Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth

[ShauryaT]

>>This may come as a surprise to many, but the Shruti and the Smrithi form the very foundation of the very constitution that the nationalist hold dear.

Please elaborate. How so?

[shiv]

Shiv - Ganesha comes before all Gods, even Agni because of the rearrangement by Vyasa and it was also done to propitiate the mother goddess who was pissed at her husband and the other Gods for having her son's head... etc. But for that Agni would still be the first priest

Yes Pulikeshi - but anyone who listens to a CD of the Rig Veda being chanted and tries to folow it on written text will not find the initial invocation of Ganesha in the transcribed text. So one has to "fast forward" to get to the start of the Rig Veda. Since the Rig Veda is older than Ganesha - it is interesting that the Rig Veda chanting is preceded by an invocation that must have been composed at a much later date. I have no idea by whom and when.

[shiv]

Orthodox vedic pandits do not give a 'damn' for modern Indian nationalism.They are not against it,but do not give a damn to it.And modern indian nationalists,for the most part,have zero formal training in vedic paatashalas or from a vedic pandit.

This is going way OT. Modern Indian nationalism includes secularism, defined boundaries that separate India and non India, and the acceptance that religions that are overtly opposed to sanatana dharma should be allowed to say and do their thing - although the freedom to do whatever they like is being questioned. Sanatana dharma is way above mundane things like secularism and not restricted by the LOC, or line drawn in pre- and post-independence maps. It is also not imposed by force, only acquired by enlightenment. Not even by birth. Must Vedic pandits wear secularism within set borders to be nationalists? I am not sure why "nationalism" of Pandits is being discussed like we say Muslims not nationalist, Pandits not nationalitst, DIE not nationalist, elite not nationalist, Khangress not nationalist.

[Pulikeshi]

>>This may come as a surprise to many, but the Shruti and the Smrithi form the very foundation of the very constitution that the nationalist hold dear.

Please elaborate. How so?

OT here as this is Out-of-India thread... but will be happy to and have done so many moon ago on BRF when I posted more actively. Suggest a more appropriate thread and I will be happy to do so...

[shiv]

I am interested in knowing how many traditional vedic pandits are there in our national policy making apparatus,think tanks,political parties.How many vedic pundits of traditional type are in BRF? How many of them are engaging in public discourse-on social,economic and political issues? Yes,they are Indian nationalists like the IIT Professors Union or the auto rickshaw drivers union.But even that 'respect' they do not have in our national life as vedic pundits.

venkat why do you stop here. How many vedic pandits join and serve in the armed forces. How many become college professors and do research for fundamental science? I think that you do not know that Pandit need a lifetime just to learn and practice and teach what they have to learn and you are reducing their knowledge to textbook level where a person passes sociology exam and then can go places. Pandits are pandits because they do and know all the things we have never learned and even our grandparents forgot. They need to be used for what they can give us in their field of specialzation rather than asking them to join our concerns. What if the Pandit asks all our nationalists how they are even Hindus without basic knowledge of Vedas or Sanskrit? What sort of self goal argument have you conjured up?

Pandits as you probably know formed only the Brahmana part of the social system Politics and social concerns was for the Kshatriyas. And trade, prices, economics, manufacturing and agriculture was for Vysyas and Shudras. Everyone else has changed but Pandits can only be pandits by sticking to the age old knowledge, not by changing. We have changed and you are asking why Pandits have not changed like other Indians? How many nationalist politicians can become Veda pandits? Have you actually thought this thing through or are you simply making an ill thought out argument with ill defined goals?

By all means let us make Pandits anything else that you desire - but they are the only people with the Vedas and it is a lifetime of study from teacher to student. You lose that we lose everything. What are you getting at? Your post sounds disappointingly ignorant to me - I see less hope for our culture with this sort of ignorance being associated with worn on the shoulder nationalism.

[johneeG]

Orthodox vedic pandits do not give a 'damn' for modern Indian nationalism.They are not against it,but do not give a damn to it.And modern indian nationalists,for the most part,have zero formal training in vedic paatashalas or from a vedic pandit.

This is a very sweeping generalization. And doesn't seem true to me. I think they are as much 'nationalists' as anybody else is. Anyway, I don't understand how this is related to 'Out of India'?

Shiv - Ganesha comes before all Gods, even Agni because of the rearrangement by Vyasa and it was also done to propitiate the mother goddess who was pissed at her husband and the other Gods for having her son's head... etc. But for that Agni would still be the first priest

I think all of us get stuck with forms and names(not even their meanings). That may be the reason why Puraanas tell their stories in the way they do. Otherwise, just the meanings of the names should be quite revealing about the underlying philosophy.

Shiva - always auspicious or beneficial.
Brahma - Biggest
Vishnu - all pervasive
Ganesha or Ganapathi - leader of groups
Senapathi - Commander-in-chief
Agni - Leader or first one.
Indhra - Lord

All of these terms could easily apply to any of the Gods. Infact, frequently these terms are used for all Gods in one form or the other. The sahasra naamas i.e. compilation of 1000 names is very interesting in this regard.

Most archaeology consists of digging up a piece of clay with a notch on it, and building up a whole civilization and "history" around it. These ppl claim forensic skills beyond those of any forensic pathologist, but I have my doubts. Their history education after all, comes from the history teachers and the prejudice and superstition is thus built into their models.

I agree archaeology is highly misused by both AIT/AMT and OIT proponents, but it does have value in answering important questions. For example, if someone says "there were no iron weapons in the Sarasvati-Sindhu region before 3000 BC", this can be refuted by digging up just a single iron weapon from the area that can be dated to that age.

The forensic methods are often of adequate reliability, and they can be characterized with an error bar (i.e., science is doing its part well in this game).

>>b) learning about entire human evolution by finding fossilized bones of some ancient extinct animals.
Personally, I find both of these to be ridiculous and fake. There may be a few facts, but it seems the whole narrative is made up of creative imaginations.

Boss, are you serious? There is real solid science behind evolutionary biology, and not all scientists - I daresay most - are not dogmatic ideologues or anything like that. Plenty of open minded people in there. Certainly the whole narrative is not made up of creative imaginations... You can't really believe that?

To clarify: I am not disputing archeology or paleontology's findings i.e. whatever they find from digging up the soil. However, when they come up with grand narrative using these simple dug up items, then it makes it becomes for me to accept it.

If someone finds a clay tablet or a piece of iron and gives it a date based on carbon dating(or some such method), I don't have any problem with it. However, when this piece of clay tablet or iron piece is used to weave narrative about entire civilization without any other source backing it up, then it seems difficult for me to accept it. If there are other independent sources backing the narrative, then its alright. If a clay tablet is confirming what is already supported by some other source, then its ok. But, using just a clay tablet or a piece of iron to weave the entire narrative about a civilization seems like stretching it.

The same applies to paleontology's findings as well. I have no problem when some fossilized bones are dug up. I have no problem in accepting that some huge animals used to live on earth in the past. I don't mind accepting that those animals became extinct or maybe the same animals have shrunk in size due to evolution. Either of these possibilities is fine for me to accept. But, the problem is that they seem to base their theories on very little facts. They use a bunch of bones to come up with grand narratives about those supposedly extinct species. It seems like it is just hypothesis over hypothesis i.e. imagination and guesstimation.

In both cases, the theories seem to assume that archeologist/paleontologist is some kind of Sherlock Holmes who can solve the entire case just by seeing a small clue.

JEM saar,
I am saying that all the objections that can be raised against archeology like
a) prejudice of the scientists in coming to their conclusions based on their pre-conceived bias
b) sponsors funding only a specific kind of narratives.

...etc etc, all of these objections can be raised against paleontology too. Infact, strictly speaking, archeology is considerably easier than paleontology. In archeology, one can atleast find ancient artifacts. Even here, there would be many fakes, but it would be much easier to find artifacts. However, paleontology seems to be much more difficult.

It seems difficult to differentiate fossilized bones from normal rocks. At the most, a few traces of skin, teeth or bones may exist. But mostly, they are similar to normal rocks. So, it seems highly difficult to even find such fossils.(thats why, there seem to be many fakes in Paleontology specially from China recently) Then the next step is grand narratives where archeology and paleontology seem to give each other competition. But even here, archeology seems to be concerned only with one particular civilization at the most while paleontology seems to be concerned with the collective past of all humanity.

So, in short, it seems to me that both these streams should restrict themselves to facts and findings instead of grand narratives like Sherlock Holmes.

----
Imagine my surprise when I found out that the author of Sherlock Holmes is actually connected to this dinosaur thing. Arthur Conan Doyle is the author of Sherlock Holmes. He also wrote book on dinosaur called lost world. He also made a movie named: lost world. It seems that movie made dinosaurs popular in the public for the first time. However, he also seems to have faked the fossils. Piltdown Man Hoax

----
Ulan Batori saar,
there are two points here when trying to understand Manthras, Yanthras, Murthis, ...etc.
a) encoding
b) energies.

Encoding would mean that allegories would be used.
Energies would mean that the energies are being represented.

For example, when Vedhas frequently talk about Horse, they seem to use the word 'Ashva'. Now, the etymological meaning of Ashva seems to be 'fast-moving one'. 'Aashu' means 'fast'. Shiva is called 'Aashu-thosh' because he is supposed to be quickly satisfied(with devotees). Similarly, there is a contest called 'Aashu-kavithas' i.e. weaving poems on the spot. Basically, 'Ashva' means 'fast moving one'.

Now, this appellation 'fast moving one' can apply to lot of other entities(other than a horse). For example, it can apply to light rays. Surya(i.e Sun) is said to ride on a chariot of 7 horses. If the horses are taken to be rays. Then, it would mean that Sun is said to ride on a vehicle of 7 rays.

Similarly, when looking at the images of Gods and Goddesses, there are two aspects:
a) encoding i.e. allegory
b) energies.

Coming to Ganesha.
Body of Ganesha represents the universe while the head(i.e. elephant head) seems to represent the Brahma. This is allegory i.e. philosophy/knowledge hidden through symbols.

The whole form of Ganesha seems to represent the energy of Om. This is energy thing.

The stories also seem to have these two aspects: Philosophy/knowledge being conveyed symbolically and energies being represented in symbolic manner.

So what knowledge is in the Rgveda ?

The knowledge that Indra rescued 60,000 cows to release floodwaters. Don't believe me? Ask Griffiths.

Saars,
could you please provide the Sanskruth version of this particular Manthra? or tell me where I can find this Manthra.

[Satya_anveshi]

svenkat ji, On the contrary, most non-practicing dhothi wearers cum panchaang dhari cum stotra spouting cum constant subject of ridicule "bommans" and their elders did give damn and sacrificed their lifestyle, their pet way of life, their sole basis of identity, to join the mainstream struggle in the mainstream way even at the risk of bringing their own way of life to extinction.

This is the last thing one can heap on Vedic pundits who have almost become EXTINCT.

[shiv]

svenkat ji, On the contrary, most non-practicing dhothi wearers cum panchaang dhari cum stotra spouting cum constant subject of ridicule "bommans" and their elders did give damn and sacrificed their lifestyle, their pet way of life, their sole basis of identity, to join the mainstream struggle in the mainstream way even at the risk of bringing their own way of life to extinction.

This is the last thing one can heap on Vedic pundits who have almost become EXTINCT.

+1

The nation has lost many things and I am absolutely amazed to hear some trying to tear up the little that remains in the name of misinterpreted/maldefined nationalism. If this is not ignorance it is the very same subversion that came with the two invasions. Astounding how deep the indoctrination and cultural meme erasure has gone where the new identity is nationalism and the traditional definitions of India are "uncaring" about the new nationalism.

[shiv]

The knowledge that Indra rescued 60,000 cows to release floodwaters. Don't believe me? Ask Griffiths.

Saars,
could you please provide the Sanskruth version of this particular Manthra? or tell me where I can find this Manthra.

You will never find such a mantra. If you find it please tell me. I am also searching - in between bouts of uncontrollable laughter and vomiting with disgust. But here is a link to a world phamous Vedic school, the British Museum
http://www.ancientindia.co.uk/staff/res ... g32doc.doc

One of the greatest deeds performed by Indra is to release the waters held captive by the demons. There are a few legends connected with this theme. At times, the clouds are imagined as cows, which have been trapped in a cave by the demons. Indra rescues the cows after waging a war against the demons, signified by the thunder and lightning. The cows show their gratitude in loud bellowing cries, which mark the beginning of the rains. One of the greatest deeds performed by Indra is to release the waters held captive by the demons. There are a few legends connected with this theme. At times, the clouds are imagined as cows, which have been trapped in a cave by the demons. Indra rescues the cows after waging a war against the demons, signified by the thunder and lightning. The cows show their gratitude in loud bellowing cries, which mark the beginning of the rains.

[svenkat]

shivji,satya_anveshi ji,
Clearly,I have not communicated my thoughts well.I will reply in detail a little later.

[johneeG]

To clarify further about Archeology and Paleontology: I don't even have any problem with grand narratives as long as they are presented as hypothesis or guesstimates. It is only when they say that they know it for sure because they found a piece of clay or a bone, then it makes me incredulous.

The knowledge that Indra rescued 60,000 cows to release floodwaters. Don't believe me? Ask Griffiths.

Saars,
could you please provide the Sanskruth version of this particular Manthra? or tell me where I can find this Manthra.

You will never find such a mantra. If you find it please tell me. I am also searching - in between bouts of uncontrollable laughter and vomiting with disgust. But here is a link to a world phamous Vedic school, the British Museum
http://www.ancientindia.co.uk/staff/res ... g32doc.doc

One of the greatest deeds performed by Indra is to release the waters held captive by the demons. There are a few legends connected with this theme. At times, the clouds are imagined as cows, which have been trapped in a cave by the demons. Indra rescues the cows after waging a war against the demons, signified by the thunder and lightning. The cows show their gratitude in loud bellowing cries, which mark the beginning of the rains. One of the greatest deeds performed by Indra is to release the waters held captive by the demons. There are a few legends connected with this theme. At times, the clouds are imagined as cows, which have been trapped in a cave by the demons. Indra rescues the cows after waging a war against the demons, signified by the thunder and lightning. The cows show their gratitude in loud bellowing cries, which mark the beginning of the rains.

I just did a cursory google search and I found this:

Chapter 10 (Appendix 3)

SaramA and the PaNis: A Mythological Theme in the Rigveda

The myth of SaramA and the PaNis is found in the Rigveda X.108.

The hymn, as Griffith notes, �is a colloquy between SaramA, the messenger of the Gods or of Indra� and the PaNis or envious demons who have carried off the cows or rays of light which Indra wishes to recover�.1

But, according to Macdonell, the hymn is about �the capture by Indra of the cows of the PaNis� (who) possess herds of cows which they keep hidden in a cave far beyond the RasA, a mythical river. SaramA, Indra�s messenger, tracks the cows and asks for them in Indra�s name, but is mocked by the PaNis.�2

Clearly, there is a basic difference in the above descriptions of the myth: Griffith�s description suggests that the cows were stolen by the PaNis, and are sought to be recovered by Indra; Macdonell�s description suggests that the cows belong to the PaNis and are coveted by Indra.

The myth is a complex one, which has developed many shades and facets in the Rigveda itself. We will examine this myth as follows:

I. Development of the Vedic myth.
II. The PaNis in Teutonic Mythology.
III. SaramA and the PaNis in Greek Mythology.
IV. Mythology and History.


I
DEVELOPMENT OF THE VEDIC MYTH

Primitive myths came into being out of efforts to arrive at explanations for the phenomena of nature.

One very common phenomenon in nature is the daily transition from day to night and night to day. This was conceived of in mythical terms as an eternal struggle between the forces of light and the forces of darkness: the forces of darkness, with unfailing regularity, stole away the Sun or its rays, leading to the onset of night. The forces of light, with equal regularity, rescued the Sun, or recovered its rays, leading to the onset of daytime.

The forces of light had a specific name: Devas (from div-, �light�). The forces of darkness, however, did not have such a clear-cut name, as darkness (being merely the absence of light) is a negative phenomenon. The action of stealing and hiding away the Sun or its rays was likened to that of the miserly traders and merchants who hoarded goods and money, hence the name PaNi, originally meaning trader or merchant, was applied to them.

In the course of time, a regular phenomenon of nature was converted into a single mythical incident: the incident involving SaramA and the PaNis.

The progressive development of the three main mythical entities in the SaramA-PaNi myth (ie. SaramA, the PaNis, and the cows) may be noted:

1. SaramA is progressively:

a. �the Dawn who recovers the rays of the Sun that have been carried away by night.�3

b. �the hound of Indra and mother of the two dogs called after their mother SArameyas who are the watchdogs of Yama the God of the Dead.�4

c. �the messenger of the Gods or of Indra.�5

2. The PaNis are progressively:

a. �in accordance with the original meaning of the word, merchants or traders.�6

b. �a class of envious demons watching over treasures.�7

c. �the fiends who steal cows and hide them in mountain caverns.�8

3. The cows are progressively:

a. �the rays of light carried off and concealed by the demons of darkness,�9 the PaNis.

b. �the rain-clouds carried off and kept concealed by the PaNis.�10

c. �the PaNi�s hoarded wealth, the cattle and the wealth in horses and in kine.�11

The myth starts off with the idea of the PaNis, the demons of darkness, stealing the rays of light and hiding them away at night, and SaramA, the Dawn, recovering them in the morning, as a matter of daily routine.

The original concept of the rays of light is still present in early hymns (VI.20.4; VII.9.2), but these rays of light are more regularly depicted as cows.

SaramA, who searches out and recovers the rays of the Sun is soon conceived of as a kind of hound, �the hound of Indra, who tracked the stolen cows�.12

A regular phenomenon gradually becomes a single incident: SaramA�s searching out and tracking of the cows stolen by the PaNis becomes a major incident in itself, and develops new angles. In some versions, the PaNis, merchants and boarders of wealth, now become the owners of the cows, and Indra becomes the covetous God who covets these cows. SaramA now becomes a messenger of Indra and the Gods in their quest for the cows of the PaNis. This is the myth represented in hymn X. 108.

The further development of this myth may be noted:

1. In X. 108, as D.D. Kosambi points out, �the hymn says nothing about stolen cattle, but is a direct, blunt demand for tribute in cattle, which the PaNis scornfully reject. They are then warned of dire consequences.�13

As we have seen, Macdonell notes that the PaNis �possess herds of cows which they keep hidden in a cave far beyond the RasA, a mythical river. SaramA, Indra�s messenger, tracks the cows and asks for them in Indra�s name, but is mocked by the PaNis.�14

The gist of the hymn is as follows:

a. SaramA makes her way over long paths and over the waters of the RasA and conveys to the PaNis Indra�s demand for their �ample stores of wealth�.

b. The PaNis refuse, and tauntingly offer to make Indra the herdsman of their cattle.

c. SaramA warns them of dire consequences if they refuse Indra�s demand.

d. The PaNis express their willingness to do battle with Indra. But they offer to accept SaramA as their sister if she will stay on with them and share their cattle and wealth.

e. SaramA, however, rejects the offer, and issues a final warning.

Here, the hymn ends; and the battle which follows, in which Indra defeats the PaNis, is to be assumed.

2. The myth is also found in the JaiminIya BrAhmaNa, II.440-442. Here, the cows are again clearly referred to as. the cows of the Gods stolen by the PaNis. This time, the Gods first send SuparNa, the eagle or the �Sun-bird�. However, the PaNis bribe him into silence, and he accepts their gifts and returns without any information. The enraged Gods strangle him, and he vomits out the curds, etc. received from the PaNis.

Then the Gods send SaramA. She crosses the RasA and approaches the PaNis. She is also offered bribes, but ( as in the Rigveda) she refuses their blandishments and returns to Indra with the information that the cows are hidden inside the RasA. She and her descendants are then blessed by a grateful Indra.

3. The myth is found, finally, in the BRhaddevatA, viii 24-36.

Here, the myth develops a curious twist. The same. sequence of events takes place, but this time SaramA accepts the bribe of the PaNis, and apparently transfers her loyalties to them. When she returns to Indra and refuses to disclose the hideout of the cows, Indra kicks her in a rage. She vomits out the milk received as a bribe, and then goes back trembling to the PaNis.

Thus, as the myth develops, we find a radical transformation in the relationship between SaramA and the PaNis. From being initially hostile to each other, the two are increasingly identified with each other, and the nature of the original myth is completely lost.

A side development in this whole myth is the development of the concept of the SArameyas, the sons of SaramA, as the hounds of Yama. They are a pair of four-eyed hounds who guard the pathway leading to the Realm of the Dead, and conduct the souls of the dead to their destination.

It will also be necessary to examine the characteristics of another Vedic God, PUSan, who represents one of the forms of the Sun. PUSan is one of the older deities in the Rigveda, being more prominent in MaNDala VI than in later MaNDalas (five of the eight hymns to PUsan in the Rigveda are in MaNDala VI), and many of his characteristics later devolve onto SaramA and the PaNis in Vedic as well as in other mythologies.

The main characteristics of PUSan are:

1. PUSan is basically an Aditya or Sun-God, and it is clear that he represents the Morning Sun: �according to SAyaNa, PUSan�s sister is USas or Dawn.�15 Moreover, in I.184.3, the ASvins are called PUSans; and the ASvins, as Griffith notes in his very first reference to them �are the earliest bringers of light in the morning sky who in their chariots hasten onward before the dawn, and prepare the way for her�.16

2. PUSan�s main function, however, is as the God of roadways, journeys and travellers: �As knower of paths, PUSan is conceived as a guardian of roads. He is besought to remove dangers, the wolf, the waylayer from the path (1.42.1-3)� He is invoked to protect from harm on his path (6.54.9) and to grant an auspicious path (10.59.7). He is the guardian of every path (6.49. and lord of the road (6.53.1). He is a guide on roads (VS.22.20). So, in the SUtras, whoever is starting on a journey makes an offering to PUSan, the road-maker, while reciting RV 6.53; and whoever loses his way turns to PUSan (AGS 3.7.8-9, SSS 3.4.9). Moreover in the morning and evening offerings to all gods and beings PUSan the road-maker receives his on the threshold of the house.�17

3. Another important function of PUSan is as the God who helps find lost objects, particularly lost animals, and especially lost cattle: �As knower of the ways, he can make hidden goods manifest and easy to find (6.48.15). He is in one passage (1.23.14-15; cp. TS 3.3.9.1) said to have found the king who was lost and hidden in secret� and asked to bring him like a lost beast. So, in the SUtras, PUSan is sacrificed to when anything lost is sought (AGS 3.7.9). Similarly, it is characteristic of PUSan that he follows and protects cattle (6.54. 5,6,10; 58.2; cp. 10.26.3)� and drives back the lost.�18 Moreover, �PUSan is the only god who receives the epithet paSupA �protector of cattle� (6.58.2) directly (and not in comparison).�19

Hymn VIII.29, which refers (in riddle form) to the particular characteristics of various Gods, refers to PUSan, in its sixth verse, as follows: �Another, thief like, watches well the ways, and knows the places where the treasures lie.�

4. A very distinctive characteristic of PUSan is his close association with the goat: �His car is drawn by goats (ajASva) instead of horses.�20 This feature is emphasised throughout the
Rigveda: I.138.4; 162.2-4; VI. 55.3,4,6; 57.3; 58.2; IX.67.10; X. 26.8; etc.

5. Another very important function of PUSan is that �he conducts the dead on the far path to the Fathers�� and leads his worshippers thither in safety, showing them the way (10.17.3-5). The AV also speaks of PUSan as conducting to the world of the righteous, the beautiful world of the gods (AV 16.9.2; 18.2.53). So PUSan�s goat conducts the sacrificial horse (1.162.2-3).�21

In post-Vedic Indian mythology, all these entities more or less faded away: neither SaramA nor the PaNis nor PUSan have any important role to play in Puranic mythology.

However, the word PaNi and its variant form VaNi (found only twice in the Rigveda: I.112.11; V.45.6) persisted into later times and provided the etymological roots for a very wide range of words pertaining to trade, commerce and economics, and business activities: paN, �to barter, purchase, buy, risk�; ApaNa, �market, shop�; ApaNika, �mercantile�; paNa, �a coin vANI/baniA, �trader�; vANijya, �commerce�, etc.

Link

So, it seems this is based on Rig Vedha, 10th Mandala and 108th Manthra.

So, I am posting the 107th, 108th and 109th Manthras of 10th Mandala of Rig Vedha(without accents):

आविरभून्महि माघोनमेषां विश्वं जीवं तमसो निरमोचि।

महि ज्योतिः पितृभिर्दत्तमागादुरुः पन्था दक्षिणाया अदर्शि॥ १०.१०७.०१

उच्चा दिवि दक्षिणावन्तो अस्थुर्ये अश्वदाः सह ते सूर्येण।

हिरण्यदा अमृतत्वं भजन्ते वासोदाः सोम प्र तिरन्त आयुः॥ १०.१०७.०२

दैवी पूर्तिर्दक्षिणा देवयज्या न कवारिभ्यो नहि ते पृणन्ति।

अथा नरः प्रयतदक्षिणासोऽवद्यभिया बहवः पृणन्ति॥ १०.१०७.०३

शतधारं वायुमर्कं स्वर्विदं नृचक्षसस्ते अभि चक्षते हविः।

ये पृणन्ति प्र च यच्छन्ति संगमे ते दक्षिणां दुहते सप्तमातरम्॥ १०.१०७.०४

दक्षिणावान्प्रथमो हूत एति दक्षिणावान्ग्रामणीरग्रमेति।

तमेव मन्ये नृपतिं जनानां यः प्रथमो दक्षिणामाविवाय॥ १०.१०७.०५

तमेव ऋषिं तमु ब्रह्माणमाहुर्यज्ञन्यं सामगामुक्थशासम्।

स शुक्रस्य तन्वो वेद तिस्रो यः प्रथमो दक्षिणया रराध॥ १०.१०७.०६

दक्षिणाश्वं दक्षिणा गां ददाति दक्षिणा चन्द्रमुत यद्धिरण्यम्।

दक्षिणान्नं वनुते यो न आत्मा दक्षिणां वर्म कृणुते विजानन्॥ १०.१०७.०७

न भोजा मम्रुर्न न्यर्थमीयुर्न रिष्यन्ति न व्यथन्ते ह भोजाः।

इदं यद्विश्वं भुवनं स्वश्चैतत्सर्वं दक्षिणैभ्यो ददाति॥ १०.१०७.०८

भोजा जिग्युः सुरभिं योनिमग्रे भोजा जिग्युर्वध्वं या सुवासाः।

भोजा जिग्युरन्तःपेयं सुराया भोजा जिग्युर्ये अहूताः प्रयन्ति॥ १०.१०७.०९

भोजायाश्वं सं मृजन्त्याशुं भोजायास्ते कन्या शुम्भमाना।

भोजस्येदं पुष्करिणीव वेश्म परिष्कृतं देवमानेव चित्रम्॥ १०.१०७.१०

भोजमश्वाः सुष्ठुवाहो वहन्ति सुवृद्रथो वर्तते दक्षिणायाः।

भोजं देवासोऽवता भरेषु भोजः शत्रून्समनीकेषु जेता॥ १०.१०७.११


किमिच्छन्ती सरमा प्रेदमानड्दूरे ह्यध्वा जगुरिः पराचैः।

कास्मेहितिः का परितक्म्यासीत्कथं रसाया अतरः पयांसि॥ १०.१०८.०१

इन्द्रस्य दूतीरिषिता चरामि मह इच्छन्ती पणयो निधीन्वः।

अतिष्कदो भियसा तन्न आवत्तथा रसाया अतरं पयांसि॥ १०.१०८.०२

कीदृङ्ङिन्द्रः सरमे का दृशीका यस्येदं दूतीरसरः पराकात्।

आ च गच्छान्मित्रमेना दधामाथा गवां गोपतिर्नो भवाति॥ १०.१०८.०३

नाहं तं वेद दभ्यं दभत्स यस्येदं दूतीरसरं पराकात्।

न तं गूहन्ति स्रवतो गभीरा हता इन्द्रेण पणयः शयध्वे॥ १०.१०८.०४

इमा गावः सरमे या ऐच्छः परि दिवो अन्तान्सुभगे पतन्ती।

कस्त एना अव सृजादयुध्व्युतास्माकमायुधा सन्ति तिग्मा॥ १०.१०८.०५

असेन्या वः पणयो वचांस्यनिषव्यास्तन्वः सन्तु पापीः।

अधृष्टो व एतवा अस्तु पन्था बृहस्पतिर्व उभया न मृळात्॥ १०.१०८.०६

अयं निधिः सरमे अद्रिबुध्नो गोभिरश्वेभिर्वसुभिर्न्यृष्टः।

रक्षन्ति तं पणयो ये सुगोपा रेकु पदमलकमा जगन्थ॥ १०.१०८.०७

एह गमन्नृषयः सोमशिता अयास्यो अङ्गिरसो नवग्वाः।

त एतमूर्वं वि भजन्त गोनामथैतद्वचः पणयो वमन्नित्॥ १०.१०८.०८

एवा च त्वं सरम आजगन्थ प्रबाधिता सहसा दैव्येन।

स्वसारं त्वा कृणवै मा पुनर्गा अप ते गवां सुभगे भजाम॥ १०.१०८.०९

नाहं वेद भ्रातृत्वं नो स्वसृत्वमिन्द्रो विदुरङ्गिरसश्च घोराः।

गोकामा मे अच्छदयन्यदायमपात इत पणयो वरीयः॥ १०.१०८.१०

दूरमित पणयो वरीय उद्गावो यन्तु मिनतीरृतेन।

बृहस्पतिर्या अविन्दन्निगूळ्हाः सोमो ग्रावाण ऋषयश्च विप्राः॥ १०.१०८.११


तेऽवदन्प्रथमा ब्रह्मकिल्बिषेऽकूपारः सलिलो मातरिश्वा।

वीळुहरास्तप उग्रो मयोभूरापो देवीः प्रथमजा ऋतेन॥ १०.१०९.०१

सोमो राजा प्रथमो ब्रह्मजायां पुनः प्रायच्छदहृणीयमानः।

अन्वर्तिता वरुणो मित्र आसीदग्निर्होता हस्तगृह्या निनाय॥ १०.१०९.०२

हस्तेनैव ग्राह्य आधिरस्या ब्रह्मजायेयमिति चेदवोचन्।

न दूताय प्रह्ये तस्थ एषा तथा राष्ट्रं गुपितं क्षत्रियस्य॥ १०.१०९.०३

देवा एतस्यामवदन्त पूर्वे सप्तऋषयस्तपसे ये निषेदुः।

भीमा जाया ब्राह्मणस्योपनीता दुर्धां दधाति परमे व्योमन्॥ १०.१०९.०४

ब्रह्मचारी चरति वेविषद्विषः स देवानां भवत्येकमङ्गम्।

तेन जायामन्वविन्दद्बृहस्पतिः सोमेन नीतां जुह्वं न देवाः॥ १०.१०९.०५

पुनर्वै देवा अददुः पुनर्मनुष्या उत।

राजानः सत्यं कृण्वाना ब्रह्मजायां पुनर्ददुः॥ १०.१०९.०६

पुनर्दाय ब्रह्मजायां कृत्वी देवैर्निकिल्बिषम्।

ऊर्जं पृथिव्या भक्त्वायोरुगायमुपासते॥ १०.१०९.०७

Link

So, clearly the Vedhas talk about rays symbolized by cows. Yet, these so-called experts say that its a myth and then to hide their own nonsense say, 'the myth later progressively turns cows into rays'. Wow!

The silliness of these theories is really mindboggling. Why do they start with the prejudice that the Vedhic manthras must be primitive? If the Manthras are talking about rays(long before these westerners even had any idea that rays could exist), then doesn't it mean that perhaps those Manthras are quite advanced? Maybe the cows are an allegory for rays?

Anyway,
the word used for cows is 'go'. The word 'go' represents any object that has the property of 'moving'. I think the english word 'go' also has its origin in this Vaidhik word 'go'. So, any object that moves is called 'go'. Generally, several objects were called 'go' by the ancients. In Vedhas, many objects are referred as 'go'. They are cows, earth, and rays.

This means that cows, earth and rays have the property of 'moving'. So, when Manthras talk about 'go', then could be referring to cows, or earth or rays. Now, the colonials and commies come up with the interpretation that makes the Vedhas sound like a primitive tribal history. One could easily replace the words with their better synonyms(and better fitted to context) to give more advanced interpretations.

BTW, the earth having the name 'go' is very interesting. Because, if the earth was considered as having a property of moving, then perhaps they thought that the earth was not a stationary object but rather moving object.

[UlanBatori]

This means that cows, earth and rays have the property of 'moving'. So, when Manthras talk about 'go', then could be referring to cows, or earth or rays.

Aha! There u go, the Out Of India Theory is proven. The nursery rhyme that goes

The cow jumped over the Moon

was clearly developed from the Vedas! (JUST KIDDING! Pls don't set the Blasphemy Adalat on me!)

Seriously, Archaeology and Paleontology, like most fields of science, must form grand hypotheses as Models. As new facts/artifacts are unearthed, the scientist tries to fit them and their implications, into their existing Models and hypotheses. So it is true, but also natural, that the process looks like making a silk purse out of a sow's ear, or imagining a whole costume from finding one button.

This is very relevant to this thread, because the whole issue is the stubborn insistence on Models and Hypotheses that were developed while ignoring the blindingly obvious reality in the Indian subcontinent and East Asia. That
(a) the center of civilization was not in some arid place far from the sea, in the middle of a flat plain, with annual extremes of temperature. It was clearly in the vast fertile, diverse, warm and moderate-climate regions closer to the Equator. The hills and valleys with plenty of rain. Eastern India, the west coast, south India, and maybe some parts of the Deccan Plateau. Plus the foothills of the Himalayas. Plus East Asia.
(b) So the spread of civilization was obviously eastwards and northwards (China) and THEN westwards and into Iran, Babylonia. Maybe there were centers also in Africa and Central America.
(c) Machine technology was not essential to advanced civilization in such places. They looked increasingly inwards, not out to conquer and devastate ever more lands. They did not seek to destroy Nature.

Archaeology and Paleontology can only go so far in "proving" these because the evidence has been overwritten through thousands of generations. But.. yes, the evidence is there. It is coming up increasingly as technology and smarts improve.

Now the timelines have all been pushed back enormously. I saw the claim that Ukraine has been inhabited for over 40,000 years, Crimea was a center of civilization, Lucy the African woman existed some million years ago (?), there were even older traces of civilization (as in sharpened bones) in Australia, and in the Americas. But none of them had a vast, consistent knowledge base, at least any that have survived.

[shiv]

Anyway,
the word used for cows is 'go'. The word 'go' represents any object that has the property of 'moving'. I think the english word 'go' also has its origin in this Vaidhik word 'go'. So, any object that moves is called 'go'. Generally, several objects were called 'go' by the ancients. In Vedhas, many objects are referred as 'go'. They are cows, earth, and rays.

This means that cows, earth and rays have the property of 'moving'. So, when Manthras talk about 'go', then could be referring to cows, or earth or rays. Now, the colonials and commies come up with the interpretation that makes the Vedhas sound like a primitive tribal history. One could easily replace the words with their better synonyms(and better fitted to context) to give more advanced interpretations.

Here is what Aurobindo says: (The Secret of the Vedas)

A study of the Vedic horse led me to the conclusion that go and asva represent the two companion ideas of Light and Energy, Consciousness and Force, which to the Vedic and Vedantic mind were the double or twin aspect of all the activities of existence.

[Anand K]

There was authoritative condemnation of writing to be used in study of Shruti - by Panini and even in Mahabharat where writing it down condemns you to hell apparently(?). Al Beruni or Firishta also mentions that "these guys have a problem with writing down the original holy book". Even long after certain early medieval and ancient attempts Sayana himself strongly advocates against reading from written versions of the Vedic text while studying the Veda as Svadhyaya - as in actual rituals and sacrifices and invocations. Sayana's method of hermeneutics is rather a straight line from Yaska's Nirvachana and Jaimini (Madhava's work on Jaimini) - as Sayana himself says. BTW, the so-called Sayana "enterprise" was and is a big topic in Indology - seen at par with a Council of Nicaea for "new directions", if you will. Fraught with debate too.

By the way, the written versions must have been at hand and consulted when needed during other occasions and other types of reading. We do not have explicit prohibition of japa-type recitation being done with the help of written texts, right? So, what holds true with reference to the Shruti-as-svadhyaya itself does not apply when presented with a Bhashya or a Bhumika to it or commentaries on Bhashyas. Designed as scholarly works, the Bhashyas must have been composed in writing and meant to be copied and circulated in order to be read and listened to (as in a Vyakhyana, i.e. a Bhashya with a quite specific purpose) - and also to make a point with the various schools of thought, which are sometimes out of control of the new Empire - perhaps to give new direction to dying schools and bring in confused Buddhist/Jain remnants. There is some thought on how Sayana Vyakhyana became a Sayana Bhashya after the literature became predominant. Anyway, Sayana was no priest or sage, he was Madhava's brother, a polymath, householder and an imperial minister.

The Sayana Vyakhyana is an attempt, and perhaps an inconclusive one at the end of the day as he admits, to bridge the gap between the oral realm of Vedic shruti and rituals on one hand, and the written realm of the intellectual discourse. It is also attempt at re-investigating and rationalization of the "Veda Rahasya". If not the upper knowledge of Para Vidya, at least Apara Vidya - and hence the focus on ritualism, deconstruction and rationalization. The reconstruction-rationalization entails bringing the textual communities of the Veda under the influence of authoritative scholarly exposition (like Sri Harvardmatha Wietzelacharyas do now), in line with the dominant ideology of Madhava and his masters, who take from Jaimini mainly. To bridge the realms, it takes a deconstruction and reorganization of the Vedas through primarily Mimansa. Sayana says since Upadesa method to augment understanding Shruti died out along with the great Rishis who could actually perceive the true meanings an the Para Vidya, you had to take Nirvacana, Vyakarana and Mimansa to make sense of it all in this age.
Remember this was when Turks and Afghans ravaged even South India and maybe they were looking inward at what is going wrong and aren't we doing things right anymore. The new political realities were also perhaps influential - Sayana enterprise was commissioned by Bukka I and blessed by Sringeri Matha. (PS: On that note, some have commented on why Islam, Buddhism, Jainism and even 1st wave Bhakti does not feature explicitly or appear to influence "new thoughts" of the enterprise at all.)

To conclude, if some lazy ass Goras copped out by overly relying on a largely Earth-bound Vyakhyana/Bhashya project, without doing the whole Vedic study drill themselves, and blindly linking it to other Orientalist Comparative Mythology (like Smith's concurrent project with the Enuma Elish or other West Asian creation myths for instance), then it's their problem. A wrong assumption at Level 0 itself - this is AFAIK the message people like Aurobindo and other Indologists give. Perhaps a fresh look is necessary - and that will an enterprise like Sayana's 700 years ago.

[Manish_Sharma]

Now the timelines have all been pushed back enormously. I saw the claim that Ukraine has been inhabited for over 40,000 years, Crimea was a center of civilization, Lucy the African woman existed some million years ago (?), there were even older traces of civilization (as in sharpened bones) in Australia, and in the Americas. But none of them had a vast, consistent knowledge base, at least any that have survived.

Osho has quoted Bal Gangadhar Tilak providing a constellation of stars which had occured 90,000 years ago in Rig Ved, at the same place in Rig Ved sages write about greatness of Adinath the first Tirthankar of jainas.

Due to 90,000 year old constellation mentioned Tilak believed Rig Ved to be as old as that.

I haven't been able to find that book of Bal Gangadhar Tilak.

[svenkat]

AnandKji,
Thank you for that very erudite post .Two questions for you.
1)Are not all veda commentaries called veda bhashyas-as the Sayana bhashya,bhashyas of Venkata Madhava,Bhatta Bhaskara,Skanda Madhava etc.
2)I dont see any parallel between the Council of Nicea which defined christian religion and the work of Sayana which was about scholarship and collation and little do with vedanta siddhanta.Sayana did not set to define or promulgate dharma or siddhanta.Nor was that the outcome of his effort.

[shiv]

Osho has quoted Bal Gangadhar Tilak providing a constellation of stars which had occured 90,000 years ago in Rig Ved, at the same place in Rig Ved sages write about greatness of Adinath the first Tirthankar of jainas.

Due to 90,000 year old constellation mentioned Tilak believed Rig Ved to be as old as that.

I haven't been able to find that book of Bal Gangadhar Tilak.

As far as my knowledge goes Tilak (and another German, later) discovered a ref to an event around 4000 BC.
Tilak's book on the Veda is linked below - note that he agrees with AIT because that was in fashion in his day.

https://archive.org/details/orionortheantiqu021979mbp

[Anand K]

1)Are not all veda commentaries called veda bhashyas-as the Sayana bhashya,bhashyas of Venkata Madhava,Bhatta Bhaskara,Skanda Madhava etc.
2)I dont see any parallel between the Council of Nicea which defined christian religion and the work of Sayana which was about scholarship and collation and little do with vedanta siddhanta.Sayana did not set to define or promulgate dharma or siddhanta.Nor was that the outcome of his effort.

Quick reply to Point 2 for now, point 1 is finer.

In Nicaea they actually voted Jesus to Godhood and cast Heiros Gamos, ritual sp3rm consumption, the Apostle Mary Madgelene, Black Jesus etc etc into Apocryphas/Asampradayas or plain heresies deserving a nice human bonfire. In another council they made Mary a Virgin freeing her of sin - the Immaculate Conception. A friend of mine said that the charitable view on all this is that at that time there was a lot of "fan-fiction" on Jesus and the majority Pir-Reviewed views became Canon. Councils like these recast role of old Pontifex Maximus into a more powerful Pope, who gives authority to the King's rule, defined where aam admi fits in and all that.
There's a running theme, disputed highly though, that Vijayanagar was a Hindu Reconquista trying to dominate all aspects of the highly diverse Southern India for the larger vision. Sayana's enterprise was project led by a Vatican of sorts in Sringeri, giving previously unseen Divine Status, formalize structures which makes the Royalty, Priesthood and Feudals get higher control and all that. Sayana was aided by his brother and a number of scholars, but he was he guiding hand. Anyway, in this POV the Sayana enterprise was to "linearize" (for want of a better word) the Word and the Praxis AND arrive at a common theological consensus on the socio-religious structure of the new state. Perhaps the perception was that the confusion on the nature of knowledge and resulting mistakes have led to the predicament where Mlecchas, Asampradayas and Buddhism/Jainism have ascendancy. So, there has to be reorganization and deconstruction of the Gyaan.
This aim, if it was indeed the aim of Sayana and his backers, is criticized by many as a reach for the low hanging fruit Para Vidya and not the Apara Vidya, which is the true Veda Rahasya. Sayana himself IIRC admits he is not "Paramahamsa" nor an ascetic of caliber of his brother Madhava or Vidyarana. But he believes he is using the (available but more "secular") work of Yaska, Jaimini etc and so his theories were not without merit or precedence. This was the last, biggest and most consolidated enterprise (a forerunner to institutionalizing Hinduism) and there actually exists evidence of large scale permeation of the new views to various schools and temples all across India. The political aim might not have been realized due to fall of Vijayanagar, but Sayana's works soon found wide dissipation due to sheer scale of the enterprise and volume. No wonder Max Muller and Griffith jumped to Sayana - it was everywhere and a lot of it(and there were 18 works and numerous works referencing Sayana as an authority).

OTOH, a lot of threads were indeed lost from the original Upadesas so this might have been an honest attempt to salvage the truths. No imperial-shimperial stuff, but a honest-to-god attempt to understand the texts, chart a path and formalize rituals and finally arrive at higher understanding. There is a structure followed with Bhashyas, such as Bhumika (introduction), Vistara (Auto Commentary) etc and where these are provided, Sayana apparently says that he pretty much wants to - " make sense of the whole thing with those tools we have at our disposal, since Seer-Reviewed Upadesa is lost". (Yeah, it implies even Vidyarana and Madhava could not show the ultimate truths). The Bhumikas also outline hierarchy of goals and procedures which makes Sayana close to the ritualist schools which claim correct Vedic praxis (Srauta rituals) WILL lead to Dharmajnana - and that this HAS to be achieved before one can understand Veda Rahasya. Perhaps this ritualism heavy thought "sealed" Vedic analysis and channeled it in certain limiting ways as Aurobindo charges? Perhaps this has defined or institutionalized the core tenets of Hinduism to many eyes, especially foreign? I mean, Sayana's is the dominating view at least in Indology, right? That is, it became an inadvertent Nicaea of sorts indeed?

[KLP Dubey]

Anyway,
the word used for cows is 'go'. The word 'go' represents any object that has the property of 'moving'. I think the english word 'go' also has its origin in this Vaidhik word 'go'. So, any object that moves is called 'go'. Generally, several objects were called 'go' by the ancients. In Vedhas, many objects are referred as 'go'. They are cows, earth, and rays.

This means that cows, earth and rays have the property of 'moving'. So, when Manthras talk about 'go', then could be referring to cows, or earth or rays. Now, the colonials and commies come up with the interpretation that makes the Vedhas sound like a primitive tribal history. One could easily replace the words with their better synonyms(and better fitted to context) to give more advanced interpretations.

Here is what Aurobindo says: (The Secret of the Vedas)

A study of the Vedic horse led me to the conclusion that go and asva represent the two companion ideas of Light and Energy, Consciousness and Force, which to the Vedic and Vedantic mind were the double or twin aspect of all the activities of existence.

You two are getting back to the real issues here. As I have said before, a new effort to "understand" the Veda would be most welcome. But it cannot follow the same tired old approaches taken earlier, i.e. someone with a lot of spare time sitting at home with a text in hand and trying to come up with interpretations. I have already suggested methods for coming up with a set of consistent meanings for the roots in Veda. This would be a large project.

BTW, for those interested in "scientific" interpretations of Veda, there is a work that describes a full-blown "modern physics" framework in Rgveda.

http://www.amazon.com/Vedic-Physics-Sci ... 0968412009

You may or may not agree with the author's views, but the book is well worth reading.

[shiv]

Sri Aurobindo writes in an erudite and very humorous fashion to illustrate the ridiculous "translations" of the Rig Veda and brings rationality and consistency to the symbolic meanings of words - some of which have double meanings - one for the layman who hears a poem and the other for the initiated seeker of the absolute.

Here are a few of the many amusing passages:

the wealth of cows (and horses) for which the Rishis constantly pray can be no other than a wealth of this same Light; for it is impossible to suppose that the cows which Usha is said to give in the seventh verse of the hymn are different from the cows which are prayed for in the eighth, — that the word in the former verse means light and in the next physical cows and that the Rishi has forgotten the image he was using the very moment it has fallen from his tongue.

If we assume that the Vedic hymns were composed in India and the dawn is the Indian dawn and the night the brief Indian night of ten or twelve hours, we have to start with the concession that the Vedic Rishis were savages overpowered by a terror of the darkness which they peopled with goblins, ignorant of the natural law of the succession of night and day — which is yet beautifully hymned in many of the Suktas, — and believed that
it was only by their prayers and sacrifices that the Sun rose in the heavens and the Dawn emerged from the embrace of her sister Night. Yet they speak of the undeviating rule of the action of the Gods, and of Dawn following always the path of the eternal Law or Truth! We have to suppose that when the Rishi gives vent to the joyous cry “We have crossed over to the other shore of this darkness!”, it was only the normal awakening to the daily sunrise that he thus eagerly hymned. We have to suppose that the Vedic peoples sat down to the sacrifice at dawn and prayed for the light when it had already come. And if we accept all these improbabilities, we are met by the clear statement that it was only after they had sat for nine or for ten months that the lost light and the lost sun were recovered by the Angiras Rishis.

For instance in I.4.2 it is said of Indra, the maker of perfect forms who is as a good milker in the milking of the cows, that his ecstasy of the Soma-Wine is verily “cow-giving”, godaid revato madah. It is the height of absurdity and irrationality to understand by this phrase that Indra is a very wealthy god and, when he gets drunk, exceedingly liberal in the matter of cow-giving. It is obvious that as the cow-milking in the first verse is a figure, so the cow-giving in the second verse is a figure. And if we know from other passages of the Veda that the Cow is the symbol of Light, we must understand here also .. (that it means light)

And what are we to make of the constant assertion of the discovery of the Light by the Fathers; — “Our fathers found out the hidden light, by the truth in their thoughts they brought to birth the Dawn,” gudham ̄ jyotih . pitaro anvavindan, satyamantra ̄ ajanayan usasam . ̄ (VII.76.4). If we found such a verse in any collection of poems in any literature, we would at once give it a psychological or a spiritual sense; there is no just reason for a different treatment of the Veda.

[member_22872]

In case we missed:
Rakhigarhi, the biggest Harappan site

Dr. Shinde, a specialist in Harappan civilisation and Director of the current excavation at Rakhigarhi, called it “an important discovery.” He said: “Our discovery makes Rakhigarhi the biggest Harappan site, bigger than Mohenjo-daro.

Dr. Shinde said: “It was earlier thought that the origin of the early Harappan phase took place in Sind, in present-day Pakistan, because many sites had not been discovered then. In the last ten years, we have discovered many sites in this part [Haryana] and there are at least five Harappan sites such as Kunal, Bhirrana, Farmana, Girawad and Mitathal, which are producing early dates and where the early Harappan phase could go back to 5000 BCE. We want to confirm it. Rakhigarhi is an ideal candidate to believe that the beginning of the Harappan civilisation took place in the Ghaggar basin in Haryana and it gradually grew from here. If we get the confirmation, it will be interesting because the origin would have taken place in the Ghaggar basin in India and slowly moved to the Indus valley. That is one of the important aims of our current excavation at Rakhigarhi.”

[ShauryaT]

^^Is there any confirmed finding that pre-dates Mehrgarh in the sub continent?

[UlanBatori]

It was earlier thought that the origin of the early Harappan phase took place in Sind, in present-day Pakistan, because many sites had not been discovered then. In the last ten years, we have discovered many sites in this part [Haryana] and there are at least five Harappan sites

Sounds like the Research Project that set out to prove that Water is the Cause of Intoxication

Earlier we thought that it was Water+ Beer, but now v r finding Water+Brandy, Water +Rum, and even Water+Whisky...

They still call it "Harappan" civilijashun. When they have moved another 600 miles to the east, what will they call it? Maybe they should try digging UNDER the buried temple site at Ayodhya and see what was there before that temple.

[kish]

Indus sites in Oman!! Oman is roughly ~1300 miles to the "west" of main Indus sites in Haryana.

Excavation in Oman finds link to Indus Valley civilisation

Archaeologists in Oman's southern Sinaw region have discovered a site that could reveal Indus Valley civilisation's influence on the Omani society 2,300 years ago, officials said.

The tomb of a buried man with sword and daggers made of iron and steel was unearthed during an excavation and it has been scientifically proved that iron and steel arms were made in the Indus Valley civilisation first time ever, said Sultan Bensaif Al Bakri, director of Excavations and Archaeological Studies of the Ministry of Heritage and Culture Oman.

This finding may prove the influence of the Indian civilisation on Oman during that period, he was quoted as saying by the Times of Oman.

A 2,300-year-old underground chamber was found during rescue excavations 22km south of Sinaw.

This was the burial chamber of the man in his 50's, buried along with his personal arms. Near his grave, two male and female camels were also buried. They were slaughtered after the death of the man, he said.

According to the descriptions provided by the archaeologists, the sword and daggers were made of iron and steel which was first made in the Indian civilisation from where it spread to the neighbouring civilisations, including Oman, he said.

The ministry will restore these arms and will display these models in the proposed national museum scheduled to open at the end of this year, he said.

[Nilesh Oak]

Osho has quoted Bal Gangadhar Tilak providing a constellation of stars which had occured 90,000 years ago in Rig Ved, at the same place in Rig Ved sages write about greatness of Adinath the first Tirthankar of jainas.

Due to 90,000 year old constellation mentioned Tilak believed Rig Ved to be as old as that.

I haven't been able to find that book of Bal Gangadhar Tilak.

As far as my knowledge goes Tilak (and another German, later) discovered a ref to an event around 4000 BC.
Tilak's book on the Veda is linked below - note that he agrees with AIT because that was in fashion in his day.

https://archive.org/details/orionortheantiqu021979mbp

In 'Orion',BG Tilak made case for 3000-4000 BCE old Veda. In his other book- 'Arctic home in the Vedas' he alluded to even older timing.. ~6000 BCE, which comes to about ~8000 years ago.

I guess Rajnish added his own 1000 and then one more ZERO at the end to turn it into 90,000.

Not a rare example and illustration of carelessness, which many lap it up with gusto.

[RoyG]

Hopefully we can find clues on how to decipher the indus script and unlock the secrets of our past.

[ShauryaT]

In 'Orion',BG Tilak made case for 3000-4000 BCE old Veda. In his other book- 'Arctic home in the Vedas' he alluded to even older timing.. ~6000 BCE, which comes to about ~8000 years ago.

I guess Rajnish added his own 1000 and then one more ZERO at the end to turn it into 90,000.

Not a rare example and illustration of carelessness, which many lap it up with gusto.

David Frawley makes some astrological based assertions, dating "some" of the verses to be 8000 BC time frame.

[Nilesh Oak]

In 'Orion',BG Tilak made case for 3000-4000 BCE old Veda. In his other book- 'Arctic home in the Vedas' he alluded to even older timing.. ~6000 BCE, which comes to about ~8000 years ago.

I guess Rajnish added his own 1000 and then one more ZERO at the end to turn it into 90,000.

Not a rare example and illustration of carelessness, which many lap it up with gusto.

David Frawley makes some astrological based assertions, dating "some" of the verses to be 8000 BC time frame.

Not sure what specific references David Frawly is using....

Taittiriya Samhita references do take us back to ~9000 BCE. Some interesting references from it also point to both upper and lower bounds on this timing (i.e. 9000 BCE +/-4000 years).

I will write one day about them, but for now busy with 'Bhishma Nirvana' (20+ astronomy and chronology observations from Mahabharata text, related to Bhishma Nirvana) - clearly showing impossibility of Mahabharata War anytime after 4000 BCE.

I made this point with all specific references in my book on 'Mahabharata War', but the importance of this was somehow lost on the readers. Hence the project.
-------
Also working on 'Kumbhakarna' - A rational Biography (or.. A Critical Study)...working title for now... that illustrates very interesting case study from India.. about 14000 years before our time.

One baby step at a time...

[UlanBatori]

Shri Oak: Glad to see your posts here. What is your observation on the technologies referred in the battle of Kurukshetra? In other words, what happened to the technologies?

Please understand that I am just collecting explanations, offering no judgement at all.

Also, what happened in the vast intervals after those times down to the beginning of "recorded history"?

[shiv]

Frawley has an entire chapter on ancient astronomical refs in the Rig Veda - but here is a photo of the last 2 ages summarizing his views

[Nilesh Oak]

Shri Oak: Glad to see your posts here. What is your observation on the technologies referred in the battle of Kurukshetra? In other words, what happened to the technologies?

Please understand that I am just collecting explanations, offering no judgement at all.

Also, what happened in the vast intervals after those times down to the beginning of "recorded history"?

No idea what happened to the technologies referred to in the battle. What I will state is that repeated readings of Mahabharata text (and War scenes - in the context of your comment) allows one to realize that while interesting technologies did exist, our impression of it is too dramatized.. mostly driven by TV episodes, movies and Puranik (religious story tellers) and also exaggerated commentaries.

Even then, technologies described as is are still impressive indeed.

From Mahabharata War (5561 BCE) through our time.. many gaps can be (and are being filled). the interval between Ramayana (12240 BCE) and Mahabharata (5561 BCE) does have vacuum of 'recorded history', but even on that front.. it is not totally empty.

I am confident that we will certainly know lot more than we know today in next 50 years. At least, that remains my hope.

What we need is rational criticism (brutal and detailed) of existing research. IMHO, that is the way to make progress in filling the blanks....

[Nilesh Oak]

Shiv ji,

With all due respect to Shri Vamdev Shastri (David Frawly), and while he may have (and only may) right intentions, I find his language frustrating.

E.g. two pages you have produced --- the language is weak, non-confident, apologetic, wishy-washy, and there is no original research of his.. None!. In fact he is indirectly referring to work of B G Tilak and likes, without explicitly acknowledging them+ frankly making a mess out of entire timeline with his baseless speculations (proto-Rig Vedic and later-Rig Vedic)

Only my Rs. 0.02

[Pulikeshi]

Yes Pulikeshi - but anyone who listens to a CD of the Rig Veda being chanted and tries to folow it on written text will not find the initial invocation of Ganesha in the transcribed text. Since the Rig Veda is older than Ganesha - it is interesting that the Rig Veda chanting is preceded by an invocation that must have been composed at a much later date. I have no idea by whom and when.

Saar,

You are falling into honey trap - there is no age for Rig Veda onlee. All attempts at chronology are futile.
That which is Sanathana must be Sanathana
The invocation to Ganesha is but just that... it does not change the substratum of Rta that holds all.

Even if one were to argue that we could understand and interpret the Vedic corpus - you will have to concede that even the most pusillanimous translation leads one to believe that the Vedas (Rig even) was composed in a state of advanced civilization - fortified cities, trade and commerce, cattle and horses, fire heaths, etc. My traditionalists (chaiwalas are in fashion) always corrects me that the very word Arya itself meant Cultivator (Arathi) or Trader - not a Brahmin nor a Kshatriya as some may imagine. This means a continuum of culture existed prior to the transmitters (Rishi - Sages) receiving the said transmissions and making it part of the oral tradition.

If one were to take the translations at its word - the Nasadiya Sukta:

the Gods themselves are later than creation,
so who knows truly whence it has arisen?

Here even creation follows the ex nihilo nihilo fit principle in that "The one" existed before creation, or did he not?
The Vedas existed even prior to this event - whether it was perceived or not by any other.

In seriousness the traditional approach (unlike the Wastern quacks) has been along the lines of Adhiyagna, Adhidaiva & Adhyatma - in this Sayana takes the first, Saunaka the second and Yaksha the last approach. In the traditional understanding there are three other principal factors - Rishi, Chandas and Devata - this is more apparent in the Yajur which is ritualistically oriented. The Rishi here is not the author in the traditional sense but - rshati prapnoti sarvan mantran - they "visualize" the mystical speech incomprehensible to ordinary senses and cloth the vision in words of significance... (Aitareya Brahamana - tad etad rishi pasyan aby anuvacha) - therefore to claim authorship of any that is Sanatana (eternal) is incorrect and inexcusable. If authorship is establish then the Vedas are no longer Sanathana, ipso facto - they cannot be the foundation of Rta the very order of the Universe.

Instead of reading the works of quacks in English and falling into "Honey" traps - what would help is if funding was pulled together to help translate and present this traditionalist approach in an accessible manner. If anyone is aware of such an approach and a corresponding triad approach to the Veda please let me know. That this cannot be presented in a simple fashion to an age afflicted by ADHD is an opportunity as opposed to a challenge.

[ShauryaT]

^^ Here is a list "approved" by the Arya Samajis.

Translation of the Vedas:-
According to Nirukta (Grammer book for the Vedas), each mantra of the Vedas has three meanings: 'AdyiYagyik', 'AdyiDaivik' and 'Adhyatmik'. To interpret the correct and true meaning of the Vedas, not only one would need expert command of the (Vedic) Sanskrit Language but would also acquire the 'Yogic' state.
According to Pandit Bhagvaddatt, starting from the times of Skand Swami (in 630 AD) to Maharshi Dayanand (in 1886 AD), the following people have authored transalations on Rig Veda:-

Skand Swami
Narayan
Udgeeth
Hastamalak
Venkat Madhav
Bhatt Govind
Laksman
Dhanuska Yajva
Anand Tirth (Madhavacharya)
Atmaanand
Saayan
Raavan
Mudgal
Chaturved Swami
Bharat Swami
Varadraaj
DevSwami
Bhatt Bhaskar
Uvvat
Hardatt
Sudarshan Suri
Maharshi Dayanand Sarasvati

Finding a good English translation of these works is a challenge. For those who can read Hindi are in better luck.

[vishvak]

"Indus sites in Oman!! Oman is roughly ~1300 miles to the "west" of main Indus sites in Haryana.

Excavation in Oman finds link to Indus Valley civilisation"

It is perhaps time to question narrative of history and weird theories. People who pass value judgements against culture and write weird theories need to have their VISA cancelled.

[member_22872]

No textual corruption in Vedas

[shiv]

Yes Pulikeshi - but anyone who listens to a CD of the Rig Veda being chanted and tries to folow it on written text will not find the initial invocation of Ganesha in the transcribed text. Since the Rig Veda is older than Ganesha - it is interesting that the Rig Veda chanting is preceded by an invocation that must have been composed at a much later date. I have no idea by whom and when.

Saar,

You are falling into honey trap - there is no age for Rig Veda onlee. All attempts at chronology are futile.
That which is Sanathana must be Sanathana .

No. No Honey trap here.

My comment was a specific response to a specific request from Ulan batori. He wanted someone to "post the first ten lines" of the Rig Veda. The Rig Veda is not a text and it is technically wrong to "post the first ten lines" as if that might have some meaning. The honey trap is in imagining that the Rig Veda exists independently as a written text outside of what is chanted. That is a fundamental error.

The reason I complied with Ulan Batori's erroneous request of posting the first ten textual lines was because I wanted him to hear the audio of the original first ten lines rather than simply read the honey trap text. But when I listened to the audio I realized that the first ten lines of the Rig Veda as chanted do not commence until about two minutes into the chant - with those two minutes being an invocation of Ganesha. Anyone who wants to hear the first ten lines of the Rig Veda needs to be prepared for that.

There is no mention of Ganesha in the Rig Veda. Ganesha starts appearing in Indian tradition at some later stage. Whatever the timelessness of the Rig Veda, Ganesha is a concept that appeared later. If you believe that Ganesha too is timeless like the Rig Veda I would like to hear your reasoning. I think that the tradition of invoking Ganesh is separate from the Rig Veda itself, eternal and timeless as the latter might be.

[UlanBatori]

If ppl learn to recite the Rg Veda, and they actually do recite it, they must have a starting point. So there must be a "first ten lines". If they are sounds, they can be written down as the closest textual representation, Hain? Blasphemous it may be, but I don't see what is practically impossible about it.

There seems to be a disagreement on the order of the Mandalas and Rks of the Rg Veda. The Mandala known as "6" appears to be cited as the first in the order, by Talageri and one other very recent authority whom I know. Both the Mandala marked "1" which is apparently family rituals, and the one marked "6" are praises of Agni.

The Witzel gang (I presume) says:

The most common numbering scheme is by book, hymn and stanza (and pada a, b, c ..., if required). E.g., the first pada is

1.1.1a agním īḷe puróhitaṃ "Agni I invoke, the housepriest"

and the final pada is

10.191.4d yáthā vaḥ súsahā́sati

Popular suktas include Purusha Sukta, Durga Sukta and Shree Sukta.[17]

Talageri says 6.1.1 should be the first. It is plainly a description of the greatness of Agni, none of the housepriest bijnej. So there is credibility to Talageri's claim, and it is also what is followed by the ancient Mallostani Namboothiri tradition.

I think the "Oath" recitation starts with people repeating the 3 letters of AUM, with many repetitions of each. I probably did not stay around long enough for them to get around to reciting the actual Rks.

But here is my question on this: the 3 letters represent ones which require opening the mouth (A), one using the upper palate (U) and one with the mouth closed (M). Thus "AUM" is supposed to represent the full spectrum of sounds that can be made, and hence the sum total of knowledge that can be transmitted orally.

My question is, why is the Samskrtam representation of AUM then limited to the single compound Aksharam denoting UM?

Is there something else I am missing here?

Also, how does the numbering exist, given that the system of numbers came long after the Vedas?

[svenkat]

shivji,S_Aji,
My poorly worded provocative assertion about vedic pundits came from the apprehension I am outlining below.
1)Shri Dubeyji has been asserting his rather cold,lofty neo-mimamsaka view while shivji says that Sri Aurobindo may have better understanding of the Veda than Sayana.
2)Leaving aside other important interventions by various posters,my view is what one might call the 'orthodox pretender' view.Theres a community of brahmanas I know in TN,KA(they are present in MH,AP too) who dont take the 'neo-mimamsaka' view nor have been influenced by thinkers like 'Sri-Aurobindo'.They do sandhyavandanam,chant Sri Rudram,Chamakam,Purusha Suktam etc.Their view is influenced by the 'orthodox Advaita' view theres unchanging esssence and changing socio-economic circumstances.This view draws inspiration from the 'great interpreters' of Vedic tradition-Upanishads,Sri Krishna,Adi Shankara about Sruthi,yagna etc.Even Sayana was broadly from the 'Smartha-Advaita' world view and he was addressing a srauta orthodoxy engaged in yagnas and not a modern 'intellectually curious' audience.The orthodox tradition is not dumb.They have ideas of nitya/naimittika,kaamya/prayaschitta karmas and even srauta/smartha yagnas like Agnihotram/Oupaasanam.Thus the traditions of Sri Krishna/Shankara were inclusive Vedic traditions giving due importance to svadharma,lokaachara,tantra,agama,Itihaasa/Puraana,Naama Sankirtanam etc.
3)Yet in olden days,the Vedic authority was 'unquestioned' in a predominantly agrarian society.Today an economy which has a large industry/service sector with 'democratic' values questions many of the assumptions about Vedic traditions and theres some sort of mismatch between Vedic ideals and democratic Indian nation.Bharatha Varsha has seen many challenges to Vedic 'worldview' but the present one is not something one can brush way and as an 'orthodox pretender',I felt the 'middle ground' somewhere between the esoteric modern interpretations of Aurobindo and the 'lofty' neo-mimamsaka world view espoused by Dubeyji should not be lost sight of and this middle ground though having good grasp of traditional knowledge is oriented towards a modern,western worldview in terms of education,employment and that was the basis of my rhetorical question.

[svenkat]

Quick reply to Point 2 for now

Interesting post.You have noted certain criticisms of "Sayana enterprise".Where does such criticism of this enterprise come from? Can you indicate them.

It would seem given the diversity of Hinduism in South India(shaiva/vaishnava/'folk') and among the brahmanic sampradayas(Advaita,Srivaishnava,Dvaita),a "Sayana Enterprise" would seem natural for a smartha-Advaita 'establishment' who had ideological reasons to be faithful to the 'whole of the Vedic corpus'.The smartha-advaita community had no 'siddhanta/sectarian' axes to grind and had the largest no of practictioners of the srauta orthodoxy and while respectful of tantric/agamic/puraanic doctrines had no special reason to ally with particular doctrines over traditional srauta orthodoxy.

Also,it would be wrong to be infer as shivji seems to have interpreted Sri Aurobindo ,that this orthodoxy was not conscious of other 'esoteric'/yogic/adhyaathmic insights.Sayana was not addressing a 'secular' audience of the type Sri Aurobindo had in mind.The Sayana audience,it would seem, was a scholary/'technical' one -the srauta orthodoxy engaged in yagnas.

Also,why should one think that Sayana changed the tenor of Veda Bhaashyas(I am an ignoramus in such issues,my interest being in the 'evolution' of 'hindu religion') Were Sayana Bhashyas fundamentally different to earlier Bhasyas? Did Veda Bhaasyas become influential in the practice of Sanatana Dharma of the 'vedic community'/the larger hindu community after this age?