There seems to be apparently differing views on what exactly is meant by Vedas. In this article, we shall attempt to authoritatively clear this confusion.

Now Vedic literature includes several texts:
a. Veda Mantra Samhitas – Rik, Yajuh, Sama, Atharva
b. Brahmans associated with each Mantra Samhita
c. Aranyaks
d. Upanishads (actually part of above)
e. Upavedas (each Mantra Samhita has an associated Upaveda)

In reality, only the Mantra Samhitas are the divine Vedas. Other texts like Brahmans, Aranyaks, Upanishads, Upavedas, 6 Darshan, Geeta, etc are texts written by sages. But they are human creation and not divine. So these should be accepted only to extent that they comply with Vedas (Mantra Samhitas) and understood in context of these.

Doubt: Even Brahmans are divine Vedas. Katyayana Rishi has stated so. Then why don’t you also accept Brahmans as part of Vedas?

1. Brahmans are also known as Itihas, Puran, Kalp, Gatha and Narashansi. They are explanations of Vedic mantras by Rishis. They are not divine creations but developed by great saints.

2. Apart from Katyayan Pratijna Parishishth of Shukla Yajurveda (which is not authored by Katyayana as per many scholars) no other text states that Brahmans are part of Vedas.

3. The claim that ‘Mantra and Brahman are together called Vedas’ is also found in Shraut Sutras of Krishna Yajurveda. But Krishna Yajurveda itself is mixture of Brahman and Mantras, are hence here this claim is relevant only for the specific text. In same manner as Dhatu means root of word in Panini Grammar, but metal in Material Science and body elements in Ayurveda. No such reference of Brahmans being Vedas is found in branches of Rigveda, Shukla Yajurveda and Samaveda.

4. Vedas contain no history, they being permanent knowledge of Ishwar. But Brahman texts contain history and description of historical persons.

5. All major texts of Vedic literature clearly proclaim that the Mantra Samhitas of Rigveda, Yajurveda, Samaveda and Atharvaveda are divine Vedas.

For example,

Vedas:
Rig 10.90.3, Yaju 31.7, Atharva 19.6.13, Atharva 10.7.20, Yaju 35.5, Atharva 1.10.23, Rig 4.58.3, Yaju 17.91 (as explained by Nirukta 13.6), Atharva 15.6.9, Atharva 15.6.8, Atharva 11.7.24

Upanishads:
Brihadaranyak Upanishad 2.4.10, Chhandogya Upanishad, 7.1.2, Brihadaranyak 1.2.5, Mundak 1.1.5, Nrisinghapurvataapani, Chhandogya 7.7.1, Taittriya 1.1, Taittriya 2.3

Brahmans:
Shatpath Brahman 11.5.8, Gopath Purva 2.16, Gopath 1.1.29

Mahabharat:
Drona Parva 51.22, Shanti Parva 235.1, Vana Parva 187.14, Vana Parva 215.22, Sabha Parva 11.31,

Manu Smriti:
Manu Smriti 1.23,

Purans:
Padma 5.2.50, Harivansh, Visgnu Puran 1.22.82, Vishnu 5.1.36, Brahm Vaivart Prakriti 14.64

Misc:
Mahabhashya Pashpashanhik,  Kathak Samhita 40.7, Sayan in explanation of Atharva 19.9.12, Vrihadaranyavaartikasaar by Saayana (2.4), Sarvanukramanibhumika, Ramayan 3.28

etc. Even Shankaracharya states that “Chaturvidha Mantrajaatam” to conclude that 4 Mantra Samhitas alone are Vedas (explanation of Brihad 2.4.10 by Shankaracharya)

6. Even Brahmana texts do not claim that they are also Vedas.

7. Shatpath Brahman states that Vedas have 8.64 lakh alphabets. Had Brahmans been included, this would have been significantly higher.

8. Only Mantras have been preserved through Paatha Vidhis of Jata, Mala, Shukha, Rekha, Dhwaj, Danda, Ratha and Ghana. No such effort has been made to preserve the Brahman texts.

9. Swar Bhed and Maatras are used for Mantras only. Not for Brahmans.

10. Each Mantra has a specific Rishi, Devata, Chhanda and Swar, That is not so for Brahman texts.

11. Yajuh Pratishakhya states that one should say Om before Mantras and Atha before Brahman verses. Something similar is stated in Aitareya Brahman also.

12. Brahmans themselves detail the descriptions of people who wrote them. They elaborate on Mantras and even state at places while explaining meanings of mantrs that “Naatra Tirohitamivasti” – we have not elaborated those parts which are straightforward and have explained the complex parts.

Doubt: How can you say Purans are Brahmans. Purans refer to 18 Purans by Ved Vyasa

1. No, this is a misconception. These new Purans are of much recent origin. Puran refers to old.

2. Taittriya Aranyak 2.9 and Ashwalayan Grihyasutra 3.3.1 clearly state that Brahmans alone are called Kalpa, Gatha, Puran, Itihas or Narashansi.

3. Even Acharya Shankar states so while commenting on Brihadaranyak Upanishad 2.4.10

4. Same is view of Sayana in explanation of Taittriya Aranyak 8.21

5. Shatpath Brahman is much older than most other scriptures. It states in 13.4.3.13 that one should listen to Purans on ninth day of Ashwamedha Yajna. Had Purans referred to these new Purans like Brahmavaivart, what would Ram, Krishna etc had listened on ninth day? Brahmans were written generations before Veda Vyasa was born. And these new Purans are falsely attributed to Veda Vyasa. If one reads Brahmavaivart Puran etc in detail, he would clearly understand that it cannot be written by a yogi who wrote the commentary on Yoga Darshan.

Doubt: Even Vedas have history. See there is name of Jamadagni and Kashyap Rishis in Yajurveda 3.62. Many Vedic mantras talk of historical persons.

1. Do not be confused. Jamadagni and Kashyap do not refer to historical people. As per Shatpath, Jamadagni refers to Eyes and Kashyap refers to Prana or life force.

2. Similarly all names in Vedas refer to some specific attributes. Later people used them to keep their names. Just as Lal and Krishna in Mahabharat do not refer to Advani and Maya in Shankaracharya’s texts do not refer to Mayavati, same is case with Vedas.

Doubt: What about branches of Vedas. There are 1131 branches of Vedas. Most are lost today. How can we then claim that we have original Vedas

1. Branches of Vedas are not Vedas. They are explanations of Vedas. The Branches make changes in original mantras to simplify the meanings as per prevailing norms. Similarly many branches modify the sequence of mantras for specific yajnas or other purposes. Some branches mix Mantras and Brahmans also.

2. Four original Mantra Samhitas are Apaurusheya. Branches and Brahmans created by humans are correct only to extent they comply with Vedas. These are human creations.

3. Traditionally, original Mantra Samhitas have been preserved and only these have been commented upon by scholars.

Doubt: What about Upanishad, Upavedas, Geeta etc? Are they not divine?

Refer above. These are great works by great legends. But they are not parallel to Vedas which are divine. Had they been divine, Ishwar must have ensured that they are also preserved just like the 4 Vedas. So these should be interpreted in light of Vedas and those portions that contradict the Vedas should be rejected. After all, no one is superior to Ishwar.

This holds true for all texts in the world. All scriptures of our culture proclaim in one pitch that Vedas alone are ultimate truth. This should be the ultimate benchmark for us.

Doubt: But Vedas contain only rituals and worship of gods. Don’t we need other texts for philosophy and other practical applications as well?

1. This is a misconception propagated by those who have never even read the Vedas.

2. All great works of our culture are attributed to Vedas by their authors. They believe Vedas to be source of all true knowledge.

3. Vedas are source of all philosophical texts like Upanishads or Geeta etc. While other texts are useful to understand the Vedas and truth, there is nothing in them which is not already in Vedas. As we discussed earlier, Vedas are ultimate benchmarks, other texts are stairs to reach up to that. But we should be careful that no stair leads us away from the Vedas.

4. Vedas believe in One and Only One Ishwar who pervades everywhere. Vedas hardly have any rituals because they refer to knowledge which is timeless. Its a pity that misguided people have misrepresented Vedas to serve their own petty designs.

It is our utmost duty to rise above all prejudice, explore the Vedas and promote the true perspective of Vedas.

May the truth prevail!

This post is also available in Hindi at http://agniveer.com/what-are-vedas-hi/

This post is also available in Gujarati at http://agniveer.com/what-are-vedas-gu/

Essence of Vedas – first book of world

Author:
Series: Religion of Humanity, Book 2
Genre: Religion
Must know startling facts about the Vedas – The Foundation of Hinduism! And first book of world. More info →

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.

139 COMMENTS

  1. @Agniveer
    My name is Dr.Jyothish Vijay. I really like your efforts. But I can’t help giving a counter argument to one thing. Before state what that is, let me first tell u what i think your blog is for. I beleive its an effort to counter cetain Islamic scholars ridculing Hinduism as a whole based upon their interpretation of Vedas and in this process imparting knowledge upon ignorant Hindu’s as well.
    But what i find problematic here is your rejection of Puranas and Bhagavad Geeta(stating that they have been distorted and thus only those apsects are to be accepted which are in accordance with the Vedas).
    I find this stand to be problematic…..on a very personal level, its OK if one person says “I beleive only in what Vedas say”…..You say-u r against caste-system and that people should be united and stuff like that….for that, u must refrain from downgrading the “other texts”, especially Bhagavad Geeta
    There are tons of Hindu’s who believe in BG. They may take u as a fellow human being and a fellow Hindu, but still will find it difficult to connect with you, because u denounce BG..
    I feel u must find a path in between. I am not asking u to make compromises and NOT TO tell the truth. I say, nothing in the puranas or BG or Vedas contradict each other……if u think IT DOES-then probably your interpretation is wrong.
    Now I have not read the Vedas. I have only read some puranas and part of BG (that too translated).. But I firmly believe what i said is true.
    Going behind “evidences” to prove which among them is authentic is not going to be fruitful. Plz don’t do that. Saying that statements from BG claiming Lord Krishna to be god are “adulterations” are laughable. Its laugable not because i think u r ignorant(i don’t)…but because if u do that, i could argue against any of the scriptures in that manner..
    I know there is “vulgarity” in the puranas in the form of nudity, sex and gore. But why don’t u take the essence-rather than the stories per se???

  2. @Agniveer
    It would have been OK, if u just gave the clarifications on misinterpretations on Vedas….without downgrading the “other texts”

    See I am not really a “Hindu”….at best i am a agnostic Hindu. I read the BG….do not believe the BG is divine or that Lord Krishna was real or divine…but i cannot rule out the possibility….i don’t belive following teachings of BG or the Quran or Bible for that matter will “take u” anywhere (salvation/moksha etc)…….but i do beleive that following the teachings of BG will make u a good human being and if the majority did that, the world itself will be a better place….i have not read the Bible or Quran…i don’t beleive they are “authentic” (to the extent of what Christians or Muslims belive)……..but inspite of whatever Muslims are doing in this world (terrorism, accusing other religions of being faulty,,,and stuff like that)….i belive, its because of their misinterpretation of their Holy scriptures!!!!

    I do not believe in Lord Krishna or an unmanifest god….but bringing them in my mind does give me happiness….maybe its human psychology….i don’t know

    Even without “really believing” i don’t belive in caste system and gender inequality (your arguments against one another poster…i don’t know what he did)

    But still i will debate against anyone who argues against Hindusim because “our” religious teachings are GOOD (atleast from my point of view)

    As far as authenticity of scriptures are concerned (Vedas vs BG)…..plz leave it to belief…there is no reasoning in this field…Afterall when anything is >4000 years old nothing can be said to be authentic….historical evidences are useless here. The only thing that could make any of these scriptures authentic is “GOD himself appearing and ascerting something” ie once u rule out hypnotism/schizophrenia as the cause for the “manifestation….get my drift????

    There can’t be contradictions >< Vedas and BG: if u think there is plz work it out

  3. @Agniveer
    My name is Dr.Jyothish Vijay. I really like your efforts. But I can’t help giving a counter argument to one thing. Before state what that is, let me first tell u what i think your blog is for. I beleive its an effort to counter cetain Islamic scholars ridculing Hinduism as a whole based upon their interpretation of Vedas and in this process imparting knowledge upon ignorant Hindu’s as well.

    But what i find problematic here is your rejection of Puranas and Bhagavad Geeta(stating that they have been distorted and thus only those apsects are to be accepted which are in accordance with the Vedas).

    I find this stand to be problematic…..on a very personal level, its OK if one person says “I beleive only in what Vedas say”…..You say-u r against caste-system and that people should be united and stuff like that….for that, u must refrain from downgrading the “other texts”, especially Bhagavad Geeta

    There are tons of Hindu’s who believe in BG. They may take u as a fellow human being and a fellow Hindu, but still will find it difficult to connect with you, because u denounce BG..

    I feel u must find a path in between. I am not asking u to make compromises and NOT TO tell the truth. I say, nothing in the puranas or BG or Vedas contradict each other……if u think IT DOES-then probably your interpretation is wrong.

    Now I have not read the Vedas. I have only read some puranas and part of BG (that too translated).. But I firmly believe what i said is true.

    Going behind “evidences” to prove which among them is authentic is not going to be fruitful. Plz don’t do that. Saying that statements from BG claiming Lord Krishna to be god are “adulterations” are laughable. Its laugable not because i think u r ignorant(i don’t)…but because if u do that, i could argue against any of the scriptures in that manner..

    I know there is “vulgarity” in the puranas in the form of nudity, sex and gore. But why don’t u take the essence-rather than the stories per se?

  4. @Agniveer
    What are difference among Shruti, Samirities, Purans and Mahakvya like Ramayan and mahabharat. Why not Ramayan and Mahabharat called Purans? Please explain by giving example like “This is Shruti” (Vedic Guidence) and how smiriti Explains this particular shruti and How it takes form of Purans. What is meant of it that Veda are in Purans, Smirities, Ramayan etc but these text not Veda in itself

  5. “OM”

    Dear friend ,

    I m mechanical engineer . I am working on the project “science in Veda ” .

    m working on the flying technology in Veda ..

    but now I need a plate form to publish my work and need help to create that planes called Vimana again .

    I thing my research will change the world . we can design the flying machine in very low cost with help of vadic science .

    if u have any person in ur contact
    working on the same project .
    plz contact me .
    I am looking for the person with which I can go forward and continue my research .

  6. Agniveerji

    I have a doubt. You say Vedas are free from rituals. In that case is not Agnihotra a ritual?True Agnihotra conists of Stuthi, prathana and Upasana. But the element of igniting the fire, offering oblations with Swahaa etc do come under the category of rituals. And Agnihotra is also one of the five yagnas to be performed by all [ of course excluding Sanyasis] and called Devpuja. In Vedas, it is ordained that everybody should do this ritual. There are many Mantras to this effect.

  7. Let this struggle be in an Open form. Lets do something openly and publicly out of the internet also. Lets have a meeting and public get together to promote our views and Vedic knowledge to a layman. Let’s make them literate with Ved to eradicate darkness of untruth. Lets join to form a registered NGO for it. I am with you to get some Government departmental support (also from HRD ministry).

  8. Some of the modern & perhaps older spiritual teachers suggest that studying Vedanta is enough, because rest of Vedas contain only Karamkand etc. This discourages people from following the 3rd Principle of Arya Samaj. Do you have any article clarifying “Why Vedas and not just Vedanta”. If yes, please point it out for me. Alternatively, I suggest that it will be good addition.

    Thanks

    • Namaste Arjun Ji
      Karmkand is many a times mistranslated as “rituals” which is totally illogical. How does Karma give the meaning of “ritual”? Is meditation not Karma? Is Swadhyay not Karma? Is putting efforts to achieve your goal not Karma? Giving knowledge, defending self, Dharma and nation, cultivation, business, services are all Karma and thus require instructions so that we can do those in vest possible manner. So Karmakand includes all efforts made from enhancing science and technology to sharpen our intellectual and spiritual capabilities. In fact study of philosophy which can be said the part of Vedant also comes under Karmakand.

      So as per my thinking all Vedas are relevant. You can read Rigved Aadi Bhashya Bhoomika by Swami Dayanand to understand these concepts in more depth. You can download it from http://agniveer.com/2045/introduction-to-vedas/

      Thanks

    • Kindly submit your comment again after refreshing your browser cache. Please let us know if you still don’t see the comment. We do not have system of manual moderation for the site.
      Admin

  9. Salama,
    I am following the religion of Abraham @ Abarama @ Ibrahim that is the religion that god in al quran commanded. The religion is ancient, the text is in ancient language and sacred ritual also ancient. I believe in the books sent through the prophets from different times as the religion become corrupted. In the quran, it stated that god sent books/scriptures to his prophets such as the book of Noah, Abarahayama, Tawarata, Injil, Zabur and Al Quran. The purpose of this book is to preach the only religion of god. We know that the tawarata and Injil are now what is in the bible. What is the book of Zabur? The book of Zabur according to al quran sent to prophet Daud, his actual name if pronouce in the ancient language as Daawada . He is a great king and his son Prophet Salayamana (Solomon) later becomes the wise king and rule the world. The word Veda as such taking half of the name of prophet Daawada and of course the content talks about spirituality and worshipping of the one true God. However, the books later being corrupted and some part are lost. Religion is corrupted by the people that make interpretation of the texts and their views later believe as the content of the book. Such, people no longer can differentiate which is which. The book brought by prophet Daawada surely in the ancient language and later translated into Sanskrit. Actually all the books sent from God is in one language. It is later translated and during this translation some words is taken out or change by the enemy of God. The language of the book is actually a very basic language that can be understood by the people. The quran earlier is in the same language that later the enemy of god put mark and sign to hide the ancient language from our knowledge and they preach the religion based on their intrepretation and make believe that it is god’s commandment. We should strive to find the truth and free our mind from any biasness so that we can see things more clearly.

    • @mahadaya

      can u tell us the names of the revelations that were given to Noah and Abraham?? What proof do you have that Quran is not corrupted???? How about the aborogated verses????All these books can just be mere teachings of different views of people. Dont forget that all these books originated in the same area, so it was easy to trade views back then.

      Vedas have been existing since inception, so how can u claim ur stupid stories to be true???????

      • The quran is corrupted by putting signs and marks, as such the Muslims reading the quran not as the prophet reading it. Without the signs and marks, the word Islam and Muhammad does not exist. In the quran, it is stated that god sent the prophets to preach his religion and after thousand of years these book are lost or corrupted.
        The religion brought by vedas is about worshipping one God, same as the bible and the quran. The quran asked the believer to trust the quran and books before it, so that mean trusting the vedas as the content should be similar. We supposed to get the knowledge in order to understand the truth. I work on trying to get all the knowledge from the books and it is the content that is important. If you believe the vedas is from God, i believe it also and for me, in order to gain spritual freedom the knowledge of all the books combined together is the key to unlocking the secret of the universe.

  10. Mr. Agniveer let me first praise you for your some brilliant and scholarly arguments in favor of Hinduness.
    This is really a great service to the dharma.
    Now let us come to the next issue, by whatever reason and arguments you have banned the ‘Raguraman’ , definetely it is not a vadic tradisson, just because someone has some views totally against from you on some issues you are depriving his universal right of expression. What about the whole shastrath tradition and ‘nindak niere rakhiye’ stuff. By doing so you have simply killed the next person virtually just because of having different views. This is indeed the identity of Abrahminic traditions. It has added the sour and salt in the whole discussion.
    If the replies are scholarly and not in the objectionable or abusive language, it would have been better to ignore the replies rather than killing them virtually (do u propose one should not study the books written in shastrarth style to better judge the thoughts or philosophies of someone instead of blindly supporting the truth as aryasmaj is saying. Shoul one accept the views of swami Dayananda as the ultimate truth like that of the bloody Muhammad.) .
    On the issue of caste based on birth- Let me first state that depriving someone from his legitimated rights just based on skin color or cast is indeed inhuman and completely against our Dharma.Now are human beings are even lower than that of the horses and dogs which are being protected against crossbreeding to preserve their specific racial qualities.What is the ultimate result of crossbreeding. Is everyone is equal in all respect. Sab Dhan Baise Paseri!!!!?? Take ser khajha , take ser bhaji.
    Is there any difference between ‘samdarshinah’ and ‘samvertinah’ or not.
    As you have said earlier talked about your library you must read again the book(if you have and can) “Kyon-Dharma Digdarshan” (in hindi) or “Why” in (english) by Shri Madhavacharya Shastri.
    It is the matter of histry about treatment of word “Hindu” by the Aryasmaj in its earlier era and its horronous effect(obviously years after, the view was corrected but the dammage had been donne during the census counting).
    At the last – at current crucial juncture we should not vest our valuable energy and effort in arguing among ourselves about the superiority of thoughts of each other( as Aryasmaj’s view against the so called Brahminism !!! and other’s view about swami Dayananda as one of the biggest corrupter of the Vedas on the similar lining of of the so called western indologists.)
    Don’t get trapped in such situation.
    The need of the hour is the to collectively converse our efforts and energy towards the Satatinic Abrahmic threads.

    Satyameva Jayete.

    • Namaste Raj ji,

      Thanks for your blessings. We concur with you that we need to focus on fighting fanatic forces by uniting together. However that unity has to be on basis on equality. And thus, rejection of birth-based caste system is a foremost criteria for unity for us. While I personally have my doubts over both capability and integrity of Madhvacharya because while he spent his whole life debating Arya Samaj, never ever did he debate any Muslim or Christian nor published any text analyzing these cults.

      We believe that the version of Dharma as preached by Madhvacharya, Karpatriji, Kaluram Shastri has done more harm than benefit and we consider them enemies of Hindu or Sanatan dharma in unequivocal terms. The reason is that their foolish prejudice isolated and repelled so-called Dalits and huge number of Muslims who were eager to come back home over last one century itself.

      We believe caste-system is a disease and those supporting or nurturing it as greatest enemies of humanity. If someone brings name of the greatest person of history in other streams, still our stand remains unchanged on this particular issue.

      Just as we will not allow anyone to start defending rape or incest, similarly we, as a policy, will not debate with those defending caste system. We put these crimes in same category.

      Please understand that it is not about Arya Samaj vs anyone else. In fact Agniveer never claimed to be an Arya Samaj site. It simply considers Dayanand as a role model. So we have people of all faith and beliefs coming and debating here. We even had discussions with Advaitvadis and respect them for their point of view. But caste-system, rape and insult to womenhood is a strict no for us.

      Our goal is to unite entire humanity purely on basis of character and deeds, and reject all notions of birth, color, gender etc. I hope you would understand and empathize with our motives.

      Dhanyavad
      Admin
      Agniveer

  11. Mr. Agniveer let me first praise you for your some brilliant and scholarly arguments in favor of Hinduness.
    This is really a great service to the dharma.
    Now let us come to the next issue, by whatever reason and arguments you have banned the ‘Raguraman’ , definetely it is not a vadic tradisson, just because someone has some views totally against from you on some issues you are depriving his universal right of expression. What about the whole shastrath tradition and ‘nindak niere rakhiye’ stuff. By doing so you have simply killed the next person vertually just because of having different views. This is indeed the identity of Abrahminic tradition. It has added the sore and salt in the whole discussion.
    If the replies are scholarly and not in the objectionable or abusive language, it would have been better to ignore the replies rather than killing them virtually (do u propose one should not study the books written in shastrarth style to better judge the thoughts or philosophies of someone instead of blindly supporting the truth as aryasmaj is saying. Shoul one accept the views of swami Dayananda as the ultimate truth like that of the bloody Muhammad.) .
    On the issue of caste based on birth- Let me first state that depriving someone from his legitimated rights just based on skin color or cast is indeed inhuman and completely against our Dharma.Now are human beings are even lower than that of the horses and dogs which are being protected against crossbreeding to preserve their specific racial qualities.What is the ultimate result of crossbreeding. Is everyone is equal in all respect. Sab Dhan Baise Paseri!!!!?? Take ser khajha , take ser bhaji.
    Is there any difference between ‘samdarshinah’ and ‘samvertinah’ or not.
    As you have said earlier talked about your library you must read again the book(if you have and can) “Kyon-Dharma Digdarshan” (in hindi) or “Why” in (english) by Shri Madhavacharya Shastri.
    It is the matter of histry about treatment of word “Hindu” by the Aryasmaj in its earlier era and its horronous effect(obviously years after, the view was corrected but the dammage had been donne during the census counting).
    At the last – at current crucial juncture we should not vest our valuable energy and effort in arguing among ourselves about the superiority of thoughts of each other( as Aryasmaj’s view against the so called Brahminism !!! and other’s view about swami Dayananda as one of the biggest corrupter of the Vedas on the similar lining of of the so called western indologists.)
    Don’t get trapped in such situation.
    The need of the hour is the to collectively converse our efforts and energy towards the Satatinic Abrahmic threads.

    Satyameva Jayete.

  12. Dear Agni,
    I have read that chanting of Vedic hymns does a lot of good to the universe. Does the sound of Vedas have special powers to bless one with favours – i.e. Dharmic.?
    Is “Sandhya vandanam” a prescribed way of worship by the Vedas ?

  13. We gave you the reason for not debating you. You only want to further your personal casteist agenda and harm overall unity. Casteism is one of those disgusting things we just cannot tolerate. Your messages are nothing but copy-paste word to word from works of Pt Kaluram Shastri. For general public, we present here excerpts from some of the views of this Pt Kaluram Shastri whom you are representing. We only wish that propagators of such perversion would have died in wombs of their mothers rather than taking birth and spreading so much hatred and caste-discrimination.

    For you, go and start a new website countering us, if you can. And also answer mysteries of Purans at http://www.truthofhinduisim.com that is being used to convert countless Hindus even while you spit your hatred against followers of true Vedic dharma. We have already mentioned that we do not entertain casteist mindsets and consider it criminal of highest order.

    Here are views of Pt Kaluram who is icon for this person Raguraman:
    1. “If a dwija take water from a chandal (untouchable) he should vomit the entire intake to be pure. He should do praysachit. Chandals should be allowed to live out of the village and they should be allowed to possess as wealth dogs and donkeys only. Their clothes would be the left over of the dead or the old ones. During the time of any religious occasion do not see, talk or interact with them at all. They should interact and marry among equals. They must not wander at night in village or cities.”
    Sanatan Dharma Pataka, year 26, No.9, p.11-13

    2. “Brahmanee ke sath Shudra ke sansarg se jo santan hoti hai uska nam chandal hai. Wah lohe ke aur sheeshe ke zevar pahine , gale mein baddhi bandhe, kankh mein peti rakhe din ke poorvardha mein nagar ka mal (pakhana) saf kar de uttarardha mein phir nagar mein na jaye ye ikatthe hokar nagar ke bahar rahein. Aisa na karein wo dandaneeya hain.”
    Sanatan Dharma Pataka, 1926, No. 9. p 8

    3. “Yadi chandal ka darshan ho jaye to Surya ka avalokan karo aur yadi chandal ka sparsha ho jawe to pahire hue vastron ko dhowo aur snan karo. Yeh dharma shashtra ki aagya hai.”
    Sanatan Dharma Pataka, 1926, No. 9. p 8

    • Dada,
      Sri Krishna is God. If u believe Upanishads, u have to believe Krishna(GOD). Gita isn’t a book, it is Upanishad. Git-upanishad.

  14. @Raguraman

    We request you to kindly stop wasting everyone’s time here. As we said, there is no way we can entertain those mindsets who are filled with casteist hatred and consider that Shudras/ women by birth have inferior rights.

    We have amply proven that there is no caste system in Vedas and that all human beings should be united and encouraged to study and imbibe Vedas in their lives without any birth based distinction. All such birth-based discrimination is the most disgusting mindset in world.

    If indeed you are convinced that being a Brahmin as per your own definition of birth-based caste, and this site is against your views, then please ignore it and start your own site against it. We know that anti-nationals and bigots have little concern about society as a whole and all they look for is their own racial superiority.

    Our stand is clear –
    1. All birth-based discriminations are man-made and against Vedas
    2. We reject all those scriptures that smell of birth-based discriminations and all ideologies of such false scriptures.
    3. We consider birth-based discrimination to be worst limit of perverted mindsets
    4. We wish that world, and India in particular, soon reaches the status of a completely casteless society, as per message of the Vedas. Till that happens, there is no way that enemies of humanity can be effectively tackled
    5. Instead of wasting time with bigots whose only design is to somehow try to prove veracity of their false texts in Vedas through crazy means and then justify caste-system based on these false texts, we prefer to focus our energies on other core tasks.

    We are tired of deleting your casteist comments again and again. KIndly demonstrate your casteism somewhere else. If possible, go and visit http://truthofhinduism.com/ where some of your favorite texts are being ripped apart by Muslims. But we know, you will not go there for obvious reasons.

    We request you to no more spam this site.

    Angira
    Agniveer Team

  15. @Ragu
    You will not refute Zakir because his arguments are too childish! Good, so when the Mujahideens will come to your house and ask you to convert to Islam otherwise get killed, just tell them the same and your problem will be solved! When any of the Mujahideen will try to rape your wife, you would certainly stand back and see your wife being raped simply because desire is a childish one and you will not try to stop him!

  16. @Ragu
    When you accepted that Eeshvar has the ability to make you a fool, why should we take any of your comments seriously? Forget about your refutations. Cant God make our points correct and your refutations wrong? Cant Arya Samaj idiots be better than Baba Raguraman if God wills?

  17. @Ragu
    1. If dying is a sign of impotency, why not taking birth is also in the same category?

    Cant God die “divinely”? So at last you have got something which even God cant do! But it is contradicting your previous statement that God can do anything.

    2. Ram in Ramayan, when he was searching Mata Sita along with Lakshman, said to him-“I would have done so much sins in my previous lives, the result of which is now seen in the form of Sita Viyog”.
    What do you have to say about these “sins” by God Himself? Did He also misinterpret Vedas?

    Dont soldiers die painful death? Why does not Eeshvar save them?

      • Namaste

        Could you provide the context where I mentioned so.

        But several mantras in vedas state that Ishwar is unchanging, unborn and devoid of body at all times. One of the most excellent and truly one of the most heart warming, touching mantra of vedas that I have come across is Yajurveda 40.8. Meditation on this mantra could be one of the most fulfilling experiences that one can have in life – such is the extent of depth of this mantra, the feelings it brings out, the comfort and safety it provides and the way it describes Ishwar. To completely understand the extent of meaning of this mantra may take more than this birth, but each dive in this ocean is an experience in itself that is no way comparable to anything else in world.

        The mantra describes properties of Ishwar and states that He is without a body, without gaps, without nerves and veins, never born and eternal/ unchangeable always in his properties. There are other properties as well, but those mentioned relate to He being unborn.

        Please note that world is a highly optimized system without redundancies. We take birth because we need that to perform actions, manage our sanskaars and reach bliss. Without birth, our purpose will not be served. So far there is bondage, there will be birth. But Ishwar is free from bondage, and can do all he has to do without need of birth. So He does not take birth/ avatar. He need not take Avatar to set examples because He already has a method to inspire us through our inner voice. he gives birth and death as per deeds of soul and need not have to take birth to kill petty people who are crooked.

        Interstingly, there is hardly a text that states that Ishwar takes birth to set good examples. Only one shloka from Geeta is extended to mean that. But in rest of the texts supporting Avatars, Ishwar took birth as Avatars primarily because of some Shraap or curse by someone. These stories belittle Ishwar and hence need not be believed in.

        The mantra you mentioned relates to rebirth of soul. In these mantras (10.59.6/7) soul prays to Ishwar that He may provide us with healthy sense and action organs so that we may enjoy and do noble acts in each life.

        Dhanyavad

      • @Agni

        1. Your entire argument is strawman, for your understanding of Avatara of God is completely flawed. Avatara has no body, Shri Hari comes as He is in all His avataras like Shri Krishna etc.

        2. As you argued, it is NOT necessary for Ishvara to take avataras to establish dharma, but if that is His will what can you say about that. Your argument does NOT necessarily negate the possibility of avataras with right understanding as per Vedas.

      • Dear Raguraman,

        You are free to ignore this site and preach your dogmas elsewhere. We believe in Freedom of Expression and reserve this right for this site. The reasons why we do not consider you fit for any discussions is:
        a. Whatever lame arguments you are providing are simple copy-paste from those texts which have been countered several times in last 100 years. We possess several of these which have these arguments mentioned in same language and sequential order that you have provided with. And we have detailed answers to each of these. So there is nothing new that you are bringing on table.
        b. Our energies are currently towards uniting all non-birth obsessed Hindus and rational minds and thwart evil designs of many external forces which is already taking a huge toll of society through conversions happening en masse. We prefer to have our energies utilized there instead of arguing those bigots who have only their caste-based superiority to protect and cannot think beyond that.
        c. As very clear from your posts, you justify birth-based Brahmanism and banning birth-based Shudras/ women etc from study of Vedas and having same social rights as Brahmins. This birth-based discrimination is something we are vehemently against, consider it criminal both by Vedic as well as modern society standards and even a debate on this is out of purview for us. Our belief is firm and clear – those who support birth-based discrimination, who cannot welcome scholarly people (Hindus/non-Hindus) as Brahmins merely because they were not born in Brahmin family and consider birth/gender to be criteria for social rights are the prime cause for downfall of our great culture, rise of Islamic fanaticism, 1000 years of misrule and every other garbage that we are attempting to clean.
        d. It is a matter of shame that while you spend so much energies to question us on those posts which shake the foundation of birth-based superiority, but have nothing to comment on posts on Islam etc. Never in life would you dare to debate with Muslims or counter threats of Zakir Naik. Because in any case, in your myopic self-obsessed world, there is no way good Muslims can be embraced back into Vedic dharma as Brahmins, Kshatriyas and Vaishyas.
        e. The reason why you hate Dayanand is because thanks to him, the shop of those perverted Brahmanvaadis (self-proclaimed brahmins by birth and not knowledge and conduct) slowly stopped making profits. Today the society does not run as per your whims and orders, your followership is lost and hence the frustrations.
        f. Had there been some intellectual differences coupled with true desire for selfless welfare, we might have taken you seriously. But that not being the case, there is no way we would entertain the ideology you represent. We have better things to do.

        So if you have differences with posts on Agniveer, kindly start a separate blog, refute whatever is written and live in delusion of serving the cause of mother! In future, all your comments would be deleted from this site and same shall be done with your previous posts.

        You are happy that Dayanand died early due to poisoning. So foolish is mindset of people like you that you do not realize that had he not been there, perhaps most of you would have already turned Muslims or Christians just as priests of prominent Hindu temples had been doing over last 1000 years under attack of sword when these temples converted to mosques. He only tried to reverse the blunders done by bigots like you which made it impossible for huge number of Muslim converts to return back to Hinduism. Thanks to your love of mother, 90% of Muslims in India/pakistan are actually originally Hindus by descents whose forefathers were denied a return in Hindu fold merely because it affected your notion of birth-based superiority and touch-sanctity!

        Go and show courage to debate Muslim and Christian fanatics. You know that would require courage and risk your safety. Arguing and distracting an Agniveer would be easier because in any case, such people would come to rescue and help you when your family would be converting to islam/ christianity tomorrow, and would defend you when likes of you are being trapped in isolation!

        We expect you to not comment anymore here. If you do, the comments would be immediately deleted.

        Dhanyavad
        Agni

      • Excellent reply Agniveerji…just keep it up…

        Our enemies r external. Our existence is in danger so let be unite and fight the external aggression

      • A befitting reply, though as a body was born in a brahmin family, but for sure this by birth differentiation has to end at once. Veda is for all as The supreme is for all.Then what one does with that knowledge puts him/her in the varnas.

  18. Dear Agni,

    Some of the references you have provided only disproves your claims…

    ======================================
    “3. The claim that ‘Mantra and Brahman are together called Vedas’ is also found in Shraut Sutras of Krishna Yajurveda. But Krishna Yajurveda itself is mixture of Brahman and Mantras, are hence here this claim is relevant only for the specific text. ”
    ======================================

    Apastambha Paribhasha 1:31 (Apastamba-Srautasutra 24:1:31)

    mantrabrāhmaṇayorvedanāmadʰeyam

    Mantra and brAhmanas are known by the name Vedas

    a.) If you accept the possibility that Brahmanas belonging to Krishna Yajur Veda are Vedas, then your argument that Vedas contain no history falls flat in your face. You shot yourselves in the foot.

    b.) Where does it say only in Krishna Yajur Veda, Brahmanas are texts….The Srautasutra verse says mantra and brAhmanas together constitute Vedas. rest is your concoction.

    ======================================
    “5. All major texts of Vedic literature clearly proclaim that the Mantra Samhitas of Rigveda, Yajurveda, Samaveda and Atharvaveda are divine Vedas.”
    ======================================

    a.) Nowhere (in all your quoted texts) it says only mantras are Vedas explicitly.

    b.) By Vedas even Brahmanas classified among the Rig, Sama etc. are included.

    ======================================
    Even Shankaracharya states that “Chaturvidha Mantrajaatam” to conclude that 4 Mantra Samhitas alone are Vedas (explanation of Brihad 2.4.10 by Shankaracharya)
    ======================================

    Why lie and twist Sankaracharya’s bhashya?

    “Chaturvidha Mantrajaatam” means Mantras are four kinds. The entire Shankaracharya’s commentary regards Brahmanas as part of Vedas, which I will show in the refutation of your very next point given below.

    ======================================
    Doubt: How can you say Purans are Brahmans. Purans refer to 18 Purans by Ved Vyasa

    1. No, this is a misconception. These new Purans are of much recent origin. Puran refers to old.
    ………………
    3. Even Acharya Shankar states so while commenting on Brihadaranyak Upanishad 2.4.10
    ======================================

    a.) The very fact that Shankaracharya’s commentary claims Puranas in Brhadaranyaka Upanishad verse refers to Brahmanas, is because of the belief that Brahamanas constitute Vedas and that Vedas cannot contain references to the popularly known texts called Puranas. This is explicitly said in Shankaracharya’s commentary. This refutes your claim that Shankaracharya believed only Samhitas or mantras constitute Vedas.

    b.) The very fact that even Shankaracharya refers to popularly known texts called puranas shows that nobody considered Brahmanas as Puranas. Shankaracharya gave is own interpretation of this word, just like your founder.

    ======================================
    2. Taittriya Aranyak 2.9 and Ashwalayan Grihyasutra 3.3.1 clearly state that Brahmans alone are called Kalpa, Gatha, Puran, Itihas or Narashansi.
    ======================================

    Thank you for the reference, which completely refutes both Arya Samaj’s claim and Shankaracharya’s claims that brAhmanas constitute Puranas in any sense.

    a.) Ashwalayan Grihyasutra 3.3.1

    titus.uni-frankfurt.de/texte/etcs/ind/aind/ved/yvs/apss/apss.htm?apss001.htm

    atha.svādhyāyam.adhīyīta.ṛco.yajūṃṣi.sāmāny.atharva.aṅgiraso.brāhmaṇāni.kalpān.gāthā.nārāśaṃsīr.itihāsa.purāṇāni.iti./

    Then, he should study and chant regularly the Rik, yajus, sama and AtharvAngirasa hymns, the brAhmanas, kalpAs, gathAs, the texts in homnor of kings and heroes (nārāśaṃsī), the itihAsas and Puranas.

    Particularly see the reference to the words “brāhmaṇāni” and “purāṇāni” both in plural, listed in the verse. Nowhere it states brAhmanas are called as puranas etc. as you falsely claim. Instead these texts are explicitly mentioned to be DIFFERENT TEXTS.

    b.) Taittriya Aranyak 2:9:1

    sanskritweb.org/yajurveda/ta-comb.pdf

    yadbrAhmanÀnItihAsAnpurAnAni kalpAngÀthA nArASsamsIrmedAhutayo

    Again this verse lists Brahmanas, itohasas, puranas etc. each text in plural one after another for meda yajna, showing these are different texts.

    ======================================
    4. Vedas contain no history, they being permanent knowledge of Ishwar. But Brahman texts contain history and description of historical persons.
    ======================================

    This is a very weak argument. Why God cannot have permanent knowledge about all beings (past present and future) and their lives (past present and future)?

    ======================================
    Doubt: Even Vedas have history. See there is name of Jamadagni and Kashyap Rishis in Yajurveda 3.62. Many Vedic mantras talk of historical persons.
    ……………
    These are great works by great legends. But they are not parallel to Vedas which are divine. Had they been divine, Ishwar must have ensured that they are also preserved just like the 4 Vedas. So these should be interpreted in light of Vedas and those portions that contradict the Vedas should be rejected. After all, no one is superior to Ishwar.
    ======================================

    Again weak argument….Vedas have minimum three fold meaning…There is no need for everything mentioned in Vedas to be preserved. Otherwise by the very mention of the word , prakrti, tamas etc., the entire world along with everything in it must be preserved…hence your argument is not only very weak but also quite silly.

    Second, Vedas have minimum threefold meaning…On epertaining to the world, second to the world of Devatas or gods, third ultimately to God. All the three interpretations go together. That is the greatness of Vedas, not merely in chandas etc. It is NOT necessary that all of Vedic texts should have chandas, Swar etc. So your argument on this is also faulty.

    As for Puranas refering to victoria etc. it is clearly interpolation. No doubt Puranas have been interpolated. However, these does NOT mean Puaranas themselves are false. As Taittiriya Brahmana text and Ashavalayana Grihya Sutra shows Brahmanas, itihasas, Puranas are all three different sets of texts, each mentioned in plural separately. This debunks your argument and claims of Arya Samaj.

  19. Namaste Agniveer ji. I love your website.

    I wanted to ask you the meaning of the words Atharva Ved, Rig Ved, Sam Ved and Yajur Ved.

    Thank you

  20. Dear Agni,

    Some of the references you have provided only disproves your claims…

    ======================================
    “3. The claim that ‘Mantra and Brahman are together called Vedas’ is also found in Shraut Sutras of Krishna Yajurveda. But Krishna Yajurveda itself is mixture of Brahman and Mantras, are hence here this claim is relevant only for the specific text. ”
    ======================================

    Apastambha Paribhasha 1:31 (Apastamba-Srautasutra 24:1:31)

    mantrabrāhmaṇayorvedanāmadʰeyam

    Mantra and brAhmanas are known by the name Vedas

    a.) If you accept the possibility that Brahmanas belonging to Krishna Yajur Veda are Vedas, then your argument that Vedas contain no history falls flat in your face. You shot yourselves in the foot.

    b.) Where does it say only in Krishna Yajur Veda, Brahmanas are texts….The Srautasutra verse says mantra and brAhmanas together constitute Vedas. rest is your concoction.

    ======================================
    “5. All major texts of Vedic literature clearly proclaim that the Mantra Samhitas of Rigveda, Yajurveda, Samaveda and Atharvaveda are divine Vedas.”
    ======================================

    a.) Nowhere (in all your quoted texts) it says only mantras are Vedas explicitly.

    b.) By Vedas even Brahmanas classified among the Rig, Sama etc. are included.

    ======================================
    Even Shankaracharya states that “Chaturvidha Mantrajaatam” to conclude that 4 Mantra Samhitas alone are Vedas (explanation of Brihad 2.4.10 by Shankaracharya)
    ======================================

    Why lie and twist Sankaracharya’s bhashya?

    “Chaturvidha Mantrajaatam” means Mantras are four kinds. The entire Shankaracharya’s commentary regards Brahmanas as part of Vedas, which I will show in the refutation of your very next point given below.

    ======================================
    Doubt: How can you say Purans are Brahmans. Purans refer to 18 Purans by Ved Vyasa

    1. No, this is a misconception. These new Purans are of much recent origin. Puran refers to old.
    ………………
    3. Even Acharya Shankar states so while commenting on Brihadaranyak Upanishad 2.4.10
    ======================================

    a.) The very fact that Shankaracharya’s commentary claims Puranas in Brhadaranyaka Upanishad verse refers to Brahmanas, is because of the belief that Brahamanas constitute Vedas and that Vedas cannot contain references to the popularly known texts called Puranas. This is explicitly said in Shankaracharya’s commentary. This refutes your claim that Shankaracharya believed only Samhitas or mantras constitute Vedas.

    b.) The very fact that even Shankaracharya refers to popularly known texts called puranas shows that nobody considered Brahmanas as Puranas. Shankaracharya gave is own interpretation of this word, just like your founder.

    ======================================
    2. Taittriya Aranyak 2.9 and Ashwalayan Grihyasutra 3.3.1 clearly state that Brahmans alone are called Kalpa, Gatha, Puran, Itihas or Narashansi.
    ======================================

    Thank you for the reference, which completely refutes both Arya Samaj’s claim and Shankaracharya’s claims that brAhmanas constitute Puranas in any sense.

    a.) Ashwalayan Grihyasutra 3.3.1

    http://titus.uni-frankfurt.de/texte/etcs/ind/aind/ved/yvs/apss/apss.htm?apss001.htm

    atha.svādhyāyam.adhīyīta.ṛco.yajūṃṣi.sāmāny.atharva.aṅgiraso.brāhmaṇāni.kalpān.gāthā.nārāśaṃsīr.itihāsa.purāṇāni.iti./

    Then, he should study and chant regularly the Rik, yajus, sama and AtharvAngirasa hymns, the brAhmanas, kalpAs, gathAs, the texts in homnor of kings and heroes (nārāśaṃsī), the itihAsas and Puranas.

    Particularly see the reference to the words “brāhmaṇāni” and “purāṇāni” both in plural, listed in the verse. Nowhere it states brAhmanas are called as puranas etc. as you falsely claim. Instead these texts are explicitly mentioned to be DIFFERENT TEXTS.

    b.) Taittriya Aranyak 2:9:1

    http://www.sanskritweb.org/yajurveda/ta-comb.pdf

    yadbrAhmanÀnItihAsAnpurAnAni kalpAngÀthA nArASsamsIrmedAhutayo

    Again this verse lists Brahmanas, itohasas, puranas etc. each text in plural one after another for meda yajna, showing these are different texts.

    ======================================
    4. Vedas contain no history, they being permanent knowledge of Ishwar. But Brahman texts contain history and description of historical persons.
    ======================================

    This is a very weak argument. Why God cannot have permanent knowledge about all beings (past present and future) and their lives (past present and future)?

    ======================================
    Doubt: Even Vedas have history. See there is name of Jamadagni and Kashyap Rishis in Yajurveda 3.62. Many Vedic mantras talk of historical persons.
    ……………
    These are great works by great legends. But they are not parallel to Vedas which are divine. Had they been divine, Ishwar must have ensured that they are also preserved just like the 4 Vedas. So these should be interpreted in light of Vedas and those portions that contradict the Vedas should be rejected. After all, no one is superior to Ishwar.
    ======================================

    Again weak argument….Vedas have minimum three fold meaning…There is no need for everything mentioned in Vedas to be preserved. Otherwise by the very mention of the word , prakrti, tamas etc., the entire world along with everything in it must be preserved…hence your argument is not only very weak but also quite silly.

    Second, Vedas have minimum threefold meaning…On epertaining to the world, second to the world of Devatas or gods, third ultimately to God. All the three interpretations go together. That is the greatness of Vedas, not merely in chandas etc. It is NOT necessary that all of Vedic texts should have chandas, Swar etc. So your argument on this is also faulty.

    As for Puranas refering to victoria etc. it is clearly interpolation. No doubt Puranas have been interpolated. However, these does NOT mean Puaranas themselves are false. As Taittiriya Brahmana text and Ashavalayana Grihya Sutra shows Brahmanas, itihasas, Puranas are all three different sets of texts, each mentioned in plural separately. This debunks your argument and claims of Arya Samaj.

  21. I have found vedic wisdom to be very logical scientific and experiential.You are not required to have a blind faith. I pasting an article by swami ramswarup on vedas and Hinduism,
    Hinduism and Vedas

    By webmaster – Posted on 17 January 2005
    Printer-friendly version

    Hinduism is based on Vedas which are eternal, living, religious books/code and are bestowed by God on the human beings for their betterment. It is stated in Vedas, “VASUDHAIV KUTUMBAKAM” and this declaration unites humanity into one string of brotherhood all over the universe. India has come into being through very old traditions and cultural antecedents and these traditions are based on the ideals defined in Vedas and the beliefs which are still alive and are relevant to the mankind.

    Indian culture is ancient and Vedic knowledge is most ancient and the greatest, eternal culture that has flourished along the banks of river Sindhu which has provided most congenial atmosphere for the prosperity of Sanskrit language along with its grammar. This great culture has given birth to number of philosophical ideologies. The famous universities of Takshila and Nalanda were the main centers which were visited by the students from abroad for the intensive study of Indian culture and Vedic philosophy containing spiritual and worldly science etc. The admirers of this culture identified themselves as residents of India now known as Indians through out the world. It is immaterial as to which group, caste or religious sect do the residents of India belong but the admirers have always considered themselves as Indian first living all together on the banks of river Sindhu. Greeks were the first to identify the people living along the banks of river Sindhu as Indu. After them, Arabs and Persians called the group of people living across river Sindhu as “Hindi”. Just as Muslims, Christians, Buddhists, constitute a distinct religious sect. Similarly, the group of people living across Sindhu river were categorized as “Hindu”. Hence, all people residing in Hindustan are identified as “Hindus”. On the same lines as all residents of America, Britain, Israel, Africa are categorized as Americans, Britishers, Israelis, Africans etc., irrespective of their caste-creed, race or religion. Hence, categorization is purely on residential basis. Therefore it is illogical to say that Hindus are those who are followers of Vedas or those who study Geeta, Ramayana etc.

    It may be reiterated that the word Hindi stated above cannot be bound within the parameters of a distinct religion. On the basis of above facts one can only reach to a conclusion that all the members belonging to any caste, creed, religion, sect, group residing in Hindustan are Hindis, or Hindus, since thecategorization is purely on residential basis. Hence in the present scenario it has become all the more important to know the true meaning of term Hindu.Because of the reason that term Hindu gives an identification to all Indians and this identification has nationalistic basis rather than religious basis. Our religious beliefs and tenets may be different but all Indians are the inheritors of Indian culture and tradition. We have to sensitize ourselves to the fact that success lies in obliterating hatred backed by fundamentalism and castism.

    The declaration of Vedas, “VASUDHAIV KUTUMBAKAM” explains that whole world is one family of all human beings. It is surprising that all religion, sects, groups etc., claim that there is one God of whole world and preach brotherhood and tolerance towards others. However, whenever society is hit by violence, it is all in the name of religion and then where the preach of one God, brotherhood vanishes at that time? True understanding of religion and its practice is being made a difficult task in present scenario. Ancient world arya may be considered to be applicable for Hindus. In arya/Hindu religion there are four ashrams— brahmacharya, Grisath, Vanprasth and Sanyas and caste system was/is based on present pious or bad deeds according to Ved shastras and not by birth. In this connection Yajurveda mantra 31/11 also refers. People used to stay for 25 years in each ashram, so Arya/Hindus used to stay for 25 years in brahmacharya ashram to study Vedas, science, maths and other philosophies to be learnt by them to be learned boys and girls to co-operate and serve the society and nation. And there was/is no child marriage. The eternal knowledge of four Vedas— Rigveda, Yajurveda, Saamveda and Atharvaveda was/is religious book ( Samhita) and the book to obtain every worldly knowledge like science, maths, duties of each person like mother, father, king, public etc., to establish strong country and to discharge moral duties while following spiritualism too. The teachings of Vedas to Aryas/ Hindus were very well applicable and followed by all human beings up to Mahabhart war i.e., about 5300 years ago as the present sects were not originated at that time. Thereafter due to shock of death of most of the warriors in Mahabhart war people could not study and follow Vedic knowledge, the knowledge given by God direct at the time of creation.

    This all is clear from the study of Mahabhart epic and with the result mostly self made paths of worship were made. During Mahabhart Dhritrashtra who forcefully took the kingdom from his brother Pandu, was cunning fellow. Dhritrashtra/Duryodhan used to listen back-biting and wrong views from man named Kanakshastri. So Kanakshastri was accompanied by Duryodhan,Dushshashann, and Shakuni. Due to the result of hatred raised by group of above said Kanakshastri, with Pandavas, Mahabhart war took place and allwarriors met with death. The wiser Rishis like Vyas, Gemini, Vashampyan etc., were busy in their spiritual path and nobody paid attention towards Rishis being busy in war and result of the crucial war wherein all warriors and young men were met with death and only women and children or old women remained. They were shocked and did not make contact with Rishis and hence the eternal worship based on Vedas started to be removed and arrogant/ illiterate persons started making their own path. The universal monarchy came to an end and the kingdom was portioned into number ofsmaller kingdoms with separate kings. So the eternal knowledge of Vedas could not be experienced by the king as well as by the public and hence the blind faith started taking place. And the self made religion turned into business. The original knowledge of Vedas will have to be adopted again by the Hindus. Because all religious books like Valmiki Ramayan, BhagwatGeeta and shastras etc., which are being studied nowadays, have been written by ancient Rishis whose knowledge was based on Vedas and therefore it is not out of place to mention here that a philosopher of Vedas can only state the fact of said religious books and how a so called saint, who does not know Vedas, can truly explain the maters therein. Can a CharteredAccountant explain the philosophy of medical science, subject being different? The facts can only be known if we are able to study Vedas. So all Aryas/ Hindus will have to again follow the path of Vedas, to serve the society selflessly to dig out the corruption, injustice, insult of females, illusion, illiteracy etc., and thus to make India strong and to spread brotherhood all over the universe like the ancient time.

  22. Agniveer keep up with good job. I initially used to worship shivlinga. As providence has designed for me i picked up Astanga yoga and slowly – 2 i started to ponder thoughtfully about each and every thing. I agree with what agniveer, swami dayanand and all Yogis have said.Vedas are the divine voice of God. Rama < Hrishna were God realised Souls Follower of vedas.In India in temples we worship only Yogis who have achieved samadhi. But every brahmin does havan that i have observed.God never takes birth but when you start succeeeding in astang yoga sadhana he manifests in your heart at samadhi. Entire Knowledge of Geeta by krishna to arjuna is in a state of samadhi which tallies 100 % with vedas. To really know God you should get up at 4.00 clock in brahma muhurat and do astanga yoga sadhana, paying obeisance to rishis, God and Guru, asana, paranyam, naam jaap and meditation. slowly automatically faith on vedas will come. Further people must read patanjali yogasutras ( i have read written by swami ramswarup based on his experience of yoga sadhana), Autobiography of Yogi by paramhanasa yogananda(really wonderful), Chidaksha Gita (collection of preachings of Bhagwaan nityananda of ganeshpuri). All of them have clearly said God is formless, vedas are God's voice.

  23. RV 10.90.1

    सहस्रशीर्षा पुरुषः सहस्राक्षः सहस्रपात |
    सभूमिं विश्वतो वर्त्वात्यतिष्ठद दशाङगुलम ||

    This verse is referring to the head of purusha(shirsha), His yes(saksa), his feet(pata)

    This could be a form that is divine

    • Haridas

      You must understand the connotation of this hymn.

      If you are are adamant on the literal meaning , you would be faced with many challenges.

      to prove my point ..sample this (from the very same hymn you are quoting ) :Rig Veda 10.90.6

      यत पुरुषेण हविषा देवा यज्ञमतन्वत |
      वसन्तोस्यासीदाज्यं गरीष्म इध्मः शरद धविः ||

      If taken literally , this would mean that Purusha was sacrificial offering in the Yagya of the Devas !!

      do you really believe that purusha was the sacrificial goat of the devas?..:))

    • @Haridas
      Brother, we would like to know your background before further conversation. It seems you deliberately picked some verses, which have been misunderstood the most and you dont have any knowledge of Sanskrit as well. You even dont know that eyes are "Aksh" and not Saksa!

      So for further discussion, first let us know your background of Sanskrit, beliefs, and intentions. If you want to debate, lets do it. But before that, make it clear about what you believe. If you have simple queries, tell us about your Sanskrit knowledge so that we can deal you according to your level.

      Dhanyawad

  24. 2. Four original Mantra Samhitas are Apaurusheya. Branches and Brahmans created by humans are correct only to extent they comply with Vedas. These are human creations.

    But Rigveda 10.90.10 verse of Purusha suktham says that vedas(rig, sama and yajur) came from yagya performed for supreme purusha and arya samaj is saying there are apaurusheya how is this possible?

    Rig Veda 10.90.10

    तस्माद यज्ञात सर्वहुत रचः सामानि जज्ञिरे |
    छन्दांसिजज्ञिरे तस्माद यजुस्तस्मादजायत ||

    [b]
    Also the rig veda 10.90.1 talks about head and eyes of purusha(god) what does arya samaj say about it since you propose that eshwaar is formless and shapeless[/b]

    • @Haridas
      Namaste,
      Which word in the Mantra means "For Lord"? Mantra uses "Panchami Vibhakti" of Vyakaran, which means "from" and not "for". Thus "Tasmaat" means "from that". Regarding the word "Yajnaat", refer Shatpath Brahman, Nighantu, and Rigvedaadi Bhashya Bhumika, which have translated "Yajna" as Eeshvar [Yajno Vai Vishnuh]. Thus the Mantra says-"All the four Vedas have been created by Eeshvar ".

      In some places, sun and moon have been said to be the eyes of Purusha. But, this is just the poetic way to tell the vastness of Eeshvar in simple words. It has nothing to do with actual eyes, because many places, Vedas clearly state Eeshvar as Nirakar. One of such example is Yajurved 40:8, which clearly says Eeshvar as "Akaayam", which means no physical form or shape.

      Dhanyawad

      • @ Arya
        Namaste
        Could you please explain what is meant by "Yajno Vai Vishnuh" ? Is this is the same Vishnuh as the hindu god?
        Thank you very much.

      • @siva
        Namaste brother,
        Yajno Vai Vishnuh means-the creator of all including Vedas is Eeshvar. "Yajna" means an act done for the betterment of others. This "Srishti" is thus a "Yajna" of Eeshvar, since it has been created to help souls attain Moksha. So the meaning of above line becomes-"This Srishti and Vedas are His(Eeshvar's) Yajna (for the betterment of souls)".

        The word "Vishnu" comes from the Sanskrit Dhaatu "Vishlri"Vyaaptou", which means "omnipresent". Thus the definition of Vishnu in Sanskrit is as follws-
        "Veveshti Vyaapnoti Charaacharam Jagat S Vishnuh Paramaatma"
        Its meaning-"Being present in every living, non living and everywhere (omnipresent), Eeshvar is called Vishnu".

        There are not 2 or 3 or more Gods. There is just One. All Shiva, Vishnu, Brahma etc are His other names depending upon different qualities possessed by Him. Shiva name means "the one who blesses others", and Brahma means "The One, who after creating everything, makes available for the needy ". In this way, all other names too are "Gunavaachak" i.e. dependent on each quality of Eeshvar. But different qualities in Eeshvar does not make Him two or three or more. And what we see in photos of Shiva a person sitting in Kailash, Vishnu in sea, and Brahma with his four mouths is all inventions of Puranas. Vedas are very clear that Eeshvar has no physical form or boundary.

        Nobody in this world could ever show multiple Gods in Vedas. Everywhere in Vedas, Eeshvar comes as Single entity and Vachan used is "Ek Vachan". This is the biggest proof of Oneness of Eeshvar.

        I request everybody to read Satyarth Prakash by Swami Dayanand, specially its first chapter for those who think Vedas talk of multiple Gods.

        Dhanyawad

  25. I do agree that the Vedas are supreme and the other texts should be taken with more than a pinch of salt. ISKCON is a well-meaning institution but still propagates sectarianism. In lecture after lecture I've heard the swamijis talking of Shiva as demi-god and that only 'materialistic' people will worship any God other than Krishna..Such thoughts are Avaidika to me. Narayana Suktha says 'sa Shivah sa Harih Sendrah..' and Rudram says 'Rudraaya Vishnave..' There is absolutely no sectarianism in the Vedas..Another example is 'Thvam Yagnah Thvam VashatkaarasthavamIndrasthvamRudrasThvamVishnusThvamBrahmaThvamParjaapathih..' There are some Saivite people too who consider Vishnu as a demi-god..Such ideas are clearly not in conformity with the Vedas.

  26. Nice article …However i have a question here(seems to be out of context here)…we have a sacred thread and do Sandhyavandhana(chant Gayathri mantra) everyday…can you please give the significance of the same also what about the significance of performing yagnas?..isnt it rituals performed? You seem to give the most logical explaination ….My sincere request for you is to come up with an article on Gayatrimantra(since it is sold in the market as any other devotional song or music) and significance of Performing Yagnas…

  27. Nice article …However i have a question here(seems to be out of context here)…we have a sacred thread and do Sandhyavandhana(chant Gayathri mantra) everyday…can you please give the significance of the same also what about the significance of performing yagnas?..isnt it rituals performed? You seem to give the most logical explaination ….My sincere request for you is to come up with an article on Gayatrimantra(since it is sold in the market as any other devotional song or music) and significance of Performing Yagnas…
    Thanks for all the enlightening articles so far….

    • @brahmin
      Please read Satyarth Prakash by Swami Dayanand and find logical explanations to all. It is not necessary to chant Mantra vocally, it can be done in mind as well. Important is the thing that one should do it with understanding its true meaning in his/her heart. Understanding is more important than anything else. Yajna is performed to purify the environment and same time, it sows the seeds of "Idanna Mam", which means "nothing for me, everything for others", in the heart of performer of Yajna. The word "Yajna" itself means "for others". In this way, any work done for the betterment of others is called "Yajna". This is why, this "Srishti" is called "Yajna" of Eeshvar, by which He helps souls come out of Ajnaan and get ultimate bliss.

      Dhanyawad

  28. Many many thanks respected brother Arya ji.U have saved my great labour.One of my friend in england wanted the meaning of this mantra word by word, this morning., in hurry and panic I couldnt do any thing but write to you . Once again I thank you and your site.

  29. Nams
    Namste Agniveerji My intention is not to teach you something but just to explore more. I am fan of Mahrshi dayanand and his books.
    Meri bhavnaoko aap samjhake yahi aasha karta hu…

  30. Namaste AgniveerJi…Great Work…
    Each and every scriptures of aaryavrat which is having common things to Veda should be acceptible.
    In order to create good society we need this system. We are really far away from path of god. Just by having some saints or scholar of high level in our country we should not be proud that much because we have lakhs of people with so much illiteracy (I mean they don't know our great period of aaryavart).One Saint per lakhs of people is not sufficient to improve our india.We need each and everyone to have basic knowledge of health,worship and some social ethics.This is correctly explain in veda but language nowdays is difficult to underastand.We don't know sanskrit…Rashtrasant Tukdoji mahraj has written one granth called Gramgeeta which tells about system of village which is backbone of this universe. go to http://www.gramgeeta.org/
    Agniveerji I request you to go through this if you get free time.dhanyvad…

  31. namestey to all. Can any body give me a litrel translation of a mantra of yejurved:===Om Shanno Devirbhisteye Aappobhaventu………………etc. word by word. I will be thankful to him.

    • @shabdika
      Namaste sister. I give hindi translation by Swami Dayanand-

      (देवी आपः) सब का प्रकाशक, सब को आनंद देने वाला और सर्वव्यापक ईश्वर, (अभिष्टये) मनोवांछित आनंद के लिए, (पीतये) पूर्णानंद की प्राप्ति के लिए, (नः) हम को (शम) कल्याणकारी, (भवन्तु) हो, अर्थात हमारा कल्याण करे. और (नः) हम पर (शन्योः) सुख की (अभिस्रवन्तु) सर्वथा वृष्टि करे.

  32. @Arya
    Namaste Aryaji
    Thank you very much. I will purchase them.

    You are doing really excellent work. I have gone through most of all your comments and they are absolutely make these guys speachless and answerless.

    Really hats of to you bhai.

    Dhanyawad.

  33. Dear Agniveer ji,
    Nice Article.
    Thank you for making this wonderful website with added features (Agnisena).

    Yes, we all know that Vedas contain absolute truth.
    But the problem is, we do not have access to Vedas. Some of us including me live in villages of India. I do have access to internet and when searched, I could not found translation by Maharshi Dayanand Saraswati or any authentic Arya Samji Vedic translation. All those were of some Maxmuller or Griffith one.
    Some one wrote in comment that they are not the correct translation and hence not authentic. Do not read those translation.

    If you provide some links about where to buy Vedas of Authentic translation or online access to Vedas, it would be very great service for all of us.

    Please kindly think over it.

    Dhanyavaad.

  34. dear agniveer
    I accept vedas as divine. But i am having doubts about puranas. I have read shivpuran and heard some part of garud puran. The seems to be fairy tales rather than divine words.

    • Contrary to popular perceptions, Purans in most part are against Vedas. To find why, I simply recommend one to read original Purans like Shiva Puran or Brahmvaivart Puran that form the basis of visual Hindusim of today. If we have to survive and revive the golden era of wisdom, bliss and prosperity, we have to rise above the Purans and revive the original Vedic dharma.

      In general, any text is against Vedas and worth rejection if it has one or more of following:
      a. Birth-based discrimination in name of caste
      b. Denigration and inferior rights of women
      c. Vulgarity and immoral stories with graphic descriptions of love acts
      d. Have internal contradictions.
      e. Have stories of miracles and scientific errors that are clearly obvious
      f. Instill fear of Heaven or Hell if failed to perform some ritual
      g. Have stories of recent people like Victoria, Muhammad etc
      h. Insult our role models of being womenizers or non-exemplary characters

      • Birth based Varna system is Vedic and is even found in dharma shastras.

        rest of your stuff is all based on faulty understanding of scriptures.

      • @Ragu
        We pray Eeshvar that people like you, who have evil ideology of their foolish birth based caste superiority, get some brain and have some thinking capability in it.

        Stop claiming your Baba cult as Vedic and its books as Shastras. Books with such ill teachings towards our own brothers and sisters deserve to be thrown away.

        Give proof from Vedas in your support if you can.

      • @Arya

        I also pray that Shri Hari somehow make you braindead Arya Samajis to give some thinking capacity.

        Stop claiming your heretic cult to be Vedic and its false interpretations of Vedas as authentic. Such ill commentaries have which leads one away from Vedas will give only painful torment to your brothers and sisters. The commentaries on Brahma Sutras given by all major schools of Vedanta are unanimous in declaring birth based Varna system. It is your baba founder (dayananda) who made new inventions in interpreting Vedas.

        There is a saying, that when one misinterprets Vedic teachings, that person suffers a lot before his death. No wonder your founder had a painful death. Where was your imaginary Ishvar from your imaginary interpretation of Vedas?

        Why did Vedic Ishvara not protect your founder if only he gave the correct interpretation of Vedas? His painful death shows he is a fraud.

        vajasaneyi Samhita (Madyandina Shaka) 14:30

        navadaśábʰir astuvata śūdrāryā́v asr̥jyetām ahorātré ádʰipatnī āstām

        With nineteen they praised; Sûdra and Arya were created. the deities of day and night are the rulers.

        Note that Sudras are separately mentioned from Aryas (Vaishyas in this context). The term Aryas in Vedas is used for those are qualified for Vedic study.

        If Varna is NOT based on birth, why mention them separately as two categories of human beings? If a Shudra can become a Brahmana what is the point of this classification?

        Taittiriya Samhita 7:1:1:6

        pattá ekaviṁśáṃ nír amimīta
        tám anuṣṭúp cʰándaḥ
        ánv asr̥jyata vairājáṁ sā́ma śūdró manuṣyā́ṇām
        áśvaḥ paśūnā́m
        tásmāt táu bʰūtasaṃkrāmíṇāv áśvaś ca śūdráś ca
        tásmāc cʰūdró yajñé ‘navakḷptas
        ná hí devátā ánv ásr̥jyata
        tásmāt pā́dāv úpa jīvataḥ
        pattó hy ásr̥jyetām

        From His foot, He formed ekavimsa stoma. After it were created anushtup meter, the sAman called vairAja, of men the sUdras, of beasts the horse. Hence, these two, both the horse and sudras , are transporters of other creatures. Hence a Shudra is incapacitated for Yajnas, because no deities were created after ekavimsa. Hence too these two subsist by their feet, for they were created from the foot.

        Notice the verse says Sudras are NOT qualified for Yajnas. If it is NOT by birth, on what grounds the verses say sudras are NOT qualified, because this same shudra in the same birth can become a brahmana if it is not by birth. So Vedas disqualifying them shudras will become meaningless. This is enough for now.

      • @Ragu
        Anyone including Dayanand and Krishna cant violate Eshvar’s “Karm Phal Vyavastha”. Deeds done in previous births will always be cause of reward or punishment according to your Karma. But Ragu, if you say Dayanand suffered before his death, it is same with Krishna. He died because of an arrow of a hunter! Can you dare to think that Krishna was another misinterpreter of Vedas so that he suffered like Dayanand?

        You need to change your words! It is Dasyu and not Shudras who are not qualified for Yajnas. And People like you and your Baba Ji are Dasyus in true sense and you deserve to be bashed publicly.

      • @Arya,

        Where is it said Shri Krishna died? Can you show it from Mahabharatha? You cannot for I know it is NOT there. One who has no material body, whose Form is satchitananda and is eternal as per Mahabharatha cannot die. get your facts straight first.

        Dayananda was a heretic who misinterpreted Vedas. One who insults Vedas, our mother by misinterpreting and stealing them away from her husband (Vishnu alias Lord Krishna), deserves to suffer the most. You can see there are founders of other schools who dies early in life, because they insulted their mother by giving wrong interpretations.

        Second, Taittiriya Samhita (Krishna yajur Veda Samhita) is Vedas. Did you read the Sanskrit verse which explicitly says “tásmāc cʰūdró yajñé ‘navakḷptas”. It says Shudra, NOT dasyus. he same with Shukla yajur Veda…

        Now you dayananda baba followers will start giving meaningless arguments.

      • @Ragu
        1. So God can not die! But you claimed in one of your posts that God can do everything! You are trapped now. If God cant die, He is no more omnipotent. If He can die then it contradicts your statement!

        2. You are as foolish as your self proclaimed Babaji when you say those who die in younger age get the punishment of insulting Vedas. Do the soldiers, who at the age of 21-22 give their lives for motherland, also misinterpret Vedas?

      • Raghuramanji,

        I don’t have problems accepting Lord Krishna as God as i myself worship him, however you your nstupid comment of Swami Dayanand Saraswati dying an early death due to the so called misrepresentation of vedas doesn’t appeal to me …..COZ….i would request you to research on Prabhupad’s death as well!!! I am sure you know what i am talking about. I Just wanna know why almighty Lord Krishna didn’t take the form of Lord Narasimha at that time to protect such a great vaishnava..LO!

      • Namaste Agniveerji.

        I had asked a question in the comments but I did not get an answer. May be did not see my comment, so I am asking again.e I consider your website as being authentic Vedic knowledge and therefore I want to ask you only. My question is what is the meaning of the words Atharva Ved, Rig Ved, Sam Ved, Yajur Ved.

        I really love your site. Keep it up.

      • Namaste:

        Ved means knowledge. It has other meanings as well but this is the prominent meaning. Rig is actually Rik which becomes Rigved due to Sandhi rules. Rik has a deep meaning but basically used to denote worship or fundamental knowledge – basically true worship. Richa and Archana are derived from this.

        Yajuh has same root as Yaj dhatu of Yajna/ Yagya. It has three main meanings – charity, worship of noble ones and relevance. It denotes those noble actions which are beneficial for self and world.

        Saama means a state of peace or equanimity. Samatva or Samataa is from same root.

        Atharva means completely in control and without fluctuations. Sthirata. Depending on the main themes of each of the Vedas, these names are provided.

        I hope this would answer your questions.

        Dhanyavad
        Agni

  35. Spiritualism is necessarily however without knowing the truth by blind vakti is meaningless, the problem in our religion these days is too much bakti less scholarly thinking

    • The problem is, we have removed the layer b/w bhakti and bewkoofi and have mixed it like anything.

      This is the biggest prob with us!

  36. This is a scholarly presentation, no doubt. But spiritual knowledge cannot be understood by simply reading it. Access to such knowledge desires qualification apart from mundane scholarship (as stated elsewhere on this website). I think somewhere the essence is lost. These technical stuff will only help one to become hard-hearted & appear scholarly. It appeals to the intellect. But the heart is not transformed. It is lacking love. The finer & subtle qualities are readily visible in a person who practices genuine spirituality. That is missing.

    • As per vedas, emotions and intellect should be in same direction. Unless the direction be clarified through intellect, emotions would mislead. Any article or in fact greatest text for that matter can only show direction to intellect. Emotions have to be discovered through self-practice alone. One can build the road for us, but each one of us will have to walk ourselves.

  37. I am just curious to know more about arya smaj view on the ram and Krishna can you provide or suggest some article on this issue

  38. @amiya

    See, all Purans, and Mahabharat hence Geetha, were interpolated and corrupted, so today we dont have the original scriptures of these, so I am pretty sure in the original scriptures of Purans and Geetha, Shri Krishna never claimed Himself to be GOD.

      • @amiya

        namaste,

        See you have got to understand, that Geetha is a part of MahaBharat, so if MahaBharat is corrupted, there are high chances that the Geetha in there was also not spared. Besides no hindu scriptue EXCEPT VEDAS, had some coding mechanism to preserve its purity. For example, Vedas have the paath vidhi mechanism that will preserve Vedas forever without a single change. Unfortunetly, Upanishads, Puranas, MahaBharat, Ramayana, Geetha did not have some mechanism like this to protect their verses from corruption.

      • @amiya
        Mahabharat itself says that it originally contained 8800 Shlokas, then disciples of Vyas increased this number up to 24000. But now, over one lakh shlokas are part of Mahabharat!

      • @Raguraman
        What will you do if I give you the evidence? Will you stop believing in incarnation of God?

      • @Ragu
        First ensure me that you will not run away after seeing that shloka by saying it as another “Leela” of “almighty” Hari!

        Give proofs from Vedas if you have!

      • Gita is part of Mahabharat and Mahabharat is subject to huge amount of interpolations. What then prevents Geeta from changes? After all 700 shlokas when everyone was waiting for Krishna and Arjun to return to their side, looks implausible. That too with discussions on topics that have no relevance to battle.

        Instead of debating whether and what changed, we should accept or interpret Geeta to extent it is as per Vedas.

      • Do you people have any credible evidence that Gita was interpolated. Anybody can claim anything. Somebody may claim that Vedas were interpolated. That does NOT make it true. Gita being an important text, was copies were maintained by different schools and commented upon extensively.

        Had there been different version of Gita, then there would have been a ruccus between different schools. This is NOT the case with Puranas or other parts of Mahabharatha, where founders of different schools have rais4ed issue on the authenticity of different copies and have openly acknowledged interpolation of Puranic and even Mahabharatha (except Gita portion og mahabharatha).

        Careless and ridiculous conclusions are no evidence for your claims. Just because it does against your faulty understanding of Vewdic scriptuires it does NOT mean Gita is interpolated.

        There is way too much evidence all over Gita and Mahabharatha, Lord Krishna claiming to be God. One cannot say all these were interpolated, especially if there is no historical reference to different version of Gita anywhere.

      • @Ragu
        Point here is not which text is interpolated and which is not. Even if you claim a text to be free from all tampering, it alone does not make it authoritative. We firmly believe that whichever text is not in accordance with Vedas should not be taken as authority in the matters of principles. However, we believe Shri Krishna to be one of the greatest souls who were enlightened with Eeshvar’s true knowledge. He could not claim himself God, being a great devotee, as it is against Vedas.

      • @Arya,

        You can believe whatever you want, but when you make false claims you cannot provide any evidence…..You have NOT provided any evidence that Gita or Mahabharatha (in its essential teachings) are against Vedas in the first place.

        Second, Shri Krishna is God as per Gita and Mahabharatha, which is very much in agreement with Vedas. That being the case your points are rejected as your own imagination.

      • @Ragu
        You also did not give any proof that Mahabharat is the authority in first place! Show any Mantra of Vedas which says that Krishna is God?

      • @ Arya,

        1. Apastamba Paribhasa clearly says both Brahmanas (inlcudes Aranyajkas and Upanishads) and Samhitas are Vedas. It does NOT say this is true only for Taittiriya Samhita. I hope you people know that Taittiriya Samhita alias Krishna Yajur Veda is Veda.

        In none of the quotes provided, the author has shown anywhere that only Samhitas constitute Vedas. It is all his misinterpretation or fabricated lies.

        In addition there is NOT one historical evidence, anywhere in any vedic schools having historically considered only Samhitas as Vedas and that Brahmanas are NOT. Even Shankaracharya whose commentary was quoted proves that he considered Brahmanas as part of Vedas. Every known ancient school (except arya samaj) considers both Samhitas and Brahmanas as Vedas.

        Hence, the position that only Samhitas are Vedas is a concoction of Dayananda, the AS founder. Show me one another person having such an opinion.

        2. Read my post in the end, where I have clearly shown that Puranas and Brahmanas and itihaasas are three different texts as per Taittriya Aranyak 2.9 and Ashwalayan Grihyasutra 3.3.1.

        I have exposed clearly that the author Agniveer is liar.

        3. here is what Atharva Veda says…

        ŕ̥caḥ sā́māni cʰándāṃsi purāṇáṃ yájuṣā sahá /
        úccʰiṣṭāj jajñire sárve diví devā́ diviśrítaḥ //

        The riks and the sâmans, the metres, the ancient legends (purânam) together with the yagus, all gods in the heavens, founded upon heaven, were born of the ukkhishta.(Atharva Veda 11:7:24)

        Clearly Puranas (which is diifferent from brahmanas and itihaasas) are authority even as per Samhitas or mantras.

        Several Puranas (which is authenticated by Atharva Veda Samhita verse) contain references to Mahabharatha, authenticating this text.

        4. All over Brahmanas (includes Aranyakas and Upanishads) itihaasas and Puranas are said to authentic. Again note that Brahamanas differentiate Bramhmanas and puranas to be different texts.

        Thus Mahabharatha and even Puaranas are authentic texts as per Vedas.

        5. Vedas have references to avataras of Lord (Trivikrama avatara of Lord Vishnu). Check Vishnu Sukta of Rig Veda for example. Trini pada etc. Now yuo may interpret it as different, however Puranic interpretation of Vedas is authentic as puranas are authentic as per Vedas. end of story.

      • @Raguraman
        Where is the Mantra?

        Can you deny any of the biographies of any Tom Dick and Herry to be Itihaas or Puranas? What is the condition for a text to be called as Itihaas? Why are not Hadith of Muslims Itihaas?

      • @Ragu
        I have proof from Vedas that only Rig, Yaju, Sam, Atharva are Vedas. If you can give proofs from Vedas in your claims, why dont you do that?

        Which history you are talking about? Can you give me just names of 18 Puranas written in Brahman or Aranyaks? Your hatred towards Shankaracharya and Dayanand is clearly visible in your comments. I know your Babaji had this idiotic philosophy for those saints who saved Dharma to the best of their abilities. Your Babaji seems to be an Arabic or Jerusalem agent and not a Vedic scholar!

        So now you admit that “critical editions” of Mahabharat are available! Interestingly, just 2-3 days before, I think it were you, who was asking me for the proofs for the same!

    • that is a baseless assumption my friend. first produce 2 completely different version of bhagwad gita in its original form(sanskrit) belonging to different time periods then claim what u just claimed.

  39. Hi Mr. Agni,
    Could U pls tell why did THe Great Sage Vyas wrote in Bhagabat Puran and in Mahabharat that KRISHNA is the supreme Lord.
    did not he have proper knowledge about Vedas.

    • There is no evidence of Rishi Vyas writing Bhagwat or 18 Purans except claims by these Purans themselves. Perhaps, when these Purans were being written (which continued till late 19th century), Rishi Vyas was a tall figure of knowledge. So the writers attributed these Purans to him to have credibility.

      Many things in these Purans are against Vedas and vulgar. So much that publishers like Geeta Press do not even publish complete purans and only print abridged versions.

      We can analyze Purans sometime later, but unlike Vedas, there is no way to claim that whatever is written in Purans is indeed true. Purans themselves call Vedas the supreme.

      So Purans are acceptable only to extent they comply with Vedas. Rest has to be rejected.

      Same is the case with Mahabharat. This book has had significant adulterations over time.

      • Thanks Agni for ur trying to answer . But it made me laugh when u said that there is no proof that Vyas Dev wrote Bhagavat Puran and Mahabharat.
        I dont get why except Dayananada and his Arya samaj, all the Great Saints and Vedic scholars believe in Avatarism. Why GOD gave the true knowledge ( acc 2 U) only to Dayanandas. lol

      • Kindly read Nirnay ke Tat Par 4 volumes available from Amarswami Prakashan, Ghaziabad which contains huge number of such debates. If you can arrange a debate with ISKCON, we would be willing to participate. However that should be based on mutual compassion and willingness to learn rather than war of mindsets.

      • While we are ready to debate anyone, we do not proactively attempt to debate those cults who are based on precepts of tolerance and compassion. This is common with Vedic foundation and hence any discussions with them would be akin to those we have in our own families.

        Our larger concern currently are those cults who claim that only they are true, and those who refuse to agree to this shall be cursed in Hell forever. They form the real threat to humanity and hence our number one priority.

      • I understand . I appretiate ur effort of Nirakar BRAHMA. but dont agree when u deny the supreme LORD SRI KRISHNA.
        I am not even a member of ISKCON.
        thnks

      • @amiya
        Sister, Vedas say Eeshvar never incarnates. One, who was born, can not be Eeshvar. Shri Krishna was a great soul and he himself used to meditate. It proves he was a great devotee of Eeshvar but not Eeshvar himself.

      • Dear brother,

        Who ever told you people that avatar means “incarnation”? This is a misleading misnomer. Mahabharatha clearly says neither Lord Krishna nor Lord Rama have material bodies or that they were born to any other being.

        acred-texts.com/hin/m03/m03099.htm

        “Lomasa said, ‘Listen, O king, to the history of Rama (the son of Dasaratha) and Rama of Bhrigu’s line gifted with intelligence. For the destruction of Ravana, O king, Vishnu, in His own body, took His birth as the son of illustrious Dasaratha.

        sacred-texts.com/hin/m05/m05070.htm

        “Sanjaya said, ‘The auspicious names (of Kesava or Krishna) have been previously heard by me…………..

        In the list of names of Lord krishna the following is said…

        sub.uni-goettingen.de/ebene_1/fiindolo/gretil/1_sanskr/2_epic/mbh/mbh_05_u.htm

        05,068.008a na jāyate janitryāṃ yad ajas tasmād anīkajit

        Literal: Not (na) born (is jāyate) from any being (janitryāṃ, mother or father), that (yad, Krishna) unborn (aja), therefore (tasmAd) unconquerable (anIkajit).

        Garuda Purana

        sub.uni-goettingen.de/ebene_1/fiindolo/gretil/1_sanskr/3_purana/garup3_u.htm

        tadrūpamāhuḥ prākṛtaṃ vai tadajñā hyandhaṃ tamaḥ praviśantyeva sarve // GarP_3,3.2 //

        Those who consider that Form (of Lord Vishnu) to be indeed material, such knowers certainly enter pitch darkness.

        avatārā mahāviṣṇoḥ sarve pūrṇāḥ prakīrtitāḥ / pūrṇaṃ ca tatparaṃ rūpaṃ pūrṇātpūrṇāḥ samudgatāḥ // GarP_3,3.3 //

        All avatars of viSNu are perfect and complete (having no tinge of material association). Perfect is that supreme Form. Perfection begets perfection.

        Lord Krishna meditates on Himself ONLY.

      • @Ragu
        If Shri Krishna etc did not have material bodies, how could other people see, talk, fight, and love them? Were other people also divine to appreciate their divine form?

        Does God need meditation? How can one meditate on self?

      • @Arya

        First read all my posts. I cannot repeat myself again and again. God is all powerful and can make His Form visible, audible etc. Again when He wills He can make His Form invisible, His voice inaudible etc.

        Lord does Sandhya vandanam and other duties to set an example, NOT to gain anything from it. As I said before, Sandhya is name of Ishvara alias Lord Krishna, so even when Lord Krishna does such things, He meditates only on Himself as said in Mahabharatha quoted below in another post.

        O Arjuna, there is nothing in the three worlds (earth, heaven, and the upper regions) that should be done by Me, nor there is anything unobtained that I should obtain, yet I engage in action. (3.22)

        Because, if I do not engage in action relentlessly, O Arjuna, people would follow My path in every way. (3.23)

        These worlds would perish if I do not work, and I shall be the cause of confusion and destruction of all these people. (3.24)

      • @Ragu
        Eeshvar can do anything according to you. So he can make you dumb (which He seem to have done!) and thus your all talks need not to be taken seriously!

        Cant Eeshvar have difficulties to meditate on Himself if He can do anything? He may want to have difficulties sometimes!

      • 1. If you have evidences that Vyas wrote Bhagvat kindly share with us all.

        2. More scholars of world believe in Islam and Christianity and Atheism today, than Avtarism. By this number logic, then Islam and Christianity should be true.

        3. Kindly list names of scholars and saints and books of ancient times that talk about Avtarism. Let us refer to 10 Upanishads, Brahmans, Aranyaks, Vedas, Upavedas, Darshans – the oldest ones and figure out how many give graphic description of Avtars, their method of worship, their clothes, their stories etc.

        4. fact is that Dayanand simply presented the wisdom of these oldest texts in simple format. God gave true knowledge to everyone. Only for a short period in recent history did this Avtarism emerge due to breakdown of Vedic order and creation of new 18 Purans.

      • Thnks again Mr. Agni.
        1.How can u prove anything that was written more than 5000 years ago. If this is the case then can u prove that Vedas was from GOD.
        2. i did not talk about number logic . All I was saying that the religion that had been practiced from millions of years how come nobody understod the real meaning of it.
        3. Satya Yuga VRigu MUni, Narada Muni, Treta yoga Balmiki Muni, Dyapar Yuga Vyasa muni and Kali yoga ………..( except Arya)

      • @amiya
        1. Sister, if you dont believe in any book before 5000 years ago, then you have to reject Ramayan, Brahmin texts, Upanishads as well. Have you ever questioned these books? Please read Satyarth Prakash by Swami Dayanand to know, why Vedas alone are from God. In short, all the Rishis and great souls Yogi have accepted Vedas to be ultimate. Vedas are only book, which qualify on scientific, logical, and moral grounds.
        2. Truthfulness is said to be one of the tenth Lakshana of Dharm. Sister, how many people, do you think, are really truthful in their lives? Is it that Truth is not Dharma because it is not practiced by most of the people for most of the times?
        3. Vedas, Brahma, Manu, Kapil, Kanad, Vyaas, Jaimini, Patanjali, Gautam, Valmiki, Ram, Krishna, Yajnavalkya, Dayanand, etc have called God to be unborn.

        Dhanyawad

      • @ arya
        I m a male. u said Vedas R v books. Is it really? I thought Vedas means Knowledge, which is not limited to four Samhitas. If it would be the case then why Vedas ( 4 Samhitas) never talked about Reincarnation and u people believe in that.
        Could U pls show me a single proof that SRI KRISHNA ever meditated or worshipped to somebody.
        HARI BOL

      • @amiya
        Dear brother,
        1. It is very sad that people dont read Vedas. Vedas are the origin of every true concept of philosophy. Please refer to Rigved 10/59/6,7 Yajurved 4/15
        Atharvaved 7/6/67/1. These are just few examples out of many in Vedas, where reincarnation has been mentioned clearly.
        2. Please see Udyog Parv 82-21 of Mahabharat (in other edition, it is given as 84-21)
        अवतीर्य रथात्तूर्णं कृत्वा शौचम् यथा विधि
        रथमोचनमादिश्य संध्यामुपविवेश ह II

        In this Shloka, Shri Krishna did Sandhya, which means worshipping Eeshvar through meditation.

        Dhanyawad

      • Lord Krishna mentone in Gita why He performs duties like an ordinary person. Even when He meditates, Sandhya (is a name of Lord Narayana or Lord krishna Himself). All names refer to Lord Hari only.

        O Arjuna, there is nothing in the three worlds (earth, heaven, and the upper regions) that should be done by Me, nor there is anything unobtained that I should obtain, yet I engage in action. (3.22)

        Because, if I do not engage in action relentlessly, O Arjuna, people would follow My path in every way. (3.23)

        These worlds would perish if I do not work, and I shall be the cause of confusion and destruction of all these people. (3.24)

      • Mahabharata, Shanti Parva (12.328.5 onwards, dialogue between Lord Krishna and Arjuna):

        brAhme rAtrikShaye prApte tasya hy amitatejasaH prasAdAtprAdurabhavatpadmaM padmanibhekShaNa tatra brahmA samabhavatsa tasyaiva prasAdajaH

        In the brahma muhurta, at the end of the night, due to the mercy of the extremely brilliant Lord, a lotus emerged from His navel and in that lotus, Brahma was born, ofcourse, due to His grace.

        ahnaH kShaye lalAtAchcha suto devasya vai tathA krodhAviShTasya sa~njaGYe rudraH saMhAra kArakaH etau dvau vibudhashreShThau prasAdakrodhajau smR^itau

        At the end of the day, the Lord [present as antaryAmi of Brahma *] created Rudra out of krodha-guna, to enable him to be the ‘samhara-karta’. Thus, these two ‘fine-among-wise’, Brahma and Rudra, are known to have been born out of grace and anger respectively.

        * This interpretation is necessary because in the later sections of Moksadharma, Brahma addresses Rudra as a son.

        tadAdeshita panthAnau sR^iShTi saMhAra kArakau nimittamAtraM tAvatra sarvaprAni varapradau

        Thus, they carry out the instructed tasks of creation and destruction. However, they, the givers of boons to all the creatures, are just the agents.

        kapardI jatilo mundaH shmashAnagR^ihasevakaH ugravratadharo rudro yogI tripuradAruNaH dakShakratuharashchaiva bhaga netraharastathA

        [Rudra has] braided hair with knot of an ascetic and rest of the head bald. He dwells in the home of graveyard, steadfast on vigorous penance as a yogi. He is ferocious to Tripurasuras, destroyed Daksayajna and took away the eyes of Bhaga.

        nArAyaNAtmako GYeyaH pANDaveya yuge yuge
        O Arjuna, know that in every yuga, Rudra is ‘nArAyaNAtmaka’. (This phrase can mean: one whose indweller is Narayana, one who is always immersed in Narayana.)

        tasmin hi pUjyamAne vai devadeve maheshvare sampUjito bhavetpArtha devo nArAyaNaH prabhuH

        It is the Lord, the prabhu, the Narayana *IN* Maheshvara (the worshipable, the lord of the devas), who is actually worshiped.

        ahamAtmA hi lokAnAM vishvAnAM pANDunandana tasmAdAtmAnamevAgre rudraM sampUjayAmyaham yadyahaM nArchayeyaM vai IshAnaM varadaM shivam AtmAnaM nArchayetkashchiditi me bhAvitaM manaH

        O son of Pandu, I am, indeed, the Atma, the indweller of this universe and the worlds. Therefore, I worship myself first, even when I worship Rudra. If I did not worship Rudra, the bestower of boons, in such a way (i.e., worshiping the indwelling Lord first), some would not worship Me, the indwelling Lord, at all – this is my opinion.

        mayA pramANaM hi kR^itaM lokaH samanuvartate pramAnAni hi pUjyAni tatastaM pUjayAmyaham
        Whatever I follow and give due worth as a pramaNa, the world follows that. Such pramanas have to be duly followed; therefore I follow them.

        yastaM vetti sa mAM vetti yo.anu taM sa hi mAm anu rudro nArAyaNashchaiva sattvamekaM dvidhAkR^itam loke charati kaunteya vyakti sthaM sarvakarmasu

        Whoever knows him, knows Me. Whoever follows him, follows Me. (Though) the world, in all its actions, worships two gods, Rudra and Narayana, it is actually one only who is worshiped.

        na hi me kenachid deyo varaH pANDavanandana iti sa~ncintya manasA purANaM vishvamIshvaram putrArthaM ArAdhitavAn AtmAnaM aham AtmanA

        O Son of Pandu, there is, of course, nobody who can grant Me boons. Knowing that well, I worhip Myself, Who am the beginningless and universal power, known as Sarveshvara, for the sake of getting sons.

        na hi viShNuH pranamati kasmai chidvibudhAya tu R^ita AtmAnameveti tato rudraM bhajAmyaham

        Indeed Vishnu does not bow to any one and [even when He bows to Himself], for what sake, but for the sake of showing the path to the wise. Therefore, it is the truth that I worship myself even when I worship Rudra.

      • @Raguraman
        Sandhya is a “Kriya” and not “Karta” in the above verse. Sandhya does not mean Krishna. Hari is not the name of God in first place.

        Vedas are ultimate and rest all texts are to be checked under the light of Vedas. Anything against Vedas cant be accepted. Vedas clearly state that Eeshvar does not incarnate.

      • @Arya

        First know what Sandhya vandanam is? Sandhya is the name of Shri Hari alias Lord Krishna. Lord Krishna is indeed God of the Vedas. Avatar is NOT incarnation, but Lord comes as He is. You Arya Samajis (including your ignorant founder) have no idea what Vedas say in the first place.

      • @Ragu
        Sandhya is “Kriya” and not “Karta”, I have told you earlier. Get some basic knowledge of Sanskrit and then think of any discussion on Vedas. There is not even a single Mantra of Vedas which talk about Shri Krishna, forget about He being God or not!

        I challenge you to show a single such Mantra and if you could, I shall accept that Dayanand was ignorant. But if you cant give such verse then better never comment here again.

      • Ragu,

        People like you are responsible for the slavery of Our beloved Bharat. You killed our Maharishi Dayanand when you could not debate with Him.

        Sanjeev

      • Ragu ji i am not arya samaji but i respect Mahrishi very much. I follow vivekananda and sri asharam bapu ji . I think u himself not know in reality the meaning of Incarnation.Read vedanta carefully and follow it .Read about the last stage of yoga and nirvikalp samadhi…after that u will be able to know the reality of Incarnation.
        Do,t say any thing like that about mahrishi he is the pride of hindusism like vevekananda

      • @abhya

        How dare you put Swami Vivekananda and the Sinner Asharam in the same league.

        You may have been blinded by faith not to see on national television how this baba was happy to protect criminals in his ashram..but I AM NOT!

        The idiot and his supporters need to be spanked in public

      • As I said, I am a young Neuro-Scientist so would like to let you know that there are similarities between Ved writing and a Text book writing of today. I explain you how: Rishi were involved in doing research for more than 4 lakh years and every Rishi was a scientist with his fellow students doing their PhD degree, their research were added and compiled up in the Veda from time to time with some advancement and produced in front of public as an advanced edition. Same thing happens in now a days science. New discoveries and research gets place in text book and we get books of some advance edditions having more updated and added knowledge. Man…. Ved are the real science.
        Angniveer ji, kindly provide me some shashtra from where I can find knowledge for medicine specially on Human brain disease and Neuro-science. and I am facinated with Vaimanik Shashtra by Rishi Bharadwaj. I would love to look at Air-spacecraft designs of ancient times. I am very much allured by videos on youtube about Viman of ancient times.
        Naman.

    • the oldest of all vedas is rigveda which speaks highly of shiva and many names have been given to him in that. lets do some children maths.
      lets assume shiva=a.
      one of the name given to shiva is vishnu and lets vishnu=b.
      so a=b—–>b=a.
      lets say krsna=c, krsna is the avatar of vishnu so thus
      b—–>c or b=c or c=b.
      so if a(shiva)=b(vishnu) and b(vishnu)=c(krsna) then
      a=c—>shiva=vishnu=krsna.
      further
      krsna means the “black one”
      shiva the destroyer is “the black one” as stated in linga and shiva purana when vishnu&brahma had a debate about their superiority shiva appears in a black cylinderical shape with infinite lengths and breadth which vishnu or brahma fails to see and then shiva reveals the gayathri mantra stating that we all are the one source but 3 forms.
      hence if you are worshipping shiva or vishnu or krsna you are actually worshipping all so there is nothing wrong in shaivas claiming shiva is the supreme or the vaishnavas claiming krsna=vishnu is the supreme since they are the same. Further it is also stated in puranas that vishnu asks shiva to let him be the highest shaiva and in joy shiva himself becomes the highest vaishnava.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here