Guest guest Posted February 17, 2004 Report Share Posted February 17, 2004 advaitin, "vasu145" <vasu145> wrote: > Dear all, > > Namaste, > > It is understood that everything is there in Vedas whihc we have in the present world. Vedas are far ahead to our normal human thinking. > Is it true ? I seek members to throw light on this aspect please. Namaste, Vasu-ji, I pull out below, for general information and possible discussion, the following extract from my book on Science and Spirituality: There is a section of opinion which mistakenly holds the view that the vedas contain everything including certain scientific facts or theories which were discovered or invented only in the last one or two centuries. Thus this kind of enthusiast looks for references, even remotely, to, say, soaps and safety matches, laser-printing and machine-fast calculation, open-heart surgery and what-have-you, in the Vedas. 'Researches' made in this direction yield some trivial satisfaction to the enthusiasts who hold on to some straws. For instance,one such enthusiasm holds that the 'kasyapa' mentioned in the Sun-worship chapter (= soorya-namskaara-prasna) of the yajur veda is actually a reference to the nuclear turmoil going on inside the physical sun! Then one makes much of such findings to proclaim that the Vedas contain everything that we know of today. This is misguided loyalty. [This 'kasyapa' business is discussed in http://www.geocities.com/profvk/kasyapa.html ] If the Vedas are divinely revealed scriptures, which is what Hinduism believes, then Man cannot insult the Omniscience of God by presuming He would waste the Vedas on man in teaching what He knows man will learn in due time by himself through his rationale and intellect! The Vedas are intended for the spiritual uplift of man and that is their only purpose; they point out to him what is beyond the intellect. This purpose would not be served by any other means of knowledge. If incidentally the Vedas also bring some knowledge about mundane matters like a geometrical theorem through their Sulva-sutras or a miracle cure for some yet unknown disease or a host of Vedic shortcuts for mechanical and arithmetical calculation -- well, these are only incidental; they do not imply that all of modern Science was in the knowledge of the ancients! PraNAms to all advaitins profvk .. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 17, 2004 Report Share Posted February 17, 2004 advaitin, "V. Krishnamurthy" <profvk> wrote: > advaitin, "vasu145" <vasu145> wrote: > > Dear all, > > > > Namaste, > > > > It is understood that everything is there in Vedas whihc we have > in the present world. > > I pull out below, for general information and possible discussion, > the following extract from my book on Science and Spirituality: Namaste, To re-iterate Ramji's and Krishnamurthyji's points, one has to adopt the view that Vedas are infinite and eternal, and universal. What is currently available is only a fraction of what once existed, even if we limit the view to the historical period. The very first line of Isha Upanishad says: IshAvAsyam idaM sarvam yatki~ncha jagatyAM jagat.h | The Spirit permeates whatsoever exists in this moving world. Gita also states that knowledge is lost over long lapse of time. evaM paramparaapraaptamimaM raajarshhayo viduH . sa kaaleneha mahataa yogo nashhTaH parantapa .. 4\-2.. Rishis of the present and future will continue to 'rediscover' the laws (R^itam) appropriate to the times. Regards, Sunder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 17, 2004 Report Share Posted February 17, 2004 advaitin, "V. KrishnamurthyIf > incidentally the Vedas also bring some knowledge about mundane > matters like a geometrical theorem through their Sulva-sutras or a > miracle cure for some yet unknown disease or a host of Vedic > shortcuts for mechanical and arithmetical calculation -- well, these > are only incidental; they do not imply that all of modern Science > was in the knowledge of the ancients! > > PraNAms to all advaitins > profvk > . Namaste profvk, Yes you are right with regard to the Vedas, essentially anyway. However the Puranas are another thing altogether, and they indicate a grasp and use of scientific knowledge surpassing that which we know today. Occasionally we get a glimpse, when a skeleton is found in a coal seam or a machine tooled screw from a level millions of years ago etc etc, or skeletons 12ft tall are found at Tiahuanaco or other places etc. The Ramayana and Mahabharata seem to indicate a level of science not realised by many, and a world that doesn't exist today, or rather beings that don't. IMO We have to be careful that modern egotism about scientific achievment, and a belief that it is all done by the modern age for the first time. As Jesus said, there is nothing new under the sun. It would teach some humility to the fixed minds of many, if they really knew how old some archeological sites are, or that much has been achieved prior to this age. Perhaps it would even teach some the futility of ignoring the Inner when the outer is much repeated and hoary with age.......ONS..Tony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 17, 2004 Report Share Posted February 17, 2004 Namaste, > If the Vedas are divinely revealed scriptures, which is what > Hinduism believes, then Man cannot insult the Omniscience of God by > presuming He would waste the Vedas on man in teaching what He knows > man will learn in due time by himself through his rationale and > intellect! The vedas are not supposed to have been divinely revealed. I think the vedAntic schools view them as apaurusheya, meaning authorless. They are not authored by God or anyone else. I view them as "laws" which cannot be known by other valid means of knowledge. Regards Raghavendra Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 17, 2004 Report Share Posted February 17, 2004 Namaste Krishnamurthyji, while on on the topic of vedas, what do you think about the animal sacrifices that are mentioned ( horse sacrifices etc. ). Doesn't it sound like cruelty ? Do these sacrifices have a different meaning or are they actual sacrifice of creatures ? Regards Guruprasad "V. Krishnamurthy" <profvk wrote: I pull out below, for general information and possible discussion, the following extract from my book on Science and Spirituality: Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 17, 2004 Report Share Posted February 17, 2004 advaitin, Guru Venkat <v_vedanti> wrote: > Namaste Krishnamurthyji, > while on on the topic of vedas, what do you think about the animal sacrifices that are mentioned ( horse sacrifices etc. ). Doesn't it sound like cruelty ? Do these sacrifices have a different meaning or are they actual sacrifice of creatures ? > > Regards > Guruprasad > Namaste, Guru Venkat, I am with you on the topic of animal sacrifices. But don't expect to get enlightened by my answers; because, the different meanings given to them are so esoteric that it is difficult to understand them in the context of our modern day world. On the other hand, if you want to take the stand that they were actual sacrifices, then you will have to admit they had such an attitude of 'naishkarmya' (actionlessness) rooted in an advaitic mental state and again it is difficult to believe in the context of our modern day mind. Either way you are stuck. Anyway I have always tried to emphasize the need for right attitudes rather than the rightness of rituals, especially when one talks of detachment or non-violence. You can have some idea of this part of my explanation from the last few pages of the following article of mine (of 7 web pages) on the web. The article is on the five fundamental qualities -- Purity, Self-control, Detachment, Truth and Non-violence. http://www.geocities.com/profvk/gohitvip/23.html PraNAms to all advaitins profvk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 18, 2004 Report Share Posted February 18, 2004 Namaste, Here is what Kanchi Paramacharya said: http://www.kamakoti.org/hindudharma/part5/chap23.htm ------------------------- For more references: http://www.kamakoti.org/gsearch/index.php?search=animal+sacrifice Animal Sacrifice in the Age of Kali from the Chapter "The Vedas" ... .... Animal Sacrifice in the Age of Kali (HinduDharma: The Vedas) Receive pages from Hindu Dharma in your email. An argument runs thus ... Is Sacrificial Killing Justified? from the Chapter "The Vedas", in ... .... Vyasa goes on to state in his Brahmasutra that animal sacrifice is not sinful since the act is permeated by the sound of the Vedas. ... Sacrifices from the Chapter "Grhasthasrama", in Hindu Dharma ... .... The haviryajna called nirudhapasubandha (or simply "pasubandha") is the first yajna in which there is animal sacrifice, "mrgabali". ... The One Goal from the Chapter "The Vedas", in Hindu Dharma ... .... Previous page in Hindu Dharma is Animal Sacrifice in the Age of Kali, in part 5 Previous, Quick jump Hindu Dharma, part 5 : ... Regards, Sunder ==================================================================== advaitin, "V. Krishnamurthy" <profvk> wrote: > advaitin, Guru Venkat <v_vedanti> wrote: > > Namaste Krishnamurthyji, > > while on on the topic of vedas, what do you think about the animal > sacrifices that are mentioned ( horse sacrifices etc. ). Doesn't it > sound like cruelty ? Do these sacrifices have a different meaning or > are they actual sacrifice of creatures ? > > > > Regards > > Guruprasad > > > > Namaste, Guru Venkat, > > I am with you on the topic of animal sacrifices. But don't expect to > get enlightened by my answers; because, the different meanings given > to them are so esoteric that it is difficult to understand them in > the context of our modern day world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 18, 2004 Report Share Posted February 18, 2004 Shree Guruprasad, To add further on Prof. VK comments, BRihadaaranyaka Upanishad starts with the horse sacrifice. If you follow the commentary and discussion that followed both in the Upanishad and the Shankara Bhashya the symbolic aspect of it becomes evident. Ignoring the karma kaanDa part, the j~naana kaanDa part of Veda-s uses mystical language to communicate that which cannot otherwise be communicated. Hari OM! Sadananda --- "V. Krishnamurthy" <profvk wrote: > advaitin, Guru Venkat <v_vedanti> wrote: > > Namaste Krishnamurthyji, > > while on on the topic of vedas, what do you think about the animal > sacrifices that are mentioned ( horse sacrifices etc. ). Doesn't it > sound like cruelty ? Do these sacrifices have a different meaning or > are they actual sacrifice of creatures ? > > > > Regards > > Guruprasad > > ===== What you have is His gift to you and what you do with what you have is your gift to Him - Swami Chinmayananda. Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want. http://antispam./tools Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 18, 2004 Report Share Posted February 18, 2004 advaitin, "V. Krishnamurthy" <profvk> wrote: > advaitin, Guru Venkat <v_vedanti> wrote: > > Namaste Krishnamurthyji, > > while on on the topic of vedas, what do you think about the animal > sacrifices that are mentioned ( horse sacrifices etc. ). Doesn't it > sound like cruelty ? Do these sacrifices have a different meaning or > are they actual sacrifice of creatures ? > > > > Regards > > Guruprasad > > > > Namaste, Guru Venkat, > > I am with you on the topic of animal sacrifices. But don't expect to > get enlightened by my answers; because, the different meanings given Namaste, Of course animal sacrifice is a violation of Ahimsa, no excuses. It is also ignorance but the level of awareness has to be taken into account. I feel that it is symobolic as well. The horse is representing the mind and senses and has to be sacrificed....ONS..Tony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 18, 2004 Report Share Posted February 18, 2004 Namaste Guruprasadji, There is no cruelty attached in performing Vedic animal sacrifices. The act of cruelty is not decided by whether the act results in perceived pain, but in the rightness of the act. The judge who passes a death sentence may be seen to be cruel, but he is only performing his rightful duty. Or take another example of a soldier who obeys his commander to kill the enemy. Is the soldier cruel? Would the soldier not be a coward and a traitor to his country by running away from the act by saying that it is cruel to kill? Likewise, the performer of a Vedic sacrifice is only performing his duty, and his action cannot be called cruel. >From what I have gathered over the years, it appears to me that the context of the Vedic sacrifices is something like this: There are duties that we have to perform in this life because it is an unpain debt owed to others during our journey through samsara. The rightness of acts cannot all be perceived within the horizons of this life - they span an immense period, and it is because we cannot see this that we have to rely on the Vedas to show us the way of action to fulfil the debts of the past, and to fulfil our commitments as citizens of the divine-human universe. The injunctions of the Vedas show us how to fulfil our debts and commitments to our forefathers, to the gods, and to our parents. I believe these debts are called nitya karma. They are the unseen commitments that have to be fulfilled. The Vedic sacrifices to the gods are said to be the exchanges between the humans and the gods in a taxonomical structure of divinity in which these gods occupy key positions in the governance of the universe. The gods need humans as much as the humans need them, and the Vedic sacrifices are the taxes that we pay to the governing Kingdom of Divinity. It was once easier to believe all this because the world was then enshrined with Life, and it was possible for humans to see the quality of divinity that imbued the world. That was when everything in nature was the persona of life -- when the hills had life, the oceans had life, the mountains had life, the rivers had life. The Bhagavata mentions that the world was dis-enshrined at the beginning of Kali Yuga, and that is why, now, in this dark iron age, it looks dead and insensate to the eye of man. That is why we disbelieve the Puranas and Itihasas as the mythopoetic imaginations of man. But they were not myths, they were the way the world once was and to which we have now become blinded. With regards, Chittaranjan advaitin, Guru Venkat <v_vedanti> wrote: > Namaste Krishnamurthyji, > while on on the topic of vedas, what do you think about the animal sacrifices that are mentioned ( horse sacrifices etc. ). Doesn't it sound like cruelty ? Do these sacrifices have a different meaning or are they actual sacrifice of creatures ? > > Regards > Guruprasad > > "V. Krishnamurthy" <profvk> wrote: > I pull out below, for general information and possible discussion, > the following extract from my book on Science and Spirituality: > > > > > > Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 18, 2004 Report Share Posted February 18, 2004 Namaste, Do look at the verse 6:4:18 of the same Upanishad where it mentions the eating of beef for begetting a noble son. best regards, K Kathirasan > > kuntimaddi sadananda [sMTP:kuntimaddisada] > Wednesday, February 18, 2004 9:32 PM > advaitin > Re: Re: What Vedas are not > > Shree Guruprasad, > > To add further on Prof. VK comments, BRihadaaranyaka Upanishad starts > with the horse sacrifice. If you follow the commentary and discussion > that followed both in the Upanishad and the Shankara Bhashya the > symbolic aspect of it becomes evident. Ignoring the karma kaanDa part, > the j~naana kaanDa part of Veda-s uses mystical language to communicate > that which cannot otherwise be communicated. > > Hari OM! > Sadananda > > > --- "V. Krishnamurthy" <profvk wrote: > > advaitin, Guru Venkat <v_vedanti> wrote: > > > Namaste Krishnamurthyji, > > > while on on the topic of vedas, what do you think about the animal > > sacrifices that are mentioned ( horse sacrifices etc. ). Doesn't it > > sound like cruelty ? Do these sacrifices have a different meaning or > > are they actual sacrifice of creatures ? > > > > > > Regards > > > Guruprasad > > > > > > ===== > What you have is His gift to you and what you do with what you have is > your gift to Him - Swami Chinmayananda. > > > > Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want. > http://antispam./tools > > > Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of > Atman and Brahman. > Advaitin List Archives available at: > http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ > To Post a message send an email to : advaitin > Messages Archived at: advaitin/messages > > > Links > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 18, 2004 Report Share Posted February 18, 2004 Namaste Sri Krishnamurthyji, Yes, I would think so too. There is no straight answer. I guess if the literal meaning is taken , we have to accept that sacrificing animals were considered a ritual in the vedas. Regards Guruprasad "V. Krishnamurthy" <profvk wrote: I am with you on the topic of animal sacrifices. But don't expect to get enlightened by my answers; because, the different meanings given to them are so esoteric that it is difficult to understand them in the context of our modern day world. On the other hand, if you want to take the stand that they were actual sacrifices, then you will have to admit they had such an attitude of 'naishkarmya' (actionlessness) rooted in an advaitic mental state and again it is difficult to believe in the context of our modern day mind. Either way you are stuck. Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 18, 2004 Report Share Posted February 18, 2004 Namaste Naikji, I quite disagree. If by killing animals , I pay my taxes to the Gods, then I'll take the penalty of not paying taxes. IRS or Indra, they have no right to claim taxes by way of sacrifice of a horse or a cow or a goat etc. I am strongly inclined in the buddhistic way of thought in this. This sought of sacrifice has to be condemned, not justified. How can you say it is purification and only good ? Purification for who ? The lamb to be slaughtered ? or you ? and what is being purified ? Aren't you the pure Atman already ? Even Jesus the christ is said to have condemned this sought of sacrifice. In fact, there seems to be no great spiritual giant who seems to have encouraged these practices. The only philosophy where this seems to take a big stance is the Tantras. There seems to be many seemingly vile and impure practices there . Animal sacrifice sounds to me more like rituals to gain occult powers or trying the short cut to realization. Here is my thinking : The Aryans were said to be from somewhere in central asia. They seem to have brought this sort of ritualistic form of worship into the Indus Valley civilization. These people at the valley were highly spiritual and were advanced in their meditation and other forms of worship. It is said that they had idols of a person sitting in meditation in the excavations that anybody in India would say right away that it resembles Lord Shiva. As the culture mixed and evolved, the vedas were written with the Aryan portion where the rituals are, and finally the lofty ideals of the valley people into Upanishads . seriously, can Brahman be realized by doing any action ? Isn't it a mere mental transition ? Regards Guruprasad Chittaranjan Naik <chittaranjan_naik wrote: Namaste Guruprasadji, There is no cruelty attached in performing Vedic animal sacrifices. The act of cruelty is not decided by whether the act results in perceived pain, but in the rightness of the act. The judge who passes a death sentence may be seen to be cruel, but he is only performing his rightful duty. Or take another example of a soldier who obeys his commander to kill the enemy. Is the soldier cruel? Would the soldier not be a coward and a traitor to his country by running away from the act by saying that it is cruel to kill? Likewise, the performer of a Vedic sacrifice is only performing his duty, and his action cannot be called cruel. Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 18, 2004 Report Share Posted February 18, 2004 Namaste Kathirasanji, I am having a copy of the upanishad from Ramakrishna Math. (There is no specific author, it just says Upanishad series. ) Here the translation seems to be different. ' Kshiroudhanam ' is translated as ' milk-rice' to be mixed with ' sarpishmantham translated as ' ghee ' . Regards Guruprasad K Kathirasan NCS <kkathir wrote: Namaste, Do look at the verse 6:4:18 of the same Upanishad where it mentions the eating of beef for begetting a noble son. best regards, K Kathirasan Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 18, 2004 Report Share Posted February 18, 2004 Namaste, I have to correct myself. I was looking at 6.4.14 instead of 18. and yes, it does seem to mention like you have said. ' mamsaudhanam ' is translated as ' rice with meat ' and ' aukshena ' is translated as ' young bull ' . This mixed with ghee seems to be recommended for obtaining a son with certain qualities. Regards Guruprasad Guru Venkat <v_vedanti wrote: Namaste Kathirasanji, I am having a copy of the upanishad from Ramakrishna Math. (There is no specific author, it just says Upanishad series. ) Here the translation seems to be different. ' Kshiroudhanam ' is translated as ' milk-rice' to be mixed with ' sarpishmantham translated as ' ghee ' . Regards Guruprasad K Kathirasan NCS <kkathir wrote: Namaste, Do look at the verse 6:4:18 of the same Upanishad where it mentions the eating of beef for begetting a noble son. best regards, K Kathirasan Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want. Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of Atman and Brahman. Advaitin List Archives available at: http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ To Post a message send an email to : advaitin Messages Archived at: advaitin/messages advaitin/ advaitin Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 18, 2004 Report Share Posted February 18, 2004 Namaste Guruprasadji, My words are an attempt to provide a rationale for Vedic sacrifices based on the premise that the Veda is supreme and infallible. Without this premise, much of the Vedas don't make sense. My reply here continues to hold on to this premise, and if you find it all unreasonable, then please feel free to disregard it. advaitin, Guru Venkat <v_vedanti> wrote: > Namaste Naikji, > I quite disagree. If by killing animals , I pay my taxes to > the Gods, then I'll take the penalty of not paying taxes. That is a noble thought. > IRS or Indra, they have no right to claim taxes by way of > sacrifice of a horse or a cow or a goat etc. By Indra is meant not a person, but a position in the heirarchy of a divine taxonomy. The tax to be paid is not dependent on an ordinance by someone that taxes are to be paid, but stands as the very nature of an eternal dharma. > I am strongly inclined in the buddhistic way of thought in this. The Buddhist way of thought is for the Buddhist for whom it is not incumbent to follow the Vedas, whereas for the Hindu it is part of his dharma. It is our actions under the law of dharma that placed us in this life as a Hindu or Buddhist or Christian and the same dharma dictates how we are to act in order to continue our journey in the most benificial manner. > This sought of sacrifice has to be condemned, not justified. It is not upto us to condemn or promote something that is in the very nature of reality as a dharma. The condemnation has no effect except to delude us into a false sense of righteousness. On the other hand, violating dharma causes harm even though we may not be able to see it. > How can you say it is purification and only good ? I am saying all this based on the explanations given by the wise. I am aware that it makes me seem odd in the eyes of the modern educated man, but I can't help that. > Purification for who ? The lamb to be slaughtered ? or you ? It is supposed to be benificial for the sacrificer as well as for the sacrificed. Some of the sacrifices are said to be benificial for humanity at large. > and what is being purified ? Aren't you the pure Atman already? I am the pure Atman, and yet I feel pain and suffer under the clutches of avidya. I am thrown into this web of causality wherein my actions and their fructifications are governed by the law of dharma. All purification is meaningful only within this governance of dharma. > Even Jesus the christ is said to have condemned this sought of > sacrifice. In fact, there seems to be no great spiritual giant > who seems to have encouraged these practices. The Vedic sacrifices are for the Hindus, not for Christians. They have different sacrifices. When you say that no great spiritual giant encouraged these sacrifices, I think you are forgetting that Yudhishtira performed the Ashwamedha Yajna with the approval of Lord Krishna. There are many more instances in the Puranas. > The only philosophy where this seems to take a big stance is > the Tantras. No, it is in the Vaidika Dharma as well. The Tantras also have their seed in the Vedas even though they were separately revealed by Shiva and Devi. > There seems to be many seemingly vile and impure practices there. "Seemingly" is a right choice of word. The Tantras are not easy to understand; they need one to dive into the living waters of Life before one can comprehend them. > Animal sacrifice sounds to me more like rituals to gain occult > powers or trying the short cut to realization. Animal sacrifice is not the means to realisation. It is part of the dharma for obtaining benificial results in samsara. > As the culture mixed and evolved, the vedas were written with > the Aryan portion where the rituals are, and finally the lofty > ideals of the valley people into Upanishads . The Vedas are not what is written, they are what is heard. The Vedas have no historical origin. > seriously, can Brahman be realized by doing any action ? Isn't it > a mere mental transition ? You are right, Brahman is not realised by doing any action. The Vedic sacrifices are not for realising Brahman. With regards, Chittaranjan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 18, 2004 Report Share Posted February 18, 2004 Namaste Guruji, The argument that I am 'Atman' cannot hold water in the Karma Kanda of the Vedas. The reason being that in the Karma Kanda, the notion of doership is very much there. Only in Jnana Kanda of the Vedas do we resolve the doership. All pursuits for Dharma, Artha & Kama involve many kinds of sacrifices which may involve the sacrifice of animals. For example, I got to know that in the 70's, pills used to regulate the insulin for diabetic patients were manufactured from extracts from pig intestines. All vegetarian diabetics had to take the pills. They had no choice then.Maybe it has changed now. So this is the very defect of Karmas or rituals. No point arguing whether the Karma Kanda works or not. The Vedas are a pramana. Therefore, we can't prove them wrong because we don't have any other pramana to prove it wrong. The Vedas reveal the supra-sensuous which cannot be verified by other pramanas, except for Self-knowledge where immediate (aparoksha jnana) knowledge takes place. All rituals are for those in the pravrtti marga (pursuing Dharma, Artha & Kama) alone and not for the ones in the nivrtti marga (pursuing Moksha). Shankara makes this very clear in the Introduction to the Gita Bhashya. So we need not make judgements on the Vedas. One more point to mention. The Vedas were never written. The Vedas are Apaurusheya or unauthored by any human being. The Vedas got revealed to Rishis but they were not the composers. This is very important to us. This is one of the reasons why the Vedas are looked as a pramana. And to say that the Aryan influence caused the insertion of the ritualistic portion is unfounded. We don't have any evidence for that. The aryan invasion itself is disputed by many scholars of the present. Ahimsa has got nothing to do with the Vedas. It is a value for seekers but it has nothing to do with the nature of the Vedas. I attribute this problem to the many scholars who mention that the Vedas are the bible for the Hindus. We should not look at the Vedas like the way the muslims and christians look at their scriptures. The Vedas are in principle a pramana not a Dharma Shastra where we can exercise our minds to make judgements based on time, place & circumstance. This is also the reason why Shraddha is emphasised for all seekers as a prerequisite. best regards, K Kathirasan > > Guru Venkat [sMTP:v_vedanti] > Thursday, February 19, 2004 10:13 AM > advaitin > Re: Re: What Vedas are not > > Namaste Naikji, > I quite disagree. If by killing animals , I pay my taxes to the Gods, then > I'll take the penalty of not paying taxes. IRS or Indra, they have no > right to claim taxes by way of sacrifice of a horse or a cow or a goat > etc. > I am strongly inclined in the buddhistic way of thought in this. This > sought of sacrifice has to be condemned, not justified. > How can you say it is purification and only good ? Purification for who ? > The lamb to be slaughtered ? or you ? and what is being purified ? Aren't > you the pure Atman already ? > Even Jesus the christ is said to have condemned this sought of sacrifice. > In fact, there seems to be no great spiritual giant who seems to have > encouraged these practices. > > The only philosophy where this seems to take a big stance is the Tantras. > There seems to be many seemingly vile and impure practices there . Animal > sacrifice sounds to me more like rituals to gain occult powers or trying > the short cut to realization. > > Here is my thinking : > The Aryans were said to be from somewhere in central asia. They seem to > have brought this sort of ritualistic form of worship into the Indus > Valley civilization. > These people at the valley were highly spiritual and were advanced in > their meditation and other forms of worship. It is said that they had > idols of a person sitting in meditation in the excavations that anybody in > India would say right away that it resembles Lord Shiva. > As the culture mixed and evolved, the vedas were written with the Aryan > portion where the rituals are, and finally the lofty ideals of the valley > people into Upanishads . > > seriously, can Brahman be realized by doing any action ? Isn't it a mere > mental transition ? > > Regards > Guruprasad > > Chittaranjan Naik <chittaranjan_naik wrote: > Namaste Guruprasadji, > > There is no cruelty attached in performing Vedic animal sacrifices. > The act of cruelty is not decided by whether the act results in > perceived pain, but in the rightness of the act. The judge who passes > a death sentence may be seen to be cruel, but he is only performing > his rightful duty. Or take another example of a soldier who obeys his > commander to kill the enemy. Is the soldier cruel? Would the soldier > not be a coward and a traitor to his country by running away from the > act by saying that it is cruel to kill? Likewise, the performer of a > Vedic sacrifice is only performing his duty, and his action cannot be > called cruel. > > > > > Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want. > > > > > > > Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of > Atman and Brahman. > Advaitin List Archives available at: > http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ > To Post a message send an email to : advaitin > Messages Archived at: advaitin/messages > > > Links > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 18, 2004 Report Share Posted February 18, 2004 Dear Venkatji, While Professorji will be replying to you, I have heard a learned person once state that the 'sacrifice of animals' mentioned in the Vedas connote the ' sacrifice of animal tendencies' in man and not actual sacrifice of animals. It is said that the Vedic dictums need to be understood in symbolic terms rather than in literal terms. Once a learned scholar talking on the 'Purusha Suktam ' mentioned that Max Mueller misunderstood the 'sacrifice of the Purusha' contained in the Suktam to indicate that human sacrifice existed in the Vedic ages. Regards and pranams Mohan Guru Venkat <v_vedanti wrote: Namaste Krishnamurthyji, while on on the topic of vedas, what do you think about the animal sacrifices that are mentioned ( horse sacrifices etc. ). Doesn't it sound like cruelty ? Do these sacrifices have a different meaning or are they actual sacrifice of creatures ? Regards Guruprasad "V. Krishnamurthy" <profvk wrote: I pull out below, for general information and possible discussion, the following extract from my book on Science and Spirituality: Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want. Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of Atman and Brahman. Advaitin List Archives available at: http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ To Post a message send an email to : advaitin Messages Archived at: advaitin/messages Sponsor Click Here advaitin/ advaitin India Insurance Special: Be informed on the best policies, services, tools and more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 19, 2004 Report Share Posted February 19, 2004 Namaste Mohanji, It is true that a number of sacrifices mentioned in the Vedas are to be understood in symbolic terms. But we also need to recognise that there is the question of valuation that influences our interpretations of the Vedas. The valuation instilled in us by our modern education makes us abhor religious rites involving animal sacrifice, with the result that we tend to become apologetic when we come across such passages in our Agamas. But I believe that adherence to truth is more important than apologetic hermeneutics. If there are Vedic sacrifices involving killing of animals, then there are Vedic sacrifices involving killing of animals. We need to live with the truth as it is, otherwise there is the danger of missing out on the true meaning and significance of large parts of the Vedas. In general, the Vedic sacrifices prescribed for grahasthashrama are often quite literal. It is in the aranyakas, which are meant for the vanaprasthashrama, that we find symbolic sacrifices to be performed as meditations. The Ashwamedha sacrifice performed by a king involves the real killing of a horse, whereas the Ashwamedha sacrifice prescribed in the Brahadaranyaka is a meditation on the form of Virat. This explanation is derived from a reading of the lectures of Sri Chandrashekarendra Saraswati, who was the previous Shankaracharya of Kanchi Mutt. With regards, Chittaranjan advaitin, S Mohan <mohanirmala> wrote: > Dear Venkatji, > While Professorji will be replying to you, I have heard a learned person once state that the 'sacrifice of animals' mentioned in the Vedas connote the ' sacrifice of animal tendencies' in man and not actual sacrifice of animals. > It is said that the Vedic dictums need to be understood in symbolic terms rather than in literal terms. > Once a learned scholar talking on the 'Purusha Suktam ' mentioned that Max Mueller misunderstood the 'sacrifice of the Purusha' contained in the Suktam to indicate that human sacrifice existed in the Vedic ages. > Regards and pranams > Mohan > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 19, 2004 Report Share Posted February 19, 2004 Namaste Chittaranji. I believe yours is the right attitude. We need not decry something just because we don't understand it. We are looking at the ancient from the vantage granted to us by our exposure to western education and thoughts. We may, therefore, be missing out on the spirit of it all. Things would have been different perhaps if external influences hadn't entered the Indian subcontinent. That is a matter of conjecture. This reminds me of some experimental vedic yajna conducted some time back in Kerala whereby reportedly it was made to rain on a summer day. The organizers of the yajna were severely criticized by rationalists and protests were held. I don't have the details and am not sure if the reported success of the yajna in producing rain is really to be believed. However, I tend to believe there is more to vedic practices than our educated eyes can discern. So, let us leave the vedas unquestioned till such time someone rises up to tell us about their real value and essence. Without being apologetic about our current ignorance of their real worth and without passing foolish judgement, let us instead concentrate on vedanta which we understand fully and which we are in a position to elucidate comfortably to the modern world. We would thus be operating effectively within the scope of this august Group. PraNAms. Madathil Nair __________________ advaitin, "Chittaranjan Naik" <chittaranjan_naik> wrote: ................. The valuation instilled in us by our > modern education makes us abhor religious rites involving animal > sacrifice, with the result that we tend to become apologetic when we > come across such passages in our Agamas. But I believe that adherence > to truth is more important than apologetic hermeneutics. If there are > Vedic sacrifices involving killing of animals, then there are Vedic > sacrifices involving killing of animals. We need to live with the > truth as it is, otherwise there is the danger of missing out on the > true meaning and significance of large parts of the Vedas. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 19, 2004 Report Share Posted February 19, 2004 advaitin, K Kathirasan NCS <kkathir@n...> wrote: > Namaste Guruji, > > The argument that I am 'Atman' cannot hold water in the Karma Kanda of the > Vedas. The Vedas are in principle a pramana > not a Dharma Shastra where we can exercise our minds to make judgements > based on time, place & circumstance. This is also the reason why Shraddha is > emphasised for all seekers as a prerequisite. > > Guru Venkat [sMTP:v_vedanti] > > Thursday, February 19, 2004 10:13 AM > > advaitin > > Re: Re: What Vedas are not > > > > Namaste Naikji, > > I quite disagree. > > Regards > > Guruprasad \ Namaste G, This is making sense, anything written down has the chance misinterpretation and including opinions from the margins into the text etc. One has to address the awareness state of the audience in all these things. The Aryans or Noble Ones probably didn't come from outside India of that day, which included central asia and iran, afghanistan etc. It said that Iran was their home as well---Iran=Aryan. So an extension into northern india is most likely. However one shouldn't look to the horse sacrifice to justify owning or going to McDonalds.....Ahimsa is the only sure way of purifying the Buddhi....ONS..Tony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 19, 2004 Report Share Posted February 19, 2004 Namaste Madathilji, >This reminds me of some experimental vedic yajna >conducted some time back in Kerala whereby reportedly >it was made to rain on a summer day. The organizers >of the yajna were severely criticized by rationalists >and protests were held. Please note that it is unscientific to say that so-called 'miracles' or deviations from the customary laws of physics NEVER occur. All the scientist can do is observe what *tends* to occur in his laboratory under controlled circumstances. In other words, statistics. However, these statistics can be assumed to operate %99.999 of the time and are pretty good at explaining our mundane world. On the other hand, this does not prove that miracles DO occur. Also, they may sometimes occur due to non-miraculous powers, e.g. laws of nature and consciousness not yet discovered. Imagine how crazy radio and television would have seemed not long ago. Either way, I don't think that miracles have much bearing on enlightenment. They are more likely to be a distraction. Still, I am intrigued to find them in books such as Yogananda's Autobiography, since I consider him an honest person. It makes me wonder. If consciousness survives the death of the body, then that is surely a miracle to the materialist. If it doesn't survive, it is a catastrophe for everybody! Hari Om! Benjamin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 19, 2004 Report Share Posted February 19, 2004 advaitin, "Madathil Rajendran Nair" <madathilnair> wrote: > Namaste Chittaranji. > > I believe yours is the right attitude. We need not decry something > just because we don't understand it. > This reminds me of some experimental vedic yajna conducted some time > back in Kerala whereby reportedly it was made to rain on a summer > day. The organizers of the yajna were severely criticized by > rationalists and protests were held. I don't have the details and am > not sure if the reported success of the yajna in producing rain is > really to be believed. Namaste, For a personal testimony from one of our Moderstors, see: http://www.escribe.com/culture/advaitin/m4191.html (I remember Madhavaji's description of rainfall responding to mantras, but I cannot locate that particular message. Maybe he himself can help us.) Regards, Sunder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 19, 2004 Report Share Posted February 19, 2004 Namaste Guru Venkat ji See Sir, we are no body to decide why Vedas suggested animal sacrifice and in what sense. Vedas above our whole human thinking. Just tell me one thing Sir. You know Jagadguru Adi Shankaracharya's life. How many of us can believe that he had shown mystic powers changing bodies, holding floods etc. Here they are centuries ahead to us. We can not believe that they had shown such powers. In fact, there are some people, who interpret that these are the added stories to their life. We are made to believe that Jesus had very good powers. May be. Becuase their days were entirely different. Their thinking was pure. So may be they got such powers. Why anybody perform Yagna? As per my understanding, Yagna is performed for the sake of society. For the welfare of society only. In Vedic Period (Times immemorial)for the sake of society they used to sacrifice their animals, horses etc. Kindly see, by sacrificing one horse how much benefit he derived for the society. In one way, for a common man concerned, can he give his favourite thing for the sake of Society (then it is also equal to sacrifice in Yagna). Though Yagna performer had taken the life of animal but he had derived so much benefit for the society and human kind. So, really we people can understand why sacrifices are suggested in Vedas. I think the problem starts when we compare their thinking to our thinking. I dont think we can not condemn Vedas whatever they tell. As far as I am concerned I never read complete Vedas. So I can not come to any conclusion without proper study of them. But I have very good respect to our Vedas. If Vedas are prescribing non-violence, why Manu had directed severe punishment to Brahmins for taking non-veg and alchohol. Sir, these are my opinions. Please forgive my ignorance. Since I respect Vedas so much I have taken the liberty to write about them. My profound namaskarams to all members, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 19, 2004 Report Share Posted February 19, 2004 Pranams to Advaitins, In continuing the discussion on the Vedas ... some clarity on a particular aspect would be welcome ..... The Vedas are said to comprise broadly two parts .. the 'Karma Kanda' ( comprising the Brahmanas and Aranyakas) and the 'Jnana Kanda' ( comprising the Upanishads ..also known as Vedanta). The current discussion is presumably regarding the Karma Kanda. The most significant aspects of the Karma Kanda are the Mantras and the Rituals( or Prescribed Processes). For the last 15 years on various occasions I have been fortunate to be able to participate in various such events , sometimes as an observer, and some times as the Main Performer ( Yajamana ). At first I was just a mute participant , mechanically doing the things advised by the purohit. In the last few years a change is visible. I have started taking the mantras and the processes quite seriously. A great curiosity has developed to learn and understand it all a little better. Also I have been reading Paramacharya's discourses on this subject. The important thing that strikes one is the crucial part of Mantras. The processes are more in the form of an adjunct meant to ensure some purification of the place, and one's person but more importantly to focus one's attention to the moment. It is the mantra that plays a key role in the fulfilment of the objective, it appears. The power of sound in making things happen . We depend on the correctness of the sound patterns on the vaidika or purohit. But it seems likely that the sound vibrations produced by the mantras are potent in influencing the result. At the individual level also it is important. In the personal meditation and performance of Ashtanga Yoga the mantra is important. But at the large scale level or universal level, one can easily imagine how very important it can be. There may be a lot of truth in what is stated about the benefits of the ritualistic approach. I have had the opportunity to witness the performance of some pretty large scale such Vedic rituals in recent years. In no case, to the best of my knowledge, has any animal sacrifice taken place. There are cults , perhaps all over the world, today and may have been there in the past , where such animal or ( like the Maya civilisations ) human sacrifices were and are prevalent. But I like to look at such cases as ' cults ' , that is, limited groupings . In the universal level which the Vedas represent, there is complete purity and respect for all forms of life. The benefits of the rituals are supposed to benefit all of creation. But benefit to the world can only come from sacrifice of narrow sectarianism and limited approachs. That may be what the Vedas are talking about. This is just a humble un-informed view . Your comments and corrections are welcome. Warm regards and pranams Mohan Sunder Hattangadi <sunderh wrote: advaitin, "Madathil Rajendran Nair" <madathilnair> wrote: > Namaste Chittaranji. > > I believe yours is the right attitude. We need not decry something > just because we don't understand it. > This reminds me of some experimental vedic yajna conducted some time > back in Kerala whereby reportedly it was made to rain on a summer > day. The organizers of the yajna were severely criticized by > rationalists and protests were held. I don't have the details and am > not sure if the reported success of the yajna in producing rain is > really to be believed. Namaste, For a personal testimony from one of our Moderstors, see: http://www.escribe.com/culture/advaitin/m4191.html (I remember Madhavaji's description of rainfall responding to mantras, but I cannot locate that particular message. Maybe he himself can help us.) Regards, Sunder Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of Atman and Brahman. Advaitin List Archives available at: http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ To Post a message send an email to : advaitin Messages Archived at: advaitin/messages advaitin/ advaitin India Insurance Special: Be informed on the best policies, services, tools and more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.