Ved > Articles > All

Read In Hindi

http://www.vedpradip.com/articlecontent.php?aid=426&linkid=1&catid=&subcatid=0&vedid=5

There is a hymn in Rigveda, which says – Oh glorious supreme being, let me be you and you be me and your blessings, thoughts about welfare of others and teaching be true.
Communal people do not pay attention to the ultimate or basic meaning of the hymn and start communal arguments. They mistake the word "va" in the hymn. I be you or you be me, one of these should happen. Whatever is possible between both of them should happen. This is the way to say and to reach an opinion. Mythological community says – Oh lord, if I cannot be you, you be me. You appear in the human body for your worshipper proving the "Avatarvad". New theological community says if you cannot be me, let me be you, let me the Brahma.
In communal debates on party is proved possible and the other as impossible. Whatever is possible proves to be right or truth and whatever impossible proves to be wrong. But Vedas call both the things are possible or right, but you being me, Brahma appearing in human body is not right, but it is said that Vedas also believe the you being me. Thus this hymn is of new theology but controversial. Thus both I being you and you being me things being true, the "va" in the hymn is not untrue but it comes as a form of "ch" meaning together. In exposition of the Vedas (nirukta), together meaning of "va" is explained. In this meaning of "va" "tha" also comes here. Thus the word Parmatma or supreme being means both the things, I being you and you being me, both are true and both are possible. Thus it is possible for both the parties that the situation of meditation or worshipping and qualities go into the worshipper. Maharishi Dayanand also wrote an article on this in "swamantawyamantavya." Vedas say that an iron ball kept in fire becomes bright and hot because of fire, thus the worshipper also takes the qualities of God. In theology it is said that "Bhogmatrasamyalingachchha"upinshiadhas say Rasa vais sa, which means the worshipper takes the qualities of the god (Mundak 3/1/3). Thus God goes inside the person who meditates or worships , he gets limited to that person. Fire seems round, i.e. to take the shape of the ball kept in it, when it enters the iron ball, soul seems to take the shape of form of the worshipper’s heart (Kath 6/7). And thus whenever we feel Brahma inside us, inside our heart, he seems limited to our body and resemble us. Theology also supports this idea (Veda 1/2/3). Upanishadhas also support you being me. Maharishi Dayanand tells the same annotation that the way the iron ball takes the form of fire when kept in fire, likewise the Supreme Being lights our hearts with knowledge and happiness. Vedas compare Supreme Being with fire, thus the example of iron and iron ball

is appropriate here. Iron ball becomes lightened and hot in fire, but it does not leave its basic round shape and fire seems rounded after entering in the round iron ball. Thus the worshiper gets happiness and peace with worship of Brahma, but he will not leave his form of indefinite and even this supreme being of Brahma becomes more glorious with the worship but he does not leave his form, which is almighty and indefinite. Thus the hymns are the medium through which God can be felt and not the medium through which he comes inside us.

I am Brahma – it means the soul I feel inside me is of Brahma. It is not an annotation from Vedas, it is annotation of centipede Brahmin and "Bruhadaranyakopanishadha". Thus this annotation is not vedic. But even if it is not vedic, it is not against Vedas. It also cannot be said that the intention with which is said is against Vedas because Vedas say I converse with my body, when should I feel the supreme being within me, how he will meet me, how can I see God with good heart.

If Brahma is indefinite, why should Vedas have prayers of dwelling inside Brahma and meeting him, and why should they desire meeting him and call him the source of happiness.
And why should they call him the ruler of all, the past, the present, and the future and why should they worship him. Thus I am Brahma is against Brahma appearing in same form. This annotation can have two possibilities. One calls worshipper being Brahma through worshiping, which other refuse to believe. The second believes more into principle. The second result of it is – "I am Brahma" this annotation comes twice in two volumes (book). Once in centipede Brahmin and the second time in Bruhadaranyakopanishadha. Thus it is an annotation of one volume, which is as following:

Before creation of nature, only Brahma existed. He realized he is the ruler of the universe. And because of Brahma world was created. Thus he dwelled in Brahma, Rishis and humans and he existed in them the way he knew himself. There is an example of Vamadev Rishi who experienced "I am Manu Rishi. I am Surya Rishi as well." So God cannot harm that person because his soul lives in that person.

In this entire recital "I am Brahmana" comes twice. First time at the beginning of the annotation. Brahma realized it. It is without doubt that Brahma experienced Brahma inside him. At this time, the person who realizes this "I am Brahma" gets everything, which is thought over. In Brahmin volumes Arthavad comes first. Praising, flattering is Arthavad. It says after Agnihotra, we get heaven. Even in this world we see beggars blessing us for a very small amount of money, like give me some money and your children will live happily, you will go to the heaven, etc. Thus for a very small thing, praising or flattery is called arthavad. "I am Brahma" arthavad comes in the form that first Brahma came, he realized himself as Brahma and the world was created. There was no evidence of Brahma going into any human, god, or rishi. There was only an example of Vamdev Rishi but even he had thought himself of Manu rishi and surya rishi and not the Brahma. At this time, the person will thing "I am Brahma" or whatever big thing, he will become that. Even god cannot anything bad about it. This is clearly arthavad. This arthavad chapter by Brahmins can be reduced by us. In political upheaval, Mahatma Gandhi discovered himself first and he become a leader and he was called Mahatma. Seemant Abdul Gaffar Khan discovered a leader and he was called "Seemant Gandhi." Even today in our country the one who will discover himself as a leader comes forward in politics; will become Gandhi. This analysis proves that this "I am Brahma" is an annotation of Brahmin books. If someone insists, we can believe this annotation but do not directly accept "I am Brahma" arthavad of Brahmin books and start chanting it. If someone starts chanting this, we can tell him that we do not have such a principle in our theology that every person calls himself as Brahma. Upanishadhas say that the one who knows Supreme Being becomes Brahma. Only the learned will say this and not every person. This annotation has two processes – the first is Veda (known) and the second is (becomes). In the process of knowing, it says one who knows Param Brahma (supreme being) becomes Brahma. In the process of knowing, the word "avum" attaches with Brahma. If we think over it, it says one who knows Param Brahma does not become Param Brahma but Brahma. The second thing is that it is never said of being Brahma. Here the word "avum" comes in mostly in the meaning as previous. It is like asking if anything is golden. Thus here "avum" word comes as "Ev" e.g. Brahma-avum = almost like Brahma because in Brahmin literature of Upanishadhas "avum" and "ev" are same

Here "ev" comes in the meaning of "avum". There literal meaning of "ev" does not match here. When "ev" and avum:" appear and have the same meaning that time "I am Brahma" means to become like Brahma, which is the right meaning. When people do not believe Upanishadhas and repeat "I am Brahma" we want to tell them that this is untrue, you are calling Brahma as any creature in the world, you are trying to prove the union of creature of Brahma and Braham, but as per the Vedas feeling Brahma is different than being Brahma.

Our soul gets Brahma the divine glory and it becomes present leaving the body, it gets mixed with the earth or nature. This has a theological principle of "sampdyavirbhav." In that condition what we become is explained.
Any creature lives in present because the same story we find in upanishadha. In Shankar Bhashya we get the same fact about the free soul. It says in free state, soul cannot function like Brahma such as creating the world, etc.

Shankaracharya also says soul can be free of other worldly luxuries. Creating the world is the work of Brahma and it is only possible for him. Thus it is clear that any creature even in the free spirit state cannot become Brahma, it stays separate from Brahma. The similarity is we can experience his qualities such as happiness, etc., the way it is said in the chapter of free spirit or free soul.

Shankar Bhashya says, when in this way soul cannot become Brahma even in its free state, its form stays indefinite, any worldly creature saying "I am Brahma" is unture.

����������������������������������������������������������� ****

dd
 Title : Vedic Theology Author : Mr S.K. Vivakar

Read In Hindi

http://www.vedpradip.com/articlecontent.php?aid=426&linkid=1&catid=&subcatid=0&vedid=5

There is a hymn in Rigveda, which says – Oh glorious supreme being, let me be you and you be me and your blessings, thoughts about welfare of others and teaching be true.
Communal people do not pay attention to the ultimate or basic meaning of the hymn and start communal arguments. They mistake the word "va" in the hymn. I be you or you be me, one of these should happen. Whatever is possible between both of them should happen. This is the way to say and to reach an opinion. Mythological community says – Oh lord, if I cannot be you, you be me. You appear in the human body for your worshipper proving the "Avatarvad". New theological community says if you cannot be me, let me be you, let me the Brahma.
In communal debates on party is proved possible and the other as impossible. Whatever is possible proves to be right or truth and whatever impossible proves to be wrong. But Vedas call both the things are possible or right, but you being me, Brahma appearing in human body is not right, but it is said that Vedas also believe the you being me. Thus this hymn is of new theology but controversial. Thus both I being you and you being me things being true, the "va" in the hymn is not untrue but it comes as a form of "ch" meaning together. In exposition of the Vedas (nirukta), together meaning of "va" is explained. In this meaning of "va" "tha" also comes here. Thus the word Parmatma or supreme being means both the things, I being you and you being me, both are true and both are possible. Thus it is possible for both the parties that the situation of meditation or worshipping and qualities go into the worshipper. Maharishi Dayanand also wrote an article on this in "swamantawyamantavya." Vedas say that an iron ball kept in fire becomes bright and hot because of fire, thus the worshipper also takes the qualities of God. In theology it is said that "Bhogmatrasamyalingachchha"upinshiadhas say Rasa vais sa, which means the worshipper takes the qualities of the god (Mundak 3/1/3). Thus God goes inside the person who meditates or worships , he gets limited to that person. Fire seems round, i.e. to take the shape of the ball kept in it, when it enters the iron ball, soul seems to take the shape of form of the worshipper’s heart (Kath 6/7). And thus whenever we feel Brahma inside us, inside our heart, he seems limited to our body and resemble us. Theology also supports this idea (Veda 1/2/3). Upanishadhas also support you being me. Maharishi Dayanand tells the same annotation that the way the iron ball takes the form of fire when kept in fire, likewise the Supreme Being lights our hearts with knowledge and happiness. Vedas compare Supreme Being with fire, thus the example of iron and iron ball

is appropriate here. Iron ball becomes lightened and hot in fire, but it does not leave its basic round shape and fire seems rounded after entering in the round iron ball. Thus the worshiper gets happiness and peace with worship of Brahma, but he will not leave his form of indefinite and even this supreme being of Brahma becomes more glorious with the worship but he does not leave his form, which is almighty and indefinite. Thus the hymns are the medium through which God can be felt and not the medium through which he comes inside us.

I am Brahma – it means the soul I feel inside me is of Brahma. It is not an annotation from Vedas, it is annotation of centipede Brahmin and "Bruhadaranyakopanishadha". Thus this annotation is not vedic. But even if it is not vedic, it is not against Vedas. It also cannot be said that the intention with which is said is against Vedas because Vedas say I converse with my body, when should I feel the supreme being within me, how he will meet me, how can I see God with good heart.

If Brahma is indefinite, why should Vedas have prayers of dwelling inside Brahma and meeting him, and why should they desire meeting him and call him the source of happiness.
And why should they call him the ruler of all, the past, the present, and the future and why should they worship him. Thus I am Brahma is against Brahma appearing in same form. This annotation can have two possibilities. One calls worshipper being Brahma through worshiping, which other refuse to believe. The second believes more into principle. The second result of it is – "I am Brahma" this annotation comes twice in two volumes (book). Once in centipede Brahmin and the second time in Bruhadaranyakopanishadha. Thus it is an annotation of one volume, which is as following:

Before creation of nature, only Brahma existed. He realized he is the ruler of the universe. And because of Brahma world was created. Thus he dwelled in Brahma, Rishis and humans and he existed in them the way he knew himself. There is an example of Vamadev Rishi who experienced "I am Manu Rishi. I am Surya Rishi as well." So God cannot harm that person because his soul lives in that person.

In this entire recital "I am Brahmana" comes twice. First time at the beginning of the annotation. Brahma realized it. It is without doubt that Brahma experienced Brahma inside him. At this time, the person who realizes this "I am Brahma" gets everything, which is thought over. In Brahmin volumes Arthavad comes first. Praising, flattering is Arthavad. It says after Agnihotra, we get heaven. Even in this world we see beggars blessing us for a very small amount of money, like give me some money and your children will live happily, you will go to the heaven, etc. Thus for a very small thing, praising or flattery is called arthavad. "I am Brahma" arthavad comes in the form that first Brahma came, he realized himself as Brahma and the world was created. There was no evidence of Brahma going into any human, god, or rishi. There was only an example of Vamdev Rishi but even he had thought himself of Manu rishi and surya rishi and not the Brahma. At this time, the person will thing "I am Brahma" or whatever big thing, he will become that. Even god cannot anything bad about it. This is clearly arthavad. This arthavad chapter by Brahmins can be reduced by us. In political upheaval, Mahatma Gandhi discovered himself first and he become a leader and he was called Mahatma. Seemant Abdul Gaffar Khan discovered a leader and he was called "Seemant Gandhi." Even today in our country the one who will discover himself as a leader comes forward in politics; will become Gandhi. This analysis proves that this "I am Brahma" is an annotation of Brahmin books. If someone insists, we can believe this annotation but do not directly accept "I am Brahma" arthavad of Brahmin books and start chanting it. If someone starts chanting this, we can tell him that we do not have such a principle in our theology that every person calls himself as Brahma. Upanishadhas say that the one who knows Supreme Being becomes Brahma. Only the learned will say this and not every person. This annotation has two processes – the first is Veda (known) and the second is (becomes). In the process of knowing, it says one who knows Param Brahma (supreme being) becomes Brahma. In the process of knowing, the word "avum" attaches with Brahma. If we think over it, it says one who knows Param Brahma does not become Param Brahma but Brahma. The second thing is that it is never said of being Brahma. Here the word "avum" comes in mostly in the meaning as previous. It is like asking if anything is golden. Thus here "avum" word comes as "Ev" e.g. Brahma-avum = almost like Brahma because in Brahmin literature of Upanishadhas "avum" and "ev" are same

Here "ev" comes in the meaning of "avum". There literal meaning of "ev" does not match here. When "ev" and avum:" appear and have the same meaning that time "I am Brahma" means to become like Brahma, which is the right meaning. When people do not believe Upanishadhas and repeat "I am Brahma" we want to tell them that this is untrue, you are calling Brahma as any creature in the world, you are trying to prove the union of creature of Brahma and Braham, but as per the Vedas feeling Brahma is different than being Brahma.

Our soul gets Brahma the divine glory and it becomes present leaving the body, it gets mixed with the earth or nature. This has a theological principle of "sampdyavirbhav." In that condition what we become is explained.
Any creature lives in present because the same story we find in upanishadha. In Shankar Bhashya we get the same fact about the free soul. It says in free state, soul cannot function like Brahma such as creating the world, etc.

Shankaracharya also says soul can be free of other worldly luxuries. Creating the world is the work of Brahma and it is only possible for him. Thus it is clear that any creature even in the free spirit state cannot become Brahma, it stays separate from Brahma. The similarity is we can experience his qualities such as happiness, etc., the way it is said in the chapter of free spirit or free soul.

Shankar Bhashya says, when in this way soul cannot become Brahma even in its free state, its form stays indefinite, any worldly creature saying "I am Brahma" is unture.

����������������������������������������������������������� ****

Tag Names : Rugveda,Nirukta,Maduk,Kath
Print
Download pdf
Link to this

Link to this
Use this URL to link to the article from your blog or site:





To view the content of Vedpradip, you need to be registered user.

For registration, please Click Here.

For login, please Click Here


Close