na kAshthe vidyate devo na shilAyam kadAchana
bhAve hi vidyate devas-tasmAd-bhAvam samAcharet
Namaste Sambya
Yaaah. You can say that since animal (pasu) is none but one's ego. Pasupati is the Lord to whom the Pasu should be submitted.
YV ii. 1. 3.
The gods and the Asuras strove for these worlds; Visnu saw this dwarf (beast), he offered it to its own deity; then he conquered these worlds. One who is engaged in a struggle should offer the dwarf (beast) to Visnu; then he becomes like Visnu and conquers these worlds.
That is how I understand it.
Om Namah Shivaya
Last edited by atanu; 21 June 2010 at 05:15 AM.
That which is without letters (parts) is the Fourth, beyond apprehension through ordinary means, the cessation of the phenomenal world, the auspicious and the non-dual. Thus Om is certainly the Self. He who knows thus enters the Self by the Self.
That which is without letters (parts) is the Fourth, beyond apprehension through ordinary means, the cessation of the phenomenal world, the auspicious and the non-dual. Thus Om is certainly the Self. He who knows thus enters the Self by the Self.
Well, I have sanskrit commentary by Mahidhara and Uvata, if you are still on the forum, I could probably scan them, so you can get them reviewed by the sanskrit scholars. I think the commenataries of Mahidhara and Uvata are pretty clear, but I am not sure if these sacrifices were performed literally as they are prescribed here. I am not even bothered by the killing of the horse after reading this text, the necrofilia and the bestiality are far more concerning. These commentaries are evidence that these ideas came from India, not from the western scholars. It's not just from one person either, but from various sources. The author of the commentary was also a tantrik practioner who wrote the Mantra Mahodadhi. Tantra uses Sandhya Bhasha, language with dubious or hidden meanings. The only conclusion I can draw from reading the commentaries is that it has a erotic symbolic meaning that I don't understand. Vedic mantras are said to have at least three meanings besides the ritualistic interpretation: adhibhautik or natural, adhidaivik or divine and adhyatmik or spiritual. This is the view of Yaska which is in disagreement with the views of te purva mimansa and also in disagreement with the view of Shankaracharya who believed that only the upanishads had any spiritual meaning. The view of Dayananda is unacceptable though, he tried to cover up these meanings with his own imaginary translations where he says that adultrous women should be punished by the King. When did the vedas instruct the king to interfere in people's personal lives? It's more in line with the protestant and islamic morals Swami Dayananda was influenced by though.
It is not like the entire commentary of Mahidhara is filled with sexuality, it only appears in the section of the ashvamedha yajna, for so far as I have read. The early english indologist translator named Griffith actually refused to translate these passages in English or in Latin. They used Latin for more obscure translations. You can see at sacredtexts.com that some mantras of chapter 23 in the Shukla Yajurveda are dotted away. People who like to bring shame to Hinduism love to excessively quote these passages. I think it's a minor issue, I don't think Hindus should react shameful or angry, these rituals have little to do with Hinduism as it is practiced today. Srila Prabhupada quotes from the brahmavaivarta purana and says that the Ashvamedha Yajna is one of the five things that is forbidden in the age of Kali (*), so nobody is going to perform this yajna properly anytime soon. The dubious nature of the ashvamedha yajna may also explain why Rama sent Sita to the forest before he was going to perform the yajna, in the yajna he used a golden murti of Sita, while Sita was safe at the ashrama of valmiki. This only adds to the purity of Sita. Most Hindus do accept other dubious stories like Brahma being adultrous with Sarasvati and Shiva taking one of brahma's heads. The ashvamedha is just another one of these controversial things in Hinduism. I don't think it has any implication on morality as we see it, the rituals were not meant for this time and age.
(*)aśvamedhaḿ gavālambhaḿ
sannyāsaḿ pala-paitṛkam
devareṇa sutotpattiḿ
kalau pañca vivarjayet
"In this age of Kali, five acts are forbidden: the offering of a horse in sacrifice, the offering of a cow in sacrifice, the acceptance of the order of sannyāsa, the offering of oblations of flesh to the forefathers, and a man's begetting children in his brother's wife."
http://tripatlas.com/Ashvamedha
Last edited by Sahasranama; 01 November 2010 at 06:52 PM.
Ashvamedha does not mean sacrifice of horse . Ashva+medha , ashva means useful . Ashvattha means useful tree which is banyan tree[ peepal ]. Gita 34/10 smritirmedhaadhritih kshamaa. Here MEDHA means wisdom . gita 10/18 medhaavee cchinnasamshayah. Here MEDHAVI means having wisdom .
So Ashvamedha yajna means the yajna which is arranged with wisdom for usefulness .
Here it is to be stated that Vedas contain Brahman part which is spiritual and termed as Upanishads , people of spirituality do not care for the ritual part or yajna . Mainly yajna contains offerings of SOMA [ madhu] which includes grains honey butter and specially sugar .
When any Marshel-Art student or student of any "Art" want to get progress or devlopment to become master of which pirticular "Art" , than he is told some precautions by teacher for the devlopment of "Art",
Similarly:
Meat, Alcohal, and Sex are some precautions told by a spiritual teacher in spirituality, for the devlopment of spiritual progress of the student towards internal spiritual planes or to cocentrate in third eye meditations,to become master in spirituality.
jasdir.
I think both the ritual interpretation and the spiritual interpretation of the mantra bhaga are correct. But indeed the ritualistic interpretation is not important at all, especially in this time and age.
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~
namasté
There is another view on this... not opposed, just another orientation. The ritual (physical) part of yajña is the expression of what is going on within the yajvan (worshipper). It is the physical symbol of the inner quality.
Each item, the flowers, sandal wood, fruits, betel nut and the like are all part of the offering ( usually 16, which is a number associated with wholeness) are symbols.
It is when these are not in sync ( the inner and outer) then 'ritual' becomes something of less value. Many mis-understand the symbols, the meaning and that reduces understanding and in some cases just makes the whole thing a mechanized event.
praṇām
यतसà¥à¤¤à¥à¤µà¤‚ शिवसमोऽसि
yatastvaṠśivasamo'si
because you are identical with śiva
_
Nice Yajvanji
That is a good translation of gita shloka 32/4
Evam bahuvidhaa yajnaa vitataa brahmano mukhe;
Karmajaan viddhi taan sarvaan evam jnaatwaa vimokshyase.Thus, various kinds of yajnas are spread out before Brahman (literally at the mouth orface of Brahman). Know them all as born of action, and knowing thus, thou shalt be liberated.
Here I shall ADD that bhagwannam sankirtan is a decent yajna too .
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks