Arya Samaj

Shyena · Posted: Wed Dec 27, 2006 7:14 pm Post subject:

Namaste Shishya,

Have you noticed that more often than not do I suddenly come up with a question and you read pertaining to that topic around that time itself Wink

I've read rgvedadi bhashya bhumika on vjsingh's website, although the formatting was terrifying I was still able to understand the book, if the formatting was better I would have enjoyed it much more...

Mind you I'm not saying atharva is a latter interpolation nor that itihaasa refers to modern itihasa [which we discussed many months ago]. Forgive me little knowledge, but what is Nigada...? I thought it was chhandas to mean poetic metre, and this is mentioned not nigada. I forgot that chhandaas also means charms, although that again will have to be kept seperate I guess cuz the mantras are 'divided' or 'classified' into three in general, rk, saman and yajus.

Now atharva veda isn't known as chandaasaveda, so I think its a bit of a superfluous conclusion that atharva should also be included, because even in that verse of manu, it speaks of rk saman and yajus attributed to three rshis not four. In the verse that speaks of vedas being summoned out of agni, vayu, aditya, it says vishnu which might simply mean overspreader i.e., god [and I dont know the etymology of angiras, as to why it is associated with him].

What I feel is, the trayi refers to the three vedas, the fourth is atharva. Its as I stated last time we continued this discussion - atharva corresponds to the fire priest. How I understand it would be that the three-fourths of purusha in heaven is the three vedas, one fourth upon earth is atharva. The three parts of the hymn if we accept mimamsa will also in the semi-platonic realm, the atharva refers to the human - thus the material world. From what I know, atharva veda refers to medicine, warfare and some hymns about marriage - which makes me feel it bears the knowledge regarding social fields.

I'm developing a tendency towards the more common notion of agni, vayu, aditya referring to the bhu, antar and dyaus lokas; vishnu refer to the overspreading and the idea that vedas were formulated in sanskrit by various rshis, the knowledge however being eternal is unmanifest in language.[/code]
_________________

Krinvanto Vishwam Aryam meditate

Namaste

Shishya · Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 11:07 pm Post subject:

Namaste Shyena,

'Chandaas' - which could mean either 'charm', 'spell' or 'prescriptive formula' - would be in reference to their purpose, which, being different from that of the other Samhitas, is what defines it as a collection from the other three. They are 'Yajus' in their form, as was pointed out in the Mimamsa. 'Nigada' - which, from what I can tell, means 'leading sound' - was a term used by the oppenent in that discussion to try and establish a fourth type of Vedic mantra on the grounds that the verses of the Atharva are recited with a louder voice than the others. Jaimini rejects this, as I think you gathered.

The problem with interpreting traiyi in reference to the first three Veda Samhitas is that the full phrase as it commonly appears is trayi-vidya, i.e. the 'three-fold knowledge' or 'science'.

In general, however, I am not against new interpretations and/or correlations in regards to the division of the Vedas, as long as the Atharva retains its position with the other three.
_________________
Namaste,

Shishya
ॐ

ॐ सह नावतु । सह तौ भुनक्तु । सह वीर्यं करवावहै । तेजस्वि नावधीतमस्तु मा विद्विषावहै ॥
"Together may we be protected. Together may we be profited. Together may we do a hero's work. May we learn intelligently. May we never hate one another."
-Brihadaranyaka & Taittiriya Upanishads

Shyena · Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 12:28 pm Post subject:

The thing is, I encounter reference of trayi and not trayi vidya, also manu speaks of three rshis not four..
_________________

Krinvanto Vishwam Aryam meditate

Namaste

Shishya · Posted: Sat Jan 06, 2007 2:38 am Post subject:

Namaste Shyena,

Sorry - that was a typographical error on my part. 'traiyi-vidya' is the correct spelling.

Again, reference to the three Rishis in Manu must be referred back to the discussion in Purva Mimamsa.

However - though I don't want to divert this topic - I am researching the first chapter of Manu Smriti, and I think quite a bit of it has been interpolated by later scribes and commentators. Of the first section [i.e. Manu's speech: 5-59] almost everything has been added by several hands at later dates. This is how I would break down the section:

5-7: Original Text.
8-13: Interpolation. 10 is clearly an addition by a later etymologist, and 12 shows signs of being the same. 11 is a superfluous duplicate of 9. The whole section disrupts the flow of the narrative, and is highly mythological - in contrast to the preceeding and subsequent sections.
14-16: Original Text. Follows directly from 7.
17-18: Interpolation. 17 is another etymological addtion, and 18 is dependent upon 17. The two repeat aspects of what has already been stated. Also, the pair contradict the subsequent section.
19: Original Text. This marks the end of the overview of creation.
20: This seems like an interpolated verse to me, inserted to bring the text in line with later philosophical ideas, particularly with those of the Samkhya.
21: Original Text. This begins the transition to the main subject, i.e. Dharma.
22-25: Interpolation. 25 is completely out of harmony with the flow of the narrative, and is furthermore self-contratictory. The entire section is, again, mythological - possible inserted by the same hand as in 8-13 - and contradicts what has preceeded it, i.e. that God establishes the principles by which evolution takes place. Also unnecessarily repetititve. (See 19.)
26: Original Text. Follows directly from 21, and marks the original purpose of the section.
27: Interpolation. Possibly from the same hand as in 20.
28: Original Text. Explains how creatures come to be due to their previous karma. Follows 26.
29: Interpolation. Contradicts the context of 28 and 30.
30: Original Text. Extension of 28.
31-48: Interpolation(s). This section shows marks from several later scribes. First, the flow of the text is completely interrupted with 31. It could be original (as it is reflected in 87) but would appear to be out of place. 32 goes off in a completely different direction. 33-35 even change voice, as if God himself were speaking. 36-48 is a later addition meant to give an overview of the details of the creation of the animal and vegetable kingdoms.
49: Original Text. Follows directly from 30.
50: This is a note added by the narrator (i.e. the speaker of the text, as shown in 1-4; not Manu). It is not necessarily a later addition in terms of the age of the text itself, but is also not Manu speaking.
51-57: Interpolation. This is a clear case of an addition by a later philoposher, possible the same as in 20 and 27.
58-59: Original Text. This marks the end of the introduction to the Science of Dharma, the original subject of the section. This is also the end of Manu's speech, the rest being dictated by Bhrigu (excepting various additions by the narrator, as in 60, etc.).

If we were to eliminate the interpolations, we would see that the text is actually quite focused in its aim of presenting the foundations of the Science of Dharma, which the entire treatise is to discuss in depth. Everything else has been added by at least 2 different scribes - one of which was pauranic and mythologically-minded, and the other of which was philosophical. There are also traces of a third scribe, who would have been more interested in etymology.

Anyways, I think the reference to the 'three Rishis' is also an addition.
_________________
Namaste,

Shishya
ॐ

ॐ सह नावतु । सह तौ भुनक्तु । सह वीर्यं करवावहै । तेजस्वि नावधीतमस्तु मा विद्विषावहै ॥
"Together may we be protected. Together may we be profited. Together may we do a hero's work. May we learn intelligently. May we never hate one another."
-Brihadaranyaka & Taittiriya Upanishads

Shyena · Posted: Sat Jan 06, 2007 12:40 pm Post subject:

I would like to know one thing then - what evidence do we have which supports the concept of three rshis over the idea of it being a reference to the three loka...
_________________

Krinvanto Vishwam Aryam meditate

Namaste