रप्सा मध्वश्चमूषदः । ऋ.वे. १-१४-०४

pravo bhriyanta indavo
mathsarā mādayiṣṇavaḥ
drapsā madhvaścamūṣadaḥ | ṛ.ve. 1-14-04

ப்ரவோ ப்ரியந்த இந்தவோ
மத்ஸரா மாதயிஷ்ணவஃ
த்ரப்ஸா மத்வஸ்சமூஷதஃ | ரிக்வே. ௧-௧௪-0௪

Here, the ṛk begins with vaḥ (vo) meaning "for you". The rest of the word meanings are given below:—
pra bhriyanta(prabhriyante) = especially procured (by us)
camūṣadaḥ indavo (indavaḥ) = soma which is in containers like camasa
mathsarā mādayiṣṇavaḥ = satisfying, exhilarating
drapsā (h) madhvaś (h) = sweet drops

It therefore appears to me that the various devas listed in the previous ṛk are being addressed further in this.

But sāyaṇa, and, following him, most translators have considered the two ṛks as separate. In the first they add an inferred portion addressed to 'agni' calling upon him to worship (he agne ! yakṣi = O agni! you worship) all those listed there, which itself includes agni as one!

 

[zebra16]

Shri Narayan,

Sri Sangom,

"If you kindly read it again without bias - or ask any third party to read it - it will be seen that your approach was very different from what you write now, which is a genuine enquiry."

I read the passage again (and without bias) and I have to confess that my original message wording was shoddy. I apologise.

Regards,

narayan

 

[vikrama]

The (rays of the) black-backed, all-sustaining (Agni) have arisen and pervaded the parents(heaven and earth) and the flowing rivers. The surrounding parents co-operate with him and bestow long life for the sake of assiduous worship.

The seven tones risen from the white-backed viand have made their way between the pair of mothers. Both circumjacent(?) parents come together to yield us length of days . They hasten forward.

Both the above are translations of the same rk. 3-7-1 The first is by Wilson (Who seems to follow Sayana). The second is by Griffith.

While the latter translates सप्तवाणीः as seven tones and makes it the subject of the sentence, the former explains it as सर्पणस्वभाव नदीः flowing rivers and makes it the object of the sentence. Further शितिपृष्ट is interpreted differently by both - black-backed and white-backed. Both of them are silent about the meaning of the word आरुः.
Kindly enlighten me on the correct meaning of the rk in keeping with the general tone of the full Veda.

This is one of the hundreds of unintelligible rks I have come across.
vikrama