Translate

सोमवार, 16 अक्तूबर 2017

Sarasvati river basin

Region of Bronze Age Meluhha speakers is Sarasvati river basin and Śakasthāna
https://tinyurl.com/y83qlxab
I suggest that Arachosia < Haraxvaitī- < सरस्वती (R̥gveda) is the Sarasvati Vedic River Basin, Meluhha speakers moved westwards to Drangiana which is Śakasthāna. Both the regions constituted the region of Meluhha speakers of Sarasvati Civilization, from ca. 8th millennium BCE and constituted the underlying speech for mlecchita vikalpa (Meluhha Indus Script cipher). The migrations of people from Kurukshetra (Sarasvati Basin) isattested in Baudhāyana Śrautasūtra.
The presence of Meluhha settlements in Ancient Near East is attested in cuneiform texts. this finds confirmation in an ancient text.
Baudhāyana śrautasūtra 18.44 which documents migrations of Āyu and Amavasu from a central region:pran Ayuh pravavraja. tasyaite Kuru-Pancalah Kasi-Videha ity. etad Ayavam pravrajam. pratyan amavasus. tasyaite Gandharvarayas Parsavo ‘ratta ity. etad AmavasavamTrans. Ayu went east, his is the Yamuna-Ganga region (Kuru-Pancala, Kasi-Videha). Amavasu went west, his is Gandhara, Parsu and Araṭṭa.Ayu went east from Kurukshetra to Kuru-Pancala, Kasi-Videha. The migratory path of Meluhha artisand in the lineage of Ayu of the Rigvedic tradition, to Kasi-Videha certainly included the very ancient temple town of Sheorajpur of Dist. Etawah (Kanpur), Uttar Pradesh. See:
Sealed failaka jar and 14 Ancient Near East artifacts (including seals) with Indus Script hieroglyphs signify iron (metal) smelting work of Bronze Age http://tinyurl.com/h4ynklt
I suggest that the Meluhha word for aloe, 'eagle wood' and cognates in Hebrew, affirms the wesward migrations detailed in Baudhāyana Śrautasūtra:
Periplus maris Erythaei, 37, 39, 49 refers to sailors bring bdellium from Gedrosia and India. (cf. Lassen, Indische Alterthumskunde, I, 289 f. 530,iii,43 Ta. akil (in cpds. akiṛ-) eagle-wood, Aquilaria agallocha; the drug agar obtained from the tree; akku eagle-wood. Ma. akil aloe wood, A. agallocha. Ka. agil the balsam tree which yields bdellium, Amyris agallocha; the dark species of Agallochum; fragrance. Tu. agilů a kind of tree; kari agilů Agallochum. / Cf. Skt. aguru-, agaru-; Pali akalu, akaḷu, agaru, agalu, agaḷu; Turner, CDIAL, no. 49. (DEDR 13) agaru m.n. ʻ fragrant Aloe -- tree and wood, Aquilaria agallocha ʼ lex., aguru -- R. [← Drav. Mayrhofer EWA i 17 with lit.] Pa. agalu -- , aggalu -- m., akalu -- m. ʻ a partic. ointment ʼ; Pk. agaru -- , agaluya -- , agaru(a) -- m.n. ʻ Aloe -- tree and wood ʼ; K. agara -- kāth ʻ sandal -- wood ʼ; S. agaru m. ʻ aloe ʼ, P. N. agar m., A. B. agaru, Or. agarū, H. agar, agur m.; G. agar, agru n. ʻ aloe or sandal -- wood ʼ; M. agar m.n. ʻ aloe ʼ, Si. ayal (agil ← Tam. akil).. (CDIAL 49)
aloe is said to derive from the Hebrew ahal אהל: O.E. aluwan (pl.) "fragrant resin of an E. Indian tree," a Biblical usage, from L. aloe, from Gk. aloe, translating Heb. ahalim (pl., perhaps ult. from a Dravidian language). The Gk. word probably was chosen for resemblance of sound to the Heb., since the Gk. and L. words originally referred to a genus of plants with bitter juice, used as a purgative drug, a sense which appeared in Eng. 1398. The word was then mis-applied to the American agave plant in 1682. "So perhaps there were two similar words - one Semitic, one from Sanskrit. Both ended up as ahal (in Hebrew) or aloe (in English - eventually)."
http://www.balashon.com/2008/03/aloe.html
सरस्वती [p= 1182,3] N. of a river (celebrated in RV. and held to be a goddess whose identity is much disputed ; most authorities hold that the name सरस्वती is identical with the Avestan Haraquaiti river in Afghanistan , but that it usually means the Indus in the RV. , and only occasionally the small sacred rivers in मध्य-देश [see below] ; the river-goddess has seven sisters and is herself sevenfold , she is called the mother of streams , the best of mothers , of rivers , and of goddesses ; the ऋषिs always recognize the connection of the goddess with the river , and invoke her to descend from the sky , to bestow vitality , renown , and riches ; elsewhere she is described as moving along a golden path and as destroying वृत्र &c ; as a goddess she is often connected with other deities e.g. with पूषन् , इन्द्र , the मरुत्s and the अश्विन्s ; in the आप्री hymns she forms a triad with the sacrificial goddesses इडा and भारती ; accord.to a myth told in the VS. xix , 12 , सरस्वती through speech [वाचा] communicated vigour to इन्द्र ; in the ब्राह्मणs she is identified with वाच् , " Speech " , and in later times becomes goddess of eloquence » below) RV. &c (Monier-Williams)
Arachosia bordered Drangiana to the west, Paropamisadae (i.e. Gandahara) to the north, a part of ancient India to the east, and Gedrosia (or Dexendrusi) to the south. Drangiana refer to Śakastana शक--स्थान [p= 1045,3] name of a country (Monier-Williams) Śaka are mentioned in ākhyāna historical narratioves in contests between वसिष्ठ and विश्वामित्र. The शकs are fabled to have been produced by the Cow of वसिष्ठ , from her sweat , for the destruction of विश्वामित्र's army ; in Mn. x , 44; they are mentioned together with the पौण्ड्रकs , ओड्रs , द्रविडs , काम्बोजs , जवनs or यवनs , पारदs , पह्लवs , चीनs , किरातs , दरदs , and खशs , described by Kull. as क्षत्रियs called after the districts in which they reside: according to the VP. iv , 3.They are sometimes regarded as the followers of शक or शालि-वाहन , and are probably to be identified with the Tartars or Indo-Scythians [Lat. Sacae] conquered by विक्रमा*दित्य (AV.Paris3. Mn. MBh. &c). शकm. a kind of animal Pan5car. (v.l. शल) m. a kind of animal Pan5car. (accord. to L. " a camel " or " an ass "). Since śaka is a synonym of śala, śaka era is a synonym for śālivāhana शालि-वाहन.
विक्रमा* दित्य N. of a celebrated Hindu king (of उज्जयिनी and supposed founder of the [मालव-] विक्रम era [cf.संवत्] , which begins 58 B.C.E [but subtract 57-56 from an expired year of the विक्रम era to convert it into C.E.] ; he is said to have driven out the शकs and to have reigned over almost the whole of Northern India ; he is represented as a great patron of literature ; nine celebrated men are said to have flourished at his court [see नव-रत्न] , and innumerable legends are related of him all teeming with exaggerations ; according to some he fell in a battle with his rival शालि-वाहन , king of the south country or Deccan , and the legendary date given for his death is कलि-युग 3044 [which really is the epoch-year of the विक्रम era] ; there are , however , other kings called विक्रमा*दित्य , and the name has been applied to king भोज and even to शालि-वाहन)Inscr. Katha1s. Vet. &c.
In a well-documented and logically argued monograph, Vedveer Arya suggest a date for the saka era. "Since the calendar of Saka era was Chaitradi and amanta, the epoch of the Śaka era must have commenced on 19th Feb 583 BCE." http://bharatkalyan97.blogspot.in/…/the-chronology-of-ancie…
See: https://www.academia.edu/…/The_Chronology_of_Ancient_India_…
"Arachosia" is the Latinized form of Greek Ἀραχωσία - Arachōsíā. "The same region appears in the Avestan Vidēvdāt (1.12) under the indigenous dialect form Haraxvaitī- (whose -axva- is typical non-Avestan)."[1] In Old Persian inscriptions, the region is referred to as 𐏃𐎼𐎢𐎺𐎫𐎡𐏁, written h(a)-r(a)-u-v(a)-t-i.[1] This form is the "etymological equivalent" of Vedic Sanskrit Sarasvatī-, the name of a river literally meaning "rich in waters/lakes" and derived from sáras- "lake, pond." (cf. Aredvi Sura Anahita).
"Arachosia" was named after the name of a river that runs through it, in Greek Arachōtós, today known as the Arghandab, a left bank tributary of the Helmand.( Schmitt, Rüdiger (August 10, 2011). "Arachosia". Encyclopædia Iranica.)
Gedrosia (/dʒɪˈdroʊʒə/; Greek: Γεδρωσία) is the Hellenized name of the part of coastal Baluchistan that roughly corresponds to today's Makran.
Jiroft Civilization covered parts of Sistan and Kerman Province (possibly as early as the 3rd millennium BCE)..
The gates of Haozdar, in Sistan (Persian/Baloch/Pashto: سیستان), known in ancient times as Sakastan (Persian/Baloch/Pashto: ساكاستان; "the land of the Saka"), is a historical and geographical region in present-day eastern Iran (Sistan and Baluchestan Province), southern Afghanistan
(Nimruz, Kandahar) and the Nok Kundi region of Balochistan (western Pakistan).
The approximate extent of Eastern Iranian languages and people in Middle Iranian times in the 1st century BCE is shown in orange
'Gorytos' from the Tomb of Philip
Gold 'gorytos' (quiver-and-bow-case) with repousse representation of the capture of a city, from the Tomb of Philip second half of 4th century BC, Thessaloniki, Archaeological Museum.
saka or Scythian warriors, drawn after figures on an electrum cup from the Kul-Oba kurgan burial near Kerch, Crimea. The warrior on the right strings his bow, bracing it behind his knee; note the typical pointed hood, long jacket with fur or fleece trimming at the edges, decorated trousers, and short boots tied at the ankle. Scythians apparently wore their hair long and loose, and all adult men apparently bearded. The gorytos appears clearly on the left hip of the bare-headed spearman. The shield of the central figure may be made of plain leather over a wooden or wicker base. (Hermitage Museum, St Petersburg)
Skunkha, king of the Sakā tigraxaudā ("pointed-cap-wearing Sakae"). Detail of Behistun Inscription.
Sakas were a Scythian tribe which from the 2nd century BC to the 1st century migrated to the Iranian Plateau and India, where they carved a kingdom known as the Indo-Scythian Kingdom. The Scythians (/ˈsɪθi.ən/ or /ˈsɪði.ən/; from Ancient Greek: Σκύθαι), also known as Scyths, Saka, Sakae, Sacae, Sai, Iskuzai, or Askuzai, were a large group of Iranian. Eurasian nomads who were mentioned by nearby literate peoples as inhabiting large areas in the central Eurasian steppes from about the 9th century BC until about the 1st century BC.[5] The Scythian languages belonged to the Eastern branch of the Iranian languages.
Saka migrated into northwest area of India, attested by a contemporary Kharosthi inscription found on the Mathura lion capital belonging to the Saka kingdom of the Indo-Scythians (200 BC – 400 CE) in northern India,.. In the Persian language of contemporary Iran the territory of Drangiana was called Sakastāna, in Armenian as Sakastan, with similar equivalents in Pahlavi, Greek, Sogdian, Syriac, Arabic, and the Middle Persian tongue used in Turfan, Xinjiang, China. (Bailey, H.W. (1996) "Khotanese Saka Literature", in Ehsan Yarshater (ed), The Cambridge History of Iran, Vol III: The Seleucid, Parthian, and Sasanian Periods, Part 2 (reprint edition), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp 1230–1231.)
Silver coin of Indo-Scythian King Azes II (ruled c. 35–12 BC). Left field on the reverse shows the srivatsa hypertext which also appears on Sanchi and Bharhut stupa toraṇa-s to signify Indus Script hypertext: ayo 'fish' rebus: aya 'iron' ayas 'alloy metal' PLUS khambhaṛā 'fish-fin' rebus: kammaṭa 'mint, coiner, coinage; PLUS dhāī f. ʻ wisp of fibres added from time to time to a rope; dāya 'dotted circle' dhāū, dhāv m.f. ʻa particular soft red ore'. Rebus: dhā̆vaḍ 'iron-smelter',Thus, together vākyārtha, meaning of sentence of hypertexts on the coin -- as a Meluhha expression -- is: mineral ore, alloy metal mint, iron smelter.
Sakastan ("the land of the Saka")> Sistan > Saka > Elamite (Sir-ra-an-qa > Old Persian z-r-k (i.e., Zranka) > Sarangian > Zarangian > Drangiana
"DRANGIANA (or Zarangiana), territory around Lake Hāmūn and the Helmand river in modern Sīstān. The name of the country and its inhabitants is first attested as Old Persian z-r-k (i.e., Zranka)in the great Bīsotūn iii inscription of Darius I (col. I l. 16), apparently the original name...in Herodotus’ tribute list (3.93.2) the Sarangians, Sagartians, Thamanaeans, Utians, Mycians (i.e., all the peoples living in the lands extending from the Iranian central desert through Baluchistan to the Persian Gulf), and neighboring islanders were included in the fourteenth tax district, required to pay the relatively high amount of 600 talents annually. " (http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/drangiana)
The ancient Arachosia and the Pactyan people during 500 BCE

बुधवार, 20 सितंबर 2017

STRUCTURE & CONTENTS -- TAITTIRIYA BRAAHAMANA

HP Rao Akella -- https://www.localcircles.com/a/home?t=c&pid=FmDZB2z1oq4vFnMrIu-Tvi7jpZ6puafPL0qqWFOSHug


PHYSICAL STRUCTURE & CONTENTS 
TAITTIRIYA BRAAHAMANA(M) 
There is cear description of 27 stars in the braahmaNa part of kRShNa YajurvEda. 
Not only the description of names, but also their divine characteristic aspects are furnished in this section. The chapter starts with mantra- 
Agnirnah paatu krittikaah 
अग्निर्नः पातु कृत्तिकाः 
This reference of krittikaas in the opening itself has given rise to a lot of research. This resulted in the opinion of some historians that the KRShNa YajurvEda was composed when the krittikaas are the presiding stars with respect to the earth. Thus dating of Vedas has become an important topic for vedic research. 
Veda is formed with the combination of mantra portion and braahmaNa portion. The mantra portion mainly concentrates on devata and dravya ( the materials associated with sacrificial processes).The braahmaNa portion comprises of statements of vidhi (do’s ) and niShEdha (don’ts) types. 
A section of the critics have been arguing that the brahmaNa portion is like a commentary and hence the former (i.e. brahmaNa portion ) cannot be taken as part of vEda , but it may be given the status of puraaNa. However the above argument is rejected by the traditionalists. They state that it cannot be denied the status of vEda just because the brahmaNa portion is like a commentary. In support of their argument, they quote that the Patanjali’s mahaabhaaShya is also called VyaakaraNa shaastra though it is commentary to original ‘AShThaadhyaayi’ of PaaNini. Similarly the commentary of Vaatsaayana to nyaaya sootras is also given the status of nyaaya shaastra. Further the traditionalists quote the Asvalaayana sootra which mentions brahmaNa and puraaNa separately. 
Atha svaadhyaayamadheeyeeta rchO yajoogmShi saamaani atharvaangirasO braahmanNaani ………. itihaasapuraaNaani. 
अथ स्वाध्यायमधीयीतर्चो यजूगम्षि सामानि अथर्वाङ्गिरसो ब्राह्मणानि .......इतिहासपुराणानि 
The nyaaya darshana declares that the subject matter of manthra and brahmaNa portions is called ‘yaJna’, where as the subject matter of Itihaasaas and puraaNaas is called ‘lokavritta’. 
यज्ञो मन्त्र ब्राह्मणस्य लोकवृत्तमितिहासस्य 
yajnO mantrabraahmaNasya LokavRttamitihaasasya 
In recent times , say during the last two centuries , Svaami Dayaananda Saraswati and his followers made a strong contention that only samhitaa part constitutes vEda, but notr braahmaNa part. They continue their tirade against brahmaNa portions as they have several references regarding animal sacrifice. 
However , this propositions is vehemently countered by Raja Siva Prasad and Kalu Ramasastri who strongly defended the traditional opinion. They maintain that the concept of of violence is to be analysed properly. Just because some words indicating violence are foumd in BraahmaNaas , they cannot be denied the status of being part of vEdas. Even mantra portions have such words. If that argument is pursued , even mantra portion of Vedas also have to be denied the status of ‘parts of vEdas’. 
Then there will be no portion will be left which can be called vEdas. 
OM TAT SAT 
These posts on Krishna yajurveda are taken from a book named " THE SPLENDOR OF KRISHNA YAJURVEDA" WRITTEN BY DR. REMELLA AVADHANULU.

सोमवार, 11 सितंबर 2017

http://www.vignanam.org/veda/purusha-suktam-devanagari.html

ॐ तच्चं॒ योरावृ॑णीमहे । गा॒तुं य॒ज्ञाय॑ । गा॒तुं य॒ज्ञप॑तये । दैवी॓ स्व॒स्तिर॑स्तु नः । स्व॒स्तिर्मानु॑षेभ्यः । ऊ॒र्ध्वं जि॑गातु भेष॒जम् । शं नो॑ अस्तु द्वि॒पदे॓ । शं चतु॑ष्पदे ।
ॐ शान्तिः॒ शान्तिः॒ शान्तिः॑ ॥
स॒हस्र॑शीर्षा॒ पुरु॑षः । स॒ह॒स्रा॒क्षः स॒हस्र॑पात् ।
स भूमिं॑ वि॒श्वतो॑ वृ॒त्वाSत्य॑तिष्ठद्दशाङ्गु॒लम् ॥
पुरु॑ष ए॒वेदग्ं सर्वम्॓ । यद्भू॒तं यच्च॒ भव्यम्॓ ।
उ॒तामृ॑त॒त्व स्येशा॑नः । य॒दन्ने॑नाति॒रोह॑ति ॥
ए॒तावा॑नस्य महि॒मा । अतो॒ ज्यायाग्॑‍श्च॒ पूरु॑षः ।
पादो॓‌உस्य॒ विश्वा॑ भू॒तानि॑ । त्रि॒पाद॑स्या॒मृतं॑ दि॒वि ॥
त्रि॒पादू॒र्ध्व उदै॒त्पुरु॑षः । पादो॓‌உस्ये॒हा‌உ‌உभ॑वा॒त्पुनः॑ ।
ततो॒ विष्व॒ण्-व्य॑क्रामत् । सा॒श॒ना॒न॒श॒ने अ॒भि ॥
तस्मा॓द्वि॒राड॑जायत । वि॒राजो॒ अधि॒ पूरु॑षः ।
स जा॒तो अत्य॑रिच्यत । प॒श्चाद्-भूमि॒मथो॑ पु॒रः ॥
यत्पुरु॑षेण ह॒विषा॓ । दे॒वा य॒ज्ञमत॑न्वत ।
व॒स॒न्तो अ॑स्यासी॒दाज्यम्॓ । ग्री॒ष्म इ॒ध्मश्श॒रध्ध॒विः ॥
स॒प्तास्या॑सन्-परि॒धयः॑ । त्रिः स॒प्त स॒मिधः॑ कृ॒ताः ।
दे॒वा यद्य॒ज्ञं त॑न्वा॒नाः । अब॑ध्न॒न्-पुरु॑षं प॒शुम् ॥
तं य॒ज्ञं ब॒र्॒हिषि॒ प्रौक्षन्॑ । पुरु॑षं जा॒तम॑ग्र॒तः ।
तेन॑ दे॒वा अय॑जन्त । सा॒ध्या ऋष॑यश्च॒ ये ॥
तस्मा॓द्य॒ज्ञात्-स॑र्व॒हुतः॑ । सम्भृ॑तं पृषदा॒ज्यम् ।
प॒शूग्-स्ताग्‍श्च॑क्रे वाय॒व्यान्॑ । आ॒र॒ण्यान्-ग्रा॒म्याश्च॒ ये ॥
तस्मा॓द्य॒ज्ञात्स॑र्व॒हुतः॑ । ऋचः॒ सामा॑नि जज्ञिरे ।
छन्दाग्ं॑सि जज्ञिरे॒ तस्मा॓त् । यजु॒स्तस्मा॑दजायत ॥
तस्मा॒दश्वा॑ अजायन्त । ये के चो॑भ॒याद॑तः ।
गावो॑ ह जज्ञिरे॒ तस्मा॓त् । तस्मा॓ज्जा॒ता अ॑जा॒वयः॑ ॥
यत्पुरु॑षं॒ व्य॑दधुः । क॒ति॒था व्य॑कल्पयन् ।
मुखं॒ किम॑स्य॒ कौ बा॒हू । कावू॒रू पादा॑वुच्येते ॥
ब्रा॒ह्म॒णो॓‌உस्य॒ मुख॑मासीत् । बा॒हू रा॑ज॒न्यः॑ कृ॒तः ।
ऊ॒रू तद॑स्य॒ यद्वैश्यः॑ । प॒द्भ्याग्ं शू॒द्रो अ॑जायतः ॥
च॒न्द्रमा॒ मन॑सो जा॒तः । चक्षोः॒ सूर्यो॑ अजायत ।
मुखा॒दिन्द्र॑श्चा॒ग्निश्च॑ । प्रा॒णाद्वा॒युर॑जायत ॥
नाभ्या॑ आसीद॒न्तरि॑क्षम् । शी॒र्ष्णो द्यौः सम॑वर्तत ।
प॒द्भ्यां भूमि॒र्दिशः॒ श्रोत्रा॓त् । तथा॑ लो॒काग्म् अक॑ल्पयन् ॥
वेदा॒हमे॑तं पुरु॑षं म॒हान्तम्॓ । आ॒दि॒त्यव॑र्णं॒ तम॑स॒स्तु पा॒रे ।
सर्वा॑णि रू॒पाणि॑ वि॒चित्य॒ धीरः॑ । नामा॑नि कृ॒त्वा‌உभि॒वद॒न्॒, यदा‌உ‌உस्ते॓ ॥
धा॒ता पु॒रस्ता॒द्यमु॑दाज॒हार॑ । श॒क्रः प्रवि॒द्वान्-प्र॒दिश॒श्चत॑स्रः ।
तमे॒वं वि॒द्वान॒मृत॑ इ॒ह भ॑वति । नान्यः पन्था॒ अय॑नाय विद्यते ॥
य॒ज्ञेन॑ य॒ज्ञम॑यजन्त दे॒वाः । तानि॒ धर्मा॑णि प्रथ॒मान्या॑सन् ।
ते ह॒ नाकं॑ महि॒मानः॑ सचन्ते । यत्र॒ पूर्वे॑ सा॒ध्यास्सन्ति॑ दे॒वाः ॥
अ॒द्भ्यः सम्भू॑तः पृथि॒व्यै रसा॓च्च । वि॒श्वक॑र्मणः॒ सम॑वर्त॒ताधि॑ ।
तस्य॒ त्वष्टा॑ वि॒दध॑द्रू॒पमे॑ति । तत्पुरु॑षस्य॒ विश्व॒माजा॑न॒मग्रे॓ ॥
वेदा॒हमे॒तं पुरु॑षं म॒हान्तम्॓ । आ॒दि॒त्यव॑र्णं॒ तम॑सः॒ पर॑स्तात् ।
तमे॒वं वि॒द्वान॒मृत॑ इ॒ह भ॑वति । नान्यः पन्था॑ विद्य॒ते‌உय॑नाय ॥
प्र॒जाप॑तिश्चरति॒ गर्भे॑ अ॒न्तः । अ॒जाय॑मानो बहु॒धा विजा॑यते ।
तस्य॒ धीराः॒ परि॑जानन्ति॒ योनिम्॓ । मरी॑चीनां प॒दमिच्छन्ति वे॒धसः॑ ॥
यो दे॒वेभ्य॒ आत॑पति । यो दे॒वानां॓ पु॒रोहि॑तः ।
पूर्वो॒ यो दे॒वेभ्यो॑ जा॒तः । नमो॑ रु॒चाय॒ ब्राह्म॑ये ॥
रुचं॑ ब्रा॒ह्मं ज॒नय॑न्तः । दे॒वा अग्रे॒ तद॑ब्रुवन् ।
यस्त्वै॒वं ब्रा॓ह्म॒णो वि॒द्यात् । तस्य॒ दे॒वा अस॒न् वशे॓ ॥
ह्रीश्च॑ ते ल॒क्ष्मीश्च॒ पत्न्यौ॓ । अ॒हो॒रा॒त्रे पा॒र्श्वे ।
नक्ष॑त्राणि रू॒पम् । अ॒श्विनौ॒ व्यात्तम्॓ ।
इ॒ष्टं म॑निषाण । अ॒मुं म॑निषाण । सर्वं॑ मनिषाण ॥
तच्चं॒ योरावृ॑णीमहे । गा॒तुं य॒ज्ञाय॑ । गा॒तुं य॒ज्ञप॑तये । दैवी॓ स्व॒स्तिर॑स्तु नः । स्व॒स्तिर्मानु॑षेभ्यः । ऊ॒र्ध्वं जि॑गातु भेष॒जम् । शं नो॑ अस्तु द्वि॒पदे॓ । शं चतु॑ष्पदे ।
ॐ शान्तिः॒ शान्तिः॒ शान्तिः॑ ॥

गुरुवार, 7 सितंबर 2017

महाभारत व्याख्यान १६ व १७ यक्षप्रश्न १ Mahabharat 16 Yaksha Prashna

समाजकी आनुवांशिक स्मृति

समाजशास्त्र व मानसशास्त्र दोनोंमें यह सिद्धांत आता है कि जब कोई समाज किसी बहुत बडे सुख या दुखकी घटनाको एकसाथ झेलता है तब उस पूरे समाजकी एक आनुवांशिक स्मृति बनती है जो अगली कई पीढीयोंमें एक आनुवांशिक गुणसुत्रके रूपमें उतरती है। जाने-अनजाने वे पीढीयाँ उस सुख या त्रासदीको लेकर चलती हैं।

रामजन्मका आनंद, रामके वनगमनका दुख और वनवाससे लौटनेकी खुशियाँ जो कई हजार वर्षोंसे लोगोंकी कथा-गीतों-नाट्यमंचनमें उभरी हैं वे केवल एक वाल्मिकी-रामायणके रच जानेसे नही, बल्कि इसलिये कि वह वास्तविक घटनाएँ थीं जिसे लोगोंने सहभागिता पूर्वक झेला है।
रामके वास्तविक इतिहास-पुरुष होनेका यह एक समाजशास्त्रीय प्रमाण है। यही प्रमाण कृष्ण व महाभारत के लिये भी उपलब्ध है। 

रही बात राम या कृष्णके अवतारी पुरुष होनेकी। उसके प्रमाणके निकष कुछ अन्य होंगे। वह फिर कभी।
-- ्अपूर्ण 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
कदाचित निम्नलिखित त्रासदी  ही वह कारण है जो धर्म-वापसीकी सुषुप्त इच्छा जगाती है और जो बचे रहे उनमें कुछ और भावनाएँ संचरित होती हैं।
-------------------------------------------------------------------


Ronnie Mendonca rpmdxb@hotmail.com [TheBecoming]
 TheBecoming@yahoogroups.com


Copied from another discussion group:

The Good, bad and the ugly. These are the three categories I will use to explain the Muslim mindset and practice 

The "good" Muslim

The first category is that of good Muslims.  By good I mean true believers—those who follow the teachings of their prophet, the Quran and the Sunnah to the letter, who try to emulate him in every way and are strict and pious Muslims.  Since the teachings and the examples of Muhammad are full of violence and terror, the more one follows and emulates him the more radical one becomes. Muhammad raided and butchered people merely because they were not his followers. The good Muslims do the same.  All the bombings and terrorism perpetrated by Muslims are replicas of Muhammad’s raids, or "ghazwa", as he called them.  Taking Women as sex slaves, which the Islamic State and Boko Haram practice was also practiced by Muhammad and he sanctioned it in the Quran (33:50; 23: 1-6; 70:30; 4:24; 66:1-2).  He ordered the assassination of his critics stoning the adulterers, chopping the hands of thieves and killing the apostates.  So, the terrorists are actually good Muslims.

The "bad" Muslim 

The second category is of bad Muslims.  These are those who don’t practice their religion and are often ignorant of it.  They may pray or chant the Quran, but have no clue of its content.  They read it for sawab (reward) without understanding it.  These Muslims are ordinary people we all know.  Like everybody else, some are good and some are not so good. Some of them are friendly, but they see themselves as superior, by virtue of their faith, and of “higher morals.”

Morality in Islam has nothing to do with what others understand by this word.  Morality for Women is to cover their hair lest it arouse sexual feelings in men.  For Men, it is not to shake hands with Muslim women lest it arouse them sexually, or not to masturbate, etc. Morality in Islam is primarily about genitals and their use.  For example, while having sex out of marriage is considered immoral, stoning people caught in such act is not immoral. While looking at bare arms and legs of Muslim women is considered immoral, raping non-Muslim women is not immoral.  Homosexuality is immoral, but pedophilia is not.

These Muslims migrate to the West to better their lives, but they segregate themselves, form isolated communities and warn their Children to not learn the ways of Unbelievers or take them as Friends unless they intend to convert them to Islam.  They give huge amounts of money to charity.  But Islamic charity has nothing to do with charity.  All that money goes to build mosques, print Islamic materials and promote Islam.  If any of that is spent for the needy, it is to enlist them for jihad or support the families of the suicide bombers.  The bad Muslims are the lifeline of Islam and the breeding ground for good Muslims.  All Muslim terrorists, unless they are converts, are born in and emerge from this group.  Without the moral and financial support of the bad Muslims Islam will cease to exist.

The "ugly" Muslim

Then we have the ugly Muslims.  As we learned the good Muslims are not good at all, and the bad ones are not really bad people, the ugly Muslims actually look beautiful.  Islam is a world down the rabbit hole.  Nothing is what it is because everything is what it is not.  The ugly Muslims are clean-shaven, handsome or attractive, eloquent, articulate, and highly intelligent, just the kind of people you want to hang around with.  They are journalists, professors, regular guests and contributors to mainstream media.  They know what to say to gain your approval and your applause.  They are charming.  Their words are reassuring and their faces are familiar.  You like them and trust them.  So why do I call them ugly?  Because they lie! Their job is to deceive you and to make you believe that the “real Islam” poses no threat to you.  These wolves in sheep clothing are the most dangerous group.  Deception is deadlier than terror.  Do you fear more a ferocious animal that you can see or a deadly virus that you can’t?  The enemy within is a lot more dangerous.

Unlike the bad Muslims, the ugly ones are not ignorant of their religion.  They know of Muhammad’s raids, rapes, assassinations, genocides, tortures, beheadings, but they deny them, twist the facts and defend him.  They accuse the good Muslims of having hijacked their religion of peace when they know they lie. They claim to be Reformers when they know that Islam cannot be reformed.  Islam is what it is.  To reform Islam one has to change the Quran.  Over 70% of it must be scrapped, and the other 30% is just sheer nonsense.

These self-styled Reformers don’t want to change the Quran.  They just want Muslims to practice it less.  In theory it works.  Even the deadliest poison in small doses is not lethal. But how can they convince all Muslims to not take their holy book seriously?  This project is doomed from the start.  This is either naiveté and wishful thinking, or a ruse to deceive the non-Muslims, to give them false hope so they can buy more time for Islam to take over the world, which is the goal of every Muslim, the good, the bad and the ugly."

Ex Muslims United
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: devindersingh gulati <dgulhati@yahoo.com>
To: iftekhar.hai <iftekhar.hai@gmail.com>; Msa40 <msa40@aol.com>
Sent: Tue, Sep 5, 2017 8:59 pm
Subject: Re: Re: Att: Hindu Haters of Islam: Re: Do you respect the Quran?

The Vulgar meaning (see the preceding post) of Quran has been implemented by most Muslims in power.

Dr. Koenraad Elst in his article “Was There an Islamic Genocide of Hindus?” states:
“There is no official estimate of the total death toll of Hindus at the hands of Islam. A first glance at important testimonies by Muslim chroniclers suggests that, over 13 centuries and a territory as vast as the Subcontinent, Muslim Holy Warriors easily killed more Hindus than the 6 million of the Holocaust. Ferishtha lists several occasions when the Bahmani sultans in central India (1347-1528) killed a hundred thousand Hindus, which they set as a minimum goal whenever they felt like punishing the Hindus; and they were only a third-rank provincial dynasty.
The biggest slaughters took place during the raids of Mahmud Ghaznavi (ca. 1000 CE); during the actual conquest of North India by Mohammed Ghori and his lieutenants (1192 ff.); and under the Delhi Sultanate (1206-1526).”
He also writes in his book “Negation in India”:
“The Muslim conquests, down to the 16th century, were for the Hindus a pure struggle of life and death. Entire cities were burnt down and the populations massacred, with hundreds of thousands killed in every campaign, and similar numbers deported as slaves. Every new invader made (often literally) his hills of Hindus skulls. Thus, the conquest of Afghanistan in the year 1000 was followed by the annihilation of the Hindu population; the region is still called the Hindu Kush, i.e. Hindu slaughter.”
Will Durant have argued in his 1935 book “The Story of Civilization: Our Oriental Heritage” (page 459):
“The Mohammedan conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. The Islamic historians and scholars have recorded with great glee and pride the slaughters of Hindus, forced conversions, abduction of Hindu women and children to slave markets and the destruction of temples carried out by the warriors of Islam during 800 AD to 1700 AD. Millions of Hindus were converted to Islam by sword during this period.”
Francois Gautier in his book ‘Rewriting Indian History’ (1996) wrote:
“The massacres perpetuated by Muslims in India are unparalleled in history, bigger than the Holocaust of the Jews by the Nazis; or the massacre of the Armenians by the Turks; more extensive even than the slaughter of the South American native populations by the invading Spanish and Portuguese.”
Writer Fernand Braudel wrote in A History of Civilizations (1995), that Islamic rule in India as a
“colonial experiment” was “extremely violent”, and “the Muslims could not rule the country except by systematic terror. Cruelty was the norm – burnings, summary executions, crucifixions or impalements, inventive tortures. Hindu temples were destroyed to make way for mosques. On occasion, there were forced conversions. If ever there were an uprising, it was instantly and savagely repressed: houses were burnt, the countryside was laid waste, men were slaughtered and women were taken as slaves.”
Alain Danielou in his book, Histoire de l’ Inde writes:
“From the time, Muslims started arriving, around 632 AD, the history of India becomes a long, monotonous series of murders, massacres, spoliations, and destructions. It is, as usual, in the name of ‘a holy war’ of their faith, of their sole God, that the barbarians have destroyed civilizations, wiped out entire races.”
Irfan Husain in his article “Demons from the Past” observes:
“While historical events should be judged in the context of their times, it cannot be denied that even in that bloody period of history, no mercy was shown to the Hindus unfortunate enough to be in the path of either the Arab conquerors of Sindh and south Punjab, or the Central Asians who swept in from Afghanistan…The Muslim heroes who figure larger than life in our history books committed some dreadful crimes. Mahmud of Ghazni, Qutb-ud-Din Aibak, Balban, Mohammed bin Qasim, and Sultan Mohammad Tughlak, all have blood-stained hands that the passage of years has not cleansed. Seen through Hindu eyes, the Muslim invasion of their homeland was an unmitigated disaster.
Mughals hacking children apart, wax statue reenactment in India.
Islamic methods of punishment in India.
“Their temples were razed, their idols smashed, their women raped, their men killed or taken slaves. When Mahmud of Ghazni entered Somnath on one of his annual raids, he slaughtered all 50,000 inhabitants. Aibak killed and enslaved hundreds of thousands. The list of horrors is long and painful. These conquerors justified their deeds by claiming it was their religious duty to smite non-believers. Cloaking themselves in the banner of Islam, they claimed they were fighting for their faith when, in reality, they were indulging in straightforward slaughter and pillage…”
A sample of contemporary eyewitness accounts of the invaders and rulers, during the Indian conquests
The Afghan ruler Mahmud al-Ghazni invaded India no less than seventeen times between 1001 – 1026 AD. The book ‘Tarikh-i-Yamini’ – written by his secretary documents several episodes of his bloody military campaigns: “The blood of the infidels flowed so copiously [at the Indian city of Thanesar] that the stream was discoloured, notwithstanding its purity, and people were unable to drink it…the infidels deserted the fort and tried to cross the foaming river…but many of them were slain, taken or drowned… Nearly fifty thousand men were killed.”
In the contemporary record – ‘Taj-ul-Ma’asir’ by Hassn Nizam-i-Naishapuri, it is stated that when Qutb-ul- Din Aibak (of Turko – Afghan origin and the First Sultan of Delhi 1194-1210 AD) conquered Meerat, he demolished all the Hindu temples of the city and erected mosques on their sites. In the city of Aligarh, he converted Hindu inhabitants to Islam by the sword and beheaded all those who adhered to their own religion.
The Persian historian Wassaf writes in his book ‘Tazjiyat-ul-Amsar wa Tajriyat ul Asar’ that when the Alaul-Din Khilji (An Afghan of Turkish origin and second ruler of the Khilji Dynasty in India 1295-1316 AD) captured the city of Kambayat at the head of the gulf of Cambay, he killed the adult male Hindu inhabitants for the glory of Islam, set flowing rivers of blood, sent the women of the country with all their gold, silver, and jewels, to his own home, and made about twenty thousand Hindu maidens his private slaves.





















मंगलवार, 5 सितंबर 2017

authority vs adhikar

Divya Jhingran --  indigenous1985@yahoo.com 
The prevailing sentiment on this board is that “we” have an Indic perspective and therefore some sort of adhikaar to speak for Hindus. That Shraddha is enough for us to be valid spokespersons for our cause. 
This is far from the truth. We too are in the clutches of a western perspective and we too analyze our traditions through the Protestant framework. We approach our traditions as if they were a religion rather than treating them as systems of knowledge. 
Any old Baba can set up shop without proper knowledge credentials as long as he is brown-skinned and hails from the Desh. We act like he has proper adhikaar to represent our traditions.  In fact such people do as much harm to our image as Wendy and her children.
Our discussions about hatha yoga also betray our western "religious" approach. We are indignant that we have somehow lost control of yoga and that it is a western product now. But the proper way to counter this trend would be to become masters of yoga ourselves. Only a yogi has the adhikaar to speak on behalf of yoga. Hindus who do not practice yoga do not have any adhikaar to speak on its behalf.  It is a system of knowledge and not a religion that any believer can profess to be an expert on. 
On one had we feel proud, and rightly so, about the fact that our traditions are experimental and scientific. However, being experimental and scientific entails that we actually practice and experiment before we proclaim to have knowledge. Merely belonging to the Hindu fold does not give us this adhikaar. Shraddha is a necessary condition but by no means a sufficient one.
Koenraad Elst made a strong point about not trying to gain acceptance by emulating western norms. We will never succeed on those grounds. In any case, egalitarianism is a phony idea, bequeathed to us by Christianity, and treated like the Gospel truth.  Why should we Hindus subscribe to it? It would be much wiser to strengthen our own frameworks of different varnas and ashramas. Not because it is Hindu but because it promises to be a more fruitful approach towards understanding human beings and society. 
I am deeply grateful for everything I have learned from Koenraad Elst. I find him to be a beacon of light and knowledge. Hindus are their own worst enemies (even the ones who believe they are full of Shraddha). I wish we would take his ideas more seriously and really examine where we are going wrong.
Regards,
------------------------------------------------
There are different kinds and levels of adhikar. Some examples:

A shastri knows certain texts at the intellectual level, and has been qualified/authorized with adhikar to explain them to others. S/he may or may not know them experientially. I would say that outsiders are typically shastris. Most Indologists are certified as shastra experts and dont necessarily even respect the teachings experientally.

A rishi knows experientally; this is embodied knowing. This is a higher level than mentally knowing shastras. In fact, the rishi's uttering later gets compiled into shastras which other shastris study and try to interpret.

A pandit/purohit has adhikar to perform rituals as per aagamas. May or may not know shastras or have embodied experience. But there are strict requirements to get this adhikar.

There are pre-requisites in the tradition for being given specific kinds of adhikar. I invite people here to post from various traditions and explain the process for obtaining adhikar of specific kinds.

Western "authority" is based on a system of higher education certification that has its own history and politics. We have discussed it many times. Indians have largely adopted this criteria for authority. But such authority is not the same as adhikar in the tradition.













गुरुवार, 31 अगस्त 2017

आगम शास्त्र -भोपाळ

I have not studied Veda-s so no idea about that. There is a book published by MP Hindi Sahitya Akadami, Bhopal on Agama Shastra. It is compilation of serial lectures on Agama by Acharya Rammurthy Tripathi delivered at Jiwaji University, Gwalior years ago. I have the book but I have not been able to complete it's study which I intend to, soon. It is claimed to be the best exposition on Agama by a pratitioner of Agama. You can have the book from the Akadami at Bhopal. Being Govt. body, they did precious little to popularise the book.