Introduction:
By the end of the 18th century, Europeans travelers extensively studied Vedic literatures & cultures and were totally mesmerized by their richness & vastness. This era of unbiased study & presentation by the Europeans - is now called “romantic orientalism” (1785-1830).
However, as their colonial control increased, the presentation of the Vedic literatures & cultures changed dramatically.
Scholars like Max Muller were paid by the East India Company to study Vedic literatures & cultures - with the purpose of showcasing the superiority of the West & Christianity and inferiority of the Indian subcontinent & Vedic tradition.
Max Muller himself later admitted this colonial agenda and opposed his own theories in the last 30 years of his life (Read his own “The Life and Letters of Friedrich Max Müller” and B.B. Lal’s “Origin of Indian Civilization”).
Nonetheless, due to colonial propaganda which was later borrowed & adopted by some activists (like E V Ramaswamy / Periyar), the inferior view of Vedic literature & culture entered the mainstream in post-independent India.
Due to this, today there are many misconceptions prevailing about Vedic literatures & cultures. These misconceptions are utilized to demoralize its peoples and to spread semitic religions on one hand & marxism on the other hand.
Vedic Tribe is happy to present this series - on ten popular misconceptions about Vedic tradition.
Our intention is to create enough curiosity in you so that you study Vedic literatures and defend the same against incorrect views prevalent in the society.
All the best.
Madhwesh K
Vedic Tribe
—
1. Vedas were written written during 1500-900 BCE - a misconception
Vedic knowledge has been passed-on orally since times immemorial and it was reduced to writing less than one thousand years ago. The oldest surviving manuscript is around 980 years old (dated to 1040 CE).
In the 1870s, Friedrich Max Müller hypothesized that Vedas were written 3000 years ago. However, he admits that it is a mere guess-work. In the preface to his book on Rigveda he says “I have repeatedly dwelt on the merely hypothetical character of the dates, which I have ventured to assign to the first periods of Vedic literature.”
The contemporary philological theories (i.e., based on form & structure of Vedic language) suggest that Vedas were composed 3500 years ago (1500-900 BCE). But there is no consensus in academia because philology is not sufficient and other evidence like archeology are not considered. The Indus Valley civilization, though has striking features of a Vedic culture, is dismissed as “pre-vedic”.
In 2014, Stephanie W. Jamison and Joel P. Brereton said that dating vedic literature “has been and is likely to remain a matter of contention and reconsideration”. (See: The Rigveda: The Earliest Religious Poetry of India)
Regardless of this, “1500-900 BCE” has become the gold standard in Indian academia. There is also no regard for the pre-classical & classical literature which unequivocally suggest that Vedic knowledge is time immemorial. In addition, Indus Valley Civilization is still called pre-vedic.
As Vedic peoples, it is our duty to study & understand these opposing propositions in the light of contemporary academia & also vedic literature and clear misconceptions prevailing in the society.
You may start your study with B.B. Lal’s “Origin of Indian Civilization”.
In our next write up, we will discuss the second misconception “Veda is the word of God”.
Madhwesh K
Vedic Tribe
—
2. Veda is the word of God - a misconception
In Abrahamic Religions, Torah, Zabur, Gospel and Quran are considered “word of God”; i.e. the God rendered them to the respective prophet either directly or through an angel.
In Vedic Tradition - the literature is largely divided into two segments: Shruti and Smruti.
“Shruti” is the knowledge which exists co-eternally with God among other realities like primordial nature, jeevatma…etc. “Shruti” is called "apaurusheya" i.e. not composed by anyone. It is first revealed by God to the first consciousness to enter a creation - “Virinchi ''. Rishis by performing intense penance received a tiny bit of this knowledge and passed it on to us which is called “Vedas”.
“Smruti” is largely everything else apart from “Shruti”. Many such Vedic literatures have been composed by many including Bhagavan. For example, the Mahabharata was composed by the Lord himself as Vyasa, the sages composed the Dharma Shastras, and even today scriptures are being written by many scholars.
If "Smriti" is Paurusheya, "Shrti" (Vedas) is Apaurusheya.
Regardless of this, in popular culture Veda is called the word of God. This was done earlier primarily for the western audience. But sadly the usage has entered mainstream in Indian society.
As Vedic peoples, it is our duty to study & understand a branch of academia called “comparative religion” and clear misconceptions prevailing in the society.
You may start your study with Kedar Nath Tiwari’s “Comparative Religion”.
In our next write up, we will discuss the third misconception “Brahminism is the source for Vedic literature & culture ”.
Madhwesh K
Vedic Tribe
—
3. Brahminism is the source for Vedic literature & culture - a misconception
In contemporary academia, “brahminism” is considered a technical term for “hinduism”. It stems from a proposition that “priesthood ideology” of brahmin-caste shaped “hinduism”.
The said misconception has its roots in colonial propaganda, western bias & marxism. This gained traction due to exclusivism practiced among people in brahmin-caste.
Firstly, in 16th century the original term “Bramanismo” (portuguese) was coined by Gonçalo Fernandes Trancoso, in order to distinguish Vedic tradition from other eastern traditions. Since Vedic tradition is centered around “parabrahman” he assigned the term “Brahman-ismo” (See Journal of early modern history 24 (2020) 463-470). This term “Brahman-ism” in English was later twisted to “Brahmin-ism” as a part of colonial propaganda.
Secondly, until 14th century Europe was dominated by Catholic priesthood and witnessed religious oppression & church’s control over the state. Europeans carried this bias into the study of Indian culture and interpreted our literature to indicate an oppressive Vedic priesthood.
Both the aforesaid propaganda & bias were successful in dividing Indian societies and served the colonial powers tremendously.
In India, the aforesaid ideas fused with marxist idea of “oppressor & oppressed” and resulted in a mainstream view that - entire Hinduism is the result of self-serving Brahminism. This view completely disregards the concept of “brahman” in Vedic literature & tradition and entirely depends on foreign ideas.
As Vedic peoples, it is our duty to study & understand the concept of “brahman” in Vedic literature & tradition (which has nothing to do with jati / caste exclusivism) and clear misconceptions prevailing in the society.
You may study Yudhishtira’s conversation as part of “Ajagara Upakhyana '' in Mahabharata’s Vana-parva, which clearly explains the original concept of “brahman”, which is totally different from the so called “brahminism”.
In our next write up, we will discuss the fourth misconception “Vedic literature promotes caste system”.
Madhwesh K
Vedic Tribe
—
4. Vedic literature promotes caste system - a misconception
Vedic tradition promotes a “non-hierarchical - conduct based - varna system” and not a “hierarchical - caste based - jati system”.
Varna-system is a primordial & an eternal idea which does not involve superiority of one Varna over the other. However, jati-system is a social construct which categorizes people largely as upper caste & lower caste.
In Mahabharata, Yudhishthira categorically states that only "character & conduct" determines "Varna '' & not the birth.
Over time, the native societies were invaded by turks, mughals…etc which turned them into a protectionist society. As a result, the “jati system” gained traction and “varna system” fell back. This is evident from the comparison of classical & post-classical Sanskrit literature.
Later Colonial powers found it convenient to categorize native population based on “caste”. Because it was rooted in lineage as opposed to “Varna” which was up to an individual's choice. This was successful in dividing Indian societies and served the colonial powers tremendously.
Sadly, this has turned into caste-politics post-independence and hence the caste-system has now become almost impossible to eradicate.
As Vedic peoples, it is our duty to study & understand the difference between Vedic-Varna system & social-caste system and clear misconceptions prevailing in the society.
To know more, you may study “Varna, Jati, Caste: A Primer on Indian Social Structures” by Rajiv Malhotra.
In our next write up, we will discuss the fifth misconception “Vedic study is prohibited for women and lower castes”.
Madhwesh K
Vedic Tribe
—
5. Vedic study is prohibited for women and lower castes - a misconception
In Mahabharata, Yudhishthira states that anyone who has earned eligibility can be initiated into Vedas irrespective of their birth (“Ajagara Upakhyana'' in Vana-parva).
Satyakama Jabala was initiated into Vedas by Haridrumata Gautama, irrespective of the fact that his caste was not known. The initiation was only based on Satyakama's eligibility, i.e., commitment to "truth".
Women who chose to study Vedas were called "Brahmavadini' and many of them became seers of Veda mantras. In Sarvanukramani, Katyaayana mentions women who were such seers.
In medieval India, due to foreign invasion & rule, the Indian society turned protectionist and as a by-product, orthodoxy gained popularity. As a part of orthodoxy, women & shudras were prohibited from Vedic Study & practice. Such prohibition became part of post-classical literature too and resulted in centuries of social discrimination.
Due to the efforts of scholars like Sri Dayanand Saraswati, Sri Aurobindo…etc Vedic study is now widely available to everyone.
Irrespective of this fact, the Indian mainstream academia still holds that Vedic tradition itself is discriminatory in nature. This coupled with the exclusivism practiced among people in upper-caste, has allowed the left and the hinduphobic communities to spread inferiority and cultural cringe among Hindus.
As Vedic peoples, it is our duty to study & understand liberal & pluralistic ideals in Vedic tradition, subsequent social modification and recent resurgence of Vedic studies. This helps us clear misconceptions prevailing in the society.
To know more, you may study “Women in Rigveda” by Bhagwat Saran Upadhyaya and "Valmiki & Vedavyasa: Cultural leaders of India" by Kamala Ratnam & R Rangachari.
In our next write up, we will discuss the sixth misconception “Vedic philosophy (Vedanta) is non-dualism / monism (Advaita)”.
Madhwesh K
Vedic Tribe
—
6. Vedic philosophy (Vedanta) is non-dualism / monism (Advaita) - a misconception
Vedic tradition is pluralistic and contains innumerable schools of thought ("darshana").
There are six major schools: samkhya, yoga, nyaya, vaisheahika, mimamsa and vedanta. Among them "vedanta" school is the one practiced by a super- majority of Hindus today. Others have only academic significance and at best are practiced with heavy deviation from their original form (E.g. yoga).
Foundational texts of Vedanta school are called “prastana trayi”: Bhagavad Gita, Upanishads and Brahma-sutra.
Any commentary on Brahma-sutra, later became foundational text for sub-schools of Vedanta. Sri Adi Shankaracharya's commentary became foundational text for Advaita sub-school, Sri Ramanujacharya's for Vishishtadvaita and Sri Madhwacharya's for Tattvavada.
In 14th century, Sri Narayana Panditachrya in his "Madhwavijaya Bhavaprakashika" notes that there were 21 such commentaries before Sri Madhwacharya's. However during his time, only three were available: Sri Shankaracharya's, Sri Bhaskara's and Sri Ramanujacharya's.
Due to the influence of Sri Ramakrishna Paramhansa and Swamy Vivekananda, "Advaita" sub-school gained popularity. As a result many traditional & modern scholars use the terms "vedanta" and "advaita" interchangeably. This is irrespective of the fact that there are many other sub-schools in Vedanta and they are seldom referred to.
As Vedic peoples, it is our duty to study & understand different sub-schools of Vedanta and clear misconceptions prevailing in the society.
To know more, you may study “The Brahmasūtras and their principal commentaries: a critical exposition" by B. N. Krishnamurti Sharma.
In our next write up, we will discuss the seventh misconception “Vedic tradition is polytheistic”.
Madhwesh K
Vedic Tribe
—
7. Vedic tradition is polytheistic - a misconception
In academia, "Monotheism" is the belief in one God and "Polytheism" is the belief in different Gods.
Vedic theology is considered "polytheistic" because apparently different Gods are worshiped.
In Rigveda, hymns are invariably dedicated to 33 major deities. Classical literature mentions 33 crore deities. This has become a source of confusion and ridicule in the hands of certain Hindus and Semitic propagators, who do not understand the fundamental essence of Veda.
The fundamental essence of Vedic theology is captured in “prastanatrayi”: Upanishad, Brahma-sutra and Bhagavad Gita.
Across all “prastanathrayi” texts Vedic monotheism is unequivocally upheld. For example, Shvetashwatara Upanishad declares that there is only one God immanent in everything else (6:11). Brahma Sutra starts with saying that entire Vedic literature is for discerning "parabrahman" (1.1.1). Bhagavad Gita says that there is a permanent source for all the temporary creation (2.17).
Nonetheless, for the benefit of lay people, Rishis have promulgated different traditions to worship different deities. Hence, at the superficial level Vedic theology seems pluralistic.
In a nutshell Vedic tradition is pluralistic-monotheism but not polytheism.
As Vedic peoples, it is our duty to study & understand Vedic theology and clear misconceptions prevailing in the society.
To know more, you may study “Vedic Monotheism" by Ananda Kumaraswamy.
In our next write up, we will discuss the eighth misconception “Sanatana-dharma is Hindu extremism”.
Madhwesh K
Vedic Tribe
—
8. Sanatana-dharma is Hindu extremism - a misconception
Many countries with a colonial past suffer from a deep “cultural cringe”. In India even after 75 years of independence, most Hindus hesitate to publicly talk about Vedic culture & heritage. This is the direct result of colonial propaganda which morphed into pseudo-secularism & hinduphobia post independence.
In the words of Max Muller (19th century) "It (Veda) is the root of their religion, and to show them what the root is, I feel sure, is the only way of uprooting all that has sprung from it during the last 3,000 years". The same idea was articulated recently (Sep 2023) by Udhayanidhi Stalin, but under a different guise of abolishing untouchability. This is the success of Macaulay who said (in 19th century) "We must at present do our best to form a class who may be interpreters between us and the millions whom we govern; a class of persons, Indian in blood and colour, but English in taste, in opinions, in morals, and in intellect."
In popular culture "sanatana dharma" and "sanatani(s)" are depicted as goons, abusers, bullies or gangsters. On the other hand, church fathers & mullahs are depicted as peaceful saintly persons. Moreover, now the term "sanatana Dharma" is used to indicate a hypothetical "hindu extremism".
"Sanatana Dharma" is the eternal way of being and the whole of Vedic tradition is a pursuit of this eternal truth. Sadly - foreign terms like Indian & Hindu are a mainstream identity rather than indigenous terms like Sanatani or Vaidika. This is due to the deep cultural cringe we suffer.
As Vedic peoples, it is our duty to study & understand the essence of Sanatana Dharma and clear misconceptions prevailing in the society.
To know more about colonial propaganda which resulted in the present day pseudo-secularism & hinduphobia, you may read “The Life and Letters of Friedrich Max Müller” and Sat Sharma's "Corrupt Inept Rudderless Politicians: Impediment to India's Forward March".
In our next write up, we will discuss the ninth misconception “Veda was introduced by invading Aryans”.
Madhwesh K
Vedic Tribe
—
9. Veda was introduced by invading Aryans - a misconception
Sri Aurobindo suggests that the term "Arya" indicates ".. (the one) who, through labor and battle, aspires to Truth, to Heaven (liberation)".
In the traditional literature the term was mainly used to indicate "civilized" or "Vedic peoples".
In Bhagavad Gita, Lord Krishna calls Arjuna's rant as "anaryam" - uncivilized (2:2)
Later, Dharma Shastras called the subcontinent (with variations) as "aryavarta" to indicate the homeland of Vedic Peoples.
So, the term "Arya" had a spiritual & cultural connotation, but never indicated ethnicity, race or creed.
In the 19th century, the idea of Aryan, via the works of Max Muller, was appropriated by German nationalists to hypothesize a superior "race" of Europeans who invaded the subcontinent and introduced Vedas. This is irrespective of the fact that Vedic literature calls the sapta-sindu region (Northwestern subcontinent) and pancha-apa region (Punjab) as Veda-bhoomi (where Vedas were revealed to Rishis).
Max Muller himself criticized this hypothesis by saying "I have declared again and again that if I say Aryan, I mean neither blood nor bones, nor skull nor hair; I mean simply those who speak the Aryan language (Vedic sanskrit)…".
Though contemporary academia has denounced "invasion theory", still "migration theory" is hypothesized purely based on insufficient philological sources. This completely disregards the fact that there is no mention of any invasion or migration of Vedic people in the whole of Vedic and classical literature.
But sadly, Aryan invasion theory is still in the mainstream Indian academia.
As Vedic peoples, it is our duty to study & understand the Aryan invasion / migration theory and clear the misconceptions prevailing in the society.
To know more, you may read “Aryan Invasion Theory: The final nail in its coffin" by Stephen Knapp
In our next write up, we will discuss the tenth misconception “Vedic literature is obsolete”.
Madhwesh K
Vedic Tribe
—
10. Vedic literature is obsolete - a misconception
Vedic literature covers a vast number of subjects: rituals, worship, philosophy, history, cosmogony, cosmography, geography, metaphysics, medicines, art, architecture, psychology etc.
Some of the literature has become obsolete. E.g. the vaisheshika darshana dealt with ancient metaphysics, but considering advancement in scientific methodologies, it has retained only academic significance today.
Similarly, the ancient cosmography centered on "meru mountain" only holds mystic significance today due to development of observational cosmology and theoretical physics.
Also the ancient geography referring to Islands like jambu dweepa (land of Malabar plum trees) and oceans like dhadi samudra (sea of curd) - today only have mystical significance.
Scholars use geographical references, cosmic events, structure of language etc in Vedic literature to study subcontinent's history, anthropology, linguistics etc.
However, the left in India and Semitic propagators - contend that the entire Vedic literature has become obsolete. This is regardless of many apparent facts; for example, the Vedas contain universal messages, Vedanta is the most sophisticated Philosophy, psychological enquiries of Yoga darshana are essential material in both mainstream Western academia & also in popular culture, Bhakti movement in Vedic tradition is the most universally accepted one without the need for any machinery or extremism etc.
In essence, though some of the literature in Vedic tradition have become obsolete, a large portion of them are highly significant in practice even today. This is not only among Indians but also among many other peoples, with whom the Vedic tradition has cordially assimilated.
As Vedic peoples, it is our duty to study & understand which part of Vedic literature is obsolete and which parts are highly prevalent. This helps us clear the misconceptions prevailing in the society.
To know more, you may read “Eternal Relevance of Vedas" by Agnihotram Ramanuja Tatachariar.
Vedic Tribe is happy to have brought you this series - on ten popular misconceptions about Vedic tradition.
Our intention is to create enough curiosity in you so that you study Vedic literatures and defend the same against incorrect views prevalent in the society.
All the best.
Madhwesh K
Vedic Tribe
No comments:
Post a Comment