Understanding the Vedas - Vedas 105 - A few key teachings of the Vedas

[R. Narayanaswami]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp Email Share Link

Vedas 105 - A few key teachings of the Vedas

The Vedas contain many valuable teachings and each writer can choose those teachings most suited to introduce and explain the Vedas. I have selected the following six teachings. Understanding these six teachings well will go a long way to better understand the 'spirituality and the wisdom in the Vedas' and the very many excellent works of great scholars of Vedas like Sri Aurobindo, Sri Kapali Sastry, Prof Kashyap and others.

The first teaching of the Vedas:

‘tat ēkam’: (or, That One): refers to the Supreme Power that the Rishis identified as the controller guiding and controlling all events happening in the Universe around them to move with clockwork precision. The Upanishadic Rishis later identified the ‘tat ēkam’ as the 'brahman' of the Upanishads.

The Vedas state that the world in which human beings on earth live is governed by a system which is complex and not known to anyone. There is no persisting chaos, even though there may be some difficult periods of disorder or destruction. This complex system has ‘tat ēkam’ as the Supreme Person or Supreme Power or Supreme Energy, who is both transcendent and immanent, and who acts as though as the creator and Controller, controlling all motions of, and in, the universe which all move with clockwork precision.

The second teaching of the Vedas:

Devas: or "Powers of Light": Devas are supra-physical beings with consciousness, force and psychological power. Names like Agni, Vayu, Indra, Soma, Surya, Saraswathi, Aditi etc. are used in the Rig Veda for the devas and their distinct and unique powers. Devas want to help human beings to remove darkness (and negative thinking and thoughts) and to learn and know about Truth (and Light). Devas can be imagined or visualized as the limbs of the Supreme (if the supreme power is considered as a Person) or devas can be imagined or visualized as sub-energies coming out of the universal energy if supreme power is treated as supreme energy and not as a Person. And the universal energy (or ‘tat ēkam’, the supreme power, being or energy) and separate individual sub-energies (or devas, the limbs of the supreme) manage the near-clock-work precision of activities occurring in the Universe.
The Supreme Power or ‘tat ēkam’ is assisted by devas in ensuring its law over the universe. Vedas state ‘tat ēkam’ (that one) and the devas are supra-physical beings with consciousness, psychological power and force.

Dasyus: or Powers of Darkness: Just like devas are powers of Light and Truth, there are dasyus who are powers of darkness and falsehood in the Universe. Names like Vrtra, Vala, Pani are used in Rig Veda to denote dasyus. Why such powers of darkness exist, whether they were originally devas and adopted negative ways and falsehood by straying from the path of truth either by choice or by association and hence became dasyus is not clear. As can be seen and known, such forces exist and these are broadly classified as dasyus in the Vedas. These are symbols used to describe the common forms of negative traits possessed by human beings, like, kama (desire), krodha (anger), lobha (greed), moha (delusion), mada (pride and hubris), and matsarya (jealousy), also commonly referred to as the ‘shad ripus’ (or six enemies) of mankind. The dasyus seek to influence the human beings to their ways by opposing the efforts of the devas to help human beings in every way. Symbolically, the Vedas describe many battles between devas and dasyus and the victory of devas.

The third teaching of the Vedas: World considered as separated into seven imaginary zones
The Vedas state that the world can be considered to be divided, from the Earth’s station where human beings live to the Supreme Station, where the Supreme Power’s abode is, into seven dhamas or seven imaginary zones, (Rig Veda Mantra 1.22.16, ‘prithivyāḥ saptha dhāmabhih’), located at different (increasing) height levels from the earth station to the supreme station. Each such dhama or imaginary zone is named a loka (or non-physical world) with an associated level of consciousness. For example, the earth loka (known as ‘Bhu loka’ in the Vedas) has the matter or material consciousness; the next higher ‘loka’, the ‘Bhuvah loka’ that of air or Vayu or emotional consciousness; next higher, the ‘Suvah loka’, that of mind and so on; the highest station or the ‘supreme station’, known as ‘Satya loka’ (the truth world) has pure truth, consciousness and existence.

The fourth teaching of the Vedas: Yajna and Sacrifices:

At the core of the Vedic teaching is yajna. The Rishis of the Vedic period taught the inner yajna and the wisdom in the Vedas to their 'key' disciples. The Rishis also taught the 'outer yajna' and its benefits to all other disciples.

The fifth teaching of the Vedas: Divinizing Life:
The Rishis state that the Vedas show how all human beings can lead a ‘divinized life’ and at the same time pursue one’s interests, profession or trade and lead a happy married life.

The sixth teaching of the Vedas: Re-incarnation (or re-births):

The Vedas state that the human beings have many lives (re-birth). The aim of human life, in each life, is to lead a good and moral life, engaged in karma or work or action of one’s choice, seeking and advancing to higher and higher levels of consciousness and eventually reaching the Supreme Station of the Supreme Power or Supreme Energy or Supreme Person which Vedas name as ‘tat ēkam’ (That One). This may require multiple births. In every life, living starts from the consciousness level that one attained at the previous birth. In other words, it is a continuous journey in the succeeding birth from the consciousness level that one left off in the previous birth.

 

[renuka]

Vedas 105 - A few key teachings of the Vedas

The Vedas contain many valuable teachings and each writer can choose those teachings most suited to introduce and explain the Vedas. I have selected the following six teachings. Understanding these six teachings well will go a long way to better understand the 'spirituality and the wisdom in the Vedas' and the very many excellent works of great scholars of Vedas like Sri Aurobindo, Sri Kapali Sastry, Prof Kashyap and others.

The first teaching of the Vedas:

‘tat ēkam’: (or, That One): refers to the Supreme Power that the Rishis identified as the controller guiding and controlling all events happening in the Universe around them to move with clockwork precision. The Upanishadic Rishis later identified the ‘tat ēkam’ as the 'brahman' of the Upanishads.

The Vedas state that the world in which human beings on earth live is governed by a system which is complex and not known to anyone. There is no persisting chaos, even though there may be some difficult periods of disorder or destruction. This complex system has ‘tat ēkam’ as the Supreme Person or Supreme Power or Supreme Energy, who is both transcendent and immanent, and who acts as though as the creator and Controller, controlling all motions of, and in, the universe which all move with clockwork precision.

The second teaching of the Vedas:

Devas: or "Powers of Light": Devas are supra-physical beings with consciousness, force and psychological power. Names like Agni, Vayu, Indra, Soma, Surya, Saraswathi, Aditi etc. are used in the Rig Veda for the devas and their distinct and unique powers. Devas want to help human beings to remove darkness (and negative thinking and thoughts) and to learn and know about Truth (and Light). Devas can be imagined or visualized as the limbs of the Supreme (if the supreme power is considered as a Person) or devas can be imagined or visualized as sub-energies coming out of the universal energy if supreme power is treated as supreme energy and not as a Person. And the universal energy (or ‘tat ēkam’, the supreme power, being or energy) and separate individual sub-energies (or devas, the limbs of the supreme) manage the near-clock-work precision of activities occurring in the Universe.
The Supreme Power or ‘tat ēkam’ is assisted by devas in ensuring its law over the universe. Vedas state ‘tat ēkam’ (that one) and the devas are supra-physical beings with consciousness, psychological power and force.

Dasyus: or Powers of Darkness: Just like devas are powers of Light and Truth, there are dasyus who are powers of darkness and falsehood in the Universe. Names like Vrtra, Vala, Pani are used in Rig Veda to denote dasyus. Why such powers of darkness exist, whether they were originally devas and adopted negative ways and falsehood by straying from the path of truth either by choice or by association and hence became dasyus is not clear. As can be seen and known, such forces exist and these are broadly classified as dasyus in the Vedas. These are symbols used to describe the common forms of negative traits possessed by human beings, like, kama (desire), krodha (anger), lobha (greed), moha (delusion), mada (pride and hubris), and matsarya (jealousy), also commonly referred to as the ‘shad ripus’ (or six enemies) of mankind. The dasyus seek to influence the human beings to their ways by opposing the efforts of the devas to help human beings in every way. Symbolically, the Vedas describe many battles between devas and dasyus and the victory of devas.

The third teaching of the Vedas: World considered as separated into seven imaginary zones
The Vedas state that the world can be considered to be divided, from the Earth’s station where human beings live to the Supreme Station, where the Supreme Power’s abode is, into seven dhamas or seven imaginary zones, (Rig Veda Mantra 1.22.16, ‘prithivyāḥ saptha dhāmabhih’), located at different (increasing) height levels from the earth station to the supreme station. Each such dhama or imaginary zone is named a loka (or non-physical world) with an associated level of consciousness. For example, the earth loka (known as ‘Bhu loka’ in the Vedas) has the matter or material consciousness; the next higher ‘loka’, the ‘Bhuvah loka’ that of air or Vayu or emotional consciousness; next higher, the ‘Suvah loka’, that of mind and so on; the highest station or the ‘supreme station’, known as ‘Satya loka’ (the truth world) has pure truth, consciousness and existence.

The fourth teaching of the Vedas: Yajna and Sacrifices:

At the core of the Vedic teaching is yajna. The Rishis of the Vedic period taught the inner yajna and the wisdom in the Vedas to their 'key' disciples. The Rishis also taught the 'outer yajna' and its benefits to all other disciples.

The fifth teaching of the Vedas: Divinizing Life:
The Rishis state that the Vedas show how all human beings can lead a ‘divinized life’ and at the same time pursue one’s interests, profession or trade and lead a happy married life.

The sixth teaching of the Vedas: Re-incarnation (or re-births):

The Vedas state that the human beings have many lives (re-birth). The aim of human life, in each life, is to lead a good and moral life, engaged in karma or work or action of one’s choice, seeking and advancing to higher and higher levels of consciousness and eventually reaching the Supreme Station of the Supreme Power or Supreme Energy or Supreme Person which Vedas name as ‘tat ēkam’ (That One). This may require multiple births. In every life, living starts from the consciousness level that one attained at the previous birth. In other words, it is a continuous journey in the succeeding birth from the consciousness level that one left off in the previous birth.

Dear Sir,

Some of the above you posted match the Abrahamic faiths.
Especially the Deva-Dasyu concept is like the Angel- Devil concept.

In Christianity the Devil is a fallen angel.

In Islam the Devil is a being made from fire(Jinn) and he used to be the best of devotees of God but he got jealous of Adam and fell from grace.
In Islam the Devil has his troops of followers too(not clear from where he got his troop, whether other angels too became fallen ones).

Angels in Islam help man to thread the straight path to God but the Devil and his troop make men go astray.

Also in Islam there is the concept of seven zones is also seen as follows:

• Raqi'a
• Araqlun
• Qaydum
• Ma'una
• Di'a
• Daqua
• 'Ariba(Jannatul Firdaus)

 

[R. Narayanaswami]

Thank you for the email.

I have now noted the 'equivalences' and/or the 'analogous nature' of similar teachings as emphasized in the Vedas occurring in the Abrahamic faiths as pointed out by you in this reply. Not having studied those religious texts at length, I do not wish to comment on those points directly.

That said, permit me to point out a few additional points in response to your email.
First, as you have stated in the email, "Abrahamic faiths", the faiths quoted by you, are "faiths" or "religions" or "theology" requiring "faith" and 'total acceptance'. For example, Christianity requires the 'acceptance of Jesus Christ as Saviour' as a pre-requisite. Similarly in other faiths and religions and theology. No such pre-requisite is needed, in my opinion, to follow the Vedas.

Next, the Vedas, and the Sanatana Dharma way of life supported by the Vedas is a science or 'shastra'. It consists of 'theology' part to get started with & which will gradually drop out once the practitioner becomes the experiencer, and a second and more important part of 'spirituality' all combined into one. As our Rishis repeatedly state, 'anubhavam eva shastram' (experience alone is this science) is the essence of the Vedas. The major and significant difference of 'tat ekam' (That One) the Supreme or Controller in the Universe and the same Spirit or energy as the 'antharyami' (the one residing inside the being) and this spirit is aided by the 'devas' (powers of light) with a few 'dasyus' preventing the light from reaching the individual are ideas and validatable (a seen from the lives of many great saints and self-realized souls). These are 'alien concepts' to the other faiths that you have cited.

Next, most of the other religions or faiths came much later than the Vedas and the teachings of our Rishis. It is therefore quite possible and likely that many ideas and concepts in the Vedas may have been included, just an opinion without any research on my part, by the theologians of such faiths. In that sense, any similarity seen in other faiths with the ideas in the Vedas may be just that, similarities! Perhaps, without the deep science and conviction behind such statements as we can see and establish in the Vedas.

 

[renuka]

Thank you for the email.

I have now noted the 'equivalences' and/or the 'analogous nature' of similar teachings as emphasized in the Vedas occurring in the Abrahamic faiths as pointed out by you in this reply. Not having studied those religious texts at length, I do not wish to comment on those points directly.

That said, permit me to point out a few additional points in response to your email.
First, as you have stated in the email, "Abrahamic faiths", the faiths quoted by you, are "faiths" or "religions" or "theology" requiring "faith" and 'total acceptance'. For example, Christianity requires the 'acceptance of Jesus Christ as Saviour' as a pre-requisite. Similarly in other faiths and religions and theology. No such pre-requisite is needed, in my opinion, to follow the Vedas.

Next, the Vedas, and the Sanatana Dharma way of life supported by the Vedas is a science or 'shastra'. It consists of 'theology' part to get started with & which will gradually drop out once the practitioner becomes the experiencer, and a second and more important part of 'spirituality' all combined into one. As our Rishis repeatedly state, 'anubhavam eva shastram' (experience alone is this science) is the essence of the Vedas. The major and significant difference of 'tat ekam' (That One) the Supreme or Controller in the Universe and the same Spirit or energy as the 'antharyami' (the one residing inside the being) and this spirit is aided by the 'devas' (powers of light) with a few 'dasyus' preventing the light from reaching the individual are ideas and validatable (a seen from the lives of many great saints and self-realized souls). These are 'alien concepts' to the other faiths that you have cited.

Next, most of the other religions or faiths came much later than the Vedas and the teachings of our Rishis. It is therefore quite possible and likely that many ideas and concepts in the Vedas may have been included, just an opinion without any research on my part, by the theologians of such faiths. In that sense, any similarity seen in other faiths with the ideas in the Vedas may be just that, similarities! Perhaps, without the deep science and conviction behind such statements as we can see and establish in the Vedas.

Dear Sir,
I have studied Islam Deen rather well and also took a qualification in Arabic and Basic Islamic Jurisprudence and by using the Arabic studied and not reading a translations..it opened up my own understanding on similarities.

My understanding of Sanathana Dharma too has been an interesting one since I also teach Sanskrit and love studying Sanathana Dharma text in depth..but nevertheless all that would be considered information becos jnana as we know only comes from Guru or God or Supreme Consciousness.

But anyway I do not intend to go into details on similarities between Dharma and Deen as I would love to respect this thread and keep it Vedic.

Regards

 

[R. Narayanaswami]

Noted your points. I agree with your statement to keep this thread for discussions on the Vedas.

 

[a-TB]

Vedas 105 - A few key teachings of the Vedas

The Vedas contain many valuable teachings and each writer can choose those teachings most suited to introduce and explain the Vedas. I have selected the following six teachings. Understanding these six teachings well will go a long way to better understand the 'spirituality and the wisdom in the Vedas' and the very many excellent works of great scholars of Vedas like Sri Aurobindo, Sri Kapali Sastry, Prof Kashyap and others.

The first teaching of the Vedas:

‘tat ēkam’: (or, That One): refers to the Supreme Power that the Rishis identified as the controller guiding and controlling all events happening in the Universe around them to move with clockwork precision. The Upanishadic Rishis later identified the ‘tat ēkam’ as the 'brahman' of the Upanishads.

The Vedas state that the world in which human beings on earth live is governed by a system which is complex and not known to anyone. There is no persisting chaos, even though there may be some difficult periods of disorder or destruction. This complex system has ‘tat ēkam’ as the Supreme Person or Supreme Power or Supreme Energy, who is both transcendent and immanent, and who acts as though as the creator and Controller, controlling all motions of, and in, the universe which all move with clockwork precision.

The second teaching of the Vedas:

Devas: or "Powers of Light": Devas are supra-physical beings with consciousness, force and psychological power. Names like Agni, Vayu, Indra, Soma, Surya, Saraswathi, Aditi etc. are used in the Rig Veda for the devas and their distinct and unique powers. Devas want to help human beings to remove darkness (and negative thinking and thoughts) and to learn and know about Truth (and Light). Devas can be imagined or visualized as the limbs of the Supreme (if the supreme power is considered as a Person) or devas can be imagined or visualized as sub-energies coming out of the universal energy if supreme power is treated as supreme energy and not as a Person. And the universal energy (or ‘tat ēkam’, the supreme power, being or energy) and separate individual sub-energies (or devas, the limbs of the supreme) manage the near-clock-work precision of activities occurring in the Universe.
The Supreme Power or ‘tat ēkam’ is assisted by devas in ensuring its law over the universe. Vedas state ‘tat ēkam’ (that one) and the devas are supra-physical beings with consciousness, psychological power and force.

Dasyus: or Powers of Darkness: Just like devas are powers of Light and Truth, there are dasyus who are powers of darkness and falsehood in the Universe. Names like Vrtra, Vala, Pani are used in Rig Veda to denote dasyus. Why such powers of darkness exist, whether they were originally devas and adopted negative ways and falsehood by straying from the path of truth either by choice or by association and hence became dasyus is not clear. As can be seen and known, such forces exist and these are broadly classified as dasyus in the Vedas. These are symbols used to describe the common forms of negative traits possessed by human beings, like, kama (desire), krodha (anger), lobha (greed), moha (delusion), mada (pride and hubris), and matsarya (jealousy), also commonly referred to as the ‘shad ripus’ (or six enemies) of mankind. The dasyus seek to influence the human beings to their ways by opposing the efforts of the devas to help human beings in every way. Symbolically, the Vedas describe many battles between devas and dasyus and the victory of devas.

The third teaching of the Vedas: World considered as separated into seven imaginary zones
The Vedas state that the world can be considered to be divided, from the Earth’s station where human beings live to the Supreme Station, where the Supreme Power’s abode is, into seven dhamas or seven imaginary zones, (Rig Veda Mantra 1.22.16, ‘prithivyāḥ saptha dhāmabhih’), located at different (increasing) height levels from the earth station to the supreme station. Each such dhama or imaginary zone is named a loka (or non-physical world) with an associated level of consciousness. For example, the earth loka (known as ‘Bhu loka’ in the Vedas) has the matter or material consciousness; the next higher ‘loka’, the ‘Bhuvah loka’ that of air or Vayu or emotional consciousness; next higher, the ‘Suvah loka’, that of mind and so on; the highest station or the ‘supreme station’, known as ‘Satya loka’ (the truth world) has pure truth, consciousness and existence.

The fourth teaching of the Vedas: Yajna and Sacrifices:

At the core of the Vedic teaching is yajna. The Rishis of the Vedic period taught the inner yajna and the wisdom in the Vedas to their 'key' disciples. The Rishis also taught the 'outer yajna' and its benefits to all other disciples.

The fifth teaching of the Vedas: Divinizing Life:
The Rishis state that the Vedas show how all human beings can lead a ‘divinized life’ and at the same time pursue one’s interests, profession or trade and lead a happy married life.

The sixth teaching of the Vedas: Re-incarnation (or re-births):

The Vedas state that the human beings have many lives (re-birth). The aim of human life, in each life, is to lead a good and moral life, engaged in karma or work or action of one’s choice, seeking and advancing to higher and higher levels of consciousness and eventually reaching the Supreme Station of the Supreme Power or Supreme Energy or Supreme Person which Vedas name as ‘tat ēkam’ (That One). This may require multiple births. In every life, living starts from the consciousness level that one attained at the previous birth. In other words, it is a continuous journey in the succeeding birth from the consciousness level that one left off in the previous birth.

Dear Sir,

Could you please give exact set of references from vedas (not Gita or Mahabharatha)? where you got this interpretation or translation that you have stated

"The Vedas state that the human beings have many lives (re-birth). The aim of human life, in each life, is to lead a good and moral life, engaged in karma or work or action of one’s choice, seeking and advancing to higher and higher levels of consciousness and eventually reaching the Supreme Station of the Supreme Power "

Thank you

 

[R. Narayanaswami]

Thanks a-TB for your email and question. I reply as follows:

Re-birth is mentioned in the Vedas. I quote RV (1.140.12) below which explicitly mentions about re-birth.

"rathāya nāvamuta nō gr̥hāya nityāritrāṁ patvatīṁ rāsyagnē |
asmākaṁ vīrām̐ uta nō maghōnō janām̐śca yā pārayāccharma yā ca ||"

Meaning of the mantra: O Agni, for chariot and for home, you give us a ship, traveling with the eternal progress of motion, that shall carry us across the births and across the peace, our strong spirits and our spirits of fullness.

Analysis of the mantra:
Note that re-birth is not transmigration (which is the passing of a soul into another body after death). The same ship (referred in the mantra for the soul) goes through many different environments, each standing for a different birth. The soul creates for itself the different birth.

Rebirth is also mentioned in other mantras of Rig Veda in the 10th mandala (10.18.5), (10.59.6) and (10.59.7). The soul is the ship. The same ship or soul goes through many different environments, each standing for a different birth.

For details of all these mantras and detailed explanations, please refer to "Rig Veda Samhita - Mandala 10" by Prof. R. L. Kashyap, SAKSHI Trust Publications, Bengaluru, India 2007 ([email protected]).

 

[renuka]

Thanks a-TB for your email and question. I reply as follows:

Re-birth is mentioned in the Vedas. I quote RV (1.140.12) below which explicitly mentions about re-birth.

"rathāya nāvamuta nō gr̥hāya nityāritrāṁ patvatīṁ rāsyagnē |
asmākaṁ vīrām̐ uta nō maghōnō janām̐śca yā pārayāccharma yā ca ||"

Meaning of the mantra: O Agni, for chariot and for home, you give us a ship, traveling with the eternal progress of motion, that shall carry us across the births and across the peace, our strong spirits and our spirits of fullness.

Analysis of the mantra:
Note that re-birth is not transmigration (which is the passing of a soul into another body after death). The same ship (referred in the mantra for the soul) goes through many different environments, each standing for a different birth. The soul creates for itself the different birth.

Rebirth is also mentioned in other mantras of Rig Veda in the 10th mandala (10.18.5), (10.59.6) and (10.59.7). The soul is the ship. The same ship or soul goes through many different environments, each standing for a different birth.

For details of all these mantras and detailed explanations, please refer to "Rig Veda Samhita - Mandala 10" by Prof. R. L. Kashyap, SAKSHI Trust Publications, Bengaluru, India 2007 ([email protected]).

Dear Sir,

In the Rigveda I have with me the word is पद्वतीं (padvatIM) meaning : travelling/running/with feet.

The transliteration above says patvatīṁ.
patvatīṁ is assume it should be arising from पत्वन् (patvan) which means flying.

Could you kindly clarify this or is it a typo in the transliteration as the Devanagari states padvatīṁ which is from प॒त्ऽवती॑म्.

रथा॑य॒ नाव॑मु॒त नो॑ गृ॒हाय॒ नित्या॑रित्रां प॒द्वतीं॑ रास्यग्ने। अ॒स्माकं॑ वी॒राँ उ॒त नो॑ म॒घोनो॒ जनाँ॑श्च॒ या पा॒रया॒च्छर्म॒ या च॑ ॥
rathāya nāvam uta no gṛhāya nityāritrām padvatīṁ rāsy agne | asmākaṁ vīrām̐ uta no maghono janām̐ś ca yā pārayāc charma yā ca ||



Also I can't seem to find the word"births" in :

"rathāya nāvamuta nō gr̥hāya nityāritrāṁ patvatīṁ rāsyagnē |
asmākaṁ vīrām̐ uta nō maghōnō janām̐śca yā pārayāccharma yā ca ||"

janām̐śca जनाँ॑श्च॒ is an accusative plural word meaning people/mankind.


Could you kindly explain how the word "births" is seen in this stanza.
It seems like a meaning of "taking mankind across"
I assume its taking mankind across the ocean of existence but I can't seem to find "births" as in "each standing for a different birth"

I could be wrong..kindly shed some light.

 

[a-TB]

Thanks a-TB for your email and question. I reply as follows:

Re-birth is mentioned in the Vedas. I quote RV (1.140.12) below which explicitly mentions about re-birth.

"rathāya nāvamuta nō gr̥hāya nityāritrāṁ patvatīṁ rāsyagnē |
asmākaṁ vīrām̐ uta nō maghōnō janām̐śca yā pārayāccharma yā ca ||"

Meaning of the mantra: O Agni, for chariot and for home, you give us a ship, traveling with the eternal progress of motion, that shall carry us across the births and across the peace, our strong spirits and our spirits of fullness.

Analysis of the mantra:
Note that re-birth is not transmigration (which is the passing of a soul into another body after death). The same ship (referred in the mantra for the soul) goes through many different environments, each standing for a different birth. The soul creates for itself the different birth.

Rebirth is also mentioned in other mantras of Rig Veda in the 10th mandala (10.18.5), (10.59.6) and (10.59.7). The soul is the ship. The same ship or soul goes through many different environments, each standing for a different birth.

For details of all these mantras and detailed explanations, please refer to "Rig Veda Samhita - Mandala 10" by Prof. R. L. Kashyap, SAKSHI Trust Publications, Bengaluru, India 2007 ([email protected]).

Thank you very much , Mr Narayanaswami for sharing your expertise in the forum.

I am still wondering about the lines :

"The Vedas state that the human beings have many lives (re-birth)" - I suppose human beings and all life forms must have many lives and not just human beings - Thanks for the reference.


"The aim of human life, in each life, is to lead a good and moral life, engaged in karma or work or action of one’s choice, seeking and advancing to higher and higher levels of consciousness and eventually reaching the Supreme Station of the Supreme Power "

In the above set of statements :

A. Is the aim of human life stated explicitly in the vedas? I am sure there are statements to the effect to respect mother, father, teacher , etc. Is not morality a highly subjective term?

B. Are there clarifications in the vedas as to what morality is?
Vedic rituals have animal sacrifices mentioned (I do not have direct references) - How can that be considered moral?

C. "Seeking and advancing higher levels of consciousness" - who is seeking? Is that the soul? If soul is the ship, who is the inhabitant of the ship? What does advancing higher levels of consciousness mean if the soul is unitary and changeless? Are these explicitly called out in the vedas?

D. Tatvamasi - This seem to be unconditional statement with no talk of advancing to higher levels of consciousness.


Thank you again.

 

[R. Narayanaswami]

Thanks to a-TB and to Renuka for further questions. I shall address both set of questions.

First - response to a-TB:
1. The RV mantras quoted support rebirths as explained by Prof Kashyap in his 26-vol Veda translations ([email protected]). Your point of expanding "human beings" to all inclding animals, birds etc. is appreciated.

2. Reg your point "A". Vedas do not state the aim not does it say what must be done, what must not be done. Vedas use Mantras with 'stayam tapah shraddhayam' - satyam (Truth), tapas (austerity is how it is translated but examples of tapas include single-minded, dedicated efforts etc.), shraddha (focussed attention, concentration etc.). Rishis who had revelations of Veda Mantras have invited the devas (powers of light) and from meanings of mantras, Sri Aurobindo, Kapali Sastry, Prof Kashyap have all stated and explained that devas plant an emanation (a seed of their poer of light) on the chanters and seekers. This power, same as that of 'tat ekam' (That one) helped the Rishis to remove 'dasyus' or powers of darkness in themselves which allow the 'antaryamin' inside to see clearly and to rise in consciousness levels etc. In that sense, the spiritual and psychological meanings of the Veda Mantras, not just the 'direct external meanings of the Sanskrit words' comprising the Veda Mantras, lead us to make statements like those that I have made. Hope this helps.

3. Reg your point B: The 'external, direct word meanings' of the Veda Mantras, published for the first time in the 14th century by Sayana Acharya does talk of animal sacrifices. But the spiritual and psychological meanings stated by Madhvacharya in the 13th century, Sr Aurobindo in the early 20th century and Prof Kashyap in his translations have looked at those "same mantras (Krishna Yajur Veda Kanda 1, 3rd Anuvaka etc.)' and categorically denied that animal sacrifices are what are implied in those mantras. I have done research on the Vedas under Prof Kashyap for the past 8 years and I agree with my teacher Prof Kashyap that there is no animal sacrifice in the Vedas. it is the animal like qualities of 'shad ripus' that we have are to be 'immolated'.

4. Reg your point C: the 'pur antaryami' is a witness only. Does not do anything. Requires lot more space and time to get into detailed discussion. 'dwa suprana ..' Two birds, the jivatma and the paramntama etc. etc. I will leave it here.

5. Reg your point D: That only says that the 'antaryami' and the Supreme 'tat ekam' are one and the same. Humans (and animals, birds etc.) have taken birth to do karma. How to do karma and get to your original state and be one with 'tat ekam' are why we need the Vedas. The spiritual and psychological meanings of SA, TVKS, RLK help us in that direction. And I have summarized such teachings in my book, "Understanding the Vedas" as best as I have understood.

Hope these points are helpful .

Shall now respond to Renuka's questions:

1. Yes, it was a typo in the 'patvtim'. The Devanagiri format of the mantra RV (1.140.12) quoted in the footnote of page 197 of my book, "Understanding the Vedas" is correctly stated as you have quoted in the transliterated and the Devanagiri words of the Mantra. The transliterated word should have been as you have stated, patvatIM. Sorry for the typo of the transliterated word in my text (and in my book).

2. Also, if you notice, I have also used the meaning as, "travelling', exactly as you have quoted. I thank you for joining in this discussion, adding your expertise of Sanskrit, Veda and your 'vast knowledge base'. We are all richer for your contributions and for joining in this thread.

3. Regarding your question of where the 'births' in this mantra, the fourth pada of the mantra, the word 'ya pArayAt, sharma ya cha' (where I have split the 'pArayachcharma ya cha') is translatable as "across the births and across the peace". ( shores of life can be taken as end of life and start of another life or births).

Hope these points are helpful.

 

[R. Narayanaswami]

This is the same post that I posted today at 11:52 am PDT. As of 8:00 pm PDT of same date, I notice that it is awaiting moderator approval. Since I notice a few typos, I am correcting and re-posting now. If you have not approved the 11:52 am post, please approve the following post and delete the earlier 11:52 am post. Or, you can approve both posts, this second one will not have the typos in the former one.
Thanks to a-TB and to Renuka for further questions. I shall address both set of questions. I prefer the former though, posting ONLY the corrected post posted at 8 pm PDT on June 30, 2021.

First - response to a-TB:
1. The RV mantras quoted support rebirths as explained by Prof Kashyap in his 26-vol Veda translations ([email protected]). Your point of expanding "human beings" to all including animals, birds etc. is appreciated.

2. Reg your point "A". Vedas do not state what the the aim of life is or should be. It also does not state what must be done, what must not be done. In that sense, Vedas is not a 'do-it' kind of book.

Vedas use Mantras with 'stayam tapah shraddhayam' - satyam (Truth), tapas (austerity is how it is translated but examples of tapas include single-minded, dedicated efforts etc.), shraddha (focussed attention, concentration etc.). Rishis who had revelations of Veda Mantras have invited the devas (powers of light) to their inner beings. From meanings of mantras, Sri Aurobindo, Kapali Sastry, Prof Kashyap have all stated and explained that devas plant an emanation (a seed of their power of light) on the chanters and seekers. This power, same as that of 'tat ekam' (That one), helped the Rishis to remove 'dasyus' or powers of darkness in themselves. which, in tuen, allow the 'antaryamin' inside to see clearly and to rise in consciousness levels etc. In that sense, the spiritual and psychological meanings of the Veda Mantras, not just the 'direct external meanings of the Sanskrit words' comprising the Veda Mantras, lead us to make statements like those that I have made as the essence of Vedic teaching. The putting together of such a sentence is my own. Hope this helps.

3. Reg your point B: The 'external, direct word meanings' of the Veda Mantras, published for the first time in the 14th century by Sayana Acharya, do talk of animal sacrifices. But the spiritual and psychological meanings stated by Madhvacharya in the 13th century, Sri Aurobindo in the early 20th century and Prof Kashyap, in the latter parts of the 20th century CE and early parts of 21st century CE, in his 26-vol Veda translations have looked at those "same mantras (Krishna Yajur Veda Taittiriya Samhita Kanda 1, Prapathaka 3, Anuvaka 8)' and categorically denied that animal sacrifices are what are implied in those mantras. I have done research on the Vedas under Prof Kashyap for the past 8 years and I agree with my teacher Prof Kashyap that there is no animal sacrifice in the Vedas. It is the animal like qualities of 'shad ripus' that we have that are to be 'immolated' in our yajnas.

4. Reg your point C: 'our antaryami' is a witness only. Does not do anything. Requires lot more space and time to get into detailed discussion of this question . 'dwa suprana ..' Two birds, the jivatma and the paramatma, The famous RV mantra, also stated in Mundaka Upanishad, provide more answers to questions like these. I would like to leave it here.

5. Reg your point D: That only says that the 'antaryami' and the Supreme 'tat ekam' are one and the same. Humans have taken birth to do karma. How to do karma and get to our original state and be one with 'tat ekam' are why we need the Vedas. The spiritual and psychological meanings of SA, TVKS, RLK help us in that direction. And I have summarized such teachings in my book, "Understanding the Vedas" as best as I have understood.

Hope these points are helpful .

Shall now respond to Renuka's questions:

1. Yes, it was a typo in the 'patvim'. The Devanagiri format of the mantra RV (1.140.12) quoted in the footnote of page 197 of my book, "Understanding the Vedas" is correctly stated as you have quoted in the transliterated and the Devanagiri words of the Mantra. The transliterated word should have been as you have stated, padvatIM. Sorry for the typo of the transliterated word in my text (and in my book).

2. Also, if you notice, I have also used the meaning as, "travelling', exactly as you have quoted. I thank you for joining in this discussion, adding your expertise of Sanskrit, Veda and your 'vast knowledge base'. We are all richer for your contributions and for joining in this thread.

3. Regarding your question of where the 'births' in this mantra, the fourth pada of the mantra, the word 'ya pArayAt, sharma ya cha' (where I have split the 'pArayachcharma ya cha') is translatable as "across the births and across the peace". ( shores of life can be taken as end of life and start of another life or births).

Hope these points are helpful.

 

[renuka]

Dear

Thanks to a-TB and to Renuka for further questions. I shall address both set of questions.

First - response to a-TB:
1. The RV mantras quoted support rebirths as explained by Prof Kashyap in his 26-vol Veda translations ([email protected]). Your point of expanding "human beings" to all inclding animals, birds etc. is appreciated.

2. Reg your point "A". Vedas do not state the aim not does it say what must be done, what must not be done. Vedas use Mantras with 'stayam tapah shraddhayam' - satyam (Truth), tapas (austerity is how it is translated but examples of tapas include single-minded, dedicated efforts etc.), shraddha (focussed attention, concentration etc.). Rishis who had revelations of Veda Mantras have invited the devas (powers of light) and from meanings of mantras, Sri Aurobindo, Kapali Sastry, Prof Kashyap have all stated and explained that devas plant an emanation (a seed of their poer of light) on the chanters and seekers. This power, same as that of 'tat ekam' (That one) helped the Rishis to remove 'dasyus' or powers of darkness in themselves which allow the 'antaryamin' inside to see clearly and to rise in consciousness levels etc. In that sense, the spiritual and psychological meanings of the Veda Mantras, not just the 'direct external meanings of the Sanskrit words' comprising the Veda Mantras, lead us to make statements like those that I have made. Hope this helps.

3. Reg your point B: The 'external, direct word meanings' of the Veda Mantras, published for the first time in the 14th century by Sayana Acharya does talk of animal sacrifices. But the spiritual and psychological meanings stated by Madhvacharya in the 13th century, Sr Aurobindo in the early 20th century and Prof Kashyap in his translations have looked at those "same mantras (Krishna Yajur Veda Kanda 1, 3rd Anuvaka etc.)' and categorically denied that animal sacrifices are what are implied in those mantras. I have done research on the Vedas under Prof Kashyap for the past 8 years and I agree with my teacher Prof Kashyap that there is no animal sacrifice in the Vedas. it is the animal like qualities of 'shad ripus' that we have are to be 'immolated'.

4. Reg your point C: the 'pur antaryami' is a witness only. Does not do anything. Requires lot more space and time to get into detailed discussion. 'dwa suprana ..' Two birds, the jivatma and the paramntama etc. etc. I will leave it here.

5. Reg your point D: That only says that the 'antaryami' and the Supreme 'tat ekam' are one and the same. Humans (and animals, birds etc.) have taken birth to do karma. How to do karma and get to your original state and be one with 'tat ekam' are why we need the Vedas. The spiritual and psychological meanings of SA, TVKS, RLK help us in that direction. And I have summarized such teachings in my book, "Understanding the Vedas" as best as I have understood.

Hope these points are helpful .

Shall now respond to Renuka's questions:

1. Yes, it was a typo in the 'patvtim'. The Devanagiri format of the mantra RV (1.140.12) quoted in the footnote of page 197 of my book, "Understanding the Vedas" is correctly stated as you have quoted in the transliterated and the Devanagiri words of the Mantra. The transliterated word should have been as you have stated, patvatIM. Sorry for the typo of the transliterated word in my text (and in my book).

2. Also, if you notice, I have also used the meaning as, "travelling', exactly as you have quoted. I thank you for joining in this discussion, adding your expertise of Sanskrit, Veda and your 'vast knowledge base'. We are all richer for your contributions and for joining in this thread.

3. Regarding your question of where the 'births' in this mantra, the fourth pada of the mantra, the word 'ya pArayAt, sharma ya cha' (where I have split the 'pArayachcharma ya cha') is translatable as "across the births and across the peace". ( shores of life can be taken as end of life and start of another life or births).

Hope these points are helpful.

Dear Sir,

The word travelling was used for Padvatim by me partly because Arabic too has a very similar concept where a word Yajri(يجري) is identical with Padvatim..where the meanings can range from :
To run,flow,travelling, going on,continous flow,floating and moving along the current depending on the concept.

So I have done quite a lot of comparison with both Sanskrit and Arabic and noted that Tajweed rules of Arabic is so similar to Sandhi rules of Sanskrit and also the Classical Arabic text of the Quran has a multilayered meaning and easily misinterpreted just like how Vedic text are at times misunderstood too.

Its amazing to note that Classical languages like Sanskrit and Classical Arabic needs a real deep insight and contemplation and not go word for word and lose the fragrance of Divine Wisdom.

 

[R. Narayanaswami]

Thanks Renuka for your post with clarifications on the meaning of 'padvatIM'. I appreciate your taking the time to add your expertise of Sanskrit and Arabic languages as well as your study of the Vedas and Quran etc. in addition to whatever else may be your scholarship areas. As I stated in yesterday's post, your joining in this discussion thread and sharing your expertise in these areas have made all of us richer! Thanks for your time and contributions to this thread that have embellished my own responses.

 

[renuka]

Thanks Renuka for your post with clarifications on the meaning of 'padvatIM'. I appreciate your taking the time to add your expertise of Sanskrit and Arabic languages as well as your study of the Vedas and Quran etc. in addition to whatever else may be your scholarship areas. As I stated in yesterday's post, your joining in this discussion thread and sharing your expertise in these areas have made all of us richer! Thanks for your time and contributions to this thread that have embellished my own responses.

Dear respected Sir,

I have a question here:

पा॒रया॒च्छर्म॒ या च॑ when the Sandhi is broken down we get
पा॒रया॑त्। शर्म॑। या। च॒ ॥


पा॒रया॑त् here the meaning is very clear ..to cross/traverse/go to the opposite bank/transcendent.

but the शर्म॑ means happiness/comfort/bliss/peace/delight/joy/comfort/refuge/safety/
protection etc.

I still am not able to find any indication of "across the births"

It does seem like the mantra is about seeking to traverse the ocean of existence for bliss/refuge but it does not really say anything about across births.

Many ancient schools of thoughts had a celestial boatman concept as to take souls across upon death and they do not mention about across births.

Could you explain how you arrived to the across births translation?

 

[a-TB]

This is the same post that I posted today at 11:52 am PDT. As of 8:00 pm PDT of same date, I notice that it is awaiting moderator approval. Since I notice a few typos, I am correcting and re-posting now. If you have not approved the 11:52 am post, please approve the following post and delete the earlier 11:52 am post. Or, you can approve both posts, this second one will not have the typos in the former one.
Thanks to a-TB and to Renuka for further questions. I shall address both set of questions. I prefer the former though, posting ONLY the corrected post posted at 8 pm PDT on June 30, 2021.

First - response to a-TB:
1. The RV mantras quoted support rebirths as explained by Prof Kashyap in his 26-vol Veda translations ([email protected]). Your point of expanding "human beings" to all including animals, birds etc. is appreciated.

2. Reg your point "A". Vedas do not state what the the aim of life is or should be. It also does not state what must be done, what must not be done. In that sense, Vedas is not a 'do-it' kind of book.

Vedas use Mantras with 'stayam tapah shraddhayam' - satyam (Truth), tapas (austerity is how it is translated but examples of tapas include single-minded, dedicated efforts etc.), shraddha (focussed attention, concentration etc.). Rishis who had revelations of Veda Mantras have invited the devas (powers of light) to their inner beings. From meanings of mantras, Sri Aurobindo, Kapali Sastry, Prof Kashyap have all stated and explained that devas plant an emanation (a seed of their power of light) on the chanters and seekers. This power, same as that of 'tat ekam' (That one), helped the Rishis to remove 'dasyus' or powers of darkness in themselves. which, in tuen, allow the 'antaryamin' inside to see clearly and to rise in consciousness levels etc. In that sense, the spiritual and psychological meanings of the Veda Mantras, not just the 'direct external meanings of the Sanskrit words' comprising the Veda Mantras, lead us to make statements like those that I have made as the essence of Vedic teaching. The putting together of such a sentence is my own. Hope this helps.

3. Reg your point B: The 'external, direct word meanings' of the Veda Mantras, published for the first time in the 14th century by Sayana Acharya, do talk of animal sacrifices. But the spiritual and psychological meanings stated by Madhvacharya in the 13th century, Sri Aurobindo in the early 20th century and Prof Kashyap, in the latter parts of the 20th century CE and early parts of 21st century CE, in his 26-vol Veda translations have looked at those "same mantras (Krishna Yajur Veda Taittiriya Samhita Kanda 1, Prapathaka 3, Anuvaka 8)' and categorically denied that animal sacrifices are what are implied in those mantras. I have done research on the Vedas under Prof Kashyap for the past 8 years and I agree with my teacher Prof Kashyap that there is no animal sacrifice in the Vedas. It is the animal like qualities of 'shad ripus' that we have that are to be 'immolated' in our yajnas.

4. Reg your point C: 'our antaryami' is a witness only. Does not do anything. Requires lot more space and time to get into detailed discussion of this question . 'dwa suprana ..' Two birds, the jivatma and the paramatma, The famous RV mantra, also stated in Mundaka Upanishad, provide more answers to questions like these. I would like to leave it here.

5. Reg your point D: That only says that the 'antaryami' and the Supreme 'tat ekam' are one and the same. Humans have taken birth to do karma. How to do karma and get to our original state and be one with 'tat ekam' are why we need the Vedas. The spiritual and psychological meanings of SA, TVKS, RLK help us in that direction. And I have summarized such teachings in my book, "Understanding the Vedas" as best as I have understood.

Hope these points are helpful .

Shall now respond to Renuka's questions:

1. Yes, it was a typo in the 'patvim'. The Devanagiri format of the mantra RV (1.140.12) quoted in the footnote of page 197 of my book, "Understanding the Vedas" is correctly stated as you have quoted in the transliterated and the Devanagiri words of the Mantra. The transliterated word should have been as you have stated, padvatIM. Sorry for the typo of the transliterated word in my text (and in my book).

2. Also, if you notice, I have also used the meaning as, "travelling', exactly as you have quoted. I thank you for joining in this discussion, adding your expertise of Sanskrit, Veda and your 'vast knowledge base'. We are all richer for your contributions and for joining in this thread.

3. Regarding your question of where the 'births' in this mantra, the fourth pada of the mantra, the word 'ya pArayAt, sharma ya cha' (where I have split the 'pArayachcharma ya cha') is translatable as "across the births and across the peace". ( shores of life can be taken as end of life and start of another life or births).

Hope these points are helpful.

Thank you for providing clarifications on your view points.

 

[R. Narayanaswami]

Thanks a-TB for your response. I wish to add additional clarification to ensure that my response is not ambiguous.

To your question, on my statement that the "aim of life ....", whether the 'aim of life is explicitly stated in the Vedas", I had to honestly reply that the Vedas is not a 'do it' kind of book but is a book of knowledge and that the statement was developed by me. What I ought to have added but forgot to add is that the various parts of the sentence have Veda mantra support. This can cause doubts in reader's minds whether I am providing my personal opinion. I wish to state emphatically in the negative. I have NOT added any of my opinion or biases in my book, "Understanding the Vedas" or in my postings and replies in this community. I have ONLY stated in my words what are in the Veda Mantras, what many of our scholars like Madhvacharya, Sri Aurobindo, Kapali Sastry and Prof Kashyap have explained in their publications. All sub-parts written in that statement of "the aim of life is ..." are all supported by Veda Mantras and the spiritual meanings explained by the above mentioned authors. Since some of the above scholar's works are quite involved, I have written my book, and these postings, in easy to understand style for all people. In that sense, the phrasing is mine. However, all parts of that sentence and all other statements in my book and in the postings are supported by Veda mantras. In the next few posts, I will also be providing quotes of Veda Mantras where I have chance to discuss again how Vedas suggest human beings lead their lives.

 

[a-TB]

Thanks a-TB for your response. I wish to add additional clarification to ensure that my response is not ambiguous.

To your question, on my statement that the "aim of life ....", whether the 'aim of life is explicitly stated in the Vedas", I had to honestly reply that the Vedas is not a 'do it' kind of book but is a book of knowledge and that the statement was developed by me. What I ought to have added but forgot to add is that the various parts of the sentence have Veda mantra support. This can cause doubts in reader's minds whether I am providing my personal opinion. I wish to state emphatically in the negative. I have NOT added any of my opinion or biases in my book, "Understanding the Vedas" or in my postings and replies in this community. I have ONLY stated in my words what are in the Veda Mantras, what many of our scholars like Madhvacharya, Sri Aurobindo, Kapali Sastry and Prof Kashyap have explained in their publications. All sub-parts written in that statement of "the aim of life is ..." are all supported by Veda Mantras and the spiritual meanings explained by the above mentioned authors. Since some of the above scholar's works are quite involved, I have written my book, and these postings, in easy to understand style for all people. In that sense, the phrasing is mine. However, all parts of that sentence and all other statements in my book and in the postings are supported by Veda mantras. In the next few posts, I will also be providing quotes of Veda Mantras where I have chance to discuss again how Vedas suggest human beings lead their lives.

Thank you for your response. Let me share only a view point of mine.

I am limited in my exposure. I found that even Acharyas who may have a huge following, seem to have added a lot of spin in providing interpretations.

It comes about with an agenda they seem to have to start with and then offer interpretation to suit that agenda,

Some want to somehow have an agenda that all Vedas, Puranas, Vedanta are fully consistent. That is not possible. For example, Purana has deep definitions of good and evil. Vedanta seem to have no concept of evil . I can be corrected.

Ramanuja Acharya seem to have different interpretations than Madhvacharya.

I could not understand Sankara's interpretations easily (as interpreted by others who write about that in English) but I could see that he was consistent without bringing his own spin. But then what do I know.

When it comes to logic it has to stand by itself and Shastras need to provide only those things that I cannot know any other way and that too it should not violate what I already know to be established by proper reasoning. I do not find that to be the case in reading the interpretations.

Everyone claims they are really speaking the words of the teaching exactly as is. In fact the Hare Krishna consciousness founder wrote 'Gita as is' and there are many that disagree with his interpretations.

All authors and acharyas with huge following seem to have their own views expressed as authority,

With that said, your original posts came across as your view points. Hence I was interested in Veda Mantra translated directly. If there is a word for rebirth exists in Sanskrit and it is absent in the mantra , interpreting as rebirth brings in one's own proclivities providing a spin,

I can be corrected

I do not mean to disrespect any acharyas by offering this critique

 

[R. Narayanaswami]

Thanks a-TB for taking the time to clarify your views. Only now, I fully understand your question/concern, so shall try to respond directly to what I consider are the issues:

1. I agree with you that neither you nor I mean to disrespect our Acharyas. We are only sharing our viewpoints to understand ourselves and our scriptures in a better light.

2. The last sentence of your email is the relevant point that I would like to address, namely, "If there is a word for rebirth exists in Sanskrit and it is absent in the mantra , interpreting as rebirth brings in one's own proclivities providing a spin". I do not know whether you read my posts on (i) Meaning of Veda Mantras dated June 9, 2021 (ii) Meaning of Veda Mantras (continued) - Adhyathmic meanings and (iii) Vedas 104 - Adhyathmic Meaning of Veda Mantras (continued). As I have stated there, Yaska in 2000 BCE and Madhvacharya in the 13th century CE have stated that Veda Mantras have multiple meanings. Madhvacharya, "triartho hi vedah" (meaning Vedas have 3 meanings) (a) the adhi- bhouthic or direct or external word meanings (b) adhi-daivic or related to the devas or gods (c) adhyathmic or spiritual meanings or inner meanings. Madhvacharya translated the first 40 suktas of the Rig Veda with all 3 meanings of the Veda Mantras. Sayana Acharya in the very next century after Madhvacharya's works translated all Veda Mantras, in the 14th century CE, with direct or external word meanings, even while stating that the Veda Mantras have spiritual and Adhyathmic meanings as well. Sayana Acharya's famous work, Vedartha Prakasha, developed with the help of over 100 scholars of Vedas and Sanskrit is considered as a very important contribution of Veda Mantra meanings to Vedic understanding. For the first time since the antiquated dates of Vedic origin of 6000 BCE or earlier, we have, in 1367 CE, the complete word-by-word meanings of all Veda Mantras with external or direct meanings.

If that is all what you are willing to accept, namely, the Veda mantra word's Sanskrit direct meaning, and Sanskrit direct meaning only, I refer you to Sayana Acharya's work of 1367 CE. This work has been translated into English by Max Mueller, Wilson and Griffith in the 19th century. Also many Indologists in the 20th and 21st centuries CE have developed their works using Sayana Acharya's works and the English translations of 19th century. Please refer to any of these works and you have ONLY the direct meanings of the Veda Mantras,

As explained in my book and as discussed in my 3 posts on Veda Mantra meanings cited above, the direct or external word meanings only of Veda Mantras do not make much sense in many Veda Mantras or in many passages of the Vedas. And, wherever the Veda mantra meanings using the direct word meanings did not make sense to Mueller, Wilson and Griffith, they concluded that the Veda Mantras have no wisdom and are ritualistic. Since most Indians have learnt about the Vedas from these English translations, they accepted such conclusions and abandoned the study of the Vedas.

Radhavendra Swami in the 17th century CE and a disciple of the Madhvacharya published 'Mantrartha Manjari" by giving further support and examples of the adhyathmic meanings proposed by Madhvacharya. However no others followed up their works or tried to translate all Veda Mantras using adhyathmic meanings of madhvacharya and Raghavendra Swami.

It was Sri Aurobindo in 1914 CE onwards, first by direct vision and later by the study of Veda Mantras, who propounded that the Veda Mantras have spiritual and psychological meanings (the adhyathmic meanings) and only by studying these adhyathmic meanings will we be able to understand the spirituality and wisdom in the Vedas. He wrote extensively and translated 3000 Rig Veda Mantras out of a total of 10,552 Mantras in RV by such meanings. T. V. Kapali Sastry who independently had concluded about Adhyathmic meanings of Veda Mantras (or whether he agreed with Madhvacharya's works is not known exactly) joined Sri Aurobindo in the 1940s and published his seminal work "Siddhanjana" in Sanskrit so that Sri Aurobindo's works in English could be understood by the Vedic Scholars of the day who knew Sanskrit well but not English. Sri Aurobindo died in 1950 & TVKS in 1953 and perhaps, just perhaps, the contributions of SA & TVKS would have ended up like that of Madhvacharya & Raghavendra Swami and not known to mankind but for the singular contributions of Prof R. L. Kashyap. RLK singlehandedly from 1999 to 2014 in a 15-year period translated all Veda Mantras in all Vedas (over 27,000 Veda Mantras) and published them in 26 Volumes.

Not satisfied by the translations of Sayana Acharya and the English translations of Mueller, Wilson & Griffith and the messaging that the Vedas are ritualistic and devoid of wisdom, I was in deep inquiry for many years from the 2005 onwards. I had a chance meeting with Prof RLK in 2012 and in the first 30 minutes his explanations allowed me to grasp the spiritual meanings and the wisdom in the Vedas. I have been doing research on the Vedas under Prof RLK and teaching the Vedas to my friends. My book explains the spiritual and psychological meanings of the Vedas and the wisdom in the Vedas as propounded by SA & RLK. In other words, quoting their works without adding my personal veiwponits into their assigned 'spiritual meanings'.

One more point must be stated in this context. The fact that spiritual or adhyathmic meanings are the inner meanings of the Veda Mantras does not give anybody and everybody (for example, a person like me) the right or authority to draw any meanings for the Veda mantra words to develop any meaning (to quote your words, "to suit their proclivities"). Even most acharyas may or may not be able or capable of eliciting the spiritual meanings of Vedic words. Only persons of the calibre of Rishis - I consider Sri Aurobindo as a modern day Rishi - can develop such adhyathmic meanings. Prof RLK is, in my opinion, if not a modern day Rishi at least a great Saint who I have seen lead a saintly life! Before assigning the 'spiritual or adhyathmic meanings of the Veda Mantras', all the Veda Mantras in all the Vedas must be studied to see at how many places a 'Veda Mantra word' appears. Some words appear at over 100 mantras, many in over 10 to 20 mantras. Only if the (spiritual) meaning assigned to the word is acceptable to all such occasions of all those Veda Mantras, then, and then only, that spiritual meaning for the word is accepted. Sri Aurobindo has laid down this rule and he has followed his own rule. I know Prof RLK has followed and strictly observed this rule before assigning to spiritual meanings of words, not assigned by SA.

Another point worth noting is that if "only direct external word meanings" are allowed to be used to study the Upanishads, the meanings of many sentences/passages in many Upanishads will also not make much sense. Adhyathmic meanings are liberally developed and used by our great Acharyas to explain the Upanishads and that is how they are known as spiritual or Jnana texts.

In conclusion, what I had written in my book and in these postings is what SA as a modern day Rishi had assigned as its spiritual meaning. Prof RLK, painstakingly and with guidance of SA's works and his own deep understandings and spending long hours, had studied ALL Veda Mantra words for their occurrence at all Veda Mantras before assigning its spiritual meaning. I have taken such spiritual meanings of Veda Mantra words and phrases of words in the Veda Mantras, without adding "any proclivities" of my own. SA & RLK has helped to restore the Vedas to the days of antiquity of 6000 BCE or earlier when our Rishis Vasishta, Vishamitra, Atri, Angirasa, their sons and grandsons and their disciples, used a dual viewpoint way of teaching the Veda mantras - the 'spiritual and psychological meanings and inner yajna' to their 'initiate' disciples and the external word meanings and the outer yajna to the commoners.

Hope these explanations help.

 

[renuka]

It was Sri Aurobindo in 1914 CE onwards, first by direct vision and later by the study of Veda Mantras, who propounded that the Veda Mantras have spiritual and psychological meanings (the adhyathmic meanings) and only by studying these adhyathmic meanings will we be able to understand the spirituality and wisdom in the Vedas. He wrote extensively and translated 3000 Rig Veda Mantras out of a total of 10,552 Mantras in RV by such meanings. T. V. Kapali Sastry who independently had concluded about Adhyathmic meanings of Veda Mantras (or whether he agreed with Madhvacharya's works is not known exactly) joined Sri Aurobindo in the 1940s and published his seminal work "Siddhanjana" in Sanskrit so that Sri Aurobindo's works in English could be understood by the Vedic Scholars of the day who knew Sanskrit well but not English. Sri Aurobindo died in 1950 & TVKS in 1953 and perhaps, just perhaps, the contributions of SA & TVKS would have ended up like that of Madhvacharya & Raghavendra Swami and not known to mankind but for the singular contributions of Prof R. L. Kashyap. RLK singlehandedly from 1999 to 2014 in a 15-year period translated all Veda Mantras in all Vedas (over 27,000 Veda Mantras) and published them in 26 Volumes.

Not satisfied by the translations of Sayana Acharya and the English translations of Mueller, Wilson & Griffith and the messaging that the Vedas are ritualistic and devoid of wisdom, I was in deep inquiry for many years from the 2005 onwards. I had a chance meeting with Prof RLK in 2012 and in the first 30 minutes his explanations allowed me to grasp the spiritual meanings and the wisdom in the Vedas. I have been doing research on the Vedas under Prof RLK and teaching the Vedas to my friends. My book explains the spiritual and psychological meanings of the Vedas and the wisdom in the Vedas as propounded by SA & RLK. In other words, quoting their works without adding my personal veiwponits into their assigned 'spiritual meanings'.

One more point must be stated in this context. The fact that spiritual or adhyathmic meanings are the inner meanings of the Veda Mantras does not give anybody and everybody (for example, a person like me) the right or authority to draw any meanings for the Veda mantra words to develop any meaning (to quote your words, "to suit their proclivities"). Even most acharyas may or may not be able or capable of eliciting the spiritual meanings of Vedic words. Only persons of the calibre of Rishis - I consider Sri Aurobindo as a modern day Rishi - can develop such adhyathmic meanings. Prof RLK is, in my opinion, if not a modern day Rishi at least a great Saint who I have seen lead a saintly life! Before assigning the 'spiritual or adhyathmic meanings of the Veda Mantras', all the Veda Mantras in all the Vedas must be studied to see at how many places a 'Veda Mantra word' appears. Some words appear at over 100 mantras, many in over 10 to 20 mantras. Only if the (spiritual) meaning assigned to the word is acceptable to all such occasions of all those Veda Mantras, then, and then only, that spiritual meaning for the word is accepted. Sri Aurobindo has laid down this rule and he has followed his own rule. I know Prof RLK has followed and strictly observed this rule before assigning to spiritual meanings of words, not assigned by SA.

Another point worth noting is that if "only direct external word meanings" are allowed to be used to study the Upanishads, the meanings of many sentences/passages in many Upanishads will also not make much sense. Adhyathmic meanings are liberally developed and used by our great Acharyas to explain the Upanishads and that is how they are known as spiritual or Jnana texts.

SA & RLK has helped to restore the Vedas to the days of antiquity of 6000 BCE or earlier when our Rishis Vasishta, Vishamitra, Atri, Angirasa, their sons and grandsons and their disciples, used a dual viewpoint way of teaching the Veda mantras - the 'spiritual and psychological meanings and inner yajna' to their 'initiate' disciples and the external word meanings and the outer yajna to the commoners.

Hope these explanations help.

Dear Sir,

It does seem that finally it all boils down to acceptance, reverence, belief,trust and faith in the words of Ancient Rishis and Modern day Rishi Shri Aurobindo.

It's with this belief/faith/trust that we are able to align with their revelations.
If we keep intellectualizing everything we go into over drive of our declarative memory and block ourselves from tuning into the Adhyatamic meanings.

Well,I guess this is the point where all schools of thought meet, be it Sanathana Dharma or Abrahamic or Nature oriented systems..where one simply has to surrender to the wisdom acquired by deep insight and revelations of the Rishis/Prophets/Elders and align with it.

 

[R. Narayanaswami]

Thanks Renuka for sharing your thoughts in these posts.

I am a former NASA Scientist, a Veda practitioner, a Veda teacher and am a researcher on the Vedas during the past 10 years. I do not have any study experience of other religions or faiths whether Abrahamic or Nature oriented. So I would like to confine my remarks to what ever I know; I therefore limit my remarks to pertain to only the Vedas.

Responding to points raised in the discussions sometimes does not accurately reflect what the 'discusser' meant to convey - whether it is I or you and any other person as the discusser. I shall speak for myself and if my explanations in the last post gave the impression that "belief/faith/trust' is needed to follow the Vedas, I wish to clarify my position with 2 pints: (i) the Vedas is considered as a science, and states so by all learners and pandits of the Vedas. the Sanskrit word, shastra' is used to refer to the Vedas. I have stated in my book that the various Rishis at different points of time (perhaps separated by hundreds or thousands of years apart) have received 'revelations of Veda Mantras' for devas like Agni, Indra, Soma. Surya, Saraswathi, Aditi and others that all point out to similar psychological powers of those devas. In other words, experimental science requires the ability to be able to do the same experiment at different times by different people and to be able to obtain 'same or similar results'. I therefore consider the Veda Mantras having experimental validity. (ii) Clearly, our Masters suggest that everyone begin the study by having faith in the Veda Mantras. Without the patient's faith, even perhaps a physician's medicine may not have a positive impact on the patient's curing of the disease. However Vedic masters and teachers are stating that each such person who began the study of the Vedas with faith will start 'experiencing' the benefits of Vedic wisdom and the devas' help and grace; once they start experiencing the powers of the devas in them selves and starting to see the benefits of the Vedic wisdom, the faith/belief with which they started the study of the Vedas drops out. They then become the 'experiencer'. And the Vedic teachers say that if they were not able to 'experience', they are free to, and must, drop out of the study. In other words, each and everyone will, and must, be able to realize the divinization of their life and activities. 'anubhavam eva shastram' (experience alone is this (Vedic) Science).

If my emphasis on 'adhyathmic' meanings propounded by our original Rishis (6000 BCE or earlier), Yaska (about 2000 BCE), Madhvacjarya (13th century), Sayana Acharya (14th century, even though he stated that the Veda Mantras have adhythmic meanings but he confined to put out only the direct, external meanings of the words of the Veda Mantra), Raghavendra Swamy (17th Century), Sri Aurobindo (20th century), TV Kapali Sastry and Prof R. L. Kashyap (20th century) gave the impression that one must believe in the powers of Rishis and Acharyas to have the faith or belief to study the Vedas, that was not the point that I wanted to convey. What I wanted to convey is this: All our scriptural texts - the Veda Samhitas, Brahmanas, Aranyakas, Upanishads, Puranas, the Bhagavad Gita - all of them use symbols, symbolism and have multiple meanings. Hence study and understanding of any of our scriptural texts is NOT possible without taking into account 'adhyathmic meanings'. The adhyathmic meaning determination requires deep vision, follow established rules and is painstakingly hard. Hence those whose expertise and vision are established well, following their adhyathmic meanings is required. But all those cited above have given each individual the freedom to 'experience' the adhythmic meanings and teachings. I have benefited by my study and practice of the Vedas and wanted to share such teachings that show the wisdom path of the Vedas. Since I do not know about other faiths/beliefs/religions, I do not know whether they provide the freedom for the individual to 'experience' or not . The Vedas provide full freedom for all to 'experience' the teachings and do not require any acceptance by blind faith/belief etc.

I hope my position is fully clarified and clear.

 

[renuka]

Thanks Renuka for sharing your thoughts in these posts.

I am a former NASA Scientist, a Veda practitioner, a Veda teacher and am a researcher on the Vedas during the past 10 years. I do not have any study experience of other religions or faiths whether Abrahamic or Nature oriented. So I would like to confine my remarks to what ever I know; I therefore limit my remarks to pertain to only the Vedas.

Responding to points raised in the discussions sometimes does not accurately reflect what the 'discusser' meant to convey - whether it is I or you and any other person as the discusser. I shall speak for myself and if my explanations in the last post gave the impression that "belief/faith/trust' is needed to follow the Vedas, I wish to clarify my position with 2 pints: (i) the Vedas is considered as a science, and states so by all learners and pandits of the Vedas. the Sanskrit word, shastra' is used to refer to the Vedas. I have stated in my book that the various Rishis at different points of time (perhaps separated by hundreds or thousands of years apart) have received 'revelations of Veda Mantras' for devas like Agni, Indra, Soma. Surya, Saraswathi, Aditi and others that all point out to similar psychological powers of those devas. In other words, experimental science requires the ability to be able to do the same experiment at different times by different people and to be able to obtain 'same or similar results'. I therefore consider the Veda Mantras having experimental validity. (ii) Clearly, our Masters suggest that everyone begin the study by having faith in the Veda Mantras. Without the patient's faith, even perhaps a physician's medicine may not have a positive impact on the patient's curing of the disease. However Vedic masters and teachers are stating that each such person who began the study of the Vedas with faith will start 'experiencing' the benefits of Vedic wisdom and the devas' help and grace; once they start experiencing the powers of the devas in them selves and starting to see the benefits of the Vedic wisdom, the faith/belief with which they started the study of the Vedas drops out. They then become the 'experiencer'. And the Vedic teachers say that if they were not able to 'experience', they are free to, and must, drop out of the study. In other words, each and everyone will, and must, be able to realize the divinization of their life and activities. 'anubhavam eva shastram' (experience alone is this (Vedic) Science).

If my emphasis on 'adhyathmic' meanings propounded by our original Rishis (6000 BCE or earlier), Yaska (about 2000 BCE), Madhvacjarya (13th century), Sayana Acharya (14th century, even though he stated that the Veda Mantras have adhythmic meanings but he confined to put out only the direct, external meanings of the words of the Veda Mantra), Raghavendra Swamy (17th Century), Sri Aurobindo (20th century), TV Kapali Sastry and Prof R. L. Kashyap (20th century) gave the impression that one must believe in the powers of Rishis and Acharyas to have the faith or belief to study the Vedas, that was not the point that I wanted to convey. What I wanted to convey is this: All our scriptural texts - the Veda Samhitas, Brahmanas, Aranyakas, Upanishads, Puranas, the Bhagavad Gita - all of them use symbols, symbolism and have multiple meanings. Hence study and understanding of any of our scriptural texts is NOT possible without taking into account 'adhyathmic meanings'. The adhyathmic meaning determination requires deep vision, follow established rules and is painstakingly hard. Hence those whose expertise and vision are established well, following their adhyathmic meanings is required. But all those cited above have given each individual the freedom to 'experience' the adhythmic meanings and teachings. I have benefited by my study and practice of the Vedas and wanted to share such teachings that show the wisdom path of the Vedas. Since I do not know about other faiths/beliefs/religions, I do not know whether they provide the freedom for the individual to 'experience' or not . The Vedas provide full freedom for all to 'experience' the teachings and do not require any acceptance by blind faith/belief etc.

I hope my position is fully clarified and clear.

Dear Sir,

I totally agree with you about having faith because as a medical doctor, I do notice that patients who have "faith" , somehow heal better God willingly.

But at the same time Covid 19 has proved to everyone of us that faith or no faith most of us got vaccinated because we have hope that it could prevent Covid 19.

So besides faith, hope too is needed.

ShAstra is one of the terms which needs more expansion and its not actually only science.

The meanings can range from body of teaching,divine revelations,treatise be it arts or science and instruction.

So its not just science alone but a whole range of work.

I think sometimes our profession does interfere a little in our perception..for example one who is a scientists might have a scientific slant to his/her perception, one who is a medic might have a medical slant to his/her perception, this is where I feel we do not "see" things in the NOW and AS IT IS.

May be its part of maya to let us have a relative experience of everything by comparing with what we already know.

Coming to Rishis and Gurus..Vedic translations by Swami Dayanand Saraswati does not match much of Shri Aurobindo's translations.

So who is right?
Both!

Cos I feel in reality, sacred text reveal itself to us that too oriented to time,place and person and each of us would have a different revelation which is customized and do not contradict the original text in anyway and one who read it in 1980 would have understood it differently and reading it again in 2020 would reveal a different meaning and so on....change is the only constant as we know and the meanings too would morph to suit the need of the reader.

That is why we find no two Gurus having the same meaning of every verse.

In fact the verse where you said crossing from one bank to another indicates across births is not seen in the translations of Swami Dayanand Saraswati.

This clearly shows that his revelation could have been different from Shri Aurobindo's revelation.

"anubhavam eva shastram' is indeed right and you said that a student who has not felt the experience needs to drop out of the study.
Fair enough provided one does not get Bhranti Darshana(delusions) and claim they are indeed experiencing the "experience"

The experiencer state is also seen in other schools of thoughts but thats a long story.

Anyway, there is no harm starting of with faith and using it as a boat to sail across the ocean of existence and signing of with Jalal -ad -Din Mohammad Rumi and Jesus(pbuh) which both spoke about "experiencing"

"I looked for myself, but my self was gone,
The boundaries of my being had disappeared in the sea.
Waves broke. Awareness rose again.
And a voice returned to myself.

It always happens like this.
Sea turns on itself and foams,
and with every foaming bit
another body, another being takes form.
And when the sea sends word,
each foaming body
melts back to ocean-breath"
----Jalal -ad -Din Mohammad Rumi


"If you give birth to what is within you
the voices you redeem will redeem you.
If you fail to find and give birth to them,
they become part of what is destroying you"....Jesus(pbuh)

 

[R. Narayanaswami]

Thank you Renuka for your detailed response.

I have noted your viewpoints on Dayananda Saraswathi, shAstra having various meanings and other valuable observations. Sharing my viewpoints on all those points expressed by you will take lots of time and space in these postings. Also that is not my intent in starting these posts Vedas 101 thru Vedas 107 (so far) with another few more which will complete these posts. My intent to write my book and to provide about 10 key points from the book via these posts is the following:

It is my opinion, and so stated in my book, that the Vedas are revered by most Sanatana Dharma followers even while most of them have not studied or read the Vedas. The Sayana Acharya's translations of the Veda Mantras with external or direct word meanings and the English translations of 19th century British & German authors and other Indology scholars in 19th and 20th centuries based solely on Sayana's works have given the general impression to most that Vedas are ritualistic and devoid of wisdom. The divide between the Vedas for priests and for material success and for blind followers and the Vedanta for Jnana and for the elite and for the progressives had almost, in my opinion, ensured the near-total abandonment of the study of the Veda Samhitas. Even this Veda-Vedanta divide is, again in my opinion, due to the Veda Samhitas explained and studied with ONLY the direct and external meanings and the Vedanta texts explained and studied with MAINLY the inner or adhyathmic or spiritual meanings. However, the messaging, branding and this divide, in my opinion again. which is widely sited by most elites and progressives DOES NOT bring out this key difference in the study and explanations of the Veda and Vedanta texts. Whether Dayananda Saraswathi or Sri Aurobindo is right or whether both are right (or both are wrong) are discussions for scholars. Such discussion can and must continue but not in this context of my posts. Because as I said, my opinion and the reason for writing the book, and providing the essence of the Veda Samhitas using the spiritual and psychological meanings of SA and Prof RLK who has translated all 27,000+ Mantras of all the Vedas with such spiritual meanings is only to highlight that the Veda Samhitas also, if studied using the spiritual meanings, like the Vedanta texts are studied, will show that the Vedas have spirituality and wisdom. I am not aware of our original Rishis', or Yaska's, or Dayananda Saraswathis' or Madhvacharya's or Raghavendra Swami's writings on adhyathmic meanings of Veda mantras taken up by their shishya's with translation of all 27,000+ Mantras. Whether my statements that I have benefited or experienced the benefits of Vedic wisdom appear as 'delusional' or 'accidental occurrences' or 'mithya' also can be debated at other forums (or fora) or context but not as part of these posts. Suffice it to say my purpose and intent to write the book and these posts is to share with a vast group of persons who if they had abandoned the study of the Veda Samhitas based on the negative imaging and branding of the Vedas may reconsider and start the study of the Veda Samhitas because Veda Samhitas contain wisdom and spirituality. Also, the rishis, devas and the Veda Mantras (see my posts on power of Veda Mantra) and 'tat ekam' will help all those who seek help but will leave them alone to do whatever they want to do if that is their preference etc. Because SA's & RLK's works may appear difficult to read for beginning readers to study and understand the Vedas, I wrote the book and these posts in simple easy to understand language so that more of those may take to study of the Veda Samhitas and derive benefits of Vedic wisdom. While I am happy to respond to all scholar's posts to the extent of my knowledge and understanding, I do not wish that the 'main purpose' of these posts get lost by discussions of similarities or lack of them between Vedas and other faiths etc. or advanced works on Veda itself by various other scholars who may differ with SA & RLK or TVKS or me because I rely on their teachings. I have studied and researched the Vedas sufficiently to state that SA, RLK, TVKS works of spiritual meanings are a good way to get started on the study of the Veda Samhitas for the large number of Sanatana Dharma followers who may have abandoned the study because of the negative image and branding of the Vedas. All because of ONLY direct or external meanings for the Veda Samhitas whereas Vedanta is studied with inner or adhyathmic or spiritual meanings. And RLK's 26 volume translations of all Veda mantras is a valuable source of all Veda Mantras to all.

Hope you understand.

 

[a-TB]

Thanks a-TB for taking the time to clarify your views. Only now, I fully understand your question/concern, so shall try to respond directly to what I consider are the issues:

1. I agree with you that neither you nor I mean to disrespect our Acharyas. We are only sharing our viewpoints to understand ourselves and our scriptures in a better light.

2. The last sentence of your email is the relevant point that I would like to address, namely, "If there is a word for rebirth exists in Sanskrit and it is absent in the mantra , interpreting as rebirth brings in one's own proclivities providing a spin". I do not know whether you read my posts on (i) Meaning of Veda Mantras dated June 9, 2021 (ii) Meaning of Veda Mantras (continued) - Adhyathmic meanings and (iii) Vedas 104 - Adhyathmic Meaning of Veda Mantras (continued). As I have stated there, Yaska in 2000 BCE and Madhvacharya in the 13th century CE have stated that Veda Mantras have multiple meanings. Madhvacharya, "triartho hi vedah" (meaning Vedas have 3 meanings) (a) the adhi- bhouthic or direct or external word meanings (b) adhi-daivic or related to the devas or gods (c) adhyathmic or spiritual meanings or inner meanings. Madhvacharya translated the first 40 suktas of the Rig Veda with all 3 meanings of the Veda Mantras. Sayana Acharya in the very next century after Madhvacharya's works translated all Veda Mantras, in the 14th century CE, with direct or external word meanings, even while stating that the Veda Mantras have spiritual and Adhyathmic meanings as well. Sayana Acharya's famous work, Vedartha Prakasha, developed with the help of over 100 scholars of Vedas and Sanskrit is considered as a very important contribution of Veda Mantra meanings to Vedic understanding. For the first time since the antiquated dates of Vedic origin of 6000 BCE or earlier, we have, in 1367 CE, the complete word-by-word meanings of all Veda Mantras with external or direct meanings.

If that is all what you are willing to accept, namely, the Veda mantra word's Sanskrit direct meaning, and Sanskrit direct meaning only, I refer you to Sayana Acharya's work of 1367 CE. This work has been translated into English by Max Mueller, Wilson and Griffith in the 19th century. Also many Indologists in the 20th and 21st centuries CE have developed their works using Sayana Acharya's works and the English translations of 19th century. Please refer to any of these works and you have ONLY the direct meanings of the Veda Mantras,

As explained in my book and as discussed in my 3 posts on Veda Mantra meanings cited above, the direct or external word meanings only of Veda Mantras do not make much sense in many Veda Mantras or in many passages of the Vedas. And, wherever the Veda mantra meanings using the direct word meanings did not make sense to Mueller, Wilson and Griffith, they concluded that the Veda Mantras have no wisdom and are ritualistic. Since most Indians have learnt about the Vedas from these English translations, they accepted such conclusions and abandoned the study of the Vedas.

Radhavendra Swami in the 17th century CE and a disciple of the Madhvacharya published 'Mantrartha Manjari" by giving further support and examples of the adhyathmic meanings proposed by Madhvacharya. However no others followed up their works or tried to translate all Veda Mantras using adhyathmic meanings of madhvacharya and Raghavendra Swami.

It was Sri Aurobindo in 1914 CE onwards, first by direct vision and later by the study of Veda Mantras, who propounded that the Veda Mantras have spiritual and psychological meanings (the adhyathmic meanings) and only by studying these adhyathmic meanings will we be able to understand the spirituality and wisdom in the Vedas. He wrote extensively and translated 3000 Rig Veda Mantras out of a total of 10,552 Mantras in RV by such meanings. T. V. Kapali Sastry who independently had concluded about Adhyathmic meanings of Veda Mantras (or whether he agreed with Madhvacharya's works is not known exactly) joined Sri Aurobindo in the 1940s and published his seminal work "Siddhanjana" in Sanskrit so that Sri Aurobindo's works in English could be understood by the Vedic Scholars of the day who knew Sanskrit well but not English. Sri Aurobindo died in 1950 & TVKS in 1953 and perhaps, just perhaps, the contributions of SA & TVKS would have ended up like that of Madhvacharya & Raghavendra Swami and not known to mankind but for the singular contributions of Prof R. L. Kashyap. RLK singlehandedly from 1999 to 2014 in a 15-year period translated all Veda Mantras in all Vedas (over 27,000 Veda Mantras) and published them in 26 Volumes.

Not satisfied by the translations of Sayana Acharya and the English translations of Mueller, Wilson & Griffith and the messaging that the Vedas are ritualistic and devoid of wisdom, I was in deep inquiry for many years from the 2005 onwards. I had a chance meeting with Prof RLK in 2012 and in the first 30 minutes his explanations allowed me to grasp the spiritual meanings and the wisdom in the Vedas. I have been doing research on the Vedas under Prof RLK and teaching the Vedas to my friends. My book explains the spiritual and psychological meanings of the Vedas and the wisdom in the Vedas as propounded by SA & RLK. In other words, quoting their works without adding my personal veiwponits into their assigned 'spiritual meanings'.

One more point must be stated in this context. The fact that spiritual or adhyathmic meanings are the inner meanings of the Veda Mantras does not give anybody and everybody (for example, a person like me) the right or authority to draw any meanings for the Veda mantra words to develop any meaning (to quote your words, "to suit their proclivities"). Even most acharyas may or may not be able or capable of eliciting the spiritual meanings of Vedic words. Only persons of the calibre of Rishis - I consider Sri Aurobindo as a modern day Rishi - can develop such adhyathmic meanings. Prof RLK is, in my opinion, if not a modern day Rishi at least a great Saint who I have seen lead a saintly life! Before assigning the 'spiritual or adhyathmic meanings of the Veda Mantras', all the Veda Mantras in all the Vedas must be studied to see at how many places a 'Veda Mantra word' appears. Some words appear at over 100 mantras, many in over 10 to 20 mantras. Only if the (spiritual) meaning assigned to the word is acceptable to all such occasions of all those Veda Mantras, then, and then only, that spiritual meaning for the word is accepted. Sri Aurobindo has laid down this rule and he has followed his own rule. I know Prof RLK has followed and strictly observed this rule before assigning to spiritual meanings of words, not assigned by SA.

Another point worth noting is that if "only direct external word meanings" are allowed to be used to study the Upanishads, the meanings of many sentences/passages in many Upanishads will also not make much sense. Adhyathmic meanings are liberally developed and used by our great Acharyas to explain the Upanishads and that is how they are known as spiritual or Jnana texts.

In conclusion, what I had written in my book and in these postings is what SA as a modern day Rishi had assigned as its spiritual meaning. Prof RLK, painstakingly and with guidance of SA's works and his own deep understandings and spending long hours, had studied ALL Veda Mantra words for their occurrence at all Veda Mantras before assigning its spiritual meaning. I have taken such spiritual meanings of Veda Mantra words and phrases of words in the Veda Mantras, without adding "any proclivities" of my own. SA & RLK has helped to restore the Vedas to the days of antiquity of 6000 BCE or earlier when our Rishis Vasishta, Vishamitra, Atri, Angirasa, their sons and grandsons and their disciples, used a dual viewpoint way of teaching the Veda mantras - the 'spiritual and psychological meanings and inner yajna' to their 'initiate' disciples and the external word meanings and the outer yajna to the commoners.

Hope these explanations help.

Thank you Sir for taking time to respond in detail.

Unlike you, my knowledge is limited and what I know in these areas are only by doing Google Searches. I found most of the discussion inthe internet to be flawed. My quest to learn started while debating members here on such topics.

I am open to learn new things but whatever Veda teaches cannot contradict known things and established things. This cannot be said about other religious scriptures (I noticed some parenthetic discussion and hence provided by thoughts based on my limited 'research')

A Puranic story is great if there is an underlying significance. There are many posts in this forum pointing to this. My understanding is that Puranic stories came much later by millennia than the Vedas. Your own posts confirms this understanding.

Now commentaries by Madhavacharya and even Sayanacharya to the extent I could dig up online show that they rely on explaining Veda Mantras using Puranic stories. It is because they believe all those to be true and have a mental model to which they interpret the Mantras.

It took me some time to find an example and with the help of a friend I could do that . Hence it took a few days to respond.

Madhvacharya preaches about Maha Vishnu. Then he has thoughts of Siva and Brahma being distinct violating the teaching of One God. He thinks Vishnu alone is the real God. Strict Vaishnava temples do not allow deities of Siva.

In Kenopanishad commentary ( I got pdf of this commentary online which has translation of Madhvacharya's Sanskrit statements and translation) of Kana Upanishad. Here are some sentences he begins with

"Thus, sitting in his abode, Vaijayanti, the four-faced Brahma extolled comprehensively in seclusion the greatness of the Sri Vishnu to Sadashiva (the ever auspicious one). On being asked how does the human mind, though under control, repeatedly succumbs to attraction (towards sensory objects)? By whom energized does the Primal Breath move? Which divinity does preside over the eyes, ears, and the speech? Thus inquired, Brahma answered the divine Lord of goddess Uma."

So the so called conversation in the Kena is being interpreted by Madhvacharya as Siva the student being taught the greatness of Maha Vishnu by Brahma. To me this comes across as not credible. I respect the believers of Madhvacharya and their sentiments. But it is illogical to bring Puranic Gods for his explanation.

Sayanacharya uses Puranic story to interpret veda mantras. I could not readily find examples and have to get that via someone I know if there is interest. Or at least I can get a reference. The commentary on Sri Rudram has Puranic interpretation it seems.

So there is a lot of subjectivity and agenda in such interpretations.

Dualism and Nondualism are polar opposites and there is one more in-between. In this forum in one of the threads someone mentioned that Tatvamasi is interpreted by Madhavacharya as Atatvamasi !

The three fold views are not the issues. It is really the polar opposite views and using Puranic stories to interpret Vedas are my objections.

Thanks once again. I have interest to get your book to read through when get some time

Best Regards

 

[R. Narayanaswami]

This reply is in response to an earlier question from Renuka how the RV (1.140.12) meaning includes birth.

Sri Aurobindo has established strict rules and protocols to develop spiritual meanings of Veda Mantras. These include but are not limited to the few shown here: (i) to study the full mantra, not to translate the four padas (parts) of the mantra as though they exist independently (ii) ‘spiritual meanings’ assigned to the same word of a mantra that appear in other mantras must ensure proper meanings for all those mantras and many other suggestions. The word ‘pArayAt’ has only one meaning, namely, ‘to cross over’ or go across or take across etc. The word ‘janAmscha’ has meanings of births from the word ‘ja’ for birth, as ‘jananam’ or ‘janani as mother’ etc. Additionally as we look at the whole mantra, the word ‘nithya’ in the second pada of the mantra, translated as ‘eternal’, with the meaning quoted as ‘eternal progress of motion’. Sri Aurobindo says (see his collected works, vol 14, published by Aurobindo Ashram, Pondicherry) we have infinite births. Even after we reach perfection (or fullness) over many births, it does not end; ‘tat ekam’ may send us back again so that we may with our fullness will be able to help others.

This is my understanding of this mantra from Study of Sri Aurobindo’s works and Prof RLK’s translations from his RV Mandala 1, Book 3, which I have quoted for the mantra in this post and in my book.

Hope this explanation is helpful.

 

[R. Narayanaswami]

Thank you a-TB for your latest post and seeking further views of mine on those.

I shall respond as follows:

First, on Sayana: He studied Vedas under Sringeri Mutt Pontiffs, he was Prime Minister of Vijayanagara Empire and he used over 100s of scholars of Sanskrit and Veda and translated the meanings of all Veda Mantras into Sanskrit word meanings but used ONLY external or direct word meanings. Because over 100 scholars were in his team, the same word appearing in different Veda mantras are given different word meanings (by different scholars) so there is no unfiorm meaning for the same word of the Veda mantra across all Veda Mantras. I do not know whether he used Puranic stories to explain the Veda Mantras or not. It hardly matters – irrespective of whether Sayana used Puranic meanings or not, his translations do not help us understand the spirituality or wisdom in the Vedas because all our scriptural texts including Veda Samhitas and Upanishads require ‘spiritual or adhyathmic’ meanings for us to understand these texts correctly. All Sankara Mutts, Kanchi, Sringeri and others and all Veda Patashalas under the Mutts teaching Veda to students of the patashalas (and our future priests doing all Veda functions for all of us) hold Sayana and his work as the authority. And all our elites and progressives abandon the study of the Vedas as ritualistic and devoid of wisdom. Hence my efforts to highlight SA and RLK and their ‘spiritual meanings’ with an easier to understand book written by me.

Next on Madhvacharya: While you point out examples of his Kena Upanishad verse explanations and other cases to express your disagreements, I take a slightly different view with many of his pronouncements that run counter to my understandings. And that is to respect the ‘greatness’ of Madhvacharya and his vedic contributions & conclude that maybe I have not risen to his level of Vedic understanding and leave it at that. For example, Madhvacharya stated that there are 3 meanings to Veda Mantras: (i) the adhi-bhouthic or external/direct word meanings (ii) the adhi-daivic or related to the Gods and (iii) the ahdythmic or spiritual. In his Rig Bhashyam, where he has translated the first 40 suktas of Rig Veda, he has mainly used the adhi-daivic meanings, related to the Gods. Thus, the ‘tat ekam’ is referred by him as Maha Vishnu. Only in select places he has given the ahdythmic meanings. In that sense, he may still be justified to connect Veda Mantras explained with ‘adhi-daivic’ meanings (pertaining to the devas or Gods, the 2nd of his 3 meanings). Since the Gods in his time, the 13th century CE were Puranic Gods, the “adhi-daivic meanings” of the Rig Veda Mantras of first 40 suktas only (out of 1028 suktas in Rig veda). And the word, Vishnu, (“veveshti vyapnothi vishwam yah vishnuh”) – because he pervades over everything, inside and out, he is called Vishnu. Only at select places, Madhvacharya has given the adhyathmic or spiritual meanings. I have NOT used Madhvacharya’s Rig Bhashya or any of his translations including his “adhi-daivic” or whatever “adhyathmic” of his first 40 suktas. I have only quoted his conlusion of 3 meanings present for all Veda mantras including adhyathmic as being made as earky as 13th century CE which gave added justification of Sri Aurobindo’s justification of existence of such meanings by “direct vision” at first and later by study if the Veda mantras.

In my book and these posts, I have only used Sri Aurobindo’s works and Prof. R. L. Kashyap’s 26-vol translations of all Veda mantras, all using ‘adhyathmic and spiritual meanings’ exclusively for all Veda mantras (without the other 2 meanings stated by Madhvacharya). In that sense, even if I accept all objections raised by you about Madhvacharya & Sayana, no harm is done or no change is needed in the contents of my book or these postings because neither Madhvacharya’s nor Sayana’s meanings of Veda Mantras are used by SA, RLK or TVKS or me. I am convinced that SA, TVKS and RLK works are excellent way to introduce to all Sanatana Dharma followers the spirituality and wisdom of the Veda Samhitas. Since their works may appear as advanced and difficult to follow for many Sanatana Dharma followers who have not studied the Vedas, my book written in an easy readable style and providing overview of all scriptural texts that came out of the Vedas from its antiquated origin of 6000 BCE or earlier to the present days of 2020 CE (which are not covered in SA or RLK works), in my opinion, may provide a good textbook on the Vedas.

Hope these explanations answer your points and helpful.