Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 2345678 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 80

Thread: nArAyaNa in the veda-s

  1. #51

    Re: nArAyaNa in the veda-s

    kaTha upaniShad

    viGYaanasaarathiryastu manaH pragrahavaannaraH .
    so.adhvanaH paaramaapnoti tadvishhNoH paramaM padam.h .. 9..

    1-III-9. But the man who has a discriminating intellect as his driver, and a controlled-mind as the reins, reaches the end of the path - that supreme state of Vishnu.

    mahAnArAyaNa upaniShad

    shriirme bhajatu alakshmiirme nashyatu .
    vishhNumukhaa vai
    devaashchhandobhirimaa.c.nllokaananapajayyamabhyajayan.h .
    mahaa{\m+} indro vajrabaahuH shhoDashii sharma yachchhatu .. 48..

    I-48: May Sri favour me. May Alakshmi connected with me and mine be destroyed. The gods having Vishnu for their chief (who is the perpetual abode of Sri) by the help of (the means prescribed in) the Vedas won these worlds for themselves free from the fear of enemies. May Indra armed with thunderbolt and worshipful moon grant us happiness.

    naaraayaNaH paraM brahma tattva.n naaraayaNaH paraH .
    naaraayaNaH paro jyotiraatmaa naarayaNaH paraH .. 4..
    naaraayaNaH paro dhyaataa dhyaana.n naaraayaNaH paraH .
    yachcha kiJNchijjagatyasmin dR^ishyate shruuyate.api vaa .
    antarbahishcha tatsarva.n vyaapya naaraayaNaH sthitaH .. 5..

    XIII-4: Narayana is the Supreme Reality designated as Brahman. Narayana is the highest (Self). Narayana is the supreme Light (described in the Upanishads). Narayana is the infinite Self. [Narayana is the most excellent meditator and meditation.]

    XIII-5: Whatsoever there is in this world known through perception (because of their proximity) or known through report (because of their distance), all that is pervaded by Narayana within and without.

    hari{\m+} harantamanuyanti devaa vishvasyeshaana.n vR^ishhabhaM
    matiinaam.h .
    brahmasaruupamanu medamaagaadayanaM maa vivadhiirvikramasva .. 1..

    XLIX-1: Like servants gods follow Hari who is the Lord of the universe, who leads all thoughts as the foremost leader and who absorbs into Himself the universe at the time of dissolution (or who destroys the sins of devotees). May this path to liberation taught in the Vedas having the same form as Brahman open itself to me. Deprive not me of that. Strive to secure it for me.
    Philosoraptor

    "Wise men speak because they have something to say. Fools speak because they have to say something." - Plato

  2. #52
    Join Date
    June 2012
    Location
    Mumbai, India
    Age
    29
    Posts
    1,088
    Rep Power
    1128

    Re: nArAyaNa in the veda-s

    Quote Originally Posted by philosoraptor View Post
    Actually, I think the figure comes from a statement in one of the puranas listing the different divisions of the Vedas, against which one can compare with the known shrutis still extant. This was quoted by Satyanarayana dasa in his translation of the Tattva Sandarbha. If memory serves, it was a genuine quote.

    Satyananrayana is actually not an ISKCONite as per my understanding.
    If you see the rest of my post,I was contesting the claim that 94% of the vedas are missing and not the quote itself.Shankara,Ramanuja,Srikantha,Madhva,Bhaskara and many other early acharyas have quoted from many shakhas that are no ponger extant,but there is no sign of the 100 and1000 shakhas that the yajur and sama veda are supposed to have.It is generally considered that the numbers simply mean a large number.Also the methodology is faulty.They have simply calculated no.of shakhas of any veda divided by total no. of extant and non extant shakhas of all vedas.This does not take into account the differences in size between the vedas.One shakha of the rig veda is bigger than one shakha each of the other vedas put together.Also most shakhas have the majority of their hymns the same.Only a small no. of hymns is unique to a shakha.For these reasons and several others I think that the 94% figure is a highly inflated one.

    Besides the article in which this claim appears asks us to throw away all shruti and smriti on this account which I did not like- http://gosai.com/writings/the-suprem...over-the-vedas
    Last edited by Omkara; 20 December 2012 at 04:53 PM.
    namastE astu bhagavan vishveshvarAya mahAdevAya tryaMbakAya|
    tripurAntakAya trikAgnikAlAya kAlAgnirudrAya nIlakaNThAya mRtyuJNjayAya sarveshvarAya sadAshivAya shrIman mAhAdevAya ||

    Om shrImAtrE namah

    sarvam shrI umA-mahEshwara parabrahmArpaNamastu


    A Shaivite library
    http://www.scribd.com/HinduismLibrary

  3. #53

    Re: nArAyaNa in the veda-s

    Quote Originally Posted by Omkara View Post
    If you see the rest of my post,I was contesting the claim that 94% of the vedas are missing and not the quote itself.Shankara,Ramanuja,Srikantha,Madhva,Bhaskara and many other early acharyas have quoted from many shakhas that are no ponger extant,but there is no sign of the 100 and1000 shakhas that the yajur and sama veda are supposed to have.It is generally considered that the numbers simply mean a large number.Also the methodology is faulty.They have simply calculated no.of shakhas of any veda divided by total no. of extant and non extant shakhas of all vedas.This does not take into account the differences in size between the vedas.One shakha of the rig veda is bigger than one shakha each of the other vedas put together.Also most shakhas have the majority of their hymns the same.Only a small no. of hymns is unique to a shakha.For these reasons and several others I think that the 94% figure is a highly inflated one.

    Besides the article in which this claim appears asks us to throw away all shruti and smriti on this account which I did not like- http://gosai.com/writings/the-suprem...over-the-vedas
    It is not a percentage based on the number of mantras, but on the number of shakhas described in scripture vs number known to be extant. This was obvious from the Satyanarayana's analysis of the quote in TS, and I don't think he ever claimed otherwise. I haven't followed the gosai people so I don't know what they say.
    Philosoraptor

    "Wise men speak because they have something to say. Fools speak because they have to say something." - Plato

  4. #54
    Join Date
    June 2012
    Location
    Mumbai, India
    Age
    29
    Posts
    1,088
    Rep Power
    1128

    Re: nArAyaNa in the veda-s

    Quote Originally Posted by philosoraptor View Post
    It is not a percentage based on the number of mantras, but on the number of shakhas described in scripture vs number known to be extant. This was obvious from the Satyanarayana's analysis of the quote in TS, and I don't think he ever claimed otherwise. I haven't followed the gosai people so I don't know what they say.
    That's the point.If you take a petcentage based on the number of mantras and then say that percentage of the vedas is missing,it is misleading.If you want to calculate the amount of vedic literature missing,you must calculate the number of verses missing.They are just trying to inflate the number as large as possible so that they can say that there is no point in consulting the vedas because only fragments are left.
    namastE astu bhagavan vishveshvarAya mahAdevAya tryaMbakAya|
    tripurAntakAya trikAgnikAlAya kAlAgnirudrAya nIlakaNThAya mRtyuJNjayAya sarveshvarAya sadAshivAya shrIman mAhAdevAya ||

    Om shrImAtrE namah

    sarvam shrI umA-mahEshwara parabrahmArpaNamastu


    A Shaivite library
    http://www.scribd.com/HinduismLibrary

  5. #55

    Re: nArAyaNa in the veda-s

    Quote Originally Posted by Omkara View Post
    That's the point.If you take a petcentage based on the number of mantras and then say that percentage of the vedas is missing,it is misleading.If you want to calculate the amount of vedic literature missing,you must calculate the number of verses missing.They are just trying to inflate the number as large as possible so that they can say that there is no point in consulting the vedas because only fragments are left.
    I think the point of counting the shakhas is that each one represents a unified teaching of some sort. That was the way I took it when I heard the percentage, not as percentage of mantras lost.
    Philosoraptor

    "Wise men speak because they have something to say. Fools speak because they have to say something." - Plato

  6. #56
    Join Date
    June 2012
    Location
    Mumbai, India
    Age
    29
    Posts
    1,088
    Rep Power
    1128

    Re: nArAyaNa in the veda-s

    Quote Originally Posted by philosoraptor View Post
    I think the point of counting the shakhas is that each one represents a unified teaching of some sort. That was the way I took it when I heard the percentage, not as percentage of mantras lost.
    The entire argument comes from one pf Jiva Goswamin's sandarbhas(can't remember which one) where he says that there is no point consulting the shruti as almost all of it is lost and one must instead go to the puranas.From there he argues that the bhagavatam is the best of all puranas and muat be consulted when other puranas contradict each other.The 94% figure is used in this context to argue that almost all of the shruti is lost, ao there ia no point in consulting yhe fragmenta.Frankly it is a pathetic excuse by which gaudiya vaishnavas refrain from commenting on the upanishads.That would be very interesting.I wonder how they would fit in their theology that Brahman is an entity different from the supreme being and an efflugence of the Supreme being into which some jivas merge.This actually entails the destruction of the jiva,contradicting numerous pramanas.
    namastE astu bhagavan vishveshvarAya mahAdevAya tryaMbakAya|
    tripurAntakAya trikAgnikAlAya kAlAgnirudrAya nIlakaNThAya mRtyuJNjayAya sarveshvarAya sadAshivAya shrIman mAhAdevAya ||

    Om shrImAtrE namah

    sarvam shrI umA-mahEshwara parabrahmArpaNamastu


    A Shaivite library
    http://www.scribd.com/HinduismLibrary

  7. #57

    Re: nArAyaNa in the veda-s

    Quote Originally Posted by Omkara View Post
    The entire argument comes from one pf Jiva Goswamin's sandarbhas(can't remember which one) where he says that there is no point consulting the shruti as almost all of it is lost and one must instead go to the puranas.
    He actually does not say that. What he does say is that there are limitations in studying the Vedas, of which one is that they are limited to the twice-born varnas only while another is that they are not present in toto. And this is in Tattva-Sandarbha, the first of the six sandarbhas. Both he and the other Chaitanya followers do quote from shruti, though they are not a traditional shruti-parampara.
    Philosoraptor

    "Wise men speak because they have something to say. Fools speak because they have to say something." - Plato

  8. #58

    Re: nArAyaNa in the veda-s


    Namaste

    In my humble opinion, I’m not sure that it is accurate to statethat shruti can be lost. If one accepts the Veda as apaurusheya shruti how can Itcease to exist? In fact, more generally just because something is not commonly availabledoes not necessarily mean that it is nonextant.


    Pranam

  9. #59
    Join Date
    January 2010
    Location
    tadvishno paramam padam
    Age
    38
    Posts
    2,168
    Rep Power
    2547

    Re: nArAyaNa in the veda-s

    Quote Originally Posted by Tapasya View Post
    In my humble opinion, I’m not sure that it is accurate to statethat shruti can be lost. If one accepts the Veda as apaurusheya shruti how can Itcease to exist? In fact, more generally just because something is not commonly availabledoes not necessarily mean that it is nonextant.
    Shruti is never lost, but the parts that are revealed to human beings over time become forgotten and is revealed again later. This goes on in cycles.

  10. #60
    Join Date
    January 2010
    Location
    tadvishno paramam padam
    Age
    38
    Posts
    2,168
    Rep Power
    2547

    Re: nArAyaNa in the veda-s

    Quote Originally Posted by Omkara View Post
    The 94% figure is a fantasy of iskconites who want us to throw away the vedas and accept the bhagavata purana as the major pramana.
    Firstly,it is foolish to take it that there are 100 and thousand shakhas of the yajur and sama veda but only 21 and nine shakhas of the rig and atharva veda.Most scholars take 100 and thousand as symbolic of a large number as is often used in vedic literature.
    Also,most shakhas contain a lot of material from other shakhas,so that further reduces the amount of verses actually lost.Further,the sama and yajur veda contain a lot of material from the Rig Veda.I would estimate about 30% of the vedas is lost.
    I cited part of that article to show the relation between the vedas and itihasa and puranas. I have similar quotes in another book, but it was more convenient to copy them from that website. I agree that we cannot say exactly how many percent of the Vedas is still available among human kind. I don't think it's useful to speculate on any exact figure.

    The 100 shakhas for the yajurveda is not hard to imagine. It makes sense that there are more shakhas of the yajurveda than the Rigveda. The Rigveda is first of all much bigger than the yajurveda. Secondly, the yajurveda deals with rituals and we already know that many shrauta rituals have become lost. I only agree that the number 1000 for Sama Veda is not entirely accurate if we consider that it could have meant a number close to thousand, like 1008 or 994. I do not think that the 1000 number merely means "a lot." It also makes sense that the Sama Veda has that many branches. The Sama Veda consists of Rig mantras converted into Sama chantings. One shakha of the Sama Veda only has a fraction of the mantras of the Rig. Second, one mantra of the Rig can be converted into more than one Sama chanting. If you consider this, the 1000 number should not seem that hard to imagine.

    These figures come from the Vishnu Purana. Vyasa is said to have collected whatever of the Vedas was known in his time and passed this knowledge on to his students. Since vyasa lived in Dvapara, it is possible that the Vedas in Satya yuga were even more voluminous. Indologists will consider this story from the Vishnu Purana to be fantasy, because they can't possible imagine one person collecting, remembering and passing on this much literature. Indologists are very quick to doubt that one Patanjali could have been a master of Ayurveda, Yoga and Grammar as he is considered traditionally in India, but they don't doubt that Leonardo Da Vinci was a master of so many arts and sciences. In these matters it's better not to listen to so called "scholars" who consider this information to be symbolic.

    Although, I do not agree with the Gaudiya conclusion to discard all other scriptures and rely solely on the Srimad Bhagavata Purana, this information and pramana from shruti itself underscores the importance of understanding shruti in combination with the itihasas and puranas.
    Last edited by Sahasranama; 05 January 2013 at 12:39 PM.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. atharva-veda highlights
    By saidevo in forum Vedas & Brahmanas
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 23 March 2011, 09:05 AM
  2. A Personal Hindu Library
    By saidevo in forum Dharma-related Websites
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 17 March 2009, 12:31 AM
  3. Hindu view of Jesus
    By ScottMalaysia in forum Christianity
    Replies: 46
    Last Post: 06 March 2008, 03:16 AM
  4. Identity of Narayana
    By Sri Vaishnava in forum Hare Krishna (ISKCON)
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 24 January 2008, 08:51 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •