Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth

[shiv]

Can someone post here the exact content (beginning 10 lines) of the Rg Veda? No explanations, just the content.

Listen to ten lines from here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... 8KYY#t=102

The lines are
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/rvsan/rv01001.htm

In roman script:

aghnimīḷe purohitaṃ yajñasya devaṃ ṛtvījam |
hotāraṃ ratnadhātamam ||
aghniḥ pūrvebhirṛṣibhirīḍyo nūtanairuta |
sa devāneha vakṣati ||
aghninā rayimaśnavat poṣameva dive-dive |
yaśasaṃ vīravattamam ||
aghne yaṃ yajñamadhvaraṃ viśvataḥ paribhūrasi |
sa iddeveṣu ghachati ||
aghnirhotā kavikratuḥ satyaścitraśravastamaḥ |
devo devebhirā ghamat ||

अग्निमीळे पुरोहितं यज्ञस्य देवं रत्वीजम |
होतारं रत्नधातमम ||
अग्निः पूर्वेभिर्र्षिभिरीड्यो नूतनैरुत |
स देवानेह वक्षति ||
अग्निना रयिमश्नवत पोषमेव दिवे-दिवे |
यशसं वीरवत्तमम ||
अग्ने यं यज्ञमध्वरं विश्वतः परिभूरसि |
स इद्देवेषु गछति ||
अग्निर्होता कविक्रतुः सत्यश्चित्रश्रवस्तमः |
देवो देवेभिरा गमत ||

Confession - I find it relaxing to simply listen to the chanting. Interestingly the first one minute or so before those lines sounds like a prayer to Ganesh. Ganesha does not occur in the Rig Veda but the Rig Veda chanting always seems to start with an invocation of Ganesha as all beginnings of anything do.

[UlanBatori]

deleted, out of place, posted below

[Yogi_G]

^^^^I have heard the same in Samaveda Shanmukha Sharma garu's pravachana on Ramayana. Interestingly I heard it while driving through deserts on my way to the Grand canyon. The desert surroundings, the well explained pravachana had an immense effect on me.

[UlanBatori]

Question out of ignorance (hold the trishuls pls):
Those lines are in Samskrtam, maybe I don't understand every word, or even every 5th word, but it is some form of Samskrtam. This part is obviously translatable. Then where is the basis for the claim that the original is some "bird-calls"?

See

However scholars do think that in India there are many examples of texts being preserved accurately over very long periods of time: one of the best examples -- which was in our first film -- is the Rig Veda: the earliest layers of the thousand hymns are thought by many to be mid 2nd millennium BCE, and were therefore transmitted orally for two thousand five hundred years or more: but scholars say they have preserved Bronze Age language with a high degree of accuracy even when the meaning has been lost. I agree with you about the mantras in Kerala: there is more than one way of explaining what they are and how they have been transmitted, but the fact is that they are not linguistic, they don’t have meaning, but they follow rules. Have a look at Frits Staal’s Rules Without Meaning, which is a lengthy analysis of the implications of these particular mantras within the Agni ritual.

[UlanBatori]

My Evil 6th Coujin E6C has heard students (ranging from the very young) learning the Vedas at the ancient Southern Samooha Madhom in Keralastan. They seemed to be repeating the same sound over and over again for a long time but then again, it did change a bit over time. There was nothing there that he could decipher. It seemed like voice training. Mostly very low-frequency.

[Satya_anveshi]

The basis is in the Vedangas (can't provide a link as I don't have a good one), the way the study in Vedas is initiated and conducted. IMO one needs much more than basic intro of this subject to be able to go further into understanding this topic 101. This study is only (currently) possible in company of a good vidyapeetha, a guru, co-students, and almost a lifetime of committment. Sadly, this is also a deterrent today for the interested ones to pursue this area. IMHO.

[JE Menon]

^^ JEM ji, that is an everyday small talk among certain community in desh who do and ask their kith, kin, and everyone who comes in their contact to practice a japa, a mantra, a stotram, a shastram and/or the whole enchilada.

I myself grew up until the age of 8 reciting these daily at the feet of my grandma, along with my sister and cousins... daily, for hours. But as children, and I daresay as adults, many do not interpret the chants as being anything other than that, chants.

However, what I find stunning is the articulation by Batori - for that is an accessible interpretation, accessible to all, not just those who know them - and that is the sort of thing which serves as a rational foundation for learning the chants; testing to see if there is any resonance to it in the everyday (no pun intended).

[johneeG]

Ulan Batori saar,
I haven't read some of your recent posts. So, I say sorry to you in advance if I am missing some point that you made in your recent posts. I'll read them later.

That is powerful (no pun intended). I have not got around to understanding how an electromagnetic or gravitational field can act across vacuum, so I am quite a long way (or time) from understanding energy.

a) It seems heat and light(of sun) can act across vacuum(if one assumes the space to be vacuum). So, maybe the energy will transform into heat or light while traveling through vacuum. The energy will not be destroyed, so it will transform into a form that it can survive in.

b) The theory that space is vacuum is advanced by modern science. I don't know whether the ancient bhaarathiyas believed in it. It seems to me that perhaps they did not believe in vacuum theory. Rather they seem to believe in 'ether' theory where Akaasha is some kind of an ether.

That energy and matter are the same, has now been accepted by humans.

I know that it is accepted by modern day humans. It seems it was believed by the ancient humans as well. But, the modern day scientists don't seem to realize the full implications of this theory. On the other hand, the ancients seem to have realized the wide implications of this theory.

What are the implications?
If all matter is merely energy
If all energy can transform from one form to another
then, theoretically, it should be possible to transform matter using energy. Since physical attributes of matter are merely temporal, then physical attributes of matter can be tweaked by using energy. Matter can be transformed using energy. This theory opens up all kinds of exciting possibilities.

Infact, it removes the physical boundaries completely.

For example, is it possible to make a woman virgin again using sound energy?
is it possible to make a person pregnant using light energy?
is it possible to make a person young or old using sound energy?
is it possible to make the skies rain or the plants flower using music?

All such things should be theoretically possible if the energies can be replicated.

The Manthras and rituals of Vedhas seem to represent exactly this thinking. It seems that the ancient people(and many modern people also) use these Manthras for their 'magical' properties.

The belief is that if these manthras are chanted, then it results in certain things. Ex: one can chant a Manthra and become rich. or One can chant a Manthra and cure a disease.

All these beliefs are based on the theory that the physical matter can be transformed using sound energy.

Similarly, going to temple and watching the image of God or praying to light is also considered auspicious. This is based on the theory that the physical matter can be transformed using light energy.

Similarly, visiting pilgrimages is considered powerful. This is based on the belief that some places are natural reservoirs of vast energy where people can go and increase their energy levels.

The whole construction of Temple is based on rituals and Manthras which are believed to be energizing the whole place and act as a reservoir of energy for the whole community.

Yanthras represent energy in drawing form.
Manthras represent energy in audio form.
Murthis represent energy in physical form.

When I say represent energy, I mean that they can replicate or reproduce the energy. For example, the belief is that the Fire Manthra can reproduce heat when it is heard or said in various objects.

Actually, I wanted to write a lot more on this, but its somehow not coming properly.

What is the best source to see the "actual" content of the Rg Veda (I mean as sounds or whatever). If transmitting the content as audible sound was the compression/encoding mechanism, then does it not follow that the entire "knowledge base" was compressed into the spectrum of about 0.1Hz to 20,000 Hz (audible range of humans)? The actual electromagnetic spectrum ranges, I suppose, from some extremely low frequency (period of hajaar-hajaar saal) to some extremely high frequency.

There are two things that these Manthras are believed to do:
a) encoding the knowledge
b) replicating energies and using it to transform matter

This seems to be belief held by the ancients about Vedhas. Manthras in Vedhas were used to derive various knowledges and those Manthras were used(i.e. chanted or heard) for their 'magical' properties(i.e. to transform the matter).

Frequency would be important when replicating energies to transform matter. So, intonations and pronunciations are both considered important while Manthras are chanted.

Whether these Manthras actually worked magically or not, is beside the point. The point I am making is that to understand the Vedhas and their role, one has to think like the ancients thought. And ancients thought that it was possible to transform matter using these Manthras(i.e. sound energy), using Yanthras and Murthi, using fire(i.e. heat energy), ...etc.

To decode the knowledge, one needs grammar, etymology, ...etc. So, there are two things here and both of them were considered to be the functions of Vaidhik Manthras.

If the content was explained into textual verses, why was it still essential to transmit the sounds to later generations?
Is it plausible that actually "writing" the "text" occurred much, much later, the content was transmitted purely by oral/aural means and continually refined in each transmission/ generation.

The simple answer is: we don't know. Anything is possible or plausible. But, exactly what happened, we don't know. Speculation is futile because everyone can come up with their own version of events. Unless there is some ancient source that tells us that so and so happened, it is just empty speculation.

However, there seem to be some Manthras which indicate that the writing was not unknown. Whether the Vedhas themselves were written down or not, is not known. However, generally, Vedhas seem to be transmitted through listening from master to disciples. And since the intonation and pronunciation are very important(because it is believed that they can use this sound energy along with that particular frequency to transform matter), the transmitting may be more easy through listening rather than reading.

Anyway, back to my original point: The general assumption that SD "arose" first in the Sapta Sindhu, should be questioned.

I think the assumption that Sanathana Dharma 'arose' at any place is made by westerners and modern Hindhus influenced by the western thinking.

It seems this whole issue starts with the Abrahamics asking the question,"Hey, who, where and when did Hindhuism start?"

They ask this question because their own creeds have specific time, place and person who started their creed. So, they expect Hindhuism also to have a similar origin.

Even Judaism proper seems to start with Abrahamic while Moses played crucial role later. Before Abrahamic, they don't know what happened.

So, they ask Hindhuism also about its place of origin and originator. But, Hindhuism doesn't have any such description on it own. Any such description is given by others in much later time depending on their own inclinations.

Hindhuim's own narrative is: Hindhuism was there from the time the universe came into being. All creatures followed Hindhuism at the time.

I personally think this form of OIT is most probable i.e. the entire world followed Hindhuism and at that time, Bhaarath was rich, powerful and considered very advanced. So, naturally, everyone would ape Bhaarath directly or indirectly, knowingly or unknowingly.

Over a period, it seems that slowly, the world was somehow cut off from Bhaarath. They retained some of these practices and beliefs in corrupted or distorted forms. Even in Bharathavarsha, many new cults seem to be born(which had their origin in Hindhuism) and developed into a new creed.

----
I think this theory of 'natural names' is wrong. It is not about 'natural names' but rather replicating the energies.

For example, what is the sound made by the sap while flowing through a plant? That sound is useless regardless. But, if there is a sound which can make the sap flow in a plant or create sap in a dead plant(i.e. make it alive again), then such a sound will be the Manthra.

If a particular sound is just 'natural sound' made by an object, then chanting it would be useless. The chanting would be considered important only when it would be believed that the energies can be used to transform the matter.

----

If the content was explained into textual verses, why was it still essential to transmit the sounds to later generations?

The sense I get from various sources is that those chants made in that manner are necessary for the fulfilment of functions that need them for fulfilment - such as say a mantra for illness to be used by a physician.

We tend to be sceptics in this day and age - but the entire Atharva Veda - the last and latest of the Vedas (and possibly its "lost half" - the Parsi Zend Avesta) were all about potions and spells. Possibly some of these may have been effective - and particularly the Parsi (aka "Avestan") practitioners of this were called "magi" - yes the same magi who came from the east. The word "magic" is derived from this.

Maaya -> Maja -> Majic -> Magic.
Maayic -> Majic -> Magic
Maayi -> Maji -> Magi

>>But even things that we cannot see, feel or sense "identify" themselves - i.e. they exist and have a "name". For example the sap flowing in a tree also exists and has a "natural name" that can be sensed - but not be an ordinary human. So also for rocks or for that matter, fire. That is the "natural name" - which can only be "heard" by a being who has an "absolute ear".

Doc I don't understand what you mean above. Would it be possible to explain it differently?

Tough call.

For this to have any meaning you have to already have been initiated into believing the fundamental Hindu theory of all existence (universe etc) having originated from nothingness. No light. No dark. No cold. No hot. No big. No small. Just nothing. This "nothing" is called "absolute unity" or even "God" or "Ishvara". This Ishvara "decided" exist in two states - one state of "nothingness" and another state of existence with contrasts - light, dark, hot cold etc. The state of "ultimate consciousness" having formed matter (as it were) was/is aware of every object in the universe. "Awareness" of every object mandates they they each have a unique id - or a name - a "natural or primordial name" So the supreme consciousness is able to "hear" or sense thee names as awarenes of everything in the universe.

The crucial difference between Buddhism(shunya-vaadha stream of Buddhism) and Hindhuism is:
a) shunya-vaadhis say that the world is based on nothing. It came from nothing. (Bible also seems to imitate this. It is not surprising because it seems to be written by the crypto-Buddhists).
b) Hindhuism says that the world is based on an entity called 'Brahma'. It came from 'Brahma'.

This is the crucial difference.

[ShauryaT]

I myself grew up until the age of 8 reciting these daily at the feet of my grandma, along with my sister and cousins... daily, for hours. But as children, and I daresay as adults, many do not interpret the chants as being anything other than that, chants.

However, what I find stunning is the articulation by Batori - for that is an accessible interpretation, accessible to all, not just those who know them - and that is the sort of thing which serves as a rational foundation for learning the chants; testing to see if there is any resonance to it in the everyday (no pun intended).

There continues to be a "credibility" gap between these mantras, what they meant, what they mean today and its relevance for the rational, thinking and questioning mind. There are a few who seek to bridge these gaps, but the large majority continue to recite these mantras as mantras, without any questions or understanding of them. This "education" gap continues to be a serious challenge in the domain of dharmic studies. Trying to make people question, debate and come to a understanding of these mantras for the contemporary world is an exercise few are willing to undertake. There continues to remain a wide chasm between those invested in belief/faith systems of SD, the majority and those who seek to inherit the "wisdom" of the ancients for contemporary life by using tools of reason, logic and values.

[Agnimitra]

Can someone post here the exact content (beginning 10 lines) of the Rg Veda? No explanations, just the content.

If it is sound, then it should be described as content primarily in XXX frequency bands. Or if it is repeated many times, post the Fourier coefficients with the conversions to units of pressure, and the fundamental frequency.

UB ji, the "content" of the Veda is not just physical sound. That's reductionistic. The human part is substantial. "Sound"/"speech" theory in the Vedic literature is not just about a psychoacoustic model. Physical (vaikhari) is the lowest, then middle (madhyama), then pashyanti (visible) then paraa (transcendent).

If it was said that the "content" of the Veda was "music", and we ask for a binary file format full of 0's and 1's, but don't have a way to parse it into actual sound, or ears to hear it, then it is meaningless. The binary representation does not have ANY value by itself, except as part of a PROCESS of being parsed.

Veda is transmitted primarily from heart to heart. As we understand human communication today, 80% or more of it is non-verbal - not represented in frequency bands or coefficients of physical vibration. That's the human part.

Therefore, even the Bhagavad Gita says that the Vedic knowledge was transmitted via the heart (via Vivasvaan, Manu, etc.), and it also derogates the "flowery words" (physical), i.e., the words point to the actual content - the words are not themselves the content.

[UlanBatori]

The point of my questions of course is to see how to explain SD to, say, an ABCD population or non-D ABCs or (non-AB) CDs. One loses the audience immediately if one says:

This is all beyond comprehension of someone with half an ear and 0.01 brain while the rest are occupied with rap music.

Meanwhile they get drowned in the come-ons from the Soul-Collectors and the Burveyors of Biss. Sneering at them isn't going to win any hearts either.

So one has to have a clear answer to the question: What r the Vedas? My answer is still
1. Concise collection of knowledge passed down orally/aurally through the ages.
2. Stolen by Prof. Haya Griva of Hahvahd, recovered by M. Vishnu.
3. Put into uniform language in the Samskrtam version by V. Vyasa.

[KLP Dubey]

On Words, sounds in the Vedas and their eternal nature:
Words were important, not sounds, because according to Jaimini, words are eternal not sounds.

Thanks for posting that excerpt from Ganganath Jha's commentary on Purvamimamsa. Audible sounds are obviously not eternal, as stated already in Jaimini's discussion.

[KLP Dubey]

The Manthras and rituals of Vedhas seem to represent exactly this thinking. It seems that the ancient people(and many modern people also) use these Manthras for their 'magical' properties.

The belief is that if these manthras are chanted, then it results in certain things. Ex: one can chant a Manthra and become rich. or One can chant a Manthra and cure a disease.

A fundamental tenet of Vaidikadharma is that the Veda itself has a creative power (to create and uphold the Universe). The maintenance of the World-Order is due to the continuous action of the Verbs (i.e., the actuators) present in the Vedic Words.

These features are also captured in the transmission of Veda to/by humans in the form of audible sounds and words arranged in a certain pattern (Samhita).

According to Purva Mimamsa, it is possible to "connect"/"harness" the transcendental/cosmic effects of Vedic Words for "earthly" benefits. For this purpose, two things are essential:

1) Injunctions (listed in the Brahmanas) that specify earthly/ritual Actions (which are described in detail in the Kalpasutras).

2) Actions must be combined with recitation of Mantras (i.e., Samhita). The "meaning" of the Mantras is irrelevant, what is important is their precise recitation.

The correct execution of such Actions in conjunction with Mantra creates Apurvas (which are the 'unknown' forces that enable successful harnessing of the power of the cosmic Words to generate some specific effect (e.g., obtaining wealth, children etc).

Note that according to Purva Mimamsa, the mere recitation of Mantra alone has obviously no effect as far as generation of above "material/selfish" benefits are concerned.

However, the articulation and examination of Mantras has had profound impact on human culture, e.g. by way of development of language (phonetics, grammar).

[shiv]

Question out of ignorance (hold the trishuls pls):
Those lines are in Samskrtam, maybe I don't understand every word, or even every 5th word, but it is some form of Samskrtam. This part is obviously translatable. Then where is the basis for the claim that the original is some

Aurobindo says that much of the meanings of the sounds (aka words) are symbolic and of psychological import and designed to initiate the requisite mental state among the initiated. Sayana was a commentator on the Rig Veda who lived 1300ish whose commentary was translated by Max Muller and these have now gone viral.

Aurobindo is at pains to point out many inconsistencies and errors in Sayana's interpretation. The same sounds get different meanings in different places. Aurobindo makes corrections to point out that if the symbolic meanings are taken (as per the corrections he has made) the recitation becomes more of a completely consistent guideline that sets the tone for the mental discipline that is so characteristic of Vedic knowledge. None of Aurobindo's interpretations read like a story of Indra rescuing 60,000 cows from caves to release waters.

If you are up to it try and see what Aurobindo has to say - downloadable from the link below
http://www.sriaurobindoashram.org/ashra ... .php?id=30

[ShauryaT]

Sri Aurobindo and David Frawley (Vamdev Shastri), both are also honest enough to admit that their interpretations of the Rig are "inspired" works and not necessarily the absolute meanings of the original works. They are honest enough to admit that the "original" meanings are probably lost! The reasons for their loss is something that Swami Dayananda Speculates in his works the Satyarth Prakash.

While it is interesting to speculate on the "origins" of the Vedas, and we have many theories that speculate on the nature of Sruti, in my experience the best is to do something similar to what Sri Aurobindo did, practice it yourself, be honest to the teachings of Adhyatmic Vidya and you will then derive your own set of inspired meanings and connections between the various passages of the vedas and its application to the temporal world. Once you do this yourself, you can then explain to the ABCD/ABC/CD of the world. This is a worthy mission to embark upon and rediscover the meanings of the vedas. Getting to a single version on the meanings of these works would go against the nature of plurality that is a hallmark of SD. No single version of the truth, yet remaining faithful to truths as we understand them.

[Agnimitra]

Sorry if posted before:

BBC - The Story of the Swastika

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_reuMKpgow

[Agnimitra]

The point of my questions of course is to see how to explain SD to, say, an ABCD population or non-D ABCs or (non-AB) CDs. One loses the audience immediately if one says:

This is all beyond comprehension of someone with half an ear and 0.01 brain while the rest are occupied with rap music.

Meanwhile they get drowned in the come-ons from the Soul-Collectors and the Burveyors of Biss. Sneering at them isn't going to win any hearts either.

So one has to have a clear answer to the question: What r the Vedas?

The honest answer to the question "where do the Vedas come from" is "I don't know." As the Veda says about ITSELF, it has been coming down through the ages since Time Immemorial. Its origin is at a point beyond the horizon of conscious memory. There are some things we have to accept we just don't know, or don't have a definite answer to. Its part of growing up I guess.

[UlanBatori]

OK, I can handwave the "Where did the Vedas Come From" quite nicely, but am still left with the questions:
1. What ARE the Vedas?
2. What is IN the Vedas that is so good?

shiv: There is still a disconnect between the BBC "BirdSong" story and the Sanskrit verses cited here. IOW, there is a body of recitation that cannot/ has not been ascribed meaning. In Malloostani, there is the word that is pronounced

Oath

which may the key. Have you heard of that/something equivalent in Bangalore, kerala? This when recited sounds very repetitive, and I have not been able to discern any word. I THINK this is what the BBC means when they talk about Namboothiri ritual mantras.

The link here is to a page run by Vinod Bhattatiripad, a computer programmer-turned-Computer Security Whiz - turned Vedic Promoter -cum Witzel host. Enough said, you can read how HIS ancestors came down the Khyber in the Harvard horse-drawn bus etc. He says that the word "Othu" (see above for pronunciation) means "Veda".

But like I said, the recited "Oath" is nothing like the verses I hear chanted at Vedic rituals that come from anywhere else in India, and are not IMO Sanskrit or any identifiable language.

I am still trying to find out what this "birdsong" stuff is.

[shiv]

Ulan Batori - I think there is a huge disconnect between BBC and Vedic chanting and bidrs name a lot of different sounds - so the birdsong bit is unclear.

Technically my family are Samavedis - whose numbers are small and I was recently at a unique family function where a group of Saamavedi priests recited the Samavada for the purpose of the function. In conversation with them I discovered that there do appear to be those who learn and do some things but not other stuff. But I am sketchy on detail and cannot corroborate with the Namboothiri "otthu" link you have given - which is itself a little sketchy and confusing.

What I did find out though was that many of these Veda scholars need to put in 14 to 16 years of study. Now I started my college studies in 1972 and wrote my last exam in 1987. If I think I have put in a lot of years of study - the same seems to be necessary for the Vedas.

In other words there is a huge body of knowledge there and it is almost as if spending one's life in one body of study (as I have done) virtually excludes me from having the time in my life to do proper Vedic study. Not surprised that many older people take it up and many of us seem to be heading in that direction.

I guess the question "of what use are the Vedas" cannot be answered easily from the outside - only insiders are able to state the benefits - and either we believe them or we don't. One priest at the recent function told me that only doing that study (of the Vedas and related literature) makes one understand what one gains form it. But your questions remain valid and I will try and search for answers.

[RajeshA]

So one has to have a clear answer to the question: What r the Vedas?

The honest answer to the question "where do the Vedas come from" is "I don't know." As the Veda says about ITSELF, it has been coming down through the ages since Time Immemorial. Its origin is at a point beyond the horizon of conscious memory. There are some things we have to accept we just don't know, or don't have a definite answer to. Its part of growing up I guess.

Speaking for myself, ever since I came to know of the Paracas Skulls and Skeletons, I've become unsure of the human civilizational history based solely on evolving human intellect with no interference from other intelligent species.

However the Paracas Humanids provide a much better fit to explain Bharatiya mythology.

Furthermore, if say Ravana is considered to be a non-human, as is often repeated in Ramayana, and he too knew the Vedas, then in that case Vedas can be considered as not solely limited to the homo sapiens sapiens species but also another species, a different species.

Question then becomes which species gave the other the Vedas, was it Hoomans to Paracas humanids or the other way round. If it was the latter, then it offers a different way to look at the Vedas, "authorless" being understood as with non-human origin!

If the Vedas comes from a non-human civilization, a civilization that flowered long before ours, a civilization which was much more accomplished than ours, a civilization we deemed as worthwhile to imitate, then we are simply the preservers of the Vedic treasure, and yes we may not understand them in all too much depth.

Again this is purely speculation, something in which one can indulge in once in a while!

[UlanBatori]

If the Vedas comes from a non-human civilization, a civilization that flowered long before ours, a civilization which was much more accomplished than ours, a civilization we deemed as worthwhile to imitate, then we are simply the preservers of the Vedic treasure, and yes we may not understand them in all too much depth.

Again this is purely speculation, something in which one can indulge in once in a while!

I now pronounce Rajesh as "Buddha" for he has attained True Enlightenment in the Gypsy-Alien Certainty.

IMO, a far-advanced civilization could have provided advice saying, Hey, take it easy, it's all the same etc., knowing that the younger species would not understand until they had been through enough searching down all the wrong paths. But maybe a few (i.e., we, of course ) might be guided to take the Right Path or at least a slightly straighter path.

But even they clearly realized that there has to be a Supreme Almighty Power. Evolution etc can only explain only very small segments of the whole.

Trouble with the G-AC is that it discounts the hard work and thinking of early SDs and casts them as the equivalents of remote South Sea islanders visited by the USAF in WW2. Sudden infusion of technology and knowledge of worlds far beyond. Miraculous machines. Strange social behavior. Fire-water. Cureless diseases. Drugs, both miraculous and hallucinatory. Guns. Money. Totally confuses the recipient society, maybe they keep a few log books and instruction manuals and try to pass down the Miracle Sounds that made the machines fly. To make anything work right, just chant

Sh**!! F***!! Da**!!

So as a Believer I have to reject that. It was all invented in JD onlee. 1,700,000,000 saal pehle.

[Agnimitra]

OK, I can handwave the "Where did the Vedas Come From" quite nicely, but am still left with the questions:
1. What ARE the Vedas?
2. What is IN the Vedas that is so good?

The good thing about the Veda is that it provides, both, a reflection of an individual's semantic sanity as well as a process to approach greater sanity.

As Alfred Korzybski outlined in his theory of General Semantics (check out his landmark book Science and Sanity), there are 3 or 4 basic semantic properties of sanity:
1. Non-Elementalism
2. Non-Aristotelian logics
3. Objective silence rather than Identification (see Structural Differential that determines the abstracting processes of the nervous system)

In that sense, Veda is an educational discipline, rather than a cookie jar with a few cut and dried good things in it. It is immediately obvious that the "interpretations" of AIT-Nazis and others who see mainly objects, places and even tribal history in the Vedas are suffering from a bad case of Elementalism, Aristotelian Logic and Identificationism. Their theory is about as useless to me now as they make the Veda out to be.

It goes to the theory of prakriti, vikriti and sanskriti. Prakriti is the natural states and modes of nature. Vikriti are the aberrations introduced into it due to physical or emotional pain or anticipation of pain. Sanskriti is the process of removing the vikritis so that prakriti can be fully operational.

Each one interprets the Veda based on their prakriti, their unique socio-cultural point of view -- and their unresolved vikritis.

The good and useful thing about the Veda is that it is an educational discipline to improve the human being's "knowingness" via an epistemological process. So Veda enables humans to better "know" anything as it is in present time and abstract the essence of its knowledge and relevance to survival on all dynamics (dynamics = one's body, mind, spirit, relationships with other humans, with animals, plants, the physical universe, and an infinite and unbounded being). Rather than being a primary object of knowledge itself, it is a sort of touchstone that transforms the mind and heart that can manage to make contact with it.

Added: You can tell people that the Veda and its study and practice provide all the benefits of things like "neuro-linguistic programming", "meditation", "philosophy", "the Lord's Mercy", and more.

[RajeshA]

UlanBatori ji,

I am not using any "Alien Deus ex machina" here. They can all be from Earth, or from wherever. That is beside the point. If it can be conclusively shown that Paracas Man is a hoax, then fine. We can look at other theories.

Secondly, every Generation builds on that what he receives from the earlier. So too have Bharatiyas built on what we received. Just because the South Sea Islander gets Chewing Gum thrown his way, doesn't mean he can remake it!

[Vayutuvan]

... the "content" of the Veda is not just physical sound. That's reductionistic. The human part is substantial. "Sound"/"speech" theory in the Vedic literature is not just about a psychoacoustic model. Physical (vaikhari) is the lowest, then middle (madhyama), then pashyanti (visible) then paraa (transcendent).

Agnimitra ji: Very well put. Any references or it sprung out of your mind after wide reading?

<randomRambling>
I am skeptical of both extreme claims - vedas arose one fine day (or to be more specific - over the adult life time of its putative author vEda vyAsa) from the mind of vEda vyAsa as well as the other extreme there is no history in the whole of vEdAs and upanishats. In the beginning that might be true but semantics arose through interpretations. Parsing is only syntactic where as semantics depend on interpretation. In natural languages both syntax and semantics arise naturally and go through evolution leading to expression of higher abstract thoughts or devolution and death due to its inability to measure up to expression of the thoughts of evolving human mind.

When you reduce vEdAs and upanishats to FFTs, frequencies and such, then one ends up with the strange situation of low information content (as defined through Shannon's techniques) where as Algorithmic Information Theory (or Solomonoff-Kolmogorov-Chaitin complexity) is quite high. For example even when repeated words occur they can be compressed quite well using schemes which are devoid of semantics but the words may have different meanings in their respective contexts, then their Algorithmic (SKC) complexity is higher than the same text's entropy defined by Shannon.

For example bhAravi's kirAtArjunIya and mAghA's ishupAlavadha both contain several interesting word plays (and palindromic verses or verses consisting of only one syllable) which can be compressed quite well as data but the meaning can extracted only when the uncompressed verse is read and the interpreted in context. Similarly I forget the name but there is one verse text which when read front to back syllable by syllable gives the story of bhAgawata and in reverse the story of shiva (I think). Even though it is a short text (92 verses IIRC), still it is quite long considering the feat that has been achieved. While these are not great examples of poetic beauty (even when great poets like bhAravi and mAgha engaged in it they did very sparingly and in a playful way) they bring out the flexibility and expressive power of sanskrit language and show how reductionist big data analysis would fail unless the data itself is so simple as to have not a lot of meaning but still not very compressible (for example click stream data collected by google and other websites to do page ranking and monetize the advertising opportunities).

</randomRambling>

[Agnimitra]

matrimc ji, yes, its all about information entropy. Veda is not just about physical vibration but many other aspects - most of which can be sensed by various aspects of the nervous system and some that cannot directly be sensed. Physical sciences do not yet have units for many of these aspects. Upanishads, etc. do talk of "bliss units", "attention units" and other such things, but I'm unsure what is meant exactly.

[Vayutuvan]

Here is an interesting article in AI magazine Knowledge representation in Sanskrit and AI

[UlanBatori]

Many saal pehle I learned to make web pages, and went wild, trying to eliminate paper from my office.

Actually reached fairly close. I had managed to put everything I had learned (notes etc) on to the Internet, since I expected that I might have to enable myself to access everything from across the Duniya, or lose all of it. Anyway I was wasting 3/4 of my time hunting for stuff in my office that I just "knew I had".

It was built up bit by bit, starting with phone-line access. Even now access via DSL is very slow, and I rarely have time when I HAVE access to Ulan Bator 100MBPS network, to sit and chew the cud with such stuff.

Today, after many hours of web-less-ness at airports spent making nice Banners and Logos, I tried looking at it, to try and coordinate everything into one DreamWeaver Site with a fine single standard template and all, with my newly-improved skills, with Spry Assets, pull-down menus and all.

16GB, 6008 files/folders and that was just one of many many such things that have to be downloaded.

So I was trying to imagine what it was like, trying to condense all that had been learned/passed down over the Integral (-Infinity to time t), into an organized structure, expressed in clear, precise, refined language - and that at a time when there was really no easy means of recording the content to replay section by section.

Try imagining that, and one sees the problem with imagining V. Vyasa's task. Just Rg Veda is over 10,000 verses. Someone I know, who is very highly productive in everything he has done, took over 20 years of intense post-retirement activity, and his wife says it destroyed his health scrambling so many hours every day, no break. He was translating the Rg Veda.

This is what I am trying to wrap my brain around.

[Agnimitra]

So I was trying to imagine what it was like, trying to condense all that had been learned/passed down over the Integral (-Infinity to time t), into an organized structure, expressed in clear, precise, refined language - and that at a time when there was really no easy means of recording the content to replay section by section.
...
This is what I am trying to wrap my brain around.

Its not about "condensing" a great Mass of detail into a compact codex. Its more like a set of rudiments on how to "abstract" the essence from any Mass. Like the Hansa that sucks the milk out of the mixture of milk+water. Veda is not about Mass, it is about Significance.

However, the two are related. Therefore, "the Map is not the Territory" is valid, but the "Map is also part of the Territory". Like as if one part of the Territory was a Map of the whole Territory itself. Fractal recursivity and all that...

Because of a lack of Veda, most of us who accumulate "data" only accumulate Mass rather than abstract Significance. It has a telling effect on the nervous system. The "significances" we try to "remember" are all associative - and therefore entangled with Mass.

Rather than an associative model, in the holographic model of the universe, the set of rudiments is very simple, and via simple transformations (though mathematically complex) it creates complexity. I had posted this demo long back:



So to avoid an "elephant and the blind men of hindoostan" scenario, the Vedas must be approached via the Vedangas and their associated disciplines. Every part contains the whole, and a "data-retrieval" algo that focuses on mass won't cut it.

[UlanBatori]

Fascinating. Of course, 10,324 verses is a lot of Mass, significant or not. A 3-credit course is roughly 30 lectures (because a lot of hours are spent on tests, etc), each max 30 slides (usually a lot less). So ~ 900 slides. You can't put more than the equivalent of one verse on a slide. So Rg Veda is at least eleven 3-credit semester courses at full speed. 33 credit-hours just to memorize the verses with no real discussion. Close to a Master's Degree curriculum.

In reality, the verses are very condensed. May take an hour per verse to parse and grasp. So now we can cover only 30 to 50 slides per course. That means the RV is ~ 200 courses! That curriculum took a lot of time to develop. The Mass alone is immense.

[Agnimitra]

That means the RV is ~ 200 courses! That curriculum took a lot of time to develop. The Mass alone is immense.

Yes but Prof - my point was not against Mass, but about a balance between Mass and Significance. An imbalance either way causes aberrations of different types. The "course curriculum" here involves disciplines of learning, practice and culture.

[johneeG]

Now on Tectonics and Archaeology: these are very difficult fields and even less advanced than the others. Experiments are not easy: you have to find places and items that are relevant, and go there on expensive trips wearing knickers and British Army Pith Helmets (If u Pith into it You can't Mith). See the link to Real Archaeology for proper mental preparation.

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.

Saar,
if archeology is suspect, then how much more suspect is Paleontology?
Which is more believable?
a) learning about the entire civilization by finding a small piece of clay in soil.
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.

Coming to clay tablets and pottery, the facts are:
some clay tablets and pottery are found. One has no idea how they were used and what the idea behind it was. Trying to create narrative around this clay tablet is just empty speculation.

Coming to bones, the facts are:
some huge bones are found. Many a times, they are fake. Some time, there really seem to be huge bones found. Now, there are two possibilities:
a) these are bones of some animal which is extinct
b) these are bones of the same animals that are present today.

a) if these are bones of some animal which is extinct, then further discussion on this is quite useless because it is not possible to find out about that extinct animal merely from a bunch of bones.

b) if these are bones of the same animals that are present today, then how to explain their huge size?
The only possible answer is: evolution. That the size of the animals shrunk in size due to evolution over a period. It is interesting to note that most of the ancient literature actually talks about this option. From Bhaarathiya literature to Old Testament, all of them talk about huge animals and people who lived for long period of time. Bhaarathiya literature even goes to extent of directly saying that the evolution will ensure that the size of animals and people will decrease as time goes by. Finding huge bones would actually support this narrative.

But this narrative goes against the western narrative. The narrative of western civilization is that the man started from a nomadic lifestyle and has gone further and further up the ladder of civilization. The peak of this human civilization is represented by the western civilization. If this narrative is reversed: then it means that the ancient civilizations were advanced and the modern ones are only catching up. This keeps the western civilization in lower hierarchy than the ancient civilizations.

So, may be evolution theory's prediction that the man will get better with time is because of the vested interests of western narrative. It is an attempt to push the narrative. In this process, they trampled on the bible's narrative also(by introducing dinosaurs). However, the biblical scheme of things are kept alive in many other ways from racial theories to 5000 year mark.

This 5000 year mark is very interesting and keeps cropping up.

[svenkat]

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.

[svenkat]

matrimcji,

“catvari vak parimita padani tani vidur brahmana ye minishinah, guha trini nihita neengayanti turiyam vaco manushya vadanti”

-Rg Veda I.164.45

Four are the definite grades of speech.Those brahmana-s who are wise know them.Three are deposited in secret and are motionless.Men speak the fourth grade of speech.

"Explanation"-Sabda is said to have four forms:para,pasyanti,madhyama and vaikhari.Each form is grosser than the preceding one.Articulated speech is of the fourth kind.

Vayu arising from 'muladhara' ascends through the level of the navel(Naabhi),heart(Hrdaya) and throat(Kanta) and produces audible sound.At these four levels,it has the appellations para,pasyanti,madhyama and vaikhari

[svenkat]

One is reminded of the Ilayaraja song in "Sindhu Bhairavi"-"Ellaaame sangeetham thaan,Ellaamae Sangeethanthaan Sathathil Porantha Sangathithaan Shadjamamenbathum Dheivathamenbathum
Panja Parambaraiku Appuranthaan"All this sangeetham is but sounds,this shadjama and deivatha are onlee after the pangs of hunger in the stomach.
OT:Yet,it is a fact classical tamizh removed the sounds emanating from kanta,hrdaya and naabhi from its 'grammar' to create an ornate language of self -expression which created a gulf between spoken tamizh and classical tongue.Telugu tamils like Ki-Rajanarayanan,malayali tamils like Sundar Ramaswamy have pointed attention to this fact.And it was this gap between classical language(marapu kavithai),sopken language,folk poetry(naatu paadal) which was ignored by the haughty mandarins of DMK that Maruthur Ramachandra Menon and his advisors used to unseat Mu.Ka to forge a broader coalition than dMK.

[Pulikeshi]

Four very quick points:

• Sanathana Dharma is eternal - that which is eternal can only be sustained by what is eternal - Shruti (you got to love tautologies )
• The system defended for eons by sages (Kumarila, Jaimini, Sankara, etc.) is epistemological sound and is based on the principle that the Vedas are eternal, incorruptible, of coherent construct, of non-human and non-divine origin, etc.
• The above two facts has nothing to do with nationalism or cultural chauvinism. It is just argumentation on sound footing of epistemology, therefore scientific.
• From Buddhist matha to all other prophetic beliefs of the book have no epistemological defense against the Shruti - that which is eternal cannot be refuted (see point 2). This is their real fear and therefore the need to fix a date and fate.

Neither Witzel nor Talageri have done any favors to Sanathana Dharma - one through ill intention and another through good intention. The topic of this thread is about so called Aryans and their origins. It would be a shame to allow cultural chauvinism or nationalism to allow the defeat of that very foundation of the Indian civilization that many of us hold dear. 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.

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

[JE Menon]

>>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?

[KLP Dubey]

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 patently false statement. Vedic pandits are often very much Indian nationalists, but such a sentiment arises from NOT from false claims that Veda was the product of ancient Indian genius, but from a knowledge of how the Indians used the transmitted Vedic words to gain and disseminate knowledge at a time when all others were still in hunter-gatherer stage or worse.

[KLP Dubey]

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).

[UlanBatori]

Ganesha comes before all Gods, even Agni because of the rearrangement by Vyasa

This is one of those very complex things where the Puranas have tied a knot and negated any effort at chronology.

The best explanation for the "Ganesha" name and all the Baby Elephant metaphors was the one given and sketched out by Sreekumar Vinekar MD (a piskiatry prof)during the Demolition of Limp Phallus Courtright and his Dean R. Phallus at Emory U in Feb. 2004. (Sorry the sketches are not given there, but you can imagine them from his words). He pointed out that the OM (AUM) as written in Samskrtam has the character for U with the "chandrakala" and star/dot above it. (In the hands of a bored student in a Madhom doodling on his desk in protest against long assignments - my interpretation), that became a Baby Elephant. The "Ganam" in the term "Ganesha" refers to all of Creation, enumerated, thus "Ganesha" or "Ganapati" simply refers to the Omnipotent, over all of Creation.

Once the Baby Elephant metaphor was developed, it may have "gone viral" with the approval of the Rishis because it captured the popular imagination. Also, it came in handy to convince kids that the BE is The One to go to for blessings to do well in Math (counting) and hopefully in Money-Counting, and thus images of the BE got sponsorship from bijnej ppl. At least without knowing, billions have worshipped and written and re-written the letter AUM representing the three levels outside the PararAtman. One small step towards Moksham.

So there is a simple reason why Ganesha comes before all else. Ganesha represents That which is before all else.

I have nothing against the imaginations of writers creating respectful but popular legends around these deep concepts. However, note that the Rakshasas are delighted to take these away and misuse them. Google "Emory Limp Phallus Courtright" and u will c y (or do the EZ Reading). Again, once the Rakshasas steal the Vedas, it takes aeons of untiring battle to undo the damage. That traumatic experience is what makes my BP go up when I read of the "explanations" where the much-later, populist Puranas are allowed to clutter the Basics.

Another example of the possible damage from the Puranas, in the hands of the Rakshasas, is the debate over the Bhavishya Purana: apparently it describes both the Islamic Invasion (as "Paisachikam") and the abusive reign of Poodledom Queen Victoria. The Faithful jump up and down citing this as "proof" of Vyasa using Divya Drishti, but neglect to wonder why the predictions never extend to the actual future as seen today, but always stop short, maybe by a few hundred years of today. Obviously the Puranas have been re-written/re-arranged far more than my web-site, and are nearly as jumbled.

[svenkat]

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 patently false statement. Vedic pandits are often very much Indian nationalists,

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.

Compare this with the role of the vedic pundit in pre-British India? What value does vedic/shashtraic education have in modern intellectual/social/economic life?