PDA

View Full Version : Roots of Shakti.



Aryavartian
07 January 2014, 12:49 PM
Namaste everyone,we know that Vaishnavism and Shaivism have its origins in Vedic corpus but what about Shaktism?Did the worship of Shakti exist during the Vedic era?Out of the three important Goddesses of Shaktism i.e Lakshmi,Sarasvati and Parvati,two are mentioned in Vedic corpus i.e Sarasvati and Lakshmi(aka Sri).Sri is also mentioned in early Buddhist and Jaina texts.But i could not find the mention of Parvati(Shakti herself) in Vedic corpus.AFAIK she is only mentioned once in Kena Upanishad.Could someone tell me if she is mentioned in any of the Vedic era texts?I think Goddess Kali(Avatara of Parvati) is mentioned in Vedic texts,as Nirrti.Nirrti is Goddess of death and destruction(correct me if i'm wrong) and have dark color similar to Kali.Could she be the prototype of Kali/Shakti/Parvati?

Best regards,
A.

Alter ego
16 January 2014, 12:44 AM
Pranam


Namaste everyone,we know that Vaishnavism and Shaivism have its origins in Vedic corpus but what about Shaktism?Did the worship of Shakti exist during the Vedic era?Out of the three important Goddesses of Shaktism i.e Lakshmi,Sarasvati and Parvati,two are mentioned in Vedic corpus i.e Sarasvati and Lakshmi(aka Sri).Sri is also mentioned in early Buddhist and Jaina texts.But i could not find the mention of Parvati(Shakti herself) in Vedic corpus.AFAIK she is only mentioned once in Kena Upanishad.Could someone tell me if she is mentioned in any of the Vedic era texts?I think Goddess Kali(Avatara of Parvati) is mentioned in Vedic texts,as Nirrti.Nirrti is Goddess of death and destruction(correct me if i'm wrong) and have dark color similar to Kali.Could she be the prototype of Kali/Shakti/Parvati?

Best regards,
A.

I am not sure what you mean by 'Vedic corpus'. Goddess shri is absent in vedas .

Nirrti is mentioned , but she is not a goddess . She is an abstract personification of malicious things , and as such she is not to be worshiped but avoided. There is not a single ric/sukta in praise of nirrti . The goddess durga/kali is not mentioned in vedas

devotee
16 January 2014, 01:26 AM
Namaste,

Excerpt from Atharva Veda on Mother Goddess :

4.30.1-9 These verses glorify the Mother Goddess.

Some excerpts :
“I move in the eleven Rudras and eight Vasus, the twelve Adityas and Vishvedeva. I am BrahmanvAdini (the revealer of the Brahman) and ParBrahmanAtmika (the Self one with Brahman). I nourish the MitrAvaruNa and support the IndrAgni and Ashvidvaya. I am BrahmAntikA and am the ruler of the whole manifest universe. I have realised Brahman. I am Self alone in other form. I alone preach Indra and other gods and the men the knowledge of Brahman. Whoever eats, eats through me. All works like seeing, hearing, breathing etc. are done through me alone. I pervade all as the inner dweller. .... The VidhAtA (BrahmA) who lives in satya loka is born through me. I am the cause of this universe and I am the Brahman Consciousness too. I am the fire (BaRwAnal) in the ocean and the teja in the electricity is mine alone. Without taking help from anyone, I, creating the beings act as the wind.”

OM

ameyAtmA
16 January 2014, 01:50 AM
I am not sure what you mean by 'Vedic corpus'. Goddess shri is absent in vedas .
Please say that again?
Then what is Shri Sukta ? It is in the Ṛg Ved. Where there is Purusha there is His Shri. Where there is Nārāyaṇ, Vishṇu there is His Beloved Shri. His dazzle. His sparkle. His glamour ...

Alter ego
16 January 2014, 01:52 AM
Namaste,

Excerpt from Atharva Veda on Mother Goddess :

4.30.1-9 These verses glorify the Mother Goddess.

Some excerpts :
“I move in the eleven Rudras and eight Vasus, the twelve Adityas and Vishvedeva. I am BrahmanvAdini (the revealer of the Brahman) and ParBrahmanAtmika (the Self one with Brahman). I nourish the MitrAvaruNa and support the IndrAgni and Ashvidvaya. I am BrahmAntikA and am the ruler of the whole manifest universe. I have realised Brahman. I am Self alone in other form. I alone preach Indra and other gods and the men the knowledge of Brahman. Whoever eats, eats through me. All works like seeing, hearing, breathing etc. are done through me alone. I pervade all as the inner dweller. .... The VidhAtA (BrahmA) who lives in satya loka is born through me. I am the cause of this universe and I am the Brahman Consciousness too. I am the fire (BaRwAnal) in the ocean and the teja in the electricity is mine alone. Without taking help from anyone, I, creating the beings act as the wind.”

OM

Namaste ,

The verse is addressed to vac(Goddess of speech)

This is the original--

http://is1.mum.edu/vedicreserve/atharva_veda/atharva_veda.pdf

Cant find the words brahmavadini and parabrahmatmika in original Sanskrit verse

Sudas Paijavana
16 January 2014, 02:04 AM
Nirrti is mentioned , but she is not a goddess . She is an abstract personification of malicious things , and as such she is not to be worshiped but avoided. There is not a single ric/sukta in praise of nirrti . The goddess durga/kali is not mentioned in vedas

Namaste,

Apparently, in the Shri Atharva-Veda, NirRti is described as having "golden locks" - the ["malicious"] one with blond hair (A.V.5.7.9 ?). In the Shri Rg-Veda, there are a few Rca-s that stress a notion that the agnitra seeks protection from her, that she is to be driven away for she brings with her mystical, spiritual, and physical pain or agony; and, if she approaches the yajna, inauspiciousness is brought forth and subsequently the yajna is thus voided (R.V.10.59). While Shri Rudra, a few times invoked in the Veda-s as the God of Gods, is eulogized as "nir-Rta" ("uncontrollable", "lawless", "unconquerable"), NirRti, on the other hand, is maligned as "nir-Rti" - and in the latter sense, this is implying "without order", "one who does not hold to the Rta [or the order of things] nor the yajna-dharma", rather than the praise of "uncontrollable" eulogizing Shri Rudra, the "howler" - he that dispenses those that come to destroy the yajna-dharma.


Namaste everyone,we know that Vaishnavism and Shaivism have its origins in Vedic corpus but what about Shaktism?

Namaste,

I guess today's notions of "Shaktism" can arbitrarily be posited as "proto-Shaktism" when it comes to finding it within the Vedic corpus (I presume you are talking about the Veda-s, BrAhmaNa-s, ĀraNyaka-s, & the Upanishad-s). While a full blown "Shaktic" theology is not vehemently vivid, it's also not as vapid as previously believed. In fact, Shri Devi Aditi is, often numerously, described as the Universal Mother, the Mother of the Shri Gods. This is pretty much as "Shaktic" as one can get. More importantly, numerous Rca-s extolling Shri Devi Aditi can be found even in the Shri Rig Veda -- an important Hindu scripture often previously [and probably still] held as being man-centric -- dispelling past notions of "a scripture written entirely by men", which is observably incorrect since many Rishikā-s are listed in the anukramani-s.

Unbeknownst to many Hindus, Shri Devi Ushā, another important Hindu Goddess, is the only Shri God that is invoked with "satya-mantra" - or "true prayer".



"They indeed were Comrades of the Gods, Possessed of Truth, the Poets of Old: the Fathers found the Hidden Light and with True Prayer brought forth the Dawn (Shri Devi Ushā)." (R.V.7.76.4)

Whereas other Deva-s and Devi-s are "brought forth" through mantra-s, Shri Devi Ushā, on the other hand, is "brought forth" with "true prayer". In other words, she's heck-a-lot important. :)

Alter ego
16 January 2014, 02:54 AM
Namaste,

Apparently, in the Shri Atharva-Veda, NirRti is described as having "golden locks" - the ["malicious"] one with blond hair (A.V.5.7.9 ?). In the Shri Rg-Veda, there are a few Rca-s that stress a notion that the agnitra seeks protection from her, that she is to be driven away for she brings with her mystical, spiritual, and physical pain or agony; and, if she approaches the yajna, inauspiciousness is brought forth and subsequently the yajna is thus voided (R.V.10.59). While Shri Rudra, a few times invoked in the Veda-s as the God of Gods, is eulogized as "nir-Rta" ("uncontrollable", "lawless", "unconquerable"), NirRti, on the other hand, is maligned as "nir-Rti" - and in the latter sense, this is implying "without order", "one who does not hold to the Rta [or the order of things] nor the yajna-dharma", rather than the praise of "uncontrollable" eulogizing Shri Rudra, the "howler" - he that dispenses those that come to destroy the yajna-dharma.



Namaste,

I guess today's notions of "Shaktism" can arbitrarily be posited as "proto-Shaktism" when it comes to finding it within the Vedic corpus (I presume you are talking about the Veda-s, BrAhmaNa-s, ĀraNyaka-s, & the Upanishad-s). While a full blown "Shaktic" theology is not vehemently vivid, it's also not as vapid as previously believed. In fact, Shri Devi Aditi is, often numerously, described as the Universal Mother, the Mother of the Shri Gods. This is pretty much as "Shaktic" as one can get. More importantly, numerous Rca-s extolling Shri Devi Aditi can be found even in the Shri Rig Veda -- an important Hindu scripture often previously [and probably still] held as being man-centric -- dispelling past notions of "a scripture written entirely by men", which is observably incorrect since many Rishikā-s are listed in the anukramani-s.

Unbeknownst to many Hindus, Shri Devi Ushā, another important Hindu Goddess, is the only Shri God that is invoked with "satya-mantra" - or "true prayer".



"They indeed were Comrades of the Gods, Possessed of Truth, the Poets of Old: the Fathers found the Hidden Light and with True Prayer brought forth the Dawn (Shri Devi Ushā)." (R.V.7.76.4)Whereas other Deva-s and Devi-s are "brought forth" through mantra-s, Shri Devi Ushā, on the other hand, is "brought forth" with "true prayer". In other words, she's heck-a-lot important. :)

Yes , Vedic gods have blond hair(Indra/bhaga etc..) .Though Vedic Brahmins predominantly had black hair , there are many references of blonde Brahmins [patanjali's pingalakeshin(=blond hair),hiranyakeshin(=golden hair) of srauta sutras ] etc. However , there is no racism at all anywhere in Rigveda.

The more race conscious Buddhist scriptures provide many glimpses. Buddhacharita(23.2) says--"Brahmins of uncorrupted caste have blue eyes and blond hair " . Many blond Brahmins are mentioned in Buddhist scriptures namely-Kapila, sariputra , maudgalayana , megha and others . Pramanavartikatika (A commentary on aforesaid scriptures) says absence of such features is a sign of intermixing. Buddha suggested that black haired Brahmins dye their hair colour.

However , the absence of these notions in rigveda confirms beyond any doubt that Rigvedic society was tolerant , multicultural and egalitarian .

Alter ego
16 January 2014, 03:03 AM
Namaste,

Apparently, in the Shri Atharva-Veda, NirRti is described as having "golden locks" - the ["malicious"] one with blond hair (A.V.5.7.9 ?). In the Shri Rg-Veda, there are a few Rca-s that stress a notion that the agnitra seeks protection from her, that she is to be driven away for she brings with her mystical, spiritual, and physical pain or agony; and, if she approaches the yajna, inauspiciousness is brought forth and subsequently the yajna is thus voided (R.V.10.59). While Shri Rudra, a few times invoked in the Veda-s as the God of Gods, is eulogized as "nir-Rta" ("uncontrollable", "lawless", "unconquerable"), NirRti, on the other hand, is maligned as "nir-Rti" - and in the latter sense, this is implying "without order", "one who does not hold to the Rta [or the order of things] nor the yajna-dharma", rather than the praise of "uncontrollable" eulogizing Shri Rudra, the "howler" - he that dispenses those that come to destroy the yajna-dharma.



Namaste,

I guess today's notions of "Shaktism" can arbitrarily be posited as "proto-Shaktism" when it comes to finding it within the Vedic corpus (I presume you are talking about the Veda-s, BrAhmaNa-s, ĀraNyaka-s, & the Upanishad-s). While a full blown "Shaktic" theology is not vehemently vivid, it's also not as vapid as previously believed. In fact, Shri Devi Aditi is, often numerously, described as the Universal Mother, the Mother of the Shri Gods. This is pretty much as "Shaktic" as one can get. More importantly, numerous Rca-s extolling Shri Devi Aditi can be found even in the Shri Rig Veda -- an important Hindu scripture often previously [and probably still] held as being man-centric -- dispelling past notions of "a scripture written entirely by men", which is observably incorrect since many Rishikā-s are listed in the anukramani-s.

Unbeknownst to many Hindus, Shri Devi Ushā, another important Hindu Goddess, is the only Shri God that is invoked with "satya-mantra" - or "true prayer".



"They indeed were Comrades of the Gods, Possessed of Truth, the Poets of Old: the Fathers found the Hidden Light and with True Prayer brought forth the Dawn (Shri Devi Ushā)." (R.V.7.76.4)
Whereas other Deva-s and Devi-s are "brought forth" through mantra-s, Shri Devi Ushā, on the other hand, is "brought forth" with "true prayer". In other words, she's heck-a-lot important. :)

Totally agree. Aditi already had the characteristics of a "universal mother goddess" in rigveda (mandalas 1 and 10)

Jaskaran Singh
16 January 2014, 03:11 AM
Namaste,

Excerpt from Atharva Veda on Mother Goddess :

4.30.1-9 These verses glorify the Mother Goddess.

Some excerpts :
“I move in the eleven Rudras and eight Vasus, the twelve Adityas and Vishvedeva. I am BrahmanvAdini (the revealer of the Brahman) and ParBrahmanAtmika (the Self one with Brahman). I nourish the MitrAvaruNa and support the IndrAgni and Ashvidvaya. I am BrahmAntikA and am the ruler of the whole manifest universe. I have realised Brahman. I am Self alone in other form. I alone preach Indra and other gods and the men the knowledge of Brahman. Whoever eats, eats through me. All works like seeing, hearing, breathing etc. are done through me alone. I pervade all as the inner dweller. .... The VidhAtA (BrahmA) who lives in satya loka is born through me. I am the cause of this universe and I am the Brahman Consciousness too. I am the fire (BaRwAnal) in the ocean and the teja in the electricity is mine alone. Without taking help from anyone, I, creating the beings act as the wind.”

OM
Your translation seems to be slightly interpolated and/or has an advaitin-slant, vAgAmbhR^iNI R^iShiH never says that she "preaches" to indra, the other gods, and the men, it says that she makes a person into a brAhmaNa, R^iShi, or intelligent individual (yaM kAmaye taM tamugraM kR^iNomi tam brahmANaM tamR^iShiM taM sumedhAm) THROUGH sharing the knowledge, in and of herself, which is pleasing to the deva-s, to humans, and others (ahameva svayamidaM vadAmi juShTam devebhiruta mAnuShebhiH). It never states that the deva-s themselves did not know the knowledge or that she preached to them; she is just conveying that knowledge which loved by the deva-s, hence the term "juShTam."
Here is a recitation of the devI sUktam if you're interested: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCinQRLPiBQ

Aryavartian
16 January 2014, 03:19 AM
Pranam



I am not sure what you mean by 'Vedic corpus'. Goddess shri is absent in vedas .

Nirrti is mentioned , but she is not a goddess . She is an abstract personification of malicious things , and as such she is not to be worshiped but avoided. There is not a single ric/sukta in praise of nirrti . The goddess durga/kali is not mentioned in vedas

Namaste AE,

What i meant by Vedic corpus is the main Vedic era texts like the Vedas,Upanishads,Aranyakas,Brahmanas etc :)

Yes,i know Nirrti is said to be avoided,but in Satpatha Brahmana she has a sacrificial share(or oblation) so it means she was worshiped in one way or another.

About Sri/Lakshmi,she is mentioned in Brahmanas and early Jaina-Bauddha texts as Goddess of luck.The Gajalakshmi iconography can also be seen in early Buddhist stupas like in Sanchi and Bharhut.


Namaste,
I guess today's notions of "Shaktism" can arbitrarily be posited as "proto-Shaktism" when it comes to finding it within the Vedic corpus (I presume you are talking about the Veda-s, BrAhmaNa-s, ĀraNyaka-s, & the Upanishad-s). While a full blown "Shaktic" theology is not vehemently vivid, it's also not as vapid as previously believed. In fact, Shri Devi Aditi is, often numerously, described as the Universal Mother, the Mother of the Shri Gods. This is pretty much as "Shaktic" as one can get. More importantly, numerous Rca-s extolling Shri Devi Aditi can be found even in the Shri Rig Veda -- an important Hindu scripture often previously [and probably still] held as being man-centric -- dispelling past notions of "a scripture written entirely by men", which is observably incorrect since many Rishikā-s are listed in the anukramani-s.

Unbeknownst to many Hindus, Shri Devi Ushā, another important Hindu Goddess, is the only Shri God that is invoked with "satya-mantra" - or "true prayer".



"They indeed were Comrades of the Gods, Possessed of Truth, the Poets of Old: the Fathers found the Hidden Light and with True Prayer brought forth the Dawn (Shri Devi Ushā)." (R.V.7.76.4)

Whereas other Deva-s and Devi-s are "brought forth" through mantra-s, Shri Devi Ushā, on the other hand, is "brought forth" with "true prayer". In other words, she's heck-a-lot important. :)

Namaste bro,

Yes,i am aware of Sri Aditi and Sri Ushas,there is no doubt that they are invoked as highly adored Goddesses.But my question was about Parvati(or Shakti) in general.I don't think either Aditi nor Ushas is equated with Parvati.


Btw,does anyone know about Sri Aditi's relation with fertility Goddess Lajja Gauri?She is an ancient Goddess,her imagery is found in Indus-Sarasvati civilization and during Mauryan-Sunga times....

Sudas Paijavana
16 January 2014, 03:30 AM
Yes , Vedic gods have blond hair(Indra/bhaga etc..) .Though Vedic Brahmins predominantly had black hair , there are many references of blonde Brahmins [patanjali's pingalakeshin(=blond hair),hiranyakeshin(=golden hair) of srauta sutras ] etc. However , there is no racism at all anywhere in Rigveda.

The more race conscious Buddhist scriptures provide many glimpses. Buddhacharita(23.2) says--"Brahmins of uncorrupted caste have blue eyes and blond hair " . Many blond Brahmins are mentioned in Buddhist scriptures namely-Kapila, sariputra , maudgalayana , megha and others . Pramanavartikatika (A commentary on aforesaid scriptures) says absence of such features is a sign of intermixing. Buddha suggested that black haired Brahmins dye their hair colour.

However , the absence of these notions in rigveda confirms beyond any doubt that Rigvedic society was tolerant , multicultural and egalitarian .

Namaste,

I do not mean to digress from the OP, but: regarding Shri Indra having blond hair, as per my assessment, is only a half-truth (and about Shri Bhaga, I am unfamiliar on the matter pertaining to him). A Shrutic revelation states that Shri Indra comes in many forms, that these forms are of the yajamāna-s' calling:



For each and every form he is the Model,
it is his form that is to be seen everywhere;
Indra by his charm (māyā) moves in many forms,
truly, his bay steeds are yoked a thousand times.”
–ṚV 6.47.18.

And, we must remember that another revelation, I don't recall the verse number, expresses that Shri Indra dyed both his hair and beard blond with Soma residue. This was symbolic: reiterating the duality of Indra-Soma. In fact, it is usually the solar Solar-Deities such as Shri Mitra and Shri Savitar that are described as "blond" or "golden", which is theologically and observably sensible and understandable. And, correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't "pingala" mean light brown?

Another important point relevant to the "theological colorism" (not to be confused with societal colorism, a subset of racism) at hand:

Shri Rudra has dark brown skin, but has golden colored arms and hair. Sometimes, he is described as white as camphor. Are you, by any chance, familiar with this? I am not theologically aware of the relevance of the colorism of Shri Rudra in this case.

And, Rishi Agastya, who is of the same "stock" as that of Rishi Vasishtha, has always been known for is extremely dark skin tone. Yet, the two are always eulogized as sons of Shri Mitra and Shri Varuna.

Lastly, I agree that the Rig Vedic society was egalitarian. The theological aspects of the last hymn of the Shri Rg-Veda confirm this assessment: "may we be of one accord and offer the common oblation [as brothers]" (<-- paraphrased for convenience).



Yes,i am aware of Sri Aditi and Sri Ushas,there is no doubt that they are invoked as highly adored Goddesses.But my question was about Pravati(or Shakti) in general.I don't think either Aditi nor Ushas is equated with Parvati..

Namaste,

I am unfamiliar with the topic above. Thus, I made an attempt, instead, by answering your first two questions: "Namaste everyone,we know that Vaishnavism and Shaivism have its origins in Vedic corpus but what about Shaktism?Did the worship of Shakti exist during the Vedic era?" regarding Shaktism and its probable connection to the Vedic scriptures.

Aryavartian
16 January 2014, 03:31 AM
Yes , Vedic gods have blond hair(Indra/bhaga etc..) .Though Vedic Brahmins predominantly had black hair , there are many references of blonde Brahmins [patanjali's pingalakeshin(=blond hair),hiranyakeshin(=golden hair) of srauta sutras ] etc. However , there is no racism at all anywhere in Rigveda.

The more race conscious Buddhist scriptures provide many glimpses. Buddhacharita(23.2) says--"Brahmins of uncorrupted caste have blue eyes and blond hair " . Many blond Brahmins are mentioned in Buddhist scriptures namely-Kapila, sariputra , maudgalayana , megha and others . Pramanavartikatika (A commentary on aforesaid scriptures) says absence of such features is a sign of intermixing. Buddha suggested that black haired Brahmins dye their hair colour.

However , the absence of these notions in rigveda confirms beyond any doubt that Rigvedic society was tolerant , multicultural and egalitarian .

Hmmmm....but Atharva Veda says Brahmanas had black hair.It even have a mantra to grow thick black hair.

Also i searched the so called verse in Buddhacharita about ancient neo-nazi concept :p ,it seems that the texts does not have a 23rd chapter!

http://www.dsbcproject.org/node/7224

Jaskaran Singh
16 January 2014, 03:43 AM
I am not sure what you mean by 'Vedic corpus'. Goddess shri is absent in vedas.

What? If lakShmI devI is not mentioned, then could you please explain exactly what लक्ष्मी॑ (lakShmI) is supposed to refer to in following verses from the shrI sUktam of the R^igveda khilAni:
हि॑रण्यवर्णां ह॑रिणीं सुव॑र्णरजत॑स्रजाम्।
चन्द्रां हिर॑ण्मयीं लक्ष्मीं जा॑तवेदो म॑मा॑वह॥२.६.१॥
ता॑म्म आ॑वह जातवेदो लक्ष्मी॑म॑नपगामि॑नीम्।
य॑स्यां हि॑रण्यं विन्दे॑यं गा॑म॑श्वंपु॑रुषानह॑म्॥२.६.२॥
अश्वपूर्वां रथमध्यां हस्ति॑नादप्रमोदि॑नीम्।
श्रि॑यं देवी॑मु॑प ह्वये श्री॑र्मा देवी॑जुषताम्॥२.६.३॥
कांस्य॑स्मि तां हि॑रण्यप्रावारामार्द्रा॑ञ्ज्व॑लन्तीं तृप्तां तर्प॑यन्तीम्।
पद्मेस्तिथां पद्म॑वर्णां ता॑मिहो॑प ह्वये श्रि॑यम्॥२.६.४॥
चन्द्रां प्रभासां य्यश॑सा ज्व॑लन्तीं श्रि॑यं ल्लोके॑देव॑जुष्टामुदारा॑म्।
ता॑म्पद्म॑नेमिं श॑रणं प्र॑पद्ये अलक्ष्मी॑र्मे नश्यतां त्वां वृणोमि॥२.६.५॥
आदित्य॑वर्णे त॑पसो॑धि जातो॑व॑नस्प॑तिस्त॑व वृक्षो॑थ॑बिल्वः ।
त॑स्य फ॑लानि त॑पसा॑नुदन्तु माया॑न्तरा या॑श्च बाह्या॑अलक्ष्मीः॥२.६.६॥
उ॑पैतु मान्देवसख॑ ᳲकीर्ति॑श्च म॑णिना सह॑।
प्रादु॑र्भूतो॑स्मि रा॑ष्ट्रेस्मि॑न्कीर्तिं वृद्धिं ददातु मे॥२.६.७॥
क्षु॑त्पिपासा॑मला ज्येष्ठा॑मलक्ष्मी॑न्नाशयाम्य॑हम्।
अ॑भूतिम॑समृद्धिं च स॑र्वान्नि॑र्णुद मे गॄहात्॥२.६.८॥
ग॑न्धद्वारां दुरा॑धर्षां नित्य॑पुष्टां करीषि॑णीम्।
ई॑श्वरीं स॑र्वभूतानान्ता॑मिहो॑प ह्वये श्रि॑यम्॥२.६.९॥
म॑नस ᳲका॑ममा॑कूतिं व्वाच॑स्सत्य॑मशीमहि ।
पशू॑नां रूप॑म॑न्नस्य म॑यि श्री॑श्श्रयतां य्य॑शः॥२.६.१०॥
कर्दमेन॑प्रजा भूता॑म॑यि स॑म्भव क॑र्दम ।
श्रि॑यं व्वास॑य मे कुले॑मात॑रं पद्ममालि॑नीम्॥२.६.११॥
आ॑प स्रवन्तु स्नि॑ग्धानि चि॑क्लीता व॑स मे गृहे॑।
नि॑च देवी॑म्मात॑रं श्रि॑यं व्वास॑य मे कुले॑॥२.६.१२॥
पक्वां पुष्क॑रिणीं पुष्टां पिङ्ग॑लां पद्ममालि॑नीम्।
सूर्यां हिर॑ण्मयीं लक्ष्मीं जा॑तवेदो म॑मा॑वह॥२.६.१३॥
आर्द्रां पुष्क॑रिणीं यष्टीं सुव॑र्णं हेममालि॑नीम्।
चन्द्रां हिर॑ण्मयीं ल्लक्ष्मीं जा॑तवेदो म॑मा॑वह॥२.६.१४॥
ता॑म्म आ॑वह जातवेदो लक्ष्मी॑म॑नपगामि॑नीम्।
य॑स्यां हि॑रण्यं प्र॑भूतं गा॑वो दास्यो॑विन्दे॑यं पु॑रुषानह॑म्॥२.६.१५॥
य आनन्दं समा॑विशदुपा॑धावन्विभा॑वसुम्।
श्रि॑यस्स॑र्वा उपा॑सिष्व चि॑क्लीत वस मे गृहे॑॥२.६.१६॥
कर्दमेन॑प्रजा स्रष्टा॑सम्भू॑तिं गमयामसि ।
अ॑दधादु॑पागाद्ये॑षां का॑मां ससृज्म॑हे॥२.६.१७॥
जा॑तवेद ᳲपुनीहि॑मा राय॑स्पो॑षं च धारय ।
अग्नि॑र्मा त॑स्मादे॑नसो विश्वा॑न्मुञ्चत्वंहसः॥२.६.१८॥
Edit: Also keep in mind that it even says "श्रि॑यं देवी॑मु॑पह्वये" (shrIyaMdevImupahvaye)

Alter ego
16 January 2014, 04:11 AM
Hmmmm....but Atharva Veda says Brahmanas had black hair.It even have a mantra to grow thick black hair.

Also i searched the so called verse in Buddhacharita about ancient neo-nazi concept :p ,it seems that the texts does not have a 23rd chapter!

http://www.dsbcproject.org/node/7224

And that is why I said they had PREDOMINANTLY black hair.


About buddhacharita, I read it long back and it seems that my memory failed me in remembering verse numbers. So , I will get back to that in a moment.

In the meantime , I will give you a reference to those "neo-Nazi" verses of buddhacharita-


Grains of gold-- Tales of a Cosmopolitan Traveler By Gendun Chopel (page 131)

http://books.google.co.in/books?id=XSZnAgAAQBAJ&lpg=PA131&dq=yellow%20haired%20brahmins&pg=PA131#v=onepage&q=yellow%20haired%20brahmins&f=false

Sudas,

pingala=reddish-brown, tawny, yellow, gold-coloured etc..,.

http://www.sanskritdictionary.com/piṅgala/135101/1

Alter ego
16 January 2014, 04:22 AM
What? If lakShmI devI is not mentioned, then could you please explain exactly what लक्ष्मी॑ (lakShmI) is supposed to refer to in following verses from the shrI sUktam of the R^igveda khilAni:
हि॑रण्यवर्णां ह॑रिणीं सुव॑र्णरजत॑स्रजाम्।
चन्द्रां हिर॑ण्मयीं लक्ष्मीं जा॑तवेदो म॑मा॑वह॥२.६.१॥
ता॑म्म आ॑वह जातवेदो लक्ष्मी॑म॑नपगामि॑नीम्।
य॑स्यां हि॑रण्यं विन्दे॑यं गा॑म॑श्वंपु॑रुषानह॑म्॥२.६.२॥
अश्वपूर्वां रथमध्यां हस्ति॑नादप्रमोदि॑नीम्।
श्रि॑यं देवी॑मु॑प ह्वये श्री॑र्मा देवी॑जुषताम्॥२.६.३॥
कांस्य॑स्मि तां हि॑रण्यप्रावारामार्द्रा॑ञ्ज्व॑लन् ीं तृप्तां तर्प॑यन्तीम्।
पद्मेस्तिथां पद्म॑वर्णां ता॑मिहो॑प ह्वये श्रि॑यम्॥२.६.४॥
चन्द्रां प्रभासां य्यश॑सा ज्व॑लन्तीं श्रि॑यं ल्लोके॑देव॑जुष्टामुदारा॑म्।
ता॑म्पद्म॑नेमिं श॑रणं प्र॑पद्ये अलक्ष्मी॑र्मे नश्यतां त्वां वृणोमि॥२.६.५॥
आदित्य॑वर्णे त॑पसो॑धि जातो॑व॑नस्प॑तिस्त॑व वृक्षो॑थ॑बिल्वः ।
त॑स्य फ॑लानि त॑पसा॑नुदन्तु माया॑न्तरा या॑श्च बाह्या॑अलक्ष्मीः॥२.६.६॥
उ॑पैतु मान्देवसख॑ ᳲकीर्ति॑श्च म॑णिना सह॑।
प्रादु॑र्भूतो॑स्मि रा॑ष्ट्रेस्मि॑न्कीर्तिं वृद्धिं ददातु मे॥२.६.७॥
क्षु॑त्पिपासा॑मला ज्येष्ठा॑मलक्ष्मी॑न्नाशयाम्य॑हम्।
अ॑भूतिम॑समृद्धिं च स॑र्वान्नि॑र्णुद मे गॄहात्॥२.६.८॥
ग॑न्धद्वारां दुरा॑धर्षां नित्य॑पुष्टां करीषि॑णीम्।
ई॑श्वरीं स॑र्वभूतानान्ता॑मिहो॑प ह्वये श्रि॑यम्॥२.६.९॥
म॑नस ᳲका॑ममा॑कूतिं व्वाच॑स्सत्य॑मशीमहि ।
पशू॑नां रूप॑म॑न्नस्य म॑यि श्री॑श्श्रयतां य्य॑शः॥२.६.१०॥
कर्दमेन॑प्रजा भूता॑म॑यि स॑म्भव क॑र्दम ।
श्रि॑यं व्वास॑य मे कुले॑मात॑रं पद्ममालि॑नीम्॥२.६.११॥
आ॑प स्रवन्तु स्नि॑ग्धानि चि॑क्लीता व॑स मे गृहे॑।
नि॑च देवी॑म्मात॑रं श्रि॑यं व्वास॑य मे कुले॑॥२.६.१२॥
पक्वां पुष्क॑रिणीं पुष्टां पिङ्ग॑लां पद्ममालि॑नीम्।
सूर्यां हिर॑ण्मयीं लक्ष्मीं जा॑तवेदो म॑मा॑वह॥२.६.१३॥
आर्द्रां पुष्क॑रिणीं यष्टीं सुव॑र्णं हेममालि॑नीम्।
चन्द्रां हिर॑ण्मयीं ल्लक्ष्मीं जा॑तवेदो म॑मा॑वह॥२.६.१४॥
ता॑म्म आ॑वह जातवेदो लक्ष्मी॑म॑नपगामि॑नीम्।
य॑स्यां हि॑रण्यं प्र॑भूतं गा॑वो दास्यो॑विन्दे॑यं पु॑रुषानह॑म्॥२.६.१५॥
य आनन्दं समा॑विशदुपा॑धावन्विभा॑वसुम्।
श्रि॑यस्स॑र्वा उपा॑सिष्व चि॑क्लीत वस मे गृहे॑॥२.६.१६॥
कर्दमेन॑प्रजा स्रष्टा॑सम्भू॑तिं गमयामसि ।
अ॑दधादु॑पागाद्ये॑षां का॑मां ससृज्म॑हे॥२.६.१७॥
जा॑तवेद ᳲपुनीहि॑मा राय॑स्पो॑षं च धारय ।
अग्नि॑र्मा त॑स्मादे॑नसो विश्वा॑न्मुञ्चत्वंहसः॥२.६.१८॥

These are khilas , not ricas. This is from sri suktam in the rigveda khilani not rigveda samhita.That is why I asked him what exactly he means by 'Vedic corpus' . If his definition of Vedic corpus also includes all the commentaries/appendices (There are medieval and even modern commentaries/appendices ) , then Lakshmi is definitely there .

Jaskaran Singh
16 January 2014, 04:24 AM
There are khilas , not ricas. This is from sri suktam in the rigveda khilani not rigveda samhita.That is why I asked him what exactly he means by 'Vedic corpus' . If his definition of Vedic corpus also includes all the commentaries (There are medieval and even modern commentaries) , then Lakshmi is definitely there .However , she is absent from the corpus written in Vedic Sanskrit.

Shri suktam is written in classical Sanskrit and is dated to the post paninian period.
Wikipedia disagrees (not that it's reliable, but still :D):
"The Khilani are a collection of 98 "apocryphal" hymns of the Rigveda, recorded in the Bāṣkala, but not in the Śākala shakha. They are late additions to the text of the Rigveda, but still belong to the "Mantra" period of Vedic Sanskrit."

Sudas Paijavana
16 January 2014, 04:27 AM
Wikipedia disagrees (not that it's reliable, but still :D):
"The Khilani are a collection of 98 "apocryphal" hymns of the Rigveda, recorded in the Bāṣkala, but not in the Śākala shakha. They are late additions to the text of the Rigveda, but still belong to the "Mantra" period of Vedic Sanskrit."

Namaste,

For colloquial reasons, I personally refer to this as the "Integrated ShAkala-BAshkala Edition*" - the Shri Rg-Veda we have currently.

*For anyone that ever wondered: what in the world is Sudas talking about when he always writes this "Integrated Edition" stuff? Well, now you know. :p

ps - Is the Purusha Sukta-m originally of the ShAkala/ShAkalya tradition or of BAshkala tradition? My PDF files in the Sanskrit of the two traditions are not opening right now. May someone please be kind as to confirm for me if the Purusha Sukta-m is found in both or just in one of them?


Namaste,

Both of them!

Namaste,

You are extremely sure, right?


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear OP,

I just realized that this thread is in the Shakta Forum, instead of the Vedas & Brahmanas Forum. I apologize, but I find this placement interestingly odd. Not in a bad way. But, in hindsight...it would have suited the Vedas & Brahmanas forum-section better due to the content of your original post.


....snip....

Namaste,

Dang, DD. You went all Hindutva on us.

Alter ego
16 January 2014, 04:30 AM
Wikipedia disagrees (not that it's reliable, but still :D):
"The Khilani are a collection of 98 "apocryphal" hymns of the Rigveda, recorded in the Bāṣkala, but not in the Śākala shakha. They are late additions to the text of the Rigveda, but still belong to the "Mantra" period of Vedic Sanskrit."

The same Wikipedia attests to its' late date

Quote

"The Śrī Sūkta forms part of the khilanis or appendices to the Ṛkveda.
These were late additions to the Ṛkveda, found only in the Bāṣkala śākhā,
and the hymn themselves exist in several strata that differ both in content and period of composition. For instance, according to J. Scheftelowitz, strata 1 consists of verses 1-19
(with verses 3-12 addressed to the goddess Śri and 1-2 and 13-17 to Lakṣmī),
while the second strata has verses 16-29
(i.e., the second version deletes verses 16-19 of the first).
The third strata, with verses beginning from number 23,
similarly overlaps with the second version"



Anyway , there is no point in swearing by wikipedia. I will come up with a neat reference in a moment

Alter ego
16 January 2014, 04:31 AM
Namaste,

For colloquial reasons, I personally refer to this as the "Integrated ShAkala-BAshkala Edition*" - the Shri Rg-Veda we have currently.

*For anyone that ever wondered: what in the world is Sudas talking about when he always writes this "Integrated Edition" stuff? Well, now you know. :p

ps - Is the Purusha Sukta-m originally of the ShAkala/ShAkalya tradition or of BAshkala tradition? My PDF files in the Sanskrit of the two traditions are not opening right now. May someone please be kind as to confirm for me if the Purusha Sukta-m is found in both or just in one of them?

Namaste,

Both of them!

Devi Dasi
16 January 2014, 04:41 AM
Yes , Vedic gods have blond hair(Indra/bhaga etc..) .Though Vedic Brahmins predominantly had black hair , there are many references of blonde Brahmins [patanjali's pingalakeshin(=blond hair),hiranyakeshin(=golden hair) of srauta sutras ] etc. However , there is no racism at all anywhere in Rigveda.

The more race conscious Buddhist scriptures provide many glimpses. Buddhacharita(23.2) says--"Brahmins of uncorrupted caste have blue eyes and blond hair " . Many blond Brahmins are mentioned in Buddhist scriptures namely-Kapila, sariputra , maudgalayana , megha and others . Pramanavartikatika

(A commentary on aforesaid scriptures) says absence of such features is a sign of intermixing. Buddha suggested that black haired Brahmins dye their hair colour.:cool1: Hare Krsna,

Ahh... no. For one thing Buddhists don't have varnasharama and brahmins, Lord Buddha shaved and Buddhist monks shave off all their head hair. They do not even keep brahmin shikha (lock of hair). what possible spiritual purpose is found in preserving hues of the temporary material body hairs? All this line of reasoning is British interpolation and racist "scholarship" which was imposed on Vedas. The citation of Buddhacharita(23.2) actually says, "their eyes opened wide with curiosity like blue lotuses."

Here's a quick wiki:
"Blue Lotus (Skt. utpala; Tib. ut pa la): This is a symbol of the victory of the spirit over the senses, and signifies the wisdom of knowledge. Not surprisingly, it is the preferred flower of Manjushri, the bodhisattva of wisdom."

"Europeans Vedic interpreters used this same racial idea to explain the Vedas. The Vedas speak of a battle between light and darkness. This was turned into a war between light skinned Aryans and dark skinned Dravidians. Such so-called scholars did not bother to examine the fact that most religions and mythologies including those of the ancient American Indians, Egyptians, Greeks and Persians have the idea of such a battle between light and darkness (which is the symbolic conflict between truth and falsehood), but we do not interpret their statements racially. In short, the Europeans projected racism into the history of India, and accused the Hindus of the very racism that they themselves were using to dominate the Hindus.

European scholars also pointed out that caste in India was originally defined by color. Brahmins were said to be white, Kshatriyas red, Vaishyas yellow, and Shudras black. Hence the Brahmins were said to have been originally the white Aryans and the Dravidians the dark Shudras. However, what these colors refer to is the gunas or qualities of each class. White is the color of purity (sattvaguna), dark that of impurity (tamoguna), red the color of action (rajoguna), and yellow the color of trade (also rajoguna). To turn this into races is simplistic and incorrect. Where is the red race and where is the yellow race in India? And when have the Kshatriyas been a red race and the Vaishyas as yellow race?

The racial idea reached yet more ridiculous proportions. Vedic passages speaking of their enemies (mainly demons) as without nose (a-nasa), were interpreted as a racial slur against the snub-nosed Dravidians. Now Dravidians are not snub-nosed or low nosed people, as anyone can see by examining their facial features. And the Vedic demons are also described as footless (a-pada). Where is such a footless and noseless race and what does this have to do with the Dravidians? Moreover Vedic gods like Agni (fire) are described as footless and headless. Where are such headless and footless Aryans? Yet such 'scholarship' can be found in prominent Western books on the history of India, some published in India and used in schools in India to the present day.


This idea was taken further and Hindu gods like Krishna, whose name means dark, or Shiva who is portrayed as dark, were said to have originally been Dravidian gods taken over by the invading Aryans (under the simplistic idea that Dravidians as dark-skinned people must have worshipped dark colored gods). Yet Krishna and Shiva are not black but dark blue. Where is such a dark blue race?



Moreover the different Hindu gods, like the classes of Manu, have diffe- rent colors relative to their qualities. Lakshmi is portrayed as pink, Saras- wati as white, Kali as blue-black, or Yama, the God of death, as green. Where have such races been in India or elsewhere?

In a similar light, some scholars pointed out that Vedic gods like Savitar have golden hair and golden skin, thus showing blond and fair-skinned people living in ancient India. However, Savitar is a sun-god and sun-god are usually gold in color, as has been the case of the ancient Egyptian, Mayan, and Inca and other sun-gods. Who has a black or blue sun-god? This is from the simple fact that the sun has a golden color. What does this have to do with race?...

Nor is the Caucasian race the "white" race. Caucasians can be of any color from pure white to almost pure black, with every shade of brown in between. The predominent Caucasian type found in the world is not the blond-blue-eyes northern European but the black hair, brown-eyed darker skinned Mediterranean type that we find from southern Europe to north India. Similarly the Mongolian race is not yellow. Many Chinese have skin whiter than many so-called Caucasians. In fact of all the races, the Caucasian is the most variable in its skin color." http://www.hindunet.org/hindu_history/ancient/aryan/aryan_frawley_1.html

"Such a view is not good scholarship or archeology but merely cultural imperialism. The Western Vedic scholars did in the intellectual sphere what the British army did in the political realm - discredit, divide and conquer the Hindus...


It is unfortunate that this approach has not been questioned more, particularly by Hindus. Even though Indian Vedic scholars like Dayananda Saraswati, Bal Gangadhar Tilak and Arobindo rejected it, most Hindus today passively accept it. They allow Western, generally Christian, scholars to interpret their history for them and quite naturally Hinduism is kept in a reduced role. Many Hindus still accept, read or even honor the translations of the 'Vedas' done by such Christian missionary scholars as Max Muller, Griffith, Monier-Williams and H. H. Wilson. Would modern Christians accept an interpretation of the Bible or Biblical history done by Hindus aimed at converting them to Hinduism? Universities in India also use the Western history books and Western Vedic translations that propound such views that denigrate their own culture and country.



...It is not an issue to be taken lightly, because how a culture is defined historically creates the perspective from which it is viewed in the modern social and intellectual context. Tolerance is not in allowing a false view of one's own culture and religion to be propagated without question. That is merely self-betrayal." http://www.stephen-knapp.com/solid_evidence_debunking_aryan_invasion.htm

Jaskaran Singh
16 January 2014, 04:43 AM
The same Wikipedia attests to its' late date

Quote

"The Śrī Sūkta forms part of the khilanis or appendices to the Ṛkveda.
These were late additions to the Ṛkveda, found only in the Bāṣkala śākhā,
and the hymn themselves exist in several strata that differ both in content and period of composition. For instance, according to J. Scheftelowitz, strata 1 consists of verses 1-19
(with verses 3-12 addressed to the goddess Śri and 1-2 and 13-17 to Lakṣmī),
while the second strata has verses 16-29
(i.e., the second version deletes verses 16-19 of the first).
The third strata, with verses beginning from number 23,
similarly overlaps with the second version"

Anyway , there is no point in swearing by wikipedia. I will come up with a neat reference in a moment
23 verses? Are you sure they're not adding in the phala shruti when they're dating it?
BTW, the text Devi: the great goddess : female divinity in South Asian art states that the shrI sUktam is pre-bauddha:
http://books.google.com/books?id=rQZKAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA275&img=1&pgis=1&dq=shri+suktam+dating&sig=ACfU3U3ubc0-bvxcjNpbjT4dDGgiENQ1fQ&edge=0

Alter ego
16 January 2014, 04:45 AM
Wikipedia disagrees (not that it's reliable, but still :D):
"The Khilani are a collection of 98 "apocryphal" hymns of the Rigveda, recorded in the Bāṣkala, but not in the Śākala shakha. They are late additions to the text of the Rigveda, but still belong to the "Mantra" period of Vedic Sanskrit."

I see that you and I are partly right. A part of it is from Brahmana period and another from very late classical(unaccented) period. However it is definitely not from mantra period.

Here I quote Witzel


"The hymns are of various age, and many have various additions, e.g., the Śrīsūkta has Brahmana time and even later, unaccented additions. The Śrīsūkta was and is so popular that it is even used by Nepalese Buddhists; cf. also Author, WZKS 23, 1979, 5-28, WZKS 24,1980, 21-82.


http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~witzel/canon.pdf

Alter ego
16 January 2014, 04:47 AM
23 verses? Are you sure they're not adding in the phala stuti when they're dating it?
BTW, the text Devi: the great goddess : female divinity in South Asian art states that the shrI sUktam is pre-bauddha:
http://books.google.com/books?id=rQZKAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA275&img=1&pgis=1&dq=shri+suktam+dating&sig=ACfU3U3ubc0-bvxcjNpbjT4dDGgiENQ1fQ&edge=0

That it is pre bauddha , I don't dispute . but again Buddha is dated to 400 BCE according to modern scholars , a century or more later than panini

devotee
16 January 2014, 04:50 AM
Your translation seems to be slightly interpolated and/or has an advaitin-slant, vAgAmbhR^iNI R^iShiH never says that she "preaches" to indra, the other gods, and the men, it says that she makes a person into a brAhmaNa, R^iShi, or intelligent individual (yaM kAmaye taM tamugraM kR^iNomi tam brahmANaM tamR^iShiM taM sumedhAm) THROUGH sharing the knowledge, in and of herself, which is pleasing to the deva-s, to humans, and others (ahameva svayamidaM vadAmi juShTam devebhiruta mAnuShebhiH). It never states that the deva-s themselves did not know the knowledge or that she preached to them; she is just conveying that knowledge which loved by the deva-s, hence the term "juShTam."
Here is a recitation of the devI sUktam if you're interested: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCinQRLPiBQ

This is not my translation. I have given in summary of Hindi translation done by Sri Ram Sharma Acharya, a renowned scholar of the Vedas. It is true that there may be differences in word-to-word translation as I have not reproduced word-to--word translation but a gist of it. Sri Ram Sharma Acharya cannot be considered having a Advaitic bias as you have felt as he started Gayatri-movement (which has lakhs of followers on date ... I am not one of them) and it is not purely Advaitic in nature.

OM

Alter ego
16 January 2014, 04:54 AM
:cool1: Hare Krsna,

Ahh... no. For one thing Buddhists don't have varnasharama and brahmins, Lord Buddha shaved and Buddhist monks shave off all their head hair. They do not even keep brahmin shikha (lock of hair). what possible spiritual purpose is found in preserving hues of the temporary material body hairs? All this line of reasoning is British interpolation and racist "scholarship" which was imposed on Vedas. The citation of Buddhacharita(23.2) actually says, "their eyes opened wide with curiosity like blue lotuses."


Here's a quick wiki:
"Blue Lotus (Skt. utpala; Tib. ut pa la): This is a symbol of the victory of the spirit over the senses, and signifies the wisdom of knowledge. Not surprisingly, it is the preferred flower of Manjushri, the bodhisattva of wisdom."


Pranam ,

Regarding the buddhist caste system , we already had a lot of discussion.

Please see

http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=10760

Devi Dasi
16 January 2014, 04:55 AM
Pranam ,

Regarding the buddhist caste system , we already had a lot of discussion.

Please see

http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=10760
Hare Krsna,

Caste and varna are not the same thing. Neither are they race-based classifications. Buddhists don't have varnasrama because Buddhists don't follow the Vedas.

Alter ego
16 January 2014, 05:14 AM
Hare Krsna,

Caste and varna are not the same thing. Neither are they race-based classifications.
Buddhists don't have varnasrama because Buddhists don't follow the Vedas.
I agree that varna and caste are not same .I also agree that they have nothing to do with race. However , Buddhists do have varnasharama because it is reflected in the Dharmapada. In the aforementioned link , I have provided many quotes which throw light upon the prevalence of varnashrama in Buddhism. Caste system is strikingly present in all Buddhist texts, with the exception of none. I couldn't find a single chapter without reference to caste Modern Buddhists deny they ever had caste system.So do modern sikhs.But we do know that in the bhatt bani bhai lehna praised guru arjan of "sodhi" clan. All gurus were khatris and akalis mostly "jat". In gyan prabodh , yagnas and caste system are recommended and in dasam granth kalki avtar it is said that kalki restores caste system.Even today , we see akali , ramgarhi and ravidasi gurudwaras. The Dasam patshah called himself "kshtatriya" and also said "mai naa jaano vipran ki reet" . Buddha also said something on similar lines. .

Infact ,caste in Sikhism is very mild whereas in Buddhism it is very prominent. There were Brahmin court poets in Buddhist Thailand until recently





About Sri/Lakshmi,she is mentioned in Brahmanas


Which brahmana? Where? Can you please provide the reference





Btw,does anyone know about Sri Aditi's relation with fertility Goddess Lajja Gauri?..

In the Brahmanaspati verse you posted on the other thread, the notion of creator may have been in reference to aditi . It is said that creativity commenced in uttanapad(squatting) position .It follows by saying " Aditi was born from daksha, and daksha from Aditi"

Sudas Paijavana
16 January 2014, 05:41 AM
I agree that varna and caste are not same .I also agree that they have nothing to do with race. However , Buddhists do have varnasharama because it is reflected in the Dharmapada. In the aforementioned link , I have provided many quotes which throw light upon the prevalence of varnashrama in Buddhism. Caste system is strikingly present in all Buddhist texts, with the exception of none. I couldn't find a single chapter without reference to caste Modern Buddhists deny they ever had caste system.So do modern sikhs.But we do know that in the bhatt bani bhai lehna praised guru arjan of "sodhi" clan. All gurus were khatris and akalis mostly "jat". In gyan prabodh , yagnas and caste system are recommended and in dasam granth kalki avtar it is said that kalki restores caste system.Even today , we see akali , ramgarhi and ravidasi gurudwaras. The Dasam patshah called himself "kshtatriya" and also said "mai naa jaano vipran ki reet" . Buddha also said something on similar lines. .

Infact ,caste in Sikhism is very mild whereas in Buddhism it is very prominent. There were Brahmin court poets in Buddhist Thailand until recently


Namaste,

Wasn't Nāgasena repeatedly addressed as a Brahmin even after he converted to Buddhism? I thought converts to Dhamma forfeit their titles. I'm confused now.

Alter ego
16 January 2014, 05:50 AM
Namaste,

Wasn't Nāgasena repeatedly addressed as a Brahmin even after he converted to Buddhism? I thought converts to Dhamma forfeit their titles. I'm confused now.

Indeed , and not just Nagasena

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhists_born_to_Brahmin_families

Forfeiting titles after conversion , proclaiming all are one , dining together and not mentioning caste even as a passing reference -these all sound very idealistic

But alas, neo Buddhists live in a fancy world

Barring Buddha's barber with whom he had good personal equations , no non brahman-kshatriya was ever mentioned as a disciple of Buddha.

Infact , only upper caste people were allowed to have discourse with Buddha.

This theme is recurrent through out the pali canon but for a reference one can see Ambatta sutta



"Now at that time a number of the brethren were walking up and down in the open air. And Ambattha went up to them, and said: 'Where may the venerable Gotama be lodging now? We have come hither to call upon him.'
8. Then the bhikkus thought: 'This young Brahman Ambattha is of distinguished family. and a pupil of the distinguished Brahman Pokkharasâdi. The Blessed One will not find it difficult to hold conversation with such.' And they said to Ambattha: 'There, Ambattha, is his lodging{2}, where the door is shut, go quietly up and enter the porch gently, and give a cough, and knock on the cross-bar. The Blessed One will open the door for you.'"

http://www.buddhistlibraryonline.net/the-teachings/suttapitaka/dighanikaya/silakkhandhavaggapali/3-ambattha-sutta/8-Ambatta.html

Devi Dasi
16 January 2014, 05:57 AM
I agree that varna and caste are not same .I also agree that they have nothing to do with race. However , Buddhists do have varnasharama because it is reflected in the Dharmapada.Hare Krsna,

Whatever system the Buddhists have it is NOT Vedic Varnasrama, because they don't follow the Vedas. Whether or not culturally they kept some remnant of a social caste-jati system is not the same as varnasrama. While some early brahmin converts to Buddhism may have kept their varna identification, this is not any formal part of Buddhist religion because Varnasrama is part of Vedic Sanskruti and Buddhism formally rejected it.

And the point is, about the blond hair and blue eyes, which is just a variant of British Aryan invasion theory.... nonsense.

As for Sikh's, they are Hindu's with a British corrupted rejection of their roots, nothing more and nothing less. Of course they have caste surnames. What does it have to do with Lord Buddha promoting Brahmins with dyed blonde hair to maintain an appearance of a racial remnant, as per Aryan being a WHITE caucasian race interpolated by British scholars?

There are no Buddhist brahmins because brahmins uphold the primacy of the Vedas. For what purpose a "brahmin" who doesn't even believe in Vedas?


In the aforementioned link , I have provided many quotes which throw light upon the prevalence of varnashrama in Buddhism. Caste system is strikingly present in all Buddhist texts, with the exception of none. Caste-jati is not the same thing as varnasrama and only indicates a population has Hindu origin, which we know Lord Buddha did as do Sikhs. Varnasrama has to do with maintaining Vedic Dharma, quite an impossibility when you dispense with Vedas.

I would like to know the Kshatriya varna of Buddhists, please. Where are they located?

Alter ego
16 January 2014, 06:31 AM
Hare Krsna,

Whatever system the Buddhists have it is NOT Vedic Varnasrama, because they don't follow the Vedas. Whether or not culturally they kept some remnant of a social caste-jati system is not the same as varnasrama. While some early brahmin converts to Buddhism may have kept their varna identification, this is not any formal part of Buddhist religion because Varnasrama is part of Vedic Sanskruti and Buddhism formally rejected it.

And the point is, about the blond hair and blue eyes, which is just a variant of British Aryan invasion theory.... nonsense.

As for Sikh's, they are Hindu's with a British corrupted rejection of their roots, nothing more and nothing less. Of course they have caste surnames. What does it have to do with Lord Buddha promoting Brahmins with dyed blonde hair to maintain an appearance of a racial remnant, as per Aryan being a WHITE caucasian race interpolated by British scholars?

There are no Buddhist brahmins because brahmins uphold the primacy of the Vedas. For what purpose a "brahmin" who doesn't even believe in Vedas?

Caste-jati is not the same thing as varnasrama and only indicates a population has Hindu origin, which we know Lord Buddha did as do Sikhs. Varnasrama has to do with maintaining Vedic Dharma, quite an impossibility when you dispense with Vedas.

I would like to know the Kshatriya varna of Buddhists, please. Where are they located?

Oh , I get you now. I am sorry I did not read your previous post correctly


There is not a single line in the pali canon which explicitly suggests that Buddha rejected jati-vada or caste system . The only difference is that the shramana lifestyle is hailed upon as the best.



Buddha quotes:

Buddha--"The Kshatriya is the best of those among this folk
who put their trust in lineage" (ambatta sutta/tevijja sutta/assalayana sutta))

http://www.sacred-texts.com/bud/dob/dob-03tx.htm


Buddha-- "Monks , an enlightened person is born only out of two lineages-Brahmana and Kshatriya" (Lalitavistara sutra)

http://read.84000.co/browser/released/UT22084/046/UT22084-046-001.pdf


As of those racist quotes, they are not mine .They are from buddhist canon and I have provided the reference.

Buddha does not reject the Vedic canon as whole. Infact , he credits kapila, bharadwaja , vashishta , bhrigu and many other sages of the veda.

He opposes karmakanda or Vedic ritual system , but such an opposition is also present in the Upanishads.(Where jnana marga is deemed to be superior to karma marga) .The only Veda he explicitly rejects is atharva veda(Because of its spells)

Anyways, I agree that this cannot be called varnashrama. It is jati vada.

I am not attributing racism or casteism to vedic varnashrama dharma .I have always maintained that there is no casteism or racism in varnashrama system .It is my mistake that I have used the word varnashrama in place of caste system





There are no Buddhist brahmins because brahmins uphold the primacy of the Vedas. For what purpose a "brahmin" who doesn't even believe in Vedas?


I agree , but many Buddhist Brahmins proclaimed themselves "upholders of three vedas" . Some of them were Buddha's disciples , and Buddha did not have a problem with it.

In sanchi stupa inscriptions , "tripitaki" "trivedi" and chaturvedi" were the titles given to (Brahmin) Buddhist monks .

One might say that they don't really follow vedas , but even the kaula-shaivasiddantas and Agamas do not follow vedas and actually criticise them.

Viraja
16 January 2014, 07:14 AM
Namaste friends,

I just have 1 question to ask - since I am very interested to know about Sri Lalitha Maha Tripura Sundari (Raja Rajeswari/Kamakshi), is she not mentioned in the vedas? Or is she? Thanks.

Aryavartian
16 January 2014, 07:23 AM
Dear AE,




In the meantime , I will give you a reference to those "neo-Nazi" verses of buddhacharita-


Grains of gold-- Tales of a Cosmopolitan Traveler By Gendun Chopel (page 131)

http://books.google.co.in/books?id=XSZnAgAAQBAJ&lpg=PA131&dq=yellow%20haired%20brahmins&pg=PA131#v=onepage&q=yellow%20haired%20brahmins&f=false

Here is Buddhacharita in both Samskrita and English verses :
http://www.ancient-buddhist-texts.net/Texts-and-Translations/Buddhacarita/Buddhacarita.pdf

The only reference to yellow hair goes to Mara,an aggressive demigod symbolizing death.The eyes "like blue lotuses" does occur though,i think it is a metaphor....like you you know "eagle's eye" .






Which brahmana? Where? Can you please provide the reference

Here http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sbr/sbe44/sbe44023.htm




In the Brahmanaspati verse you posted on the other thread, the notion of creator may have been in reference to aditi . It is said that creativity commenced in uttanapad(squatting) position .It follows by saying " Aditi was born from daksha, and daksha from Aditi"

Can you please confirm if the tern uttanapad refers to squatting position?:)

Aryavartian
16 January 2014, 07:31 AM
Namaste Viraja


Namaste friends,

I just have 1 question to ask - since I am very interested to know about Sri Lalitha Maha Tripura Sundari (Raja Rajeswari/Kamakshi), is she not mentioned in the vedas? Or is she? Thanks.


Sri Tripura Sundari/Bhuvaneshvari/Rajarajeshvari etc are forms of Sri Parvati....i'm trying to figure out if Sri Parvati is mentioned in any of the Vedic corpus,let alone Sri Tripura Sundari :D

Alter ego
16 January 2014, 07:55 AM
Dear AE,



Here is Buddhacharita in both Samskrita and English verses :
http://www.ancient-buddhist-texts.net/Texts-and-Translations/Buddhacarita/Buddhacarita.pdf

The only reference to yellow hair goes to Mara,an aggressive demigod symbolizing death.The eyes "like blue lotuses" does occur though,i think it is a metaphor....like you you know "eagle's eye" .






Here http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sbr/sbe44/sbe44023.htm





Can you please confirm if the tern uttanapad refers to squatting position?:)

Buddhacharita--

I have already provided the reference , and will come up with the verse or lack thereof.

Sri--

You don't get me. Shri is a personification of fortune and bounty (or fame) that is created by prajapati . The Devas instantly share her, and she performs a yagna to restore her virtues. No where is shri worshiped or extolled (As in shri suktam)


uttanapada--

Yes

isavasya
16 January 2014, 08:04 AM
Namaste

The real teaching of Dharma is not be fixated on names and forms. Parvati Devi is the mother of this universe. Her name is not important but her understanding. If your question is from scholarly point of view then answer is that the name parvati devi is not mentioned in Veda Samhitas. Among shruti, we see in Kena upanishad that she is the revealer of brahman. However from point of the the dharm, Veda is full of praises about the mother Godess. It just uses various names like Aditi or devi for the concept. She is repeatedly praised and her creative aspect is described in various hymns.

ShivaFan
16 January 2014, 08:59 AM
Namaste

There are many Vedic Devas and Devi of supreme praise that are today basically ignored.

There are many Hindu Devas and Devi today given supreme praise that are basically ignored in the Vedas.

Om Namah Sivaya

Aryavartian
16 January 2014, 10:35 AM
Buddhacharita--


Sri--

You don't get me. Shri is a personification of fortune and bounty (or fame) that is created by prajapati . The Devas instantly share her, and she performs a yagna to restore her virtues. No where is shri worshiped or extolled (As in shri suktam)

She may not be worshiped,but the personification of Sri is evident from this Brahmana passage.Similar is the case of Kumara/Skanda/Murugan.He also finds mention in the same Brahmana,but not yet worshiped.





uttanapada--

Yes

Any good reference? :)

Aryavartian
16 January 2014, 10:35 AM
Namaste

There are many Vedic Devas and Devi of supreme praise that are today basically ignored.

There are many Hindu Devas and Devi today given supreme praise that are basically ignored in the Vedas.

Om Namah Sivaya

Namaste ShivaFan,

You are somewhat right,but keep in mind that most of the leading Devas and Devis of Hindu pantheon are evolved from the Vedic pantheon.

Also,i won't say Vedas ignored the present Gods which we worship(like Ganesha for an example) but they were later developments.

Alter ego
16 January 2014, 11:08 AM
She may not be worshiped,but the personification of Sri is evident from this Brahmana passage.Similar is the case of Kumara/Skanda/Murugan.He also finds mention in the same Brahmana,but not yet worshiped.






Any good reference? :)

uttanapada=uttana+pada.

uttana=outspread; extended; face upwards; upturned; shallow, superficial; wide open; ready to hand; i-ta, cs. pp. opened wide; �-kri, open wide; �-bh�, be spread out

http://dsalsrv02.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/romadict.pl?query=uttana&display=simple&table=macdonell

pada=foot :)

Aryavartian
16 January 2014, 11:28 AM
uttanapada=uttana+pada.

uttana=outspread; extended; face upwards; upturned; shallow, superficial; wide open; ready to hand; i-ta, cs. pp. opened wide; �-kri, open wide; �-bh�, be spread out

http://dsalsrv02.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/romadict.pl?query=uttana&display=simple&table=macdonell

pada=foot

Thanks for the reference on uttana,i already know what pāda means :)

Ashwin
27 March 2014, 04:24 PM
Namaste Everyone,

Please correct me if im wrong, but shakti is Prkriti.I have not read the vedas but I would like to believe that the latter is mentioned somewhere in there.:rolleyes:

devotee
29 March 2014, 03:06 AM
Please correct me if i am wrong, but shakti is Prkriti.

When the Supreme Reality is seen in duality then "yes". i.e. Shiva and Shakti are perceived as two. In that case, one is Purusha and the other is Prakriti. However, in reality the Supreme Reality has no parts. That is why Abhinava Gupta says, "Shiva and Shakti are not aware that they are different".

OM