We are pleased to present a Hindi commentary on Ishopanishad by Pt Rajveer Shastri based on commentary on Vedas by Swami Dayanand Saraswati. Ishopanishad – which is 40th chapter of Yajurveda – is undoubtedly the best text on philosophy and spirituality that one can ever read. It forms the foundation of Geeta and in fact all powerful philosophies of world.

Read it and change your life! As with any text of philosophy, one is expected to study as if learning to drive a car and not mechanically. You need to understand the concepts, develop a feel for it and practice in life! And in process benefit from all the bliss that Ishwar has bestowed upon us!

http://agniveer.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/isha_upanishad.pdf

Facebook Comments

Liked the post? Make a contribution and help bring change.

Disclaimer: By Quran and Hadiths, we do not refer to their original meanings. We only refer to interpretations made by fanatics and terrorists to justify their kill and rape. We highly respect the original Quran, Hadiths and their creators. We also respect Muslim heroes like APJ Abdul Kalam who are our role models. Our fight is against those who misinterpret them and malign Islam by associating it with terrorism. For example, Mughals, ISIS, Al Qaeda, and every other person who justifies sex-slavery, rape of daughter-in-law and other heinous acts. For full disclaimer, visit "Please read this" in Top and Footer Menu.

29 COMMENTS

  1. Adi Shankaracharya was no doubt a genius, but he cannot be an exception to criticism. He contributed the most in propagating anti-Vedic philosophy of Adwait or Non-dualism or Monism. The Vedas, Upanishadas and Darshan Shastras – all mention that the individual soul (atma = Jivatma = jiva) is fundamentally different from Supreme Soul (God = Ishwar = Brahman = Paramatma etc.) The material cause of the universe is Prakriti = Primordial unconscious matter. There three entities – God-Soul-Matter are fundamentally different from each other and have been co-existing eternally. Shankara got inspiration from his preceptor’s preceptor Acharya Gaudapada, who was perhaps the first person who interpreted Vedic Upanishad in anti-Vedic line and was perhaps impressed by Buddhism of his times. Shankara applied unreasonable logic to interpret dualist statements of the Shastras in non-dualist line – this is plainly said by Swami Vivekananda too, who was also a Vedantin. Maharshi Dayananda was initially Vedanti of Shankara philosophy, but later on he left it aside and propounded the Vedic philosophy of three eternals – God-Soul-Matter. He wrote against Monism in Satyarth-Prakash and Vedanti-Dwant-Nivaran. Shankara wrote bhashyas (interpretations) on Gita, Upanishads and Vedant-Darshan to establish his Monism, but Dayananda doesn’t approve Adwaitvaad of Shankara. Shakaracharya himself is now believed as an incarnation of Lord Shiva !

    • we cannot make such a claim.because,we can make a relation between soul and brahman as between as ocean and a drop of water,both in essense are the same in quality.the soul comes out,or projects out from God as water droplet is taken out from a body of water.after all r=births and rebirths,the soul merges with Brahman the same way,water droplet merges into the ocean.

    • Is this article about ishavasyopanishad or ishopanishad? first time i am hearing ishopanishad

      Adi Sankara says Jivatma(soul) = paramatma (soul of Shiva, Vishnu, Durga) = Para Brahmam. Almost all says para Brahman . i want to correct here. it is Brahmam (Bramham) not Brahman, because Brahman is the supreme ritwik in a vedic sacrifice not God.

      Adi Sankar never was a Vedic critic. I think you mean he was a uttara meemamsi (vedanti) and not poorva meemamsi (mimamsa) . poorva mimamsa is based mostlly on samhita part of vedas and upanishads are from later part (Brahmanas and aranyaka part)

      Adi Sankara had atmost respect for Gods and Godesses (forms). Several hymns he composed. He beleived that saguna worship is must… Also he said we need to do rituals. Only those who do rituals will be disciplined. Only disciplined can be observing dharma under any circumstances. Some one during old age reading upanishad can neve attain salvation if he has’nt performed his duties correctly during younger age

      • the beauty of hindu dharma lies n the fact that a hindu,be him any one,in any state of awareness/comsciousness still can approach God, the supreme in any manner,i.e.,in any form.snce all the forms are encompassed by God as saguna, each ddeity is a disintegrated part,or,in other words, a manifestation that is encompassed by an all encompasing/all pervasive God.so,worshipping God in that form or this form,the goal s the same,one reaches the same supreme being in whom all the forms/manifestations exist.the only neccessity is that one must follow the principle of dharma,becuase not following the principles of dharma would narrow down our perspective.zakir naik dosent understand this simple idea.

  2. I am sorry to be the oddball here. I do not see anyone, who thinks that Aadi Shankaryacharyji made mistake in intepreting Vedas, is a higher class intellect. In every shlok, there is a critique over what Shankarachary said and the mistake he made in his definitions. Truth is that Shankaracharya stopped the extinction of Vaidic way of living, by actually getting out and actually connecting with people, only in 35 years of his age mind you. How can he not know what Ishopnishad means? I do not mind individual interpretations, but I have a hard time accepting anyone’s claim or comparision to Shankaracharya. If you are good, and complete, you do not need to be claiming it. It will happen.
    Again, this is not a preset or hard mindset against your effort but it is not complete nor deep enough to criticize great rishi.

  3. i am astonished. swami dayanand saraswati ji is doing the translation which is rpoving conventional hinduism a degraded culture and against vedas. i would have agreed to it if i hadn’t other translation.
    first thing is mantras is misplaced. mantra 9 and mantra 12 are exchanged.
    second thing is translation is completely misleading.

    andham tamah pravishyanti yeavidyamupasate.
    tato bhuya iv te tamo ye u vidyayam ratah.

    surprising thing is swamiji translates both mantra – 9 and 12 in same tone, with same meaning. means not to worship idols. this isn’t satisfactory.

    aurobindo translates it as : 9. into a blind darkness they enter who follow after ignorance (avidya), they as if into a greater darkness who devote themselves to knowledge (vidya) alone.

    this translation could be a great significance with respect to our philosophical attitude towards life. but sad thing is we are still thinking like muslims, what should we worship and what shouldn’t. this thing is painful.

    no offence to arya samaj, but i do not agree to swamiji. the more i read his views, the more i go against his views. i am not an idol worshiper, but i don’t think swamiji translated vedas correctly. i apologize for my statement, agniveer.

    • @Yash : and to consider an object that is जड to be consciousness (चेतना) is that state of mind or existence अविद्या or विद्या ?
      this is just a pointer, hope you can deduce further and conclude if the translation is wrong.

  4. Some where, I read (on this site in comments) the Vedas & Upanishads are different. And followers of Veda detested upanishads & gave name Vedanta – Ved + Anta, or end of veda…
    Previously I have idea that Vedanta is part of Vedas.. Please if anyone knows clear my doubt, thanks..

  5. Shri Truth Seeker ji
    Please don’t feel bad as I am interested in some khandan mandan.
    Follow this link:http://www.swami-krishnananda.org/katha/ka_1.html

    He writes:He performed a yajna or a sacrifice called Vishvajit, a yajna or a sacrifice by which he aspired to enter the heaven of the gods.
    Vinay Arya:Where is the heaven of the Gods?There is no heaven of the Gods.Heaven and hell are in this life.Not in the other life.And what do you want to say by saying the word “gods”?There is one God.So,how can you use the word “Gods”.

    So,please,as it is against Vedas,it is not the right translation of the Upanishadas.

    He also writes that Nachiketa was a student.NO.No.No.The word Nachiketa is meant for “humans” manushya.

    Please read “Rigvedadibhashyabhumika”.There he explains the word “nachiketa” does not mean a person.

    Please,from any of you,if you can represent to me the right translation,then just let me know>

  6. Shri Agniveerji
    It is only Ishopnishad.But I want all the ten upanishadas.I searched the internet,I found them.But.The writer has translated wrongly.This is what I have supposed.Because I found everything as a kuda karakat in their translations.So,please give me a link which gives me all the ten upanishada with the right translations.

    I hope,you will certainly find a link.I have searched the internet but I did not find.

  7. Namaste to Agniveer/ Other scholar
    Indeed Great, I have seen in my life.
    I want the book in both language Hindi & English. From where I can get the book. Please give me full address.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here