Vedic learning restricted to brahmins only - true or false?

[sudeshwer]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp Email Share Link

Both the parts of Vedas demonstration by Mani Mama(as one prohit called him) is amazing. First, why not Sringeri Mutt organize something so that from 'living' 73 years old son in Rajasthan, the two ancient mantras are recorded and kept live. I fervently appeal to Sringeri Mutt to do this for posterity. Second, the Lecturer says without understanding the meaning we should not recite anything. well, I recite every day some slogas, certainly, without understanding the meaning. Why, who understands even sandhyavandanam we do daily three times a day. I am confused. I mean meaning of every word but ofcourse many people including myself understand the overall meaning.

 

[nannilam_balasubramanian]

Both the parts of Vedas demonstration by Mani Mama(as one prohit called him) is amazing. First, why not Sringeri Mutt organize something so that from 'living' 73 years old son in Rajasthan, the two ancient mantras are recorded and kept live. I fervently appeal to Sringeri Mutt to do this for posterity. Second, the Lecturer says without understanding the meaning we should not recite anything. well, I recite every day some slogas, certainly, without understanding the meaning. Why, who understands even sandhyavandanam we do daily three times a day. I am confused. I mean meaning of every word but ofcourse many people including myself understand the overall meaning.

There many books available in the Leading Book Shops giving Bhasyam for many Slokas/Stothras including
for Sandhya Vandhanam. One can take the help of them.

Balasubramanian
Ambattur

 

[nannilam_balasubramanian]

Vedic learning

In today's world tell me how many Brahmins themselves take the study of Vedas seriously?
So I feel any deserving candidate should learn it so that Vedic Tradition remains.

The religious practices is still followed in India. Of late, people have started getting
fear amongst themselves, owing to certain ups and downs in their families, and
visit temples frequently and do pariharams, etc based on astrologer's advices,
though people in general have not shown much interest in learning Vedism with full
devotion. People engage purhoits for doing homam, etc towards prosperity of
the family, wealth, acquision of wealth, children (where there is no issue in the house)
and general well-being on account of Nava-graha Peyarchis.

Balasubramanian
Ambattur

 

[nannilam_balasubramanian]

Some people follow the practices of Homam, etc even today besides the following:

Giving Dana
Visit Family Deity regularly because of unshakeable faith
Nithya Pooja at home
Listening to Pravachan or Discourse
Show keen interest for knowledge of Vedism and develop
spiritual will to do religious acts
Sacred acts like observing Vrata
Recitation of Japa Mantras
Invite Sumangali Ladies and offer Food after performing
Suhasani Pooja
Calling Vedic People to the house to chant Vishnu Sahasranamam
once in a year

 

[nannilam_balasubramanian]

The Creator of Life and Vedas. Brahma received Vedas from OM.

Balasubramanian
Ambattur

 

[Somayaji.S]

Vedic learning restricted to brahmins only

In fact the verse "Sahanaavavathu" is the result of a quarrel (Hostility)between sri.Yagjnavalkya (student) and his Teacher sri.Vaisampayana

Reference:-WIKIPEDIA
Yājñavalkya (Devanagari: याज्ञवल्क्य) of Mithila was a legendary sage of Vedic India,[SUP][1][/SUP] credited with the authorship of the Shatapatha Brahmana (including the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad), besides the Yoga Yajnavalkya and the Yājñavalkya Smṛti.[SUP][1][/SUP] He is also a major figure in the Upanishads.

According to tradition, Yājñavalkya was the son of Devarāta and was the pupil of sage Vaiśampāyana.[SUP][1][/SUP] Once, Vaiśampāyana got angry with Yājñavalkya as the latter argued too much to separate some latter additions to Yajurveda in being abler than other students. The angry teacher asked his pupil Yājñavalkya to give back all the knowledge of Yajurveda that he had taught him.[SUP][1][/SUP]
As per the demands of his Guru, Yājñavalkya vomited all the knowledge that he acquired from his teacher in form of digested food. Other disciples of Vaiśampāyana took the form of partridge birds and consumed the digested knowledge (a metaphor for knowledge in its simplified form without the complexities of the whole but the simplicity of parts) because it was knowledge and they were very eager to receive the same.[SUP][1][/SUP]
The Saṃskṛt name for partridge is "Tittiri". As the Tittiri (partridge) birds ate this Veda, it is thenceforth called the Taittirīya Yajurveda. It is also known as Kṛṣṇa Yajurveda or Black-Yajurveda on account of it being a vomited substance. The Taittirīya Saṃhitā thus belongs to this Yajurveda.[SUP][2][/SUP]
Then Yājñavalkya determined not to have any human guru thereafter. Thus he began to propitiate the Sun God, Surya. Yājñavalkya worshipped and extolled the Sun, the master of the Vedas, for the purpose of acquiring the fresh Vedic portions not known to his preceptor, Vaiśampāyana.[SUP][3][/SUP]
The Sun God, pleased with Yājñavalkya penance, assumed the form of a horse and graced the sage with such fresh portions of the Yajurveda as were not known to any other. This portion of the Yajurveda goes by the name of Śukla Yajurveda or White-Yajurveda on account of it being revealed by Sun.

 

[Somayaji.S]

Vedic Learning restricted to brahmins only-true or false.

Rishi sri.Yaagjna Vakya is famous in many ways.Once in the Royal court of Emperor Janaka of Mithila,Kumari.Gargi Vaachanakavi (daughter of the Rishi Garga) challenged sri.Yagjnavalkya for a "Religious discussion".She said :-"Like 3 arrows from a bow at one time,I am asking you straight away 3 questions"---Kumari Gaargi is an Arshini (to whom Vedha was "revealed) and a Bahma Vaadhini(Not married,but dedicated life to religious work) (Ref;-1)---"Gargasya Putri Gaargi"

Sri.Gaargi was also an Authrity in Abtruse "Poorva Meemaamsam"(Ref;-1)

Only in Hindu Religion VEDHAM has been "Revealed" to WOMEN (Arshinis) and there are 42 such Arshinis.Sri.Vaagambruni is one such "Famous" Arshini..

Sri.Sulabha Maitreyi (anther Arshini,but "Saadhya Vathu"=married and dedicated to religious work) wife of sri.Yaagjnavalkya was the 'Cheer leader" for sri.GARGI,against her husband.

ref-1;- "Position of women in Hindu Civilisation"--Book--Sri.Anatha Sadhasiv Altekar--Publisher-Motilal Banarasidas--delhi--1959--reprint--1987.

 

[crbsram]

Hi All
Very interesting discussion. I can sincerely say that Vedic learning is not restricted to only brahmins. There are lots of people in the modern age mis-understand the word brahmin. The one who had the upanayana samskara and wear the sacred thread is not a brahmin. He is the one who should possess these qualities (I have tried to list a few)
1) Learn the essence of vedas and upanishads ( here the person should be knowing the bhasyam of vedas)
2) Should be well verse in doing pooja for the benefit of others. (nowadays these poojas and samskaras are commercialized)
3) Should do yajna for the public cause
4) Should not see partiality in human beings

Only a person with all these qualities can call himself as brahmin. My guruji always used to say, a Brahmin is a one who realises that he and Brahman are not different they are one. So in the vedic era they categorized the people who are well versed in vedas and mantra shastras as brahmins. So that for the benefit of people these brahmins can do yajna or pooja on behalf of the yajamana. So it is not restricted to brahmins, the one who really needs to study the Vedas they can learn from the learned guru.

Om Namah Shivayah
Thanks
C.R.Bala

 

[suraju06]

Vedic learning restricted to brahmins only - true or false?- is the question.


The answer is:

1. There is enough evidence to prove that vedic learning was open to every one in the society-this included brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vyshyas, Sudras, Panchamans and even those who did not know their caste/gothra.

2. There is enough evidence to prove that Vedic learning was open to ladies.

All that we hear contrary to these two well proved facts are hyperbole, politics and hypocritical manipulation.

Cheers.

 

[suraju06]

Sidhdham satsamprdhAyE sthira dhiyamanagam shrOthriyam brahma nishtam
sathvastam sathya vAcham samaya niyathayA sAdhu vruthyA samEtham
dambAsUyAthi muktham jitha vishaya ganam dheerga bandhum dhayAlum
skAlithyE cAsithAram sva para hithaparam desikam bhUshnurIpsEth. (Swami Desikan)

A good teacher's qualities:

1. He should be a learned person from the lineage of great acharya parampara.
2. He should have clear mind and intellect not wavering.
3. He should have studied the vedas and should have his mind set in the brahman which is the subject of the vedas.
4. He should be sAtvic in nature.
5. He should be a satyavadin.
6. He should be disciplined in tune with the times.
7. He should not be conceited nor should he be envious.
8. He should have control of his indriyas.
9. He should behave as a helping kin.
10.He should be kind hearted.
11.He should be quick to point out deficiencies.
12.He should be mindful of what is good for others and himself.

A sishya (student) should choose such an Acharya.

 

[renuka]

Sidhdham satsamprdhAyE sthira dhiyamanagam shrOthriyam brahma nishtam
sathvastam sathya vAcham samaya niyathayA sAdhu vruthyA samEtham
dambAsUyAthi muktham jitha vishaya ganam dheerga bandhum dhayAlum
skAlithyE cAsithAram sva para hithaparam desikam bhUshnurIpsEth. (Swami Desikan)

A good teacher's qualities:

1. He should be a learned person from the lineage of great acharya parampara.
2. He should have clear mind and intellect not wavering.
3. He should have studied the vedas and should have his mind set in the brahman which is the subject of the vedas.
4. He should be sAtvic in nature.
5. He should be a satyavadin.
6. He should be disciplined in tune with the times.
7. He should not be conceited nor should he be envious.
8. He should have control of his indriyas.
9. He should behave as a helping kin.
10.He should be kind hearted.
11.He should be quick to point out deficiencies.
12.He should be mindful of what is good for others and himself.

A sishya (student) should choose such an Acharya.

What a co incidence!! I was just reading the June issue of Sambhashana Sandesha Sanskrit magazine and the same is listed there in an article titled

आचार्यः अध्यापकः उपाध्यायः च

 

[sarang]

Rightly said, sir. We are ready to accept two hundred years of glib talk and believe whatever is said by the west and ignore our timeless treasures.

Recitation of vedas and learning of vedas are entirely different things. Many nayanmars, azhwars, of gurus and commoners of all varnas learnt vedas and preached the contents of vedas to all audiences. I also gave a reference from jeyamohan. In his essay he says people of all varnas learnt relevant portions of veda mantras for regular use in their professions.

Vedic learning restricted to brahmins only - true or false?- is the question.


The answer is:

1. There is enough evidence to prove that vedic learning was open to every one in the society-this included brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vyshyas, Sudras, Panchamans and even those who did not know their caste/gothra.

2. There is enough evidence to prove that Vedic learning was open to ladies.

All that we hear contrary to these two well proved facts are hyperbole, politics and hypocritical manipulation.

Cheers.

 

[nannilam_balasubramanian]

I find Swami Dayanand Saraswathi Lectures give us lot of inputs and produces
a spirit in us to learn Vedic Dharma. If a person who desires to attain peace
has to have some true knowledge about his existence, which can only be obtained
through study of our Hindu Vedic principles. One cannot get spirituality without seeking
the basic knowledge concepts in spirituality. One has to start studying with the help
of knowledgeable people and slowly and steadily understand Vedic explanations of
Upanishads. Once a person starts reading it regularly, a sort of Atma Shakthi will
develop. In fact, one can notice in some Lord Shiva Temples, chanting Sanskrit
Slokas, Rudram, Chamakam, etc daily in the evening, though not knowing Sanskrit.
It generates some energy towards self-development. To develop or enhance Vedic
Knowledge about Vedic Dharma, one has to have a Good Guru to teach properly
without akshara or pronounciation flaws.

Balasubramanian
Ambattur

 

[prasad1]

I know that the so self styled rationalist have left the forum.
We all can be happy, and hide our differences, and sweep it under the carpet. But unfortunately ignorance is not a bliss.
There was Caste discrimination, and there is even today caste discrimination (or reverse caste discrimination).


Criticism of Manusmriti


Needless to say, the Manusmriti has been criticised and condemned. Manusmriti's detractors feel that some of its injunctions favor one community (the Brahmins) over others. It is also accused of trying to imply that the Shudras as races foreign to India. Almost all of its injunctions pertaining to the Shudras are seen as tools for their exploitation. While it is sometimes claimed (with almost no evidence) that certain passages of Manusmriti which are highly biased against Shudras are later additions or interpolations, it must be noted that atleast some of the statements in the Manusmriti against Shudras were already present by the time of Shankaracharya (7th-8th Century CE), who quotes them in some of his commentaries. So it is unlikely that these so-called interpolations, if there were any, were done much later than the writing of the text itself.


Here are some selections:


I – 91. "One occupation only the Lord prescribed to the shudra - to serve meekly even these other three castes."
I – 93. "As the Brahmana sprang from (Prajapati’s i.e. God’s) mouth, as he was first-born, and as he possesses the veda, he is by right the lord of this whole creation."
II – 31. "Let (the first part of ) a brahmin’s (denote) something auspicious, a kshatriya’s name be connected with power and a vaishya’s with wealth, but a Shudra’s (express something) contemptible."
II – 100. "Whatever exists in the world is the property of the Brahmana; on account of the excellence of his origin the Brahmana is indeed, entitled to it all."
VIII – 37. "When a learned Brahmin has found treasure, deposited in former (times), he may take even the whole (of it); for he is the master of everything."
VIII – 270. "A shudra who insults a twice born man with gross invective, shall have his tongue cut out; for he is of low origin."
VIII – 271. "If he mentions names and castes of the (twice born) with contumely, an iron nail, ten fingers, shall be thrust red hot into his mouth."
IX – 189. "The property of a Brahmana must never be taken by the king, that is a settled rule; but (the property of men) of other castes the king may take on failure of all (heirs)."
IX – 317. "A Brahmin, whether learned or ignorant, is a powerful divinity."
X – 129. "No collection of wealth must be made by a shudra even though he be able to do it; for a shudra who has acquired wealth gives pain to Brahmana."
XI – 261-62. "A Brahmana who has killed even the peoples of the three worlds, is completely freed from all sins on reciting three times the Rig, Yajur or Sama- Veda with the Upanishad."
XII. 4. "If the shudra intentionally listens for committing to memory the veda, then his ears should be filled with (molten) lead and lac; if he utters the veda, then his tongue should be cut off; if he has mastered the veda his body should be cut to pieces."
The Manusmriti is also condemned as highly anti-feminist.



IX – 3 . "Her father protects (her) in childhood, her husband protects (her) in youth and her sons protect (her) in old age; a woman is never fit for independence."
IX – 18. "Women have no business with the text of the veda."
IX - 17. "(When creating them) Manu allotted to women (a love of their) bed, (of their) seat and (of) ornament, impure desires, wrath, dishonesty, malice, and bad conduct."

Hinduism / manusmriti

 

[renuka]

Frankly speaking logic answers everything.If God has given us humans a mind to think that means knowledge and noble thoughts should fill it up.



After all the Vedas does say:

Ano Bhadraaha Kritao Yantu Vishvataha."
" Let noble thoughts come to us from all directions"

 

[prasad1]

Shri. Vikram Masson 11/20/02

The Vedantacharyas themselves forbade Vedic (which would include the Upanishads) learning to sudras, women and dalits. Here is Shankaracharya:


Sankara and that a sudra does not possess the prerogative of acquiring divine knowledge, appears from this that, according to the smrti, he is forbidden to hear it (veda-sravana-pratishedhaH), or read it (vedAdhyayana-pratishedhaH) or learn its sense (tad artha jnAnAnushthAnayoscha pratishedhaH) it is declared in the smrti that he is forbidden either to hear the veda, or read the veda or to learn its contents, or to practise its injunctions. hearing is forbidden to him in these texts: "if he listens to the reading of the veda, his ears are to be filled with molten lead and lac' (vedam upasrinvatas traptu-jatubhyAm srotra pratipUranam); and 'the sudra is a walking cemetery; therefore no-one must read in his vicinity' (padyu ha vai etat smasAnam yat sUdras tasmAt sUdra-samIpe na adheyatavyam). "and consequently the reading of it is forbidden to him: for how can he, in whose neighbourhood even the veda is forbidden to be read, read it himself? and if he utters it, his tongue is to be cut; and if he retains it in his memory, his body is to be slit. and it results from the meaning of the terms that he is prohibited from learning its contents, or practising its injunctions, according to the texts, "let no-one impart intelligence to a sudra' (na sUdrAya matim dadyAd) and 'reading, sacrifice and liberality are the duties of twice born men' (dvIjAtInAm adhyayanam ijyA dAnam).


As for the sudras who are thought to have attained "liberation" in the Hindu tradition -- "as regards vidura, dharma, vyadha and others in whom knowledge was produced in consequence of their recollection of acts performed in former births, their enjoyment of its results cannot be prevented, from the transcendent character of the effects of knowledge; and because in the text; 'let the four castes be made to hear them', the smrti declares that the four castes possess the prerogative of learning the itihasas and puranas. but it has been established that sudras do not possess the prerogative of acquiring divine knowledge derived from the veda."


You will find similar passages in Ramanuja and Madhva. This is not something we can brush away, this is a PROBLEM, a specific theological problem.

Shastras


I agree that originally there was no intention to bar any one from learning, and in some quarters it is still true.
But it will be a folly to proclaim that some religious organization does not practice this discrimination.
Your goal is same as mine, that is to say that there should be no obstacle to learning.
Using that learning to make a living, might still be very difficult for a non-brahmin.
I am appalled that learned people like Renukaji, Sarajuji, and Sarangji are in denial.
It is like newt Gingrich saying there is no racial undertone to hatred towards Obama.
You can not hide an Elephant in plain sight.

 

[mahakavi]

>>You can not hide an Elephant in plain sight.<<

In the vernacular it is stated as: முழு பூசுனைக்காயை சோற்றில் மறைப்பது
Colloquially it is called pUsaNikkAy. But it is actually pUsunaikkAy

 

[prasad1]

>>You can not hide an Elephant in plain sight.<<

In the vernacular it is stated as: முழு பூசுனைக்காயை சோற்றில் மறைப்பது
Colloquially it is called pUsaNikkAy. But it is actually pUsunaikkAy

I was thinking of the very idiom, my mother would say it, but I did not know to write it.
Thanks.

 

[biswa]

The question is not just whether whether NBs are prevented from learning the Vedas. After all such things are difficult to do in modern, secular India. The practical question is whether NBs will be willingly taught the Vedas by those who know.

For example there are so many people in this forum (and in the outside world) who have astounding knowledge of our scriptures. Imagine a Shudra comes to your house and says: "Sir/Madam I am impressed by your knowledge. I am a good student, but not a Brahmin. I am interested in learning Gayatri Mantra, Sandhya Vandanam, Vishnu Sahashranamam and all the Vedic truths which only Brahmins seem to know. Will you teach me?"

What will the response be?

 

[prasad1]

The question is not just whether whether NBs are prevented from learning the Vedas. After all such things are difficult to do in modern, secular India. The practical question is whether NBs will be willingly taught the Vedas by those who know.

For example there are so many people in this forum (and in the outside world) who have astounding knowledge of our scriptures. Imagine a Shudra comes to your house and says: "Sir/Madam I am impressed by your knowledge. I am a good student, but not a Brahmin. I am interested in learning Gayatri Mantra, Sandhya Vandanam, Vishnu Sahashranamam and all the Vedic truths which only Brahmins seem to know. Will you teach me?"

What will the response be?

Unequivocal "YES".
I think in this forum everyone will say the same.
I am not so sure that our Acharyas will do that, Or other people who need the services of Veda-charyas will accept this learned NB or women as priest.

We had a mother who wanted to give away the bride as father had passed away, we had tuff time finding a priest who will officiate at the wedding, so we had to arrange an Arya Samaj wedding. A friend of mine passed away, and wanted his daughter to officiate at his ceremony, the vadyar kept telling her to use someone, so was majority of her family.

 

[renuka]

[h=2]IV[/h]
One of the great obstacles to the preservation and propagation of the Veda has been denial of universal access to it. For centuries only the Traivarnika men (men of the three upper castes) have been generally considered eligible to undertake Vedic study, but in effect it has been the exclusive privilege and prerogative of male Brahmins only. Even today most Brahmins who have learnt the Veda, either with or without meaning, do not teach it to women, Sudras and others. But the Veda itself does not say that it is meant for any particular sex, caste or race. On the contrary, it declares that it is meant for all. We have the following Yajur-vedic text; “Just as I have revealed this auspicious word to all human beings, so must you. I have revealed the Vedic truth to Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Sudras, Aryas, personal servants (Svaya) and to the lowest of Sudras (Aranaya) also”.[SUP] 18 [/SUP]Then we have the following Atharvavedic text: “O Man, I, being of the nature of truth and being unfathomable, have revealed the true Vedic knowledge; so I am he who gave birth to the Veda. I cannot be partial either to a Dasa (slave) or an Arya; I save all those who behave like myself (i.e., impartially) and follow my truthful commands”.[SUP] 19[/SUP] The Veda is a universal scripture.

We find examples of Sudras and sons of slaves propagating Vedic hymns. Two examples may be given: Kavashaailusha propagated Suktas 30 to 34 of the Rigveda, Mandala, X, Anuvaka III. It is known that he was a Sudra from the Itareya and Kaushiitaki Brahmanas, the Rigveda Anukramanika, and Sayana’s Bhashya. Kakshavan propagated Suktas 116 to 126 of the Rigveda, Mandala I, Anuvaka XVII. He was the son of a female slave of the king of Angadesa. This is known from the Rigveda Anukramanika, the Bhashya of Sayana and the Mahabharata. Critical study also shows that Janasruti was a Sudra, and Satyakama Jabali was the son of a woman who lived with many men. According to the Upanishads, both received the highest Vedantic teaching. According to internal evidence, women also were eligible for Vedic study. The 179th Sukta of the Rigveda, Mandala I, Anuvaka XXIII, was propagated by Lopamudra, a woman; while the 91st Sukta of the Rigveda, Mandala VIII, Anuvaka I, was propagated by Apala, another woman. The Rigveda Anukramanika and Sayana’s Bhashya inform us to this effect. It is well-known that ladies Gargi and Maitreyi were great sages who knew the highest Upanishadic truths.

Nowhere in the Samhita-Brahmana or the Upanishadic portions is any caste, sex or race excluded from studying and benefiting from the Veda. The sentence “Women and Sudras should not be taught the Veda” (na stri sudro vedam adhiyatam), frequently cited by those who advocate prohibition of access to the Veda to lower castes and women, is not a Vedic text. However, there are passages in some Smritis which lay down such a prohibition. On the contrary, there are passages in other Smritis which maintain that Sudras can receive Upanayana and study the Veda.[SUP]20[/SUP] There is considerable evidence that Sudras of good families, endowed with good qualities, were taught all the Sastras, except the Samhitas, without Upanayana.[SUP]21[/SUP] The Vedanta Sutras, I. 3. 34-38, have been interpreted by almost all the medieval Bhashyakaras as prohibiting Sudras from Vedic study. Of them Sankara is the most liberal, for he at least admits that some Sudras may like Vidura and Dharmavyadha attain Brahma-Knowledge due to the result of their actions in past lives, and that all the four castes are free to attain Brahma-Knowledge through Itihasa-puranas. Some Arya Samajist scholars, however, interpreted the relevant Vedanta Sutras as permitting Sudras also access to Vedic study.

While there is no Vedic text which prohibits Sudras from studying the Veda, there is an explicit text which says he is not eligible to perform sacrifices. “Tasmat sudro yajne anavakluptah.”[SUP]22[/SUP]According to Patanjali not all Sudras are prohibited from performing sacrifices: some are (Niravasita Sudras) and some are not (Aniravasita).[SUP]28[/SUP] Commenting on this, Kaiyata says that Sudras are eligible to perform the five Mahayajnas (great sacrifices).[SUP]24[/SUP] These include the Brahmayajna, which means Vedic study (Svadhyaya), Sandhyavandana, Japa, etc. So, as Nagesa explained, this Vedic text prohibits Sudras from performing only sacrifices like Agnihotra and not the five great sacrifices. This makes them eligible for Vedic study. The Mimsusa Sutras, VI. 1. 24 to 38, have been interpreted by their medieval commentators as prohibiting Sudras from Vedic study and sacrifices. The Arya Samajists, however, do not. accept such an interpretation and maintain that according to Jaimini, all are eligible to perform Vedic rituals because their reward is desired by all and whoever has the capacity to undertake and complete them can do so.[SUP]25[/SUP] Even the medieval commentators admit that Badari, a great sage, who is cited by Jaimini, maintained that all including Sudras are eligible to perform Vedic sacrifices. Similarly, sages like Aitisayana denied the eligibility of women to Vedic study and perform sacrifices, while Badarayana and Jaimini asserted to the contrary. Some Smritis make scriptural study mandatory to women.[SUP]26[/SUP]

To summarise, the Veda itself claims to be a universal scripture meant for all human beings. Whoever has the sincere desire (Arthitva) and capacity (Samarthya) is eligible to study it either in the original or in its translations. Some Smritis and sages assert Sudras and women are not entitled to Vedic study, while other Smritis and sages maintain that they too are entitled. Good sense, justice and reason demand that the latter view be accepted. Everyone has the right to the highest wisdom from the best source available. Moreover, as Western scholars (who according to some Smriti writers would be Mlecchas) aswell as those who are not Traivarnikas (e.g, Prince Dara Shikoh, translated, Swami Vivekananda and Sri Aurobindo) have studied, edited, translated, expounded, or published the Vedas and Upanishads, it is not only unjust but ridiculous to support any more the tabu on Vedic study. People of all castes including the Harijans and Girijans and of all nationalities–irrespective of their sex–should be encouraged to study the Veda.

“Kurvantu Visvam aryan.”

(Let us make the entire world Aryan,
i.e., noble and enlightened.)

Some Thoughts on the Veda and its Study

 

[biswa]

Sure, it is good to know all the ancient prescriptions, but haven't we heard the phrase knowledge is power? Why would somebody give away knowledge (hence power) for free? I think this may also be the reasoning behind the shruti system of learning Vedas. You had to learn it from an obliging guru who may have had his own selection criteria including caste. It is only after the advent of the written form has knowledge been more widely dissipated.

And Indian Brahmins need not be singled out for this. Christian monks and priests have been the keepers of Western knowledge for centuries.

Do you know that many people have now learned the Gayatri Mantra from publicly played CDs/cassettes. Traditionally it may have just been whispered from ear to ear or chanted during some yajnas.

 

[nannilam_balasubramanian]

Westerners are attracted to learn our Hindu Dharma. In fact, many of
them practice Yoga and we can find many in India itself. Varna just like
that could not be related to Jati as such. But then, if we approach a
Purohit to perform any hindu rituals, there will be a query at once. What
is the Community and Custom and further what is the Gothram.

Balasubramanian
Ambattur

 

[suraju06]

prasad1 in post #41:

I am appalled that learned people like Renukaji, Sarajuji, and Sarangji are in denial.It is like newt Gingrich saying there is no racial undertone to hatred towards Obama. You can not hide an Elephant in plain sight.

I feel frustrated when I read the above post. I am not in denial of anything. Rather my case is that there is nothing to deny. On the contrary there are many people in our community who are permanently mired in a ‘mia culpa’ guilt groove unable to come out of it and grow. So every thing for them has to be viewed from this position. And it has to be binary logic always in which the cardinal principle is stated in those oft quoted words “either you are with us or with them. We will bomb you to stone ages”. I have answered with proof a hundred times and I reiterate for one last time now that Vedas never prohibited any one from knowing them. It is rather the smritis which have a hunded ways of descriminating man from man and man from woman. And I have also given enough evidences that learned people take vedas as the ultimate authority and reject what is said in smritis if it is not logical or reasonable. My second objection is about the purpose. Why do we have to keep harping on the smritis and say vedas is not accessible to so and so that too in an age when everything is open to every one? If a mlecha is interested in vedas today he can master it without any one helping him. So what do we achieve by harping on the smritis? – that is, unless you are deply disturbed by the mia culpa complex. Dynamic societies move past aberrations quickly accepting and owning them as aberrations and looking forward to the future. If vedas are vedas or knowledge, smritis are chronicles of how these vedas were acquired by different segments of the society and how the society handled the issues of teaching, learning and using the knowledge. Chronicles are always notorious for the lies and half truths added to the original text over a period of time. And in the case of vedas and smritis we are talking here about the period in thousands of years. So why all this chest beating about the interpolations and the victimhood grievances? And when people try to put the entire blame at the doors of that sitting duck of a target called brahmins it becomes a free for all. In this forum it ends up in a Greek tragedy with every one dying in the end. I do not intend to write any more about this non-sense in this forum. Enough is enough. Before closing I would reiterate this:

1. Vedas are knowledge. They had always been accessible to every one interested irrespective of caste or creed. Sudras and pancamans had accessed it freely without any hindrance. For proof read vedas first (not smrities) and then come and ask for clarifications if you want.

2. All those passages where brahmins are glorified are passages which were added to the smrities by the majority of the society at that time and not by brahmins. By the same logic all those passages where Sudras are spoken of in derogatory terms were also added to the smrities by the majority of the population.

3. Many of the smrities were authored by non-brahmins and as such brahmins can not be held accountable for what is written in them.

4. 2% of a population could not have held the rest of 98% in darkness because the logic defies the simplest of credibility tests.

5. All the talk about a conspiracy to keep the Sudras down is politics of the stinking variety. That talk is the glittering cellophane cover in which communal hatred is packed and sold in the bazars of Indian political make-believe world.
Learned and aware Hindus know what is in vedas and how to access it if one is serious about it. The rest is all nonsense just to be forgiven and forgotten.

6. There is no pumpkin - not even a shred of it to hide from scrutiny. It is there only in the fertile imagination of some in our community suffering from an incurable “mia culpa” syndrome.

I do not intend to join issue with any one on this matter any more.

Cheers.

 

[renuka]

I am appalled that learned people like Renukaji, Sarajuji, and Sarangji are in denial.
It is like newt Gingrich saying there is no racial undertone to hatred towards Obama.
You can not hide an Elephant in plain sight.

Dear Prasadji,

I only saw this line now..hence my late reply.

I am not learned yet but still learning but let me share with you this much.

I am not in denial.
Discrimination exists in the mind of the person who discriminates and not in the person who is being discriminated upon.

I was once not allowed to join another Forum exclusively for Brahmins cos I am not a Brahmin.
I was politely redirected to another forum by the moderator of that forum.

Someone else told me..just fill up their requirements with your mother's gotra etc(since my mum is a Brahmin) and join it..how would they know if you are not a Brahmin.

I didn't do that cos I did not want to gain knowledge by deceit and further more that will amount to disrespecting my father.

I didn't feel discriminated cos I felt that those are rules that are man made.

Why should I feel bad if a man discriminates..God didn't discriminate anyone.

Knowledge can be got through various means these days.

If one door is closed another door is opened and there is no use fighting for learning rights from people who are not willing to impart it.

Knowledge is to be imparted to the suitable candidate.
So its the fault of the person who withholds it without even testing the candidates level of knowledge.

I will also tell you this..I myself have been guilty of discrimination to a certain extent.
Once I heard a recital of Mantra Puspham by Japanese devotees in Puttaparthi.
I was so shocked that it was flawless and felt ashamed of myself that I could not recite it as well.

I was thinking "OMG ..a Japanese can recite like this and I am an Indian and I don't know this as well"

You see I had some ego that as an Indian I should know it better.

That's when I realized that I was behaving as if Sanathana Dharma
belonged to Indians only.

What was I protecting?
I can't protect anything cos God is the only protector and not anyone else.

So in what way was I different from the Brahmin Moderator that denied me entry into his Forum?

He also was protecting something he felt is his.

After that day in Puttaparthi hearing the Japanese Devotees recite Mantra Puspham..I realized that Sanathana Dharma is Universal and not to have even the subtle pride that it's belongs to Hindus/Indians alone.

This is a valuable lesson I learnt in Puttaparthi..that never have any feeling of mine and thine when it comes to Sanathana Dharma.


I hope it's clear to you my stand on Sanathana Dharma.