Qualified brahmin!

[renuka]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

This post does not address whether Sudras were being taught vedas or not, but the fallacy masquerading as logic.



In mathematical terms, if "T" is truth and "B" is Brahmin, this can be shortened as T = B is the first assumption.



Nowhere it states that other varnas are incapable of speaking the truth. Please adduce evidence. The equation only says T = B, it does not state anywhere non B = non T. This extension is used just to load the argument in one's favour.




There is no overlooking of anything, because no one said non B = non T. So it is an attempt to derive a logical conclusion from an illogical or ungiven premise.




Continuation of fallacy. Truthfulness or otherwise of others are not at all flowing from the basic assumption.



The wording "it looks as if" is presumptive in nature. It might be legitimate or illegitimate in nature. There is also no mention of any force or coercion applied on Satyakama's mother for the supposed "illicit" act. All that is confirms is a consensual act. No one is casting aspersions on her. So there is neither virtue nor vice in the supposed "illicit" act, if it was indeed an illicit act.



On the one hand you say the truthful nature of Satyakama's father is *no special virtue* and the whole society did it, but in the next you say Satyakama should be honoured because he was truthful. As honouring is done normally only for exceptional acts, attitudes and aptitudes, does this mean by reverse logic that Sudras were not normally truth speakers?

Whatever it may be, there is no mention of truth speakers or untruth speakers of other varnas in that passage so it is more of a circular logic.



There are two ungiven assumptions hoisted in the theme.

(i) Learning vedas was mandated to be a Hindu. All the recorded evidences disprove this.

(ii) Mere non-learning of vedas with-held the status or right to Hinduism.

Neither of the statements are true.

Further, how many stories would make it "chunky" to be considered as "norm" rather than one or two stories?

Is it anywhere mentioned in vedas that "ALL" brahmins learned the vedas? I in fact find contrary passages where it is expressly stated that they neither learnt the vedas nor did any sacrifice. So why it cant be dismissed from the contrary passages that brahmins learnt the vedas?

Such logic is termed in legal parlance as attempt to shift to convenience of data in one's favour.

Sri Sangom has has also said either in this thread or elsewhere that Tantra system was the more prevalent form of worship among the non vedic population. History also tells us that many forms of tantra worship were learnt and practiced by brahmins. Though there are "one" or "twp" recorded tales of them being targeted in the past, there is no stigma attached at least to the present right handed tantra practices.

Though only *one* or *two* incidences of ostracism is reported it is not being dismissively used as mere one or two incidences in the same way the veda learning is dismissed.

For me, the story is more of a patriarchal bias of the society prevailing then...

I rather call a Spade a Spade.


You see I have absolutely no problems if a Non Dwija is not entitled to learn Vedas etc..cos the actual need for even a God is a very individualized decision and its just sort of some mental security for a person to sail thru life..God is an anti depressant. So Vedic or Non-Vedic..anti depressants exists..Prozac and all!

Its just that people should be brave enough to state as Sangom Ji stated "I am only saying that the vedas and the religion which evolved therefrom excluded Sudras from its ambit completely"


Anything else not echoing similar sentiments would not be anywhere near the truth.

No one is going to blame the Dwijas for this..its not a form is discrimination but it can be accepted as rules of the Vedic religion and may be Non Diwjas can opt for some other form of worship.

I hope you get what I am trying to say.

 

[zebra16]

I rather call a Spade a Spade.


You see I have absolutely no problems if a Non Dwija is not entitled to learn Vedas etc..cos the actual need for even a God is a very individualized decision and its just sort of some mental security for a person to sail thru life..God is an anti depressant. So Vedic or Non-Vedic..anti depressants exists..Prozac and all!

Its just that people should be brave enough to state as Sangom Ji stated "I am only saying that the vedas and the religion which evolved therefrom excluded Sudras from its ambit completely"


Anything else not echoing similar sentiments would not be anywhere near the truth.

No one is going to blame the Dwijas for this..its not a form is discrimination but it can be accepted as rules of the Vedic religion and may be Non Diwjas can opt for some other form of worship.

I hope you get what I am trying to say.

My point is simply that "vedas" or "vedic practices" were/are not the WHOLE OF HINDUISM. ​It is a mere component just like there are other components. To make vedic practices or veda as a mandatory item is to hyphenate the people who did not practice it from Hinduism.

 

[renuka]

My point is simply that "vedas" or "vedic practices" were/are not the WHOLE OF HINDUISM. ​It is a mere component just like there are other components. To make vedic practices or veda as a mandatory item is to hyphenate the people who did not practice it from Hinduism.

Ok..if you say that Vedas is merely a component....are you saying Vedas is NOT Pramanyam in Hinduism?

 

[Vaagmi]

Sangom sirji,

your post #148 for reference:

(1)I have a book which contains the Aitareya Braahmanam with Malayalam translation and is based on the Saayana Bhaashya book. In this book, the story of Kavasha is given in the second Panchika, Third Adhyaya, First Khanda. Here there is no mention of the portion given by you (viz., RishE! namaste asthu maanohimseesthvamvai na:srEshtOsi| yam thvEvamanvEtheetha|............etc.). For the sake of clarity, I reproduce portions from the relevant Khanda below:

"rishayO vai sarasvatyAm satramAsata tE kavashamailUshaM sOmadanayan daasyaaH putraH kitavO/brAhmaNaH kathaM nOmadhyEadeekshiishTEti taM bahirdhanvOdavahannatrainaM....
. . .
tEvA rishayOabruvan vidurvaa imaM dEvA upEmaMhvayAmahA itinathEtitamupAhvayantE tamupahUyai tadapOnaptreeyamakurvata pradEvatrA brahmaNE gAturEtviti tEnApAM priyaM dhAmOpAgaChasupadEvAnAM"
The portion in blue means that "the rishis then said, "the deva has recognised him. Therefore let us call him back." And everyone agreed. They called him back and performed that apOnaptru, pradEvatrA sUktas which he (Kavasha) had vision of. Due to this they reached the sacred homes of the god of water and other devas.

(2)Hence, if you read this version, just as you have done the Raikva story, there is not a word to indicate that Kavasha was learned in vedas when he was driven out by the other rishis. The story only tells that when Kavasha was dying of thirst when he had the Darsan or vision of the two suktas.

(1) Please read Aithareya Brahmanam 12-3. I reproduce the paragraph (pardon me for the transliteration errors if any):

மாத்யம: ஸரஸ்வத்யாம் ஸத்ரமாஸத| தத்ஹாபிகவஷோமத்யே நிஷஸாத| தம் ஹேம உபோதுர்தாஸ்யா வைத்வம் புத்ரோஸி; நவயம் த்வயாஸஹபக்ஷயிஷ்யாம: இதி ஸஹக்ருத்ஹ:ப்ரத்ரவத்ஸரஸ்வதீ மேதே ந ஸுக்தேன துஷ்டாவ|தம் ஹோமமந்வேயாய த உஹேமே நிராசோ இவ மேநிரே| தம் ஹாந்வாப்ருத்யோசு:| ருஷே! நமஸ்தே அஸ்து மாநோஹிம்ஸீஸ்த்வம் வைந: ஸ்ரேஷ்டோஸி| யம் த்வேவமந்வேதீத|தம்ஹயக்ஞபயாஞ்ச க்ருஸ்தஸ்ய ஹக்ரோதம் விநிந்யு:| ச ஏஷகவஷஸ்யமஹிமா ஸுக்தஸ்ய சா நுவேதிதா|

(2) Kavasha was not learned in vedas according to you. If so how come that the manthras for which he was the drishta came to be accepted as the part of Rig Veda in its 7th Ashtaka. Or would you prefer to call it Kavasha veda instead of Rig veda? LOL.

 

[a-TB]

This post does not address whether Sudras were being taught vedas or not, but the fallacy masquerading as logic.



In mathematical terms, if "T" is truth and "B" is Brahmin, this can be shortened as T = B is the first assumption.



Nowhere it states that other varnas are incapable of speaking the truth. Please adduce evidence. The equation only says T = B, it does not state anywhere non B = non T. This extension is used just to load the argument in one's favour.




There is no overlooking of anything, because no one said non B = non T. So it is an attempt to derive a logical conclusion from an illogical or ungiven premise.




Continuation of fallacy. Truthfulness or otherwise of others are not at all flowing from the basic assumption.



The wording "it looks as if" is presumptive in nature. It might be legitimate or illegitimate in nature. There is also no mention of any force or coercion applied on Satyakama's mother for the supposed "illicit" act. All that is confirms is a consensual act. No one is casting aspersions on her. So there is neither virtue nor vice in the supposed "illicit" act, if it was indeed an illicit act.



On the one hand you say the truthful nature of Satyakama's father is *no special virtue* and the whole society did it, but in the next you say Satyakama should be honoured because he was truthful. As honouring is done normally only for exceptional acts, attitudes and aptitudes, does this mean by reverse logic that Sudras were not normally truth speakers?

Whatever it may be, there is no mention of truth speakers or untruth speakers of other varnas in that passage so it is more of a circular logic.



There are two ungiven assumptions hoisted in the theme.

(i) Learning vedas was mandated to be a Hindu. All the recorded evidences disprove this.

(ii) Mere non-learning of vedas with-held the status or right to Hinduism.

Neither of the statements are true.

Further, how many stories would make it "chunky" to be considered as "norm" rather than one or two stories?

Is it anywhere mentioned in vedas that "ALL" brahmins learned the vedas? I in fact find contrary passages where it is expressly stated that they (meaning not *all*) neither learnt the vedas nor did any sacrifice. So why it cant be dismissed from the contrary passages that brahmins learnt the vedas?

Such logic is termed in legal parlance as attempt to shift to convenience of data in one's favour.

Sri Sangom has has also said either in this thread or elsewhere that Tantra system was the more prevalent form of worship among the non vedic population. History also tells us that many forms of tantra worship were learnt and practiced by brahmins. Though there are "one" or "twp" recorded tales of them being targeted in the past, there is no stigma attached at least to the present right handed tantra practices.

Though only *one* or *two* incidences of ostracism is reported it is not being dismissively used as mere one or two incidences in the same way the veda learning is dismissed.

For me, the story is more of a patriarchal bias of the society prevailing then...

I agree with this post to the extent I understand it. The call to logic is well stated, I think. There may be some unstated messages of the post -one can only guess!

 

[Vaagmi]

Renukaji,

My answers in blue:

I rather call a Spade a Spade.

That is okay a crowbar looks different and is a completely different thing like the heart. So it is not a spade in the first place.

You see I have absolutely no problems if a Non Dwija is not entitled to learn Vedas etc..cos the actual need for even a God is a very individualized decision and its just sort of some mental security for a person to sail thru life..God is an anti depressant. So Vedic or Non-Vedic..anti depressants exists..Prozac and all!

People who are perfectly alright and even doctors believe in God for a different reason. They go for Prozac for a different reason. Non dwija is and was as much entitled to learn vedas as a dwija. And this is a historic fact. That fact is denied by people here.

Its just that people should be brave enough to state as Sangom Ji stated "I am only saying that the vedas and the religion which evolved therefrom excluded Sudras from its ambit completely"

Sangomji is completely wrong and that has been proved with facts from the very vedas and smritis by which he swears.

Anything else not echoing similar sentiments would not be anywhere near the truth.

You are entitled to your opinion. Please keep it.

No one is going to blame the Dwijas for this..its not a form is discrimination but it can be accepted as rules of the Vedic religion and may be Non Diwjas can opt for some other form of worship.

Again going round and round. There were no accepted rules in Vedic religion which barred any one from seeking knowledge (veda) on the basis of varna.

 

[renuka]

Dear Vaagmi ji,

read your reply..fair enough but at the same time I am starting to wonder if Vedas is actually even necessary for continuation of life?

I am now starting to feel that life can go on and we die and be born again without the need even of knowing anything Vedic or Non Vedic...so finally nothing really matters..just live..be happy..do good..hurt no one and die!LOL

 

[Raji Ram]

While good discussions are going on, let me give the update of 'that' event.

Usually, I write songs for the special occasions and here is the one which I wrote for that upanayanam.


ரத்ன ஊஞ்சலில் ஆடினார் மெட்டு.'

(இங்கு இடுவதால், பெயர்கள் மாற்றப்பட்டன. )

அருண் வருண் உபநயனம்
அருமையாகச் செய்கிறார்
(அருண் வருண் உபநயனம் ..... )

அமெரிக்க நாட்டிலே அமர்க்களமாய் வாழ்ந்திடும்
அருமையான தம்பதி அரவிந்தன், ஆனந்தி
(அருண் வருண் உபநயனம் ..... )

இரு குமாரர்களும் இரு கண்கள் ஆனதால்
இருவருக்கும் தாமே ப்ரம்மோபதேசம் செய்து
(அருண் வருண் உபநயனம் ..... )

சுற்றத்தையும் நட்பையும் அன்புடனே அழைத்து
உற்ற நேரம் நேர்த்தியாய் குளுமையான மண்டபத்தில்
(அருண் வருண் உபநயனம் ..... )

காயத்ரி ஜபத்தின் உன்னதத்தை உணர்ந்து
காயத்ரி ஜபத்தினால் ஆசானாய் உயர்ந்து
(அருண் வருண் உபநயனம் ..... )

 

[Vaagmi]

While good discussions are going on, let me give the update of 'that' event.

Usually, I write songs for the special occasions and here is the one which I wrote for that upanayanam.


ரத்ன ஊஞ்சலில் ஆடினார் மெட்டு.'

(இங்கு இடுவதால், பெயர்கள் மாற்றப்பட்டன. )

அருண் வருண் உபநயனம்
அருமையாகச் செய்கிறார்
(அருண் வருண் உபநயனம் ..... )

அமெரிக்க நாட்டிலே அமர்க்களமாய் வாழ்ந்திடும்
அருமையான தம்பதி அரவிந்தன், ஆனந்தி
(அருண் வருண் உபநயனம் ..... )

இரு குமாரர்களும் இரு கண்கள் ஆனதால்
இருவருக்கும் தாமே ப்ரம்மோபதேசம் செய்து
(அருண் வருண் உபநயனம் ..... )

சுற்றத்தையும் நட்பையும் அன்புடனே அழைத்து
உற்ற நேரம் நேர்த்தியாய் குளுமையான மண்டபத்தில்
(அருண் வருண் உபநயனம் ..... )

காயத்ரி ஜபத்தின் உன்னதத்தை உணர்ந்து
காயத்ரி ஜபத்தினால் ஆசானாய் உயர்ந்து
(அருண் வருண் உபநயனம் ..... )

Dear RRji,

The focus here appears to be fully on Arvind and Anandi. Why left out the Arun and Varun in just a passing reference? There is something profound happening to them too. Why not write about that too in two more stanzas to make the work complete? Just a suggestion.

 

[Raji Ram]

Dear Vaagmi Sir,

The kids are too small that they keep on fighting with each other! So, what do I write about them?

Of course, when I write oonjal songs, I write about the credits of both the bride and the groom.

BTW, this tune has become a super hit in my family circle! :thumb:

 

[Raji Ram]

The upananyanam ceremony was a grand success with full attendance from relatives and friends! :grouphug:

The kids looked very cute in Ramraj 'ottikkO kattikkO' silk dhOtis!

 

[Vaagmi]

Dear Vaagmi ji,

read your reply..fair enough but at the same time I am starting to wonder if Vedas is actually even necessary for continuation of life?

I am now starting to feel that life can go on and we die and be born again without the need even of knowing anything Vedic or Non Vedic...so finally nothing really matters..just live..be happy..do good..hurt no one and die!LOL

Renukaji,

Yes life can go on and we may die and be born again without even the need to know anything vedic or non-Vedic.

Vedic knowledge is not compulsory military service. Vedas are a body of knowledge. Knowledge is sought and got after efforts.

As a human being grows it is troubled by many questions because to question and explore is natural to human being. When the questioning and exploring starts, many rituals are understood and followed with a unique satisfaction or many of them discarded as meaningless (like the poonaikkutty Acharam). It is impossible for a thinking human being to leave life as one which goes on with nothing behind the order, disorder and orderly disorder all around. So like the Betal the burden comes and sticks itself to the Vikramaditya. And the struggle to explore and understand is itself a pleasant exercise/experience and that is why all this discussion about vedas (knowledge).

And animals do live. But they do not appear to be bothered about anything of the sort that human being is bothered about. Or do they? We do not know. And I want to know. There starts again the story of search and exploration. LOL.

I enjoy my eeyachombu rasam immensely because of its unique flavour. So it is eating not just for calories or to satisfy hunger. It is enjoying the fruits of exploration. When I tell my coffee powder retailer to carefully weigh and give me a mixture of 300 gram peaberry seeds mixed with 200 grams of plantation "A" seeds without adding chicory, ground coarsely, he gives me a curious look. But I am a gourmet. I know the difference when the ratio changes. That is living the life enjoying the fruits of experimenting and exploration.

And finally animals do mate. Humans love and then mate. That love is the expression of an innate desire to know and relate. There is an exploration there.

If what you have said were to be the real world, it would have been terribly boring and I would have died of boredom long back to go and look for another interesting domain. LOL.

 

[Vaagmi]

The upananyanam ceremony was a grand success with full attendance from relatives and friends! :grouphug:

The kids looked very cute in Ramraj 'ottikkO kattikkO' silk dhOtis!

Good. I like particularly the visualisation of the kids in ottikko kattikko mundu. LOL

 

[a-TB]

Dear Vaagmi ji,

read your reply..fair enough but at the same time I am starting to wonder if Vedas is actually even necessary for continuation of life?

I am now starting to feel that life can go on and we die and be born again without the need even of knowing anything Vedic or Non Vedic...so finally nothing really matters..just live..be happy..do good..hurt no one and die!LOL

Human beings have lived and died for at least half a million years if not more without help of any scripture.
Source reference: Timeline of human evolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Life will continue for for million more years somewhere in the universe. Dont worry , be happy.

Life can go on, be happy, argue at TB forum, fight fairly and unfairly with strangers, be happy, live and die - be born again and hope another TB forum is available LoL

 

[renuka]

Human beings have lived and died for at least half a million years if not more without help of any scripture.
Source reference: Timeline of human evolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Life will continue for for million more years somewhere in the universe. Dont worry , be happy.

Life can go on, be happy, argue at TB forum, fight fairly and unfairly with strangers, be happy, live and die - be born again and hope another TB forum is available LoL

I totally love this reply.

 

[renuka]

And finally animals do mate. Humans love and then mate. That love is the expression of an innate desire to know and relate. There is an exploration there.

.

???? Does mating have to involve love?

I dont think so!LOL

Otherwise how do you explain total strangers having an arranged marriage and mating on their Suhaag Raat? Love had not yet come into the picture.

So for all practical purposes..mating does not need love.

Its just that in marriage people develop Stockholm's Syndrome and think its love.

Wow..Life is indeed a Delusion!

 

[Vaagmi]

???? Does mating have to involve love?

I dont think so!LOL

Otherwise how do you explain total strangers having an arranged marriage and mating on their Suhaag Raat? Love had not yet come into the picture.

So for all practical purposes..mating does not need love.

Its just that in marriage people develop Stockholm's Syndrome and think its love.

Wow..Life is indeed a Delusion!

Oh. I give up. And I enjoy. LOL.

 

[zebra16]

Ok..if you say that Vedas is merely a component....are you saying Vedas is NOT Pramanyam in Hinduism?

I suppose by "pramanyam" you mean validation of knowledge. If so, vedas are "pramanyam" in hinduism, but they are not the only ones.

We have sAnkhya and yoga pramanyam" as also Agamic and tantrik pramanyam.

Adi Sankara has in his BG BhAshyam said that even a hundred Sruthi vAkhyams cannot make the fire cold. Sruthi is a pramANam only in cases where the senses or mind cannot cognize.

The case of Satyakama and his parents and their truthfulness, the field was clearly in the area of "pratyaksham".

 

[sangom]

Sangom sirji,

Your post #142 for reference:



In the absence of any recorded evidence about the society in the vedic period, it would be better not to say anything conclusively-particularly sweeping statements like the religion was for only the dwijas etc., The language is such that interpretations can be many.



(1)It is not Vaagmi who says sruti is ultimate. It had been the accepted practice all along. Please any vedic pundit of any denomination. Please refer to:

வேதா: ப்ரமாணம் ப்ரதமம் ஸ்வத ஏவ தத: பரம்|
ஸ்ம்ருத்யஸ்ச புராணாநி பாரதம் முனிபுங்கவா:|
அந்யாந்யபி முநிஸ்ரேஷ்டா: சாஸ்த்ராணிஸுபஹுநிச|
ஸர்வம் வேதா விரோதேச ப்ரமாணம் நாந்ய வர்த்மனாம்| (ஸ்காந்தம்-ஸூதசம்ஹிதை-சிவமாஹாத்ம்ய காண்டம் அத்யாயம்36-38)

Sri japala said:

ஸ்ருதி ஸ்ம்ருதி விரோதேது ஸ்ருதிரேவ கரீயஸி|
அவிரோதே ஸதாகார்யம் ஸ்மார்த்தம் வைதிகவத்ஸதா|

Meemamsa's nyaya vadhins say "....ஸ்ருதி விரோதே ஸ்ம்ருதி வாக்யமநபெக்ஷ்யமப்ரமாணமநாதரணீயஞ்ச|

(2)I did not say that vaishnavas do not follow any smriti. Vaishnavas follow smriti wherever there is no dispute with srutis. If there is a difference, we discard smritis to that extent and follow sruti.

(3)The concluding ceremony in a vaishnavite home after the mourning period is a subha sweekaram-looking forward to good things. On that day vaishnavites chant along with the vedas the Nalayira divya Prabantha stanzas and every one without any difference can participate if they know Iyarpaa part of the prabantham as that is the part which is chanted usually.

Shri Vaagmi sir,

If our ancestors of the last so many centuries held a view similar to what you hold and if they also held the view that during the vedic period, anyone (irrespective of his/her caste) could teach the vedas, etc., to anyone (again, irrespective of caste), the question arises as to how the various smritis were followed most rigorously in respect of caste segregation. The vedic Pramanas ought to have been followed. Why do you think this did not happen? And why is it that there are injunctions like a non-dwija learning the scriptures (Shambuka)?

So there is no

scope for sarcasm. Next time when you go to such an event carry a prabantham book with you and no one will bar you from participating in the chanting.

There was no sarcasm in my mind. I wanted to merely say that a gaayatree havan such as the one which Smt. Renuka described, does not happen among the smaartha Brahmins but, may be, it happens among Vaishnavas if your views (regarding veda praamaanyam, vedic study allowed to all castes as per the vedas and Braahmana texts, etc.) reflect the position amongst Iyengars as a whole. If there is a sarcastic tone in my words, I apologize for the same.

 

[sangom]

There is no doubt about this.

In fact the Satyakama story itself is not a good example cos Sathyakama was accepted to study the Vedas becos he spoke the truth hence his father had to be a Brahmin.

That directly implies that other Varnas are not capable of speaking the truth..I wonder how come Harischandra not being a Brahmin was known to uphold truth?LOL

But at the same time a point was overlooked..that is Sathyakama's mother being a Sudra spoke the truth herself..saying she has no idea who the father of Sathyakama was.
So it proves that Sudras too can be truthful..so why assume that Sathyakama's father was surely a Brahmin?

And also it looks as if Sathyakama's dad had an illicit relationship with Sathyakama's mother....so why all the praise for being a son of a Brahmin that too a Brahmin who indulges in illicit relationships?

I feel Sathyakama should have been honoured just based on the fact that he was truthful and not link him to any Varna cos for all practical purposes his Varna remained unknown.

I feel this one or two stories about Sudras learning the Vedas does not change the fact that a Sudra has hardly any status or right to Hinduism.

One or two stories does not make a difference..it just covers up the underlying situation..its like Gandhi coining the word Harijan..it never actually addressed the Dalit discrimination.

Smt. Renukaji,

I have a few doubts.

1. Satyakama's father, even if he were a brahmin, could not be said to have had any "illicit" relationship, because the Dharma Sastras allow a brahmin to have one wife from each of the four castes, and, accordingly a brahmin could have made Jaabaala his wife, but the woman could have changed into a prostitute subsequently. These are unclear from the Upanishad.

2. Telling the truth even at the cost of belittling oneself (and one's mother) were seen as "Brahminical" qualities by the guru. I don't think there is any explicit statement to the effect that the guru said Satyakama ought to have been born to a brahmin.

 

[zebra16]

Sangom sirji,


(2) Kavasha was not learned in vedas according to you. If so how come that the manthras for which he was the drishta came to be accepted as the part of Rig Veda in its 7th Ashtaka. Or would you prefer to call it Kavasha veda instead of Rig veda? LOL.

Were the mantra-drishtas expected to do veda adhyAyanams? I thought because of their special powers they could translate what they saw into mantras or rks and yajus and sAmans and pass it on to the posterity. So why would or should kavasha learn Veda like others..?

 

[sangom]

< Clipped >

Sri Sangom has has also said either in this thread or elsewhere that Tantra system was the more prevalent form of worship among the non vedic population. History also tells us that many forms of tantra worship were learnt and practiced by brahmins. Though there are "one" or "twp" recorded tales of them being targeted in the past, there is no stigma attached at least to the present right handed tantra practices.

Though only *one* or *two* incidences of ostracism is reported it is not being dismissively used as mere one or two incidences in the same way the veda learning is dismissed.

For me, the story is more of a patriarchal bias of the society prevailing then...

Shri Narayanan sir,

I do not remember writing that "the Tantra system was the more prevalent form of worship among the non-vedic population". If I had indeed said these words, the intention was not that Sudras practised Tantra worship extensively or something like that; what I meant was that the Tantra system was separate and those who followed the Vedas and the fire sacrifices and soma offering to devas, etc., did not adopt the Tantra system.

However, to day's position is that the Taantric gestures and underlying beliefs pervade almost the entire hindu religion and whatever has been included in mainstream hinduism, is "regularized" by saying that these are all "right-handed" Tantra practices (and not 'left-handed' or Vaamaachaara). But calling a spade a spade, right from Sandhyavandanam, there is extensive use of Tantra.

Vaikhanasa Aagama is held to be one of the older scriptures which had close association with Tantra. Now most Temple practices (I am not aware of what the practices are in the temples which strictly follow the Saiva Siddhanta and its Aagamas.) are Tantric but the chantings are from Vedas and other vedic scriptures. Hence the question of being ostracized will look funny today! But, even as late as the 1950's, a few smaartha Brahmanas who were dabbling into Tantra were scrupulously avoided for any religious rites by mainstream brahmin community here. I don't know why you say these cases were not "dismissively used as mere one or two incidences in the same way the veda learning is dismissed."; did I say that all smaartha Brahmanas practised Tantra also? If I had said so, it was patently wrong.

BTB, is there a full account of how exactly sandhyaavandanam is to be performed in any of the Samhitas or Brahmana texts of the three vedas, Rik, Yajus and Saama?

Scholarly members may kindly respond.

 

[sangom]

Sangom sirji,

your post #148 for reference:



(1) Please read Aithareya Brahmanam 12-3. I reproduce the paragraph (pardon me for the transliteration errors if any):

மாத்யம: ஸரஸ்வத்யாம் ஸத்ரமாஸத| தத்ஹாபிகவஷோமத்யே நிஷஸாத| தம் ஹேம உபோதுர்தாஸ்யா வைத்வம் புத்ரோஸி; நவயம் த்வயாஸஹபக்ஷயிஷ்யாம: இதி ஸஹக்ருத்ஹ:ப்ரத்ரவத்ஸரஸ்வதீ மேதே ந ஸுக்தேன துஷ்டாவ|தம் ஹோமமந்வேயாய த உஹேமே நிராசோ இவ மேநிரே| தம் ஹாந்வாப்ருத்யோசு:| ருஷே! நமஸ்தே அஸ்து மாநோஹிம்ஸீஸ்த்வம் வைந: ஸ்ரேஷ்டோஸி| யம் த்வேவமந்வேதீத|தம்ஹயக்ஞபயாஞ்ச க்ருஸ்தஸ்ய ஹக்ரோதம் விநிந்யு:| ச ஏஷகவஷஸ்யமஹிமா ஸுக்தஸ்ய சா நுவேதிதா|

(2) Kavasha was not learned in vedas according to you. If so how come that the manthras for which he was the drishta came to be accepted as the part of Rig Veda in its 7th Ashtaka. Or would you prefer to call it Kavasha veda instead of Rig veda? LOL.

Shri Vaagmi Sir,

I am unable to find the mantras cited by you. So, kindly tell me what 12-3 stand for.

It appears to me from the words "தாஸ்யா வைத்வம் புத்ரோஸி; நவயம் த்வயாஸஹபக்ஷயிஷ்யாம: இதி ஸஹக்ருத்ஹ:ப்ரத்ரவத்" means that the objection from the sages arose on the question of eating food in the same பந்தி (நவயம் த்வயாஸஹபக்ஷயிஷ்யாம: = we will not take food along with you). You may like to consult knowledgeable people; possibly Shri tbs will be able tell, since he is a Ph. D. in Sanskrit.

(2) The rigveda does contain mantras or sooktas sung by a variety of composers; I remember one Rishi saying "I am a poet, my father is a doctor, my mother a grinder of corn...—Rigveda, 9.112.3" Hence, it seems to me that the riks were composed by various people with some poetic ability but in the mythification of the compiled whole (the Veda) our people went to the extent of qualifying these poets into "mantra drashta" and so on. Kavasha could very well have been, according to me, a Nishaada who had some ability to compose in the popular poetical metres of those days, and he could have entered into the Yaagasaala where the sages were taking food, hoping to have a nice meal.

 

[Vaagmi]

Were the mantra-drishtas expected to do veda adhyAyanams? I thought because of their special powers they could translate what they saw into mantras or rks and yajus and sAmans and pass it on to the posterity. So why would or should kavasha learn Veda like others..?

Vedas represent knowledge. Adhyayanam need not be taken in a narrow interpretation. One who is able to contribute to the repository of knowledge would be able to know the other contents of the repository and would have access to them.
That is the context in which we are discussing about Kavasha, the hunter (panchaman) and his knowledge of vedas.

 

[raysundar]

The Vedas were originally transmitted by oral communications between the original sages and their disciples. At some point when script became prolific and more people agreed upon the phonetic conversions from oral to written text the Vedas were scripted. Since then they have been rescripted and explained by several succeeding generations of sages(not all all necessarily Brahmin by Birth). Various sub groups of the Vedic religion came into existence because of following one interpretation or the other of the same Vedic scriptures each one claiming that theirs is the more superior interpretation of the Vedas. This is really a very ancient and prolonged story regarding the Vedas and is best reserved for private reading and cannot be conveyed in a chat session on a forum like this. So one has to be careful which modern "swamy" your are following. Some Swamis interpret the Vedas and give totally unreasonable interpretation and defying all logic or common sense. The truth about the Vedas lies within you. Each person has to read and understand it in their own way. There is no need to try and explain it to anyone else or influence others with your o your guruji's interpretations of the Vedas. Spirituality is your personal association with the ParamaAtma.