Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth

[ugandhar]

Can anyone read the PIE ? Here it is.
Original text was in Sanskrit I think. The English translated passage is

“Once there was a king. He was childless. The king wanted a son.
He asked his priest: “May a son be born to me!”
The priest said to the king: “Pray to the god Varuna”.
The king approached the god Varuna to pray now to the god.
“Hear me, father Varuna!”
The god Varuna came down from heaven.
“What do you want?” “I want a son.”
“Let this be so”, said the bright god Varuna.
The king’s lady bore a son.

Reconstructed pie version:

“To réecs éhest. So nputlos éhest. So réecs súhnum éwelt.
Só tóso cceutérm prcscet: “Súhnus moi jnhyotaam!”
So cceutéer tom réejm éweuqet: “Ihgeswo deiwóm Wérunom”.
So réecs deiwóm Werunom húpo-sesore nu deiwóm ihgeto.
“Cluttí moi, phter Werune!”
Deiwós Wérunos kmta diwós égweht.
“Qíd welsi?” “Wélmi súhnum.
“Tód héstu”, wéuqet loukós deiwos Werunos.
Reejós pótnih súhnum gegonhe.

Another one:

On the mountain a sheep that had no wool saw horses — one pulling a heavy waggon, one a great load, and one swiftly carrying a man.
Then the sheep said to the horses: “It pains my heart to see a man driving horses”.
Then the horses said: “Listen, sheep: it pains our heart to see man, the master, making himself a warm garment from sheep’s wool, when the sheep has no wool”.
On hearing this, the sheep fled into the plain.

Reconstructed pie version:

Gwrhéei hówis, qésyo wlhnéh ne est, hécwons spécet, hoinom kke gwrhúm wóccom wéccontm, hoinom-qe méghm ppórom, hoinom-qe ccménm hóocu ppérontm.
Hówis tu hecwoippos weuqét: “Céer hekknutór moi, hécwons héjontm hnérm widntéi”.
Hécwoos tu weuqónt: “Cluttí, hówei, céer kke hekknutór nsméi widntppós: hnéer, pótis, héwyom r wlhnéhm seppi qrnéuti nu qqérmom wéstrom; nécci héwyom wlhnéh hésti”.
Tód cecluwóos hówis héjrom ppugét.

Full article from here:
http://www.grsampson.net/Q_PIE.html

[shiv]

Please be patient with me folks. This will be a longish post

I would like to tell you people a little story about a forgettable incident that happened to me in 1989. I was in the UK and hospitals were beginning to import EU doctors. I asked one young Greek lad his name and he said what sounded to me exactly like "Patthraus". The first half sounded like "patthar" (stone in Hindi) and the last bit was neither os nor as. His name was spelt "Petros"in English. What a change.

If you say "os" and "as", the only difference is that your lips are slightly more closed in "os". An in between position of lips will sound something in between as and os. Purse your lips more and you get "oos".If you were a linguist cooking up an ancient language the choice of alphabet you might make to represent that sound (oh or ah) might vary depending on a fairly random situation of who made up the alphabet and where.

What has this got to do with this thread?

According to Shri David Anthony the words associated with wagons and wheels across all Indo-European langauges are "o-stem" words. o-stem words as per available references on the net are words that typically end with "-os" in Greek and Latin, but you will read that "this changed to '-as'" in Sanskrit and Indo Iranian langages".

You see, the statement is that "os" existed earlier and the change to "as" came later.

Why do they say "os" came earlier? Because Ancient Mycenaean Greek (remember Linear B script) has os and it is the "oldest attested script" from 1800 BC. Remember this point. Ancient Greek is "attested" to 1800 BC. If you apply the same standard to Sanskrit, the earliest Sanskrit text was dated to a time after 300 BC. So if you are honest about "attestation" by means of texts that have been found, you must date Ancient Greek to 1800 BC and you must date Sanskrit to later than 300 BC. If you are going to say that Linear B represented early Greek and therefore PIE was older (2500 BC) then you must say that Sanskrit came about 2000 years later. Wherever PIE is supposed to have existed, it took 2000 years to reach "Panjab" where the Rig Veda was located. In both cases you have irrefutable proof in written texts that the language existed. Without such proof "language does not leave markers". If you look at what is attested, and scripts that have been found, you cannot date Sanskrit and therefore the Rig Veda to any date earlier than about 300 BC or so.

Now let us look at these ancient "o stem" words that are used on horse and chariot/wagon references across all "Indo-European" languages. According to David Anthony the wheel was invented around 4000 BC, but by 3600 BC the wagon has appeared in so many places across Central Asia that he says that this indicates rapid spread. This is an assumption. (Actually Google tells me that the first archaeological evidence of the wheel has been found from 6000 BC but let me not argue with Shri Anthonyiji and accept the date of 3600 BC.) Now as per the conclusion of Anthony ji and the linguists who advised him, the story is as follows: Wheel and wagon were well known by 3600 BC in central Asia; wheel and wagon words exist as "o-stem" "deep history" words in all Indo-European languages. So that means Indo-European languages came after 3600 BC and included all words for horse and wagon.

So we have, "Proto-Indo European" after 3600 BC, but ancient Greek in 1800 BC. Therefore "PIE" split up into other languages after 3600 BC but before 1800 BC and all those languages inherited o-stem words for horse and wagon before 1800 BC (date of Ancient, Mycenaean Greek). After that date the language spread with horse and chariot to reach India by about 1200 BC - a span of about 1000 to 1500 years to get to India. This latter part is what we are discussing. It is total conjecture. It has been cooked up by linguists because it is convenient for them to explain their theory of spread of language. The earlier part of the story (3600 to 1800 BC) may be 100% true but the spread to India part is 100% fabricated for convenience

Why do I say it has been cooked up for convenience?

• Possibility 1: (Sanskrit is much older theory). Cart models have been found in Harappa from 2200 BC. That means the concept of wheel and cart were known by 2200 BC. The language is unknown. Whatever the language, it must have pre-dated the "common PIE" and must have had its own words for wheel and wagon. But if wheel and wagon caused such fast spread of people and language, surely the same spread should have occurred east into India from Harappa after 2200 BC. By 1200 BC the Harappan language and technology must have been widespread in India using the same logic that Anthony and linguists use for spread in Central Asia and Europe. But all North Indian languages are Indo-European and all have inherited the same horse and wagon words. That means that the language of Harappa in 2200 BC was probably Indo-European. That is a full 1000 years before the linguists have dated Sanskrit.
• Possibility 2: (this theory says Sanskrit is much more recent). As I said earlier, honesty demands that Sanskrit, like Mycenaean Greek, must not be dated to any time before the first text was discovered. That is after 300 BC at the earliest. This means that according to the language spread theory PIE originated in Central Asia. It came to Syria by 1500 BC (Mitanni). It came to Iran by 1200 BC (Avestan) (Or 300 BC if you take Parsi dates of Zoroaster). It came to India by 300 BC around the time of Emperor Ashoka when Sanskrit was used to record Rig Veda in Panjab. Ashoka had horses and chariots no? No problem there. But all this pastoral life and no cities bullshit goes out the window. But those Aryans too had horses and chariots too. Why did they take 1000 years to reach India from Iran? And what was the language that existed in India just before that, 100 years before Ashoka was born?

Whichever way you cut it, the dating of the Rig Veda by a series of convenient and untenable conclusions by linguists simply in order to arrive at a date for the Sanskrit language to support a theory of spread of language is fake and contrived. We have seen earlier that even the Rig Veda passages used for dating refer to horses and burials and a fundamental misrepresentation of the Rig Veda.

The chances are that a Proto-Sanskrit existed long before 2000 BC. Maybe as early as 3000 to 3500 BC or earlier. If you give an earlier date you will be asked for wheel evidence. None of this actually rules out earlier dates. But earlier dates currently do not have archaeological evidence. But for exactly the same reason it rules out the date of spread of PIE to India and the date for Sanskrit/Rig veda in India as proposed by linguists. The language spread theory can be demolished using their own logic without using any Rig Veda "evidence". Rig Veda lies allows linguists to say "I know Sanskrit. You don't and I say that this is what Rig Veda says and what the fuk you gonna do about it you illiterate clod?"

[KLP Dubey]

Aren't you assuming that either all references in the Vedas need to be either consistently real or consistently allegorical?

If you want to interpret a work *which has no authors and no OTHER independent testimony*, then YES, you must have a consistent basis. Otherwise it is all irrational. The problem statement fundamentally changes. It becomes: "find a set of meanings consistent with the sounds", as opposed to the hermeneutics of authored texts, which considers things like "at what point did the author mean something literally as opposed to allegorically ?".

Have I not been pointing that out already in this thread ? The Veda interpretation is NOT a hermeneutical problem that has appeared in any other situation. The Bible, Koran, etc are all authored works and as a matter of fact their authors are also known (if anything, there is an oversubscription of claimants to authorship of these works!).

The problem of internal inconsistencies that you refer to is one that is prevalent in practically all theologies - Hindu, Christian, Jewish or Islamic. Each of these religions have developed a sophisticated system of hermeneutics to interpret the scriptures and determine which references are to be regarded as allegorical vs which ones real.

Big mistake!

1) Hindu theology does NOT include the Veda. Please, you have written that you want hermeneutics to be Indian and not western, yet you are taking the fundamentally western step of equating the Veda interpretation with theological hermeneutics (!!). That is exactly the root of the western/islamic/communist approaches to undermine Indian civilization.

"Hindu theology" applies to things like the Bhagavad Gita and other authored works made in order to express human sentiments (love, spiritual tranquillity, etc) and perhaps even espouse hidden agendas. It compares to things like the Bible, Koran etc. Even the dvaita ("dualist") branch of Vedanta has a firm theological mission for which it has to look around for support from various Puranas (again, "authored works under divine inspiration").

The Veda, and those humans who produce and preserve its sounds, have NO, ZERO, ZILCH, theological inclinations. There is NO theology in the RV. It is eternal, impersonal, and has absolutely no specific interest in "welfare" of the human race or cultures.

2) One extremely useful thumb rule is that of "prophecies". All theological hermeneutics ultimately has some sort of prophecies associated with it, which influences all aspects of the interpretation of the text and promotion of its underlying human-social agenda. Whether it is "yada yada hi dharmasya...sambhavami yuge yuge" or the "return of Christ", or whatever.

Mimamsa, however, is concerned with the continual striving for "dharma" - a state which is permanently "in the future" but yet requires continuous effort in the present. Science is very similar in this respect. That is exactly why theology is inimical to the Veda (and also to science). It tries to entice people with the temptation that: "What is the use of continually preserving and striving for something whose attainment is permanently in the future? Come to us, we have all the right methods for you and a definite "deliverable" if you do as we say, i.e. you will meet God Almighty and you will be eternally saved."

For this reason, the "scriptures" of various religions (including Hinduism, Christianity, etc) take a large amount of interest in the "welfare" of the human race, because they are essentially social movements driven by human agendas. Anyway, from the point of view of this discussion, what it means is that theology must be continually supported with *humanly authored works*. In fact, the authors of these works are well known and historically attested by independent sources.

We only need to ensure that the hermeneutics used to interpret the Vedas is Indian and not Western - Mimamsa for example is an Indian system of hermeneutics: Hindu Hermeneutics

Sir, I have been studying Mimamsa in great detail for 10 years now. Vedanta for 17 years. I have studied in detail - among important works in Mimamsa - the Mimamsasutra and the works of Kumarila (and indirectly of Prabhakara). I am not boasting, but your linking me a very elementary summary of Mimamsa leaves a slight bitter taste.

You can be assured that my position coincides exactly on hermeneutic matters with Mimamsa. The fundamental difference between theology (whether Christian, Islamic, or Hindu) which tries to attribute their works to persons operating under "divine inspiration/contact", the Mimamsa DOES NOT do so. It *rejects* the idea of any "divine inspiration" or human authorship of any kind.

You seem to be questioning the basis of hermeneutics as a valid discipline - but the point is, it is a fairly common technique used for interpretation of all theologies. I don't think one would get very far with the claim that the Vedas alone are beyond all hermeneutics.

!!!!



After reading my posts on the eternal Veda, are you serious when you tell me that "I wouldn't get very far" with Vedic hermeneutics ? Every single one of my claims on the RV is exactly in line with Mimamsa. And the Mimamsa got VERY VERY FAR with that, and it is a great foundation of what is truly the Indian ethos. I would argue instead that we are not going to get very far with the other approaches, at best it will be a temporary and pyrrhic victory.

Many countries have epics and history (whether of the "itihasa" type or not), and it is not particularly "interesting" to me that Indian itihasa may be older than that of other countries. So what, apart from the nice feeling/boost/national pride/confidence that we likely civilized them and not the other way round. None of these is wrong and I support these motives as well. But:

What is fundamentally different in the Indian ethos is, from beginning to end, one and only thing alone:

The Eternal And Authorless Veda.

I am *affirming* Vedic hermeneutics, particularly the correct view of Mimamsa which has in the past also successfully overcome those of other schools (Nyaya and Sankhya - which in fact tried to introduce theological interpretation into the Vedas - as well as the wholesale rejectors of the Veda like the Buddhists). In fact, Vedanta (currently the most widespread Indian darshana) accepts, borrows, and acknowledges almost wholesale the Mimamsa view on this matter.

Namaskar,

KL

[Arjun]

KLP ji,

I am just trying to understand the logic of your statements better.

Some quotes from the document I had enclosed:

The golden rule of Hindu hermeneutics is that if the literal or primary meaning of a sentence is logical, non-contradictory, internally consistent and practical, then it can be accepted as such without any further interpretation.

If, on the other hand the meaning appears to be illogical, contradictory, inconsistent and unpractical one may then interpret it in a figurative way.

With these guidelines we can then proceed to examine the different levels of meaning of the Sacred Texts.
Çabdårtha — the literal sense

For example all the Gods and Goddesses mentioned in the Veda can be accepted as they are — as polytheistic deities living in heaven and accepting the sacrifices offered to them.

Bhåvartha — the allegorical sense

Based upon the statement within the Veda itself that there is only One Truth and the gods are manifestations of that Truth, we can then form a figurative explanation of the gods and goddesses as emanations or aspects of that One Truth.

Lakßyårtha — the esoteric meaning.

Or we could also interpret the deities as beings subtle energies of the universe and aspects of our own consciousness, subtle forces that operate within the depths of the unconscious mind. Indra is not just a god but is a symbol of the enlightened mind which uses the vajra (thunderbolt) representing discrimination to slay the demon Vrtra symbolising ignorance, which has stolen and hidden the 7 cows representing the streams of wisdom.

Mîmåμsa Methodology

The exegetical format is called an Adhikarana which comprises of a fivefold process.

vißaya våkya — the Scriptural sentence under discussion
samçaya — the doubt as to the correct and relevant meaning of the sentence.
pûrva-pakßa — the unsound interpretation
uttara-pakßa — the refutation of the former position and presentation of the reasoned interpretation
nirnaya — arguments for the conclusion reached

Is the contention that none of these fine techniques described above can be applied to RV in itself - but only to other scriptures? In that case, what is the basis on which Mimamsa derives Upadesa from Sabda? Surely that process would involve interpreting the RV text in some manner?

[KLP Dubey]

Please be patient with me folks.

....

The language spread theory can be demolished using their own logic without using any Rig Veda "evidence". Rig Veda lies allows linguists to say "I know Sanskrit. You don't and I say that this is what Rig Veda says and what the fuk you gonna do about it you illiterate clod?"

Very fine post. Really, I think what most of the posters are not seeing is that *knowing Sanskrit means jack-$hit in relation to interpreting the RV*. The Rgveda is not "in Sanskrit". It is an eternal set of sounds, from whose structure and patterns certain humans have derived a language called Sanskrit. This involved the deduction of roots and grammatical rules and assignments/associations of these roots with earthly objects.

The fact that the Rgveda is not "in Sanskrit" is quite obvious because the meanings assigned by humans are never consistent. That in turn, deluded some people (including Indians) in the past to suggest that:

"Hey, do you mind if we say the veda is a human work done under divine inspiration ? At least then we can explain everything away with a convenient escape route. Whenever things don't make consistent sense according to the assigned meaning, just say that it was an allegory after all."

But fortunately, sane people stood up and said: "We sure as hell DO mind." That is what the Indian ethos is about, and not some fellows strutting around in the deluded happiness that they played a cleverer game in interpreting some RV sounds than some other fellow.

KL

[Murugan]

RajeshA - ji

Words Yama == Gurdian of Southern Direction, It indeed denotes the south.

[Murugan]

KLP Dubey-ji

Great insight ! I had little similar understanding about the vedas, which i learnt from my various gurujis.

Namaskar!

***

Venug

Appropriating vedas and such knowledge is not possible.

Understanding of vedas is based on Anubhuti and this cannot not be learnt at symposiums, seminars and talks and modern classrooms, writing theses and misguiding people to find out dates, 50 symbol long Indus words, PIE words etc.

Anubhuti is far from these halfwitz appropriators.

[KLP Dubey]

Is the contention that none of these fine techniques described above can be applied to RV in itself - but only to other scriptures? In that case, what is the basis on which Mimamsa derives Upadesa from Sabda? Surely that process would involve interpreting the RV text in some manner?

Yes. It is not a contention that I am coming up with in the year 2012 CE, but a well established fact for thousands of years. I am only repeating.

Before we go ahead, again a clarification. The RV is not a "scripture". That is a level of nomenclature suited for the Bhagavad Gita, Koran, Bible etc. The RV is a collection of eternal sounds.

Now then:

(1) What is taken up for detailed discussion as the "Veda" or "Vedic shabda" in the Mimamsa adhikaranas - starting from vishaya to nirnaya (by the way the more correct term for the latter is 'siddhanta') - is the Brahmanas, NOT the Samhita. Similarly, when the Vedanta says "we are discussing the Veda" they mean the Upanishads. This has been a perennial source of confusion for many people. When they hear something from a Vedantist or (less commonly) a Mimamsaka about "the Veda", they mistakenly think the Samhita is also subject to those claims.

(2) The approach to the Samhita is very interesting in the Mimamsa. It is made clear at the very outset that:

- the Samhita is eternal

- nobody can "touch it"

- "we are not competent to interpret it properly. We should keep on trying through relentless thought and deliberation, however do not make any half-a$$ed claims in the meanwhile".

The main Mimamsaka concern was to interpret the injunctions found in the Brahmanas, because the pursuit of "dharma" requires the presence of injunctions to "do the right thing". (Again BTW the correct term for injunction is "vidhi", not "upadesha"). The Samhita is an impersonal collection of sounds and has no injunctions.

But you see, the Mimamsakas would go to ANY extent to protect the Samhita even though they had not the faintest idea of what the sounds actually meant and in fact it had no injunctions at all! For example, when it was argued that the Samhita was an unintelligible and useless mass of sounds since it contains no injunctions, they would come up with justifications (which are made in a perfectly rational and logical way that cannot be reproached, BTW) that:

(a) the Samhita has "arthavadas" which serve to induce the person to properly execute the injunctions, or

(b) the Samhita has the purpose of identifying the deities for the Yajnas. Note the mimamsakas made no commitment that the deity (devata) was some kind of "god". All that was said is that the devata is an important entity for the Yajna and hence that entity needs to be identified through the Samhita.

(3) If the Mimamsakas had the confidence to interpret the Samhita, they would absolutely have *gone to town* with it. After all, the reciting of the Samhita was what made the Yajnas (and pursuit of "dharma" prescribed therein) uniquely authoritative. Without the Samhita, not even a dog would show up for Yajnas. Despite that worldly temptation to conjure up impressive and "shock-and-awe" meanings for the Samhita, they desisted from doing so. In fact, they were willing to do anything else possible in order to keep the Samhita from falling into disuse (i.e. not being preserved anymore) but they would not bring themselves to commit the folly of starting to interpret it with Sanskrit meanings. In fact, in all of Mimamsa, the Samhita is really only taken up for discussion when forced/pressed to do so, i.e. because some opponent claimed it was nonsensical, useless, unintelligible etc.

The mimamsakas thus were placed in a very difficult position in defending the Veda. They executed their task with great ethical restraint and intellectual tenacity. Now we have a bunch of people who are busy tearing down that foundation either deliberately or unwittingly.

KL

[habal]

Almost all mastiff breeds in Europe originate from Asian immigration of Tibetan Mastiff (generic).

Russia/Caucasus - Ovtcharka
Yugoslavia - Sarplaninac
France - Great Pyrenees/Dogue De Bordeaux
Germany - Boxer/Great Dane/Rottweiler
Italy - Cane Corso/Neopolitan Mastiff
Switzerland - Saint Bernard
Turkey - Kangal

Since dogs were the true companians of human-kind, the migration of dogs provides a truer picture on human migration.

[Murugan]

Dogs' immigration thing is interesting...

Perhaps they were taken to Anatolia to understand various commands in mama language. And they extended families over there.

Also, Dogs were first domesticated in Tibet !!!

[RajeshA]

KLP Dubey ji,

perhaps you could jot down some basics for all of us:

a) How did the Vedas come to be part of human existence? What was the process?

b) Did Sanskrit language come first or did the introduction of the Vedas into human society come first?

c) How did humans gave meanings to the preexisting sounds of the Vedas? Did they assume that it is a preexisting language that needs to be decoded and translated (analytic approach), or did they assume that the Vedas are just sounds without any semantics and so they are free to assign any meanings whatsoever to the sounds (synthetic approach)? Without some understanding one cannot even have grammar or syntax!

d) What is the purpose of Vedas independent of how humans, by interpreting meaning into it, have created knowledge? What is the relevance of Vedas for humans? ADDED LATER: I have seen your posts on 'arthavadas' and 'naming of deities'! Anything else?

e) What is eternal about the Vedas, which goes beyond the aspect of maintenance of it by the humans?

I would appreciate your input!

Thanks

[habal]

Almost all mastiff breeds in Europe originate from Asian immigration of Tibetan Mastiff (generic).

Russia/Caucasus - Ovtcharka
Yugoslavia - Sarplaninac
France - Great Pyrenees/Dogue De Bordeaux
Germany - Boxer/Great Dane/Rottweiler
Italy - Cane Corso/Neopolitan Mastiff
Switzerland - Saint Bernard
Turkey - Kangal
England - English Mastiff/Bulldog

Since dogs were the true companians of human-kind, the migration of dogs provides a truer picture on human migration.

Tibetan Mastiff would be dogs taken from Himalayan Plateau/Central asia first to Caucasus/Eastern Europe, & then onwards to Southern Europe & Western Europe. There is strong breed similarity between Tibetan Mastiff and Ovtcharka/Sarplaninac i.e the Yugoslav/Caucasian mastiff breeds and thereon slight variations of build in Germany and southwards/westwards.

[Murugan]

What is sound?

According to modern science, it is vibration. "If you examine the core of an atom you will realise that all matter is one. " This Advaitic conclusion is arrived at according to nuclear science and the concepts of Einstein. All this world is one flood of energy (sakti); everything is an electromagnetic flow. But how do we account for the manifestation of different objects? It is to be attributed to different type of vibrations.

Where there is vibration there is a sound. Conversely, to produce a sound the vibration corresponding to it must also be created. The scientific concept that the different vibrations of the same energy are the cause of creation is the same as the belief that world was created with the breath of the Paramatman manifesting itself as the sound of the Vedas.

Consider human beings and other creatures. What is it that determines their health and feelings? The breath that passes through our nadis, blood vessels, during respiration produces vibrations and on them depends the state of our health. Those who keep their breathing under control through the practice of yoga are healthy to an amazing degree. They do not bleed even if their veins are cut. They are able to remain buried in the earth in samadhi stopping their pulse and heartbeat. They are not poisoned even if they are bitten by a snake or stung by a scorpion. The reason is that they keep the vibrations of the nadis under control during breathing.

Breath is vital not only to the body but also to the mind. The mind which is the source of thought and the vital(pranik) energy that is the source of breath are the same. Healthy or unhealthy thoughts are to be attributed to different vibrations of the nadis. You may test this for youself. See for yourself how you breathe when you are at peace before the sanctum of a deity or in the presence of a great and wise person and how you breathe when your mind is quickened by desire or anger. The happiness you experience when you take part in something divine, like a bhajan or atemple festival, must be different from the pleasure that sensual gratification gives you: the vibrations of the nadis concerned will also be correspondingly different.

When you experience joy of an elevated kind the passage of breath will be through the right nostril, but when you are enjoying sensual pleasure it will be through the left. When you meditate, with increasing concentration, on the Reality Serene which is the source of all your urges and feelings, the breath will pass through both nostrils slowly, evenly and rhythmically. When you are absorbed in the object of your meditation breathing itself will cease, but there will still be life. The great awareness called jnana will then be in bloom as it were.

The inert body of a man and the awareness that is the vital essence of his life are both dependent on the course of his breathing. They grow or decay according to it. The course of a man's breath keeps his inner vibrations in order.

Is it not from the Paramatman that so many countless inert objects and so many sentient beings have originated and grown? The movements appropriate to these should have also occured in the Ultimate Object that is the Paramatman.

Even according to non-dualism, the Brahman that is utterly still and is unconditioned and has no attributes (nirguna) manifests itself in the countless disguises of this cosmos with the power of Maya, Maya that cannot be described. Disguises or no disguises, we have to concede the existence, in a mundane sense, of the inert world and of the sentient beings. But we must remember that even Maya has its source in Isvara who is "Mayin". But the power of Maya apart, all that we see have arisen from the vibrations in the Object called the Parabrahman. At the same time, with all these vibrations, this Object remains still and tranquil inwardly. This stillness not withstanding, there are movements that are apparent to our perception. They are not disorderly movements but constitute a system embracing vast heavenly bodies like the sun at one end and the tiniest of insects on the other or even something as humble as a blade of glass.

It is this orderliness that goes to make worldly life happy. The Paramatmam has created this by bringing all powers of nature within an orderly system. But if you sometimes see flaws in it and the natural forces going against us, it is because he likes to be playful now and then.

The human mind can go astray to any length. Indeed it keeps wandering aimlessly like a globin or an imp. Whatever the extent to which cosmic life is orderly, it (the human mind) breaks free from all control and runs about like a mad dog.

When the powers of nature are unfavourable to us, is there a way to change their behaviour and make them favourable to us? Is there also a means by which our mind could be brought under control when it goes haywire? If everything is caused by vibration, by sound, there must be a way of making the forces of nature favourable to us and of purifying our mind and bringing it under control through this very sound. The Vedas constitute such sound.

By controlling our breath through the practice of yoga, it is possible to gain access to the breath of the Paramatman and by this means perform such actions as can uplift our own Self as well as mankind. Here the vibrations of the nadis do not produce the sound that is audible to us. Science tells us that there are sounds outside the range of human hearing in the same way as there is light that does not pass through the lens of the human eye.

However, it is possible to bring within us (within our reach) that which is without. When a musician sings on the radio, the sound of his music is converted into electromagnetic waves which travel through space. But how do we hear music? The receiving set captures the electromagnetic waves and reconverts them into sound waves.

(Science is not opposed to religion. It seems to me that it even helps in the growth of religion. A century ago, before the radio and the telephone were invented, it would not have been easy to counter the arguments of an atheist who dismisses claims made on behalf of the sound of the Vedas as absurd. Now the discoveries of science have come to our rescue. )

It is possible for humans to earn the power of energy possessed by such an inert object as the radio set. Indeed we can earn much more, do much more. It is tapas, ascetic endeavour, that will give us such energy. What is tapas? It is the determination to find the truth: it is keeping the mind one-pointed in this search, forsaking food, sleep, home, everything. But when you are a seeker like this, you must remain humble and erase the least trace of egoism in you. You must realise that the truth you seek will be revealed to you only with the grace of Isvara. The sages performed austerities in this manner and attained to the highest plane of yoga. They could perceive the vibrations in creation, that is the course taken by the breath of the Supreme Godhead. Besides, they also knew them as sound capable of being heard by the human ear in the same manner as electric waves converted into sound waves. It is these sounds that they have passed on to us the mantras of the Vedas.

The Vedas are called "Sruti. " That which is heard is Sruti. "Srotra" means the "ear". The Vedas have been handed down orally from generation to generation and have not been taught or learned from any written text. That is how they got the name of "Sruti". Why were these scriptures not permitted to be written down? Because the sound of the Vedas cannot be properly transcribed. There are sounds or phonemes that cannot be accurately represented in any script. For instance, the one between "zha" and "la". Such sounds have to be learned by listening. Besides there are svaras for Vedic mantras (tonal variations, proper accentuation):"udatta" (raised syllable), "anudatta"(lowered syllable) and "svarita"(falling syllable). Mistakes in enunciation are likely even if diacritical or some other marks are used in the printed text. Wrong chanting will not bring the desired results. There is much difference in the vibrations caused by pronouncing a syllable laying stress on it and pronouncing it without any stress. Correspondingly, there will be changes in our feelings and urges and the divine forces that rule nature....

This is the reason why it is of the utmost importance to learn the Vedas by listening - hence the name "Sruti", in Tamil "Ezhutakkilavi" (unwritten old text). Another explanation occurs to me for the name "Sruti". The sages heard, did they not, the sound of the divine vibrations that cannot be perceived by the common people? Did they read the Vedas in any book or did they compose them themselves? Sruti is an apt name for the Vedas since they were made known to the world after they had been first heard by the sages.

The Vedic seers have the name of "mantra-drastas" --a "drasta" is one who sees. In Tamil it is "parppavan". "Parppan" also means the same thing. If the sages "saw" the mantras it would mean that they did not "hear" them. Which of the two versions is correct? Did the sages see the mantras or did they hear them? If they saw them, in what script did they appear? There was no script at the time, neither Devanagari nor Grantha nor Brahmi, the basis of all. But, then, the sound of Vedas, their svaras, cannot be truly written down in any script.

The answer to this problem is that when the sages were meditating the mantras of the Vedas appeared to them in a flash in their hearts. It may be that in this state of theirs they could neither see nor hear anything. The mantras must have appeared in a flash in the inner recesses of their minds.

"Seeing" or "looking" does not denote merely what is perceived by the eye. It is a term that covers a variety of perceptions and experiences. When we say that a man has "seen" all sorrows in his life, does the term "seen" imply only what he "saw" with his eyes? Does it not mean what he has "experienced"? The term "mantra-drasta" also could be taken in a similar manner as referring to what is perceived through experience. It is further believed that the sages were able to hear the Vedas with their divine ears.

Arjuna wished to see the Lord's cosmic form (visvarupa). The Gita has it that Krsna Paramatman said to him: " You will not be able to see my cosmic form with this eyes of yours. I will give you a celestial eye. . . . . "

Just as Arjuna was endowed by the Lord with a divine eye, the sages must have been invested with celestial ears to grasp the sound emanating from the Paramatman and pervading the vast space.

The vibrations of the Vedas serve the purpose not only of creation and the conduct of life. There are indeed Vedic mantras that help us to transcend this life and become one with the Ultimate Truth. When a man returns by the same way as he comes, does he not arrive at the starting point? In the same way when we go seeking how creation came about, we are led to the point where there are no vibrations, no movements, where there is utter stillness. Some mantras that create vibrations in our nadis accomplish the same noble task of taking us to such a goal. Such are the Upanisadic mahavakyas and Pranava.

In sum, the Vedas are not anyone's compositions. The sages did not create them, nor were inscribed by the Paramatman on palm-leaves.

Sound and Creation
http://www.kamakoti.org/hindudharma/part5/chap7.htm

[Murugan]

Date of the Vedas: Inquiry Not Proper

The idea that the Vedas are eternal does not fit into the mental outlook of Western indologists. Their claims to impartiality and to conducting research in a scientific manner notwithstanding, they are not prepared to accord an elevated status to the Hindu texts. Many Hindu research scholars have also found themselves unable to accept the view that the Vedas are eternal.

Modern historians have adopted chiefly two methods to determine the date of the Vedas: the first is based on the astronomical references in the scriptures and the second on the morphology of the language of the same. But have they, using either method, come to any definite conclusion? Each investigator has arrived at a different age. Tilak has assigned the date 6000 B. C to the Vedas. According to some others it is 3000 B. C or 1500 B. C.

There is no difference of opinion among historians about the dates of the scriptures of other religions. They are agreed that the Buddhist Tripitaka was written during the time of Asoka but that the teachings of the Buddha included in it belong to an earlier time. There is similar unanimity of view in that the New Testament is 2000 years old. And all are agreed that the Qur'an was composed 1, 300 years ago. In the case of Vedas alone have historians not arrived at a decisive date.

I mentioned that two methods were adopted in reckoning the age of the Vedas. There are references in these scriptures to the position of certain heavenly bodies. The date of the Vedas, fixed at 6000 B. C. or so, is based on an astronomical conjunction mentioned in them.

But is it right to say that such an astronomical conjuntion would not have occured earlier too? Conjunctions similar to the one on the basis of which the date of 6000 B. C. has been arrived at must have occured not only before the present creation, but even far far earlier. Which of these is to be taken as the one mentioned in the Vedas? The sages had a vision that could penetrate through the eons. So such calculations will not hold in the case of the Vedas which the great sages brought together with their trans-sensual powers of perception. We find thus that the internal astronomicl "evidence" found in the Vedas and made much of by modern researchers does not help in fixing their date.

The second method is linguistic. Here we have to consider not only the language but also the script. Brahmi is tha source of all the scripts in use today in most parts of the country. Devanagari and the Tamil scripts may seem totally unrelated, but the fact is otherwise. A study has been conducted on the changes the Brahmi script has undergone during all these centuries on the basis of the edicts found throughout the land. A chart made from the results of this study shows that the scripts in use today in different parts of the country, though seemingly unrelated, were evolved from the original Brahmi. An amusing thought occurs to me that the scripts prevelent today are Brahmi letters with moustaches and horns. Something like a moustache affixes itself to the middle of Brahmi letters. The Devanagari (u and u) appear similarly formed. Many letters of the Tamil alpbabet look like Brahmi letters that have sprung horns. From the edicts and inscriptions we can find out with some precision the period taken for each alteration in the script. It is in this manner that the dates of some edicts have been determined.

The Vedas, however, have never been inscribed on stone anywhere. So there is no question of our fixing their date on the basis of any of the scripts. Other aspects of language have to be considered in this context. The morphology of words and the character of their sound keep changing with time. Many Tamil words belonging to the Sangam period have changed thus. It is a phenomenon common to all languages. An erosion takes place in the case of some sounds. Sometimes their meaning also does not remain the same. Take the Tamil word " veguli": it means a "simpleton", but earlier it meant "anger" or " an angry man ". In the old days the Tamil "manda " did not mean "dead": a Tamil scholar told me that it meant "famous". Such instances are to be met with in Sanskrit also. We do not understand the Vedas the same way as later poetical works in Sanskrit. Compared to other languages such changes are not numerous in our own tongues. Even an Englishman cannot follow one line of Anglo-Saxon English (Old English) which is only 1, 000 years old. In the course of about 3000 years English has changed so much in America as to merit a name of its own, "American English".

The period over which a phoneme changes its character has been calculated. But the time taken for a change in the meaning of a word has not been determined with the same definiteness. Scholars have tried to fix the date of the Vedas by examining the character of the sound of their words. " Every two hundred years the sound of a word undergoes such and such a change, " observes one authority of linguistics. " A Vedic sound, in the form we know it today, is the result of a number of mutations. If it has undergone ten mutations, it means that the Vedas are 2, 000 years old. Or, if thirty, they are 30x 200 = 6, 000 years old, which would mean [according to this logic] that our scripture did not exist before 4000 B. C" We hear such views expressed frequently.

One example would be enough to prove how wrong such a basis of calculation is to fix the date of the Vedas.

We have so many utensils at home. We use some of them more often than others. The bell-metal in which cook rice morning and evening has to be washed twice a day. So it wears faster. Supposse we have another vessel, quite a big one, an "anda" for instance. It is kept in the store room and not used except perhaps during a wedding or some other festive occasion. Since it is washed only at infrequent intervals it does not wear as fast as the bell-metal vessel which we perhaps bought as recently as last year. The anda must have come as part of grandmother's dowry and must be very old. Even so, it does not show any sign of wear. Are we to infer that the bell-metal pot was bought before the anda? The dinner-plate and the rose water sprinkler came together as your daughter-in -law's dowry. In ten years, the plate has gone out of shape but the sprinkler retains its glitter and polish.

The same is the case with the sounds of words of everyday speech on one hand and the Vedic words on the other, the difference between them being similar to that between the two types of vessels mentioned above. Words in common daily use undergo erosion in many ways. Though the Vedas are chanted everyday special care is taken to preserve the original sound of their words. I shall tell you later about the Vedangas, Siksa and Vyakarana and about how a system was devised by our forefathers to preserve the sound of each Vedic syllable from undergoing any mutation. The Vedic sounds are not subject ot erosion like the utensils in daily use or the words in common speech. They are like the anda which, though old, is well preserved.

Modern indologists have also put forward the view that the Rgveda is the oldest of the Vedas, that the Yajurveda, the Samaveda and the Atharvaveda came later ( in that order). They also believe that in each recension or sakha of a particular Veda, the Samhita is the oldest part, the Brahmana and Aranyaka being of later origin. They try to fix the date of these different texts on the basis of the differences in their language. Also they have carried out research into how certain words used in the Vedas are seen in a different form in the Ramayana, the Mahabharata and the works of poets like Kalidasa.

The linguistic research conducted by these indologists will not yield true results because they ignore the basic differences that I have pointed out between the sound of the Vedas and that of other works. The slight changes perceived today in certain Vedic sounds, despite all the care taken to preserve them in the original form, could not have come about in 200 years but over some thousands of years. If you realise that the "wear and tear" we speak of cannot apply to the Vedas but may be to other works or to spoken languages, you will agree that to fix the date of the Vedas, as modern indologists have tried to do, is not right.

Hindi is only some centuries old. However, since it is spoken in a large area and contains Sanskrit, Arabic and Persian words, it has changed in a comparatively short period. Tamil, though spoken in a smaller region, has not changed so much. Even so you will not understand Kamban's Ramayana to the same extent as you will the songs of Tayumanavar. As for Jnanasambandhar's Tevaram itself you will not understand it as easily as Kamban's Ramayana. And then there is the Thirumurugarrupadai which is more difficult than the Tevaram. So Tamil has also not remained the same all these centuries. Though Sanskrit was known all over India it was not a spoken language like Hindi or Tamil. It was a literary language and has not changed even to the extent Tamil has. As for the Vedas, they have been preserved with greater care than the poetical works and it is rarely that you see changes in them. So, according to linguistic experts, if it takes 1000 years for certain changes to occur in other languages, it should take 100, 000 years for the same in the Vedas.

The Vedas have been preserved with the utmost care in the firm belief that the mantras will be efficacious only if each syllable is chanted with precision so far as its sound and textual correctness are concerned. It was for this purpose that a separate caste was assigned with the mission of caring for them. Research conducted without realising this truth will not serve any purpose. Modern investigations have not succeeded in establishing that the Vedas are not eternal. Faith in the belief that they are anadi will be strengthened if you appreciate the care with which they have been preserved during all these ages and also consider the different ways in which their sound has been kept alive.

http://www.kamakoti.org/hindudharma/part5/chap9.htm

***

Vedas Are Infinite

http://www.kamakoti.org/hindudharma/part5/chap12.htm

[Murugan]

Again on Sound and Vibration of Vedic Mantras

Not all mantras that create benign vibrations are necessarily meaningful. In this context we have the example of the music. The alapana of a raga (the elaboration of a musical mode) is "pure" sound, that is, it has no words, but it is still is capable of producing emotions like joy, sorrow, etc. During the researches conducted by a university team, it was discovered that the vibrations created by the instrumental music quickened the growth of the plants and resulted in a higher yield. Here is a proof that the sound has the power of creation. Also to be noted is the fact that the instrumental music played to the plant does not obviously have any verbal contact--- this establishes that the sound has its own power.

The remarkable thing about the Vedas is that they are of immeasurable value as much for their sound as for their verbal content. While the sound has its creative power, the words are notable for the exalted character of the meaning they convey.

There are Tamil hymns of a very high order. To read them is to be moved by them; they touch our hearts with their intense devotion. But we have recourse only to a few of them for repeated incantation to expel a poison or to cure a disease. The authors of these hymns like Nakkirar, Arunagirinadhar and Sambandamurti have composed poems that are more moving and beautiful. But the sound of the hymns chosen for repeated incantation are potent like mantras. Among our Acharya's works are the Saundaryalahari and the Sivanandalahari. the recitation of each stanza of the Saundaryalahari brings in a specific benefit. The same is not said about the Sivanandalahari. The reason is the special mantrik power (of the sound) of the former.

There are mantras that are specially valuable for their sound but are otherwise meaningless. Similarly there are works pregnant with meaning but with no mantrik power. The glory of the Vedas is that they are a collection of mantras that are at once notable as much for the energising character of their sound as for the lofty truths they proclaim. A medicine, though bitter, does the body good, while some types of food, though delicious, do harm. Are we not delighted to have something like kusmanda-lehya, which is sweet to taste and is at the same time nourishing to the body? Similarly, the Vedas serve a two fold purpose: while they have the mantrik power to do immense good to each one of us and too the world, they also contain teachings embodying great metaphysical truths.

http://www.kamakoti.org/hindudharma/part5/chap15.htm

***

It is said that in Nighantu it is mentioned that the effect of vibrations generated from the vedic mantras are more important than their meanings.

[Murugan]

But is it right to say that such an astronomical conjuntion would not have occured earlier too? Conjunctions similar to the one on the basis of which the date of 6000 B. C. has been arrived at must have occured not only before the present creation, but even far far earlier. Which of these is to be taken as the one mentioned in the Vedas?

E.g., After 11,714 years Vega Will be polestar again... How many time Vega, the Abhijeet has fallen and risen as Polestar?

[RajeshA]

E.g., After 11,714 years Vega Will be polestar again... How many time Vega, the Abhijeet has fallen and risen as Polestar?

I believe at some point the human evolution theory and Out-of-Africa migration theory also kicks in!

Besides taking an earlier Abhijeet cycle as currently taken by Nilesh Oak ji, only sends the date into further antiquity but does not change anything on the "Vedas are eternal front"! "Earlier =/= Eternal"! For that a different explanation would be necessary!

[RajeshA]

Date of the Vedas: Inquiry Not Proper

Perhaps the date needs to be understood as
a) when the Sounds of the Vedas were first introduced into human society or human society became aware of these sounds, and

b) when human society was able to impose a Sanskrit semantic over these sounds!

[Murugan]

Here interpretation of word 'Ved' iirc will help to expell darkness embedded in darkness, meaning of 'eternal' is not == शाश्वत nor अनादि .

I think a different vocation and बुद्धि is required/required to be developed to understand Veds. Though it will be little challenging to convert it into a understandable in other non-indic languages.

Non Translatables = Anubhuti, Shasvat, Anaadi, Buddhi

[Murugan]

Date of the Vedas: Inquiry Not Proper

Perhaps the date needs to be understood as
a) when the Sounds of the Vedas were first introduced into human society or human society became aware of these sounds, and

b) when human society was able to impose a Sanskrit semantic over these sounds!

But ॐ is claimed to be the first word containing three sounds - a u m, अ उ म

[Arjun]

Here's a Western attempt to use the antiquity of the Rig Veda to claim it as common heritage of humanity, rather than as a Hindu contribution: The Historicity of the Rig Veda

There needs to be deeper analysis of this congenital Western tendency to lie, cheat and steal in order to claim all non-Western items of value as 'Western heritage'.

Greece is a prominent example of a non-Western civilization that was destroyed and history hijacked so it could be counted as part of the Western paradigm. We are aware of the examples pertaining to India. Colonialism was a giant global smash and grab exercise for appropriating wealth...Any other examples that fit in with this paradigm ?

[Neela]

Am I getting carried away after reading this thread or is this really appropriation ?
Wiki on Third eye

The third eye is referred to the gate that leads within to inner realms and spaces of higher consciousness. among Christian mystics.

Deliberate grammatical errors?

In Christianity
According to the teaching of Father Richard Rohr, the concept of the third eye is a metaphor for non-dualistic thinking; the way the mystics see. In Rhohr's concept, mystics employ the first eye (sensory input such as sight) and the second eye (the eye of reason, meditation, and reflection), "but they know not to confuse knowledge with depth, or mere correct information with the transformation of consciousness itself. The mystical gaze builds upon the first two eyes—and yet goes further."

"It happens whenever, by some wondrous “coincidence,” our heart space, our mind space, and our body awareness are all simultaneously open and nonresistant. I like to call it presence. It is experienced as a moment of deep inner connection, and it always pulls you, intensely satisfied, into the naked and undefended now, which can involve both profound joy and profound sadness at the very same time." Rohr refers to this level of awareness as "having the mind of Christ".[5]

Since when did Christianity talk about higher consciousness?

[Murugan]

Neela-ji,

In christianity also there are thinkers, mystics etc.

The christian mystics have been totally sidelined and we never come to know about such thinkers/seers existing there. But they have been digested without a trace.

Those mystics are threat to... To know more, you may read Rajiv Malhotra's books/see his videos on youtube.

***

Arjun-ji,

The threat is equally from our own guys who do lot of kadambosi (not giving english translation) to get their names printed in furrin universities and once they get their names printed in foreign papers, to return the favour they invite halfwitz and alike to vitiate things.

Recently our Moun Mohan Singh spoke in Ingland that Sanskrit cannot be claimed by any civilization and it is property of whole humanity...

***
Btw,
The HP looks like, pl dont get me wrong, like that albino in Dan Brown's Movie Da Vinci Code, by look and by karma.

[Rahul M]

who is HP ? in a thread replete with acronyms and jargon it behooves us not to add to the consusion.

[RajeshA]

who is HP ? in a thread replete with acronyms and jargon it behooves us not to add to the consusion.

Helena Petrovna Blavatsky

[Murugan]

Samhitas are main Text of Vedas Sakhas

Each sakhas also have Brahmana and Arnayaka.

The Brahmana lays down the various rites - karma - to be performed and explains the procedure for the same. It interprets the words of the mantras occuring in the Samhita, how they are to be understood in the conduct of sacrifices. The Brahmanas constitute a guide for the conduct of yajnas.

The word "Aranyaka" is derived from "aranya". You must have heard of places like "Dandakaranya" and "Vedaranya". "Aranya"means a "forest". Neither in the Samhita nor in the Brahmana is one urged to go and live in a forest. Vedic rites like sacrifices are to be preformed by the householder (grhastha) living in a village. But after his mind is rendered pure through such rites, he goes to a forest as a recluse to engage himself in meditation. It is to qualify for this stage of vanaprastha, to become inwardly pure and mellow, that Vedic practices like sacrifices are to be followed.

The Aranyakas prepare one for one's stage in life as an anchorite. They expound the concepts inherent in the mantras of the Samhitas and the rites detailed in the Brahmanas. In other words, they explain the hidden meaning of the Vedas, their metaphorical passages. Indeed, they throw light on the esoteric message of our scripture. For the Aranyakas, more important than the performance of sacrifices awareness of their inner meaning and significance. According to present-day scholars, the Aranyakas incorporate the metaphorical passages representing the metaphysical inquires conducted by the inmates of forest hermitages.

http://www.kamakoti.org/hindudharma/part5/chap29.htm

Then Upanisads

The Upanisads come at the close of the Aranyakas. If the Samhita is the tree, the Brahmana the flower and the Aranyaka the fruit (i. e. in its unripe stage), the Upanishads are the mellow fruit - the final fruit or "phala".

The Vedas find their final expression in the Upanisads. Indeed, the Upanisads are called "Vedanta". They form the final part of the Vedas in two ways. In each recension we have first the Samhita, then the Brahmana which is followed by the Aranyaka, the Upanisad coming at the close of the last-mentioned. The Upanisads throw light on the meaning and the purpose of the Vedas and represent the end of the scripture in more than one sense: while their text forms the concluding part of the Vedas, their meaning represents the Ultimmate Truth of the same. A village or town has a temple; the temple has its gopuram; and the gopuram has a sikhara over it. The Upanisads are the sikhara, the summit, of our philosophical [and metaphysical] system.

"Upa-ni-sad" means to "sit near by". The Upanisads are the teachings imparted by a guru to his student sitting by his side [sitting at his feet]. You could also take the term to mean "that which takes one to the Brahman". "Upanayana" may be interpreted in two ways: leading a child to his guru; or leading him to the Brahman. Similiarly, the term Upanisad could also be understood in the above two senses.

If a student sits close to the teacher when he is recieving instruction it means that a "rahasya" (a secret or a mystery) is being conveyed to him. Such teachings are not meant to be imparted to those who are not sufficiently mature and who are not capable of cherishing their value. That is why in the Upanisads themselves these words occur where subtle and esoteric truths are expounded:"This is Upanisat. This is Upanisat". What is held to be a secret in the Vedas is called a "rahasya". In the Upanisads the term "Upanisat" is itself used to mean the same.

http://www.kamakoti.org/hindudharma/part5/chap30.htm

***

Brahmasutra

How is a sutra to be understood? It must state truths in an extremely terse form. What is expressed in the least possible number of words to convey an idea or truth is a sutra, an aphorism. According to this definition the Upanisads cannot be said to be sutras. However, there does exist a basic text for all Vedantic schools in the form of sutras. This is the Brahmasutra.

In the Brahmasutra, on which there are commentaries according to the various philosophical schools, Vyasa presents in an extremely terse form the substance of the ten (principal) Upanisads. Since he dwelt under the badari tree (jujube) he came to be called "Badarayana" and his work became well-known as "Badarayana-sutra". Who or what is man (the individual self)? What is the nature of the world (jagat) in which he lives? And what is the truth underlying all this? The Brahmasutra, which is a basic text of all Vedantic schools, seeks to answer these fundamental questions. Vyasa does not project his personal views in his work. All he does is to make a penetrating study of the science of Vedanta that is already constituted by the Upanisads. Since it is an inquiry into the Upanisads which form the latter part of the Vedas, the Brahmasutra is called "Uttaramimamsa"

All Hindu philosophical systems are based on the Brahmasutra, but the Brahmasutra itself is based on the Upanisads. That is why it has become customary to describe all Vedic schools of thought as "Upanisadic systems". When Westerners keep extolling our philosophy, chanting, "Vedanta! Vedanta!", they have in mind the Upanisads. If a person turns against the petty pleasures of this world and makes a remark suggestive of jnana, people tell him, "Arre, are you mouthing Vedanta? "

If the Vedas were personified as Purusa, the Upanisads would be his head or crown. That is why these texts are called "Sruti-siras".

http://www.kamakoti.org/hindudharma/part5/chap31.htm


***

Ten Upanisads

http://www.kamakoti.org/hindudharma/part5/chap33.htm

Isa-Kena-Katha-Prasna-Munda-Mandukya-Tittari

Aitareyan ca Chandogyam Brhadranyakam dasa

***

[RajeshA]

Murugan ji, KPL Dubey ji,

I understand your concerns with respect to the Vedas, but I think this is a truly big topic, and it would derail the focus here, so perhaps we should take this to the Philosophy Thread or Discussion on Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas Thread!

I hope we can discuss it there!

Thanks!

[member_20317]

who is HP ? in a thread replete with acronyms and jargon it behooves us not to add to the consusion.

Helena Petrovna Blavatsky

Rahul M ji, the right answer is:

Michael Witzel aka Harvard Professor.

so named by RajeshA ji himself.

[RajeshA]

Murugan ji,

Do you have a link perhaps to that speech by PM Manmohan Singh?

[RajeshA]

who is HP ? in a thread replete with acronyms and jargon it behooves us not to add to the consusion.

Helena Petrovna Blavatsky

Rahul M ji, the right answer is:

Michael Witzel aka Harvard Professor.

so named by RajeshA ji himself.

Photo

[Murugan]

Rajesh - ji

I have posted on Rigved and related posts because it is time and again mentioned here and people may not have much idea about that.

They are posted here for a reference and to know what exactly they are and not discussing them here, by me.

[Murugan]

Rajesh-A ji i dont have link to England bhasan, but here it is in full quote from speech made by PM-ji at World Sanskrit conference

On the 5th January this year, Manmohan Singh, the Indian Prime Minister addressing the delegates to the World Sanskrit Conference, said:

Like the Indian civilisation, Sanskrit does not belong to any particular race, sect or religion. Sanskrit is the spirit of India.

http://www.sanskritatstjames.org.uk/events/id/1

****

Sanskrit has not only some of the greatest classics of world literature, but also a treasure of knowledge in Mathematics, Medicine, Botany, Chemistry, Arts and Humanities. If we provide the missing links and establish the required inter-disciplinary approaches, the wisdom of Sanskrit has the potential of enriching the present day knowledge systems and Indian languages immensely.

The Sanskrit language has also been the source of values and ideals that have sustained India through the ages. Like the great civilization of India, Sanskrit does not belong to any particular race, sect or religion. It represents a culture that is not narrow and sectarian but open, tolerant and all-embracing. The open-minded seers and thinkers who spelt out their vision and philosophy in the sacred Vedas and the Upanishads were able to balance the opposites in their life and in philosophy. It is this spirit of liberalism and tolerance imbedded in Sanskrit that we must inculcate in our present-day life. The message of the ancient sages of India, who gave us the concept of Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam, the world as one family, continues to be of great significance to the world even today.

Full Speech
http://pmindia.nic.in/speech-details.php?nodeid=1120

[member_20317]

Murugan ji, KPL Dubey ji,

I understand your concerns with respect to the Vedas, but I think this is a truly big topic, and it would derail the focus here, so perhaps we should take this to the Philosophy Thread or Discussion on Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas Thread!

I hope we can discuss it there!

Thanks!

RajeshA ji, RV may or may not be in Sanskrit as we understand it. It may or may not be Brahmnaad. But we all can surely agree that History keeping was not its prime concern. It will always remain open to interpretations w.r.t. to historical cues.

Ramayana and MBH are Itihaas and even to keep Itihaas serious there is a need for some basic keeping of chronologies. Ancient Indians choose Stars to keep their dates unlike others. And we should take this part seriously because at least some part of Itihaas can serve for History.

By arguing over RV we are arguing over the 'origin'. All kinds of people have all kinds of relationship with Vedas. Lets put a 'Plank epoch' between RV and ourselves and lets inform ourselves about later developments to bring in better self-discipline.

JMT.


Added later:
If however a consistent understanding of star systems etc is shown then surely it can be used even if present in RV.

[Virendra]

Very fine post. Really, I think what most of the posters are not seeing is that *knowing Sanskrit means jack-$hit in relation to interpreting the RV*. The Rgveda is not "in Sanskrit". It is an eternal set of sounds, from whose structure and patterns certain humans have derived a language called Sanskrit. This involved the deduction of roots and grammatical rules and assignments/associations of these roots with earthly objects.

The fact that the Rgveda is not "in Sanskrit" is quite obvious because the meanings assigned by humans are never consistent. That in turn, deluded some people (including Indians) in the past to suggest that:

"Hey, do you mind if we say the veda is a human work done under divine inspiration ? At least then we can explain everything away with a convenient escape route. Whenever things don't make consistent sense according to the assigned meaning, just say that it was an allegory after all."
....
KL

So Dubey Ji that means the real RV is a set of sounds whose actual meaning, date, creator etc no one knows? And that the RV we understand from Sanskrit today is what people decided for each of those sounds to mean for themselves?
So we have a known manufactured RV and an unkown one?
Sorry I'm perhaps the most naive one on this thread and most of the things are flying above my head. Please clarify if you can.

It is said that in Nighantu it is mentioned that the effect of vibrations generated from the vedic mantras are more important than their meanings.

So do I hear as well. They say that this is the reason why one should be careful to accurately recite the mantra and otherwise not recite it.
Because you don't want to generate the wrong sounds and thereby the wrong effects.
I guess some would disagree with this sci-fi funda of mantras. Any thoughts from the gurus here?

Regards,
Virendra

[RamaY]

All Veda mantras (we call them mantras not slokas) have a seer, Chandas, Kara/anga nyasa and phala sruti.

They were envisioned by various seer over a period of time and we can cross check by taking that information.

Caution must be taken to NOT to fall for modern historical dates in calculating the approximate dates and instead must follow the astromical hints (when the Yajna/year started in that period, will write more later) given there and come to conclusions.

[RajeshA]

Books of Christianists and Indologists



Publication Date: 1860
Author: John Muir
Reasons for the Establishment of a Sanskrit Chair in the University of Edinburgh

Page 6

The missionaries who go out from Scotland for the evangelization of India, should also be taken into account. Now it is not absolutely necessary that all these should know Sanskrit. Those who intend to teach English to the native youths at the Presidencies may manage to get on without it. But all those who intend to preach, will be liable to encounter some of the learned Indians (the Pandits), who are everywhere to be met with, though not in great numbers. The best of this class are well versed in Sanskrit, and remarkable for their learning and acuteness, and deeply imbued with the refined errors of their abstruse philosophy. Consequently, a missionary going to India, ignorant in Sanskrit, will find himself precisely in the same predicament with a Hindu or Mahometan who should come to England to overthrow Christianity, and to convert the British to Paganism or Mahometanism, without any knowledge of the Latin, Greek, or Hebrew. It requires little imagination to conceive the profound contempt with which such persons would be treated by our learned divines.

Publication Date: 1839
Mataparīkṣā: A sketch of the argument for Christianity, and against Hinduism, in Sanskrit verse




Publication Date: 1858
Original Sanskrit Texts on the Origin and History of the People of India: Their Religion and Institutions Volume I

Publication Date: 1860
Original Sanskrit Texts on the Origin and History of the People of India: Their Religion and Institutions Volume II

Publication Date: 1861
Original Sanskrit Texts on the Origin and History of the People of India: Their Religion and Institutions Volume III

Publication Date: 1863
Original Sanskrit Texts on the Origin and History of the People of India: Their Religion and Institutions Volume IV

Publication Date: 1870
Original Sanskrit Texts on the Origin and History of the People of India: Their Religion and Institutions Volume V

[RajeshA]

KPL Dubey ji, Murugan ji,

I have a query:

1) If the Vedas are some divine sounds, which are eternal and authorless, and it was the humans who attributed meanings to these sounds, thus creating Sanskrit and imbibing these sounds with a secondary meaning, then that at least is a historical event though undated as yet.

2) Secondly the hearer of these sounds (ṛṣi) must have had some own message in the meaning he assigned to the sound of a particular rca. Whatever meaning he assigned to the sound may have not the remotest similarity to any original meaning we cannot be aware of.

3) In these secondary meaning, there may be some information which could correspond to geography or some cosmic alignment.

So what speaks against trying to interpret this secondary meaning within the Vedas, as long as one asserts that it may not be the primary meaning?

[RajeshA]

Dating of Scriptures by Indra Javeda

Published on May 04, 2009
Date of the Mahabharata War

Published on Aug 02, 2009
Date of Sri Rama

Published on Nov 23, 2009
Date of the Puranas

[Murugan]

Rajeshji

I am of the opinion that we should try to find the antiquity of veds and with various methods including that of ASTRAL TRAVEL type.

[RajeshA]

Rajeshji

I am of the opinion that we should try to find the antiquity of veds and with various methods including that of ASTRAL TRAVEL type.

Murugan ji,

Please let us know if you find something!