Hadis Notes on The (Rig)Vedas Background on the Vedas: The Rigveda is one of 4 Vedas: besides it there is the Samaveda,

Yajurveda, and Atharva Veda (AE). Now these texts, along with other major texts like the Upanishads, the Bhagavad Gita, the Mahabharata, the Ramayana, and other works, are considered the foundational texts of many modern Indian religions, including Hinduism (and are accepted, although not absolutely, in Indian Buddhism and Jainism), though they vary in the degree to which they are considered canonical. (ISKCON) A distinction is made between texts Shruti (heard) and Smriti (remembered). Shruti is generally considered more canonical (ISKCON) and the Rigveda belongs to this group. From their composition, they remained known only to the religious in India, and unknown to the West; one of the most important critics of the Vedas was Sayana in the 1500s. When the West finally discovered the Vedas in the age of Victorian scholarship and empire, Professor Max Mueller based the first English translation and commentary on the collection and commentary of Sayana (Modak), although Ghose argues that this was a big mistake, and in fact the combined misinterpretation of Sayana and Western thinkers in reaction to this resulted in a dismissal of the texts as of a barbaric civilzation. (Ghose) Some thinkers, such as the Hindu revivalist Swami Dayananda, reinterpreted the original Vedas, reading them symbolically and mystically, even, seeminglycontradictorily, reading monotheism. (Dayandanda) The Rigveda is divided into 10 Mandalas (ie books). Though the Vedas are considered to be divinely inspired, they were composed by rsi (or rishis) who sometimes inherited the role over a long period, Talageris historical analysis is able to pin down most of the familial authors of the Mandalas (Talageri, 21-35). In the Rigveda, the rishis seem to be concerned with concerned with a mixture of historical and mythical narrative; the text is organized as hymns to various gods, heroes, or concepts, but in terms of content it is comparable in scope and in human-god interaction (after a long period before mans creation) with Greek mythology. You may note that the concept of a divinely inspired message being heard yet then written down by humans does not seem to far off from the other creation myths weve looked at, ie Islam. Mandala X, from which the passages we read came, spends a lot of time giving an account of the creation of the world. Strong linguistic evidence (Talageri, 36) seems to suggest that this Mandala was composed later than the other Mandalas (Ibid., 25). Overall, a conservative estimate suggests that the total period of the [composition of the] Rigveda must have covered a period of at least two millenniums. (Ibid., 78)

Interestingly, while the authors of other 9 Mandalas seem to be identifiable, at least in terms of family names, The Ascription of hymns in this Mandala [X] is so chaotic that in most of the hymns the names, or the patronymics/epithets, or both, of the composers, are fictitious. The family identity of the composers is a total mystery. (Ibid., 49) Interesting Historical Note: The Aryan Invasion Theory For a long time, the Aryan Invasion Theory proposed a distinction between the Indus Valley Civilization existing before the Vedas, ie Mohenjo Daro and Harrapa and the other cities that exist from the earliest times, and that of Vedic and thus Hindu culture along ethnic and linguistic lines. As many of you may know, the IndoEuropean language family works very well with linguistic evidence, indicating the relation of Sanskrit to languages like Old Persian and Latin, and thus the interrelation of all the resulting language. But linguistics cannot in itself prove the ethnic background to such claims. It is thus that the stipulation of an Aryan race that spread out from a homeland somewhere in West-Central Asia or the Caucasus, invading violently to conquer the Dravidian (native) Indians as well as the pre-Indic European tribes has been made by Western Scholars. Much debate has gone on about this, and it is not certain that it will ever be fully resolved, though the consensus seems to be swinging against it. Dahiya provides some interesting evidence for it, including the accounts (necessarily taken as at least semi-historical) of the Rig Veda of great war, and ethnic differences between the Aryans [who] were very proud of their long noses and white complexions and the darker complexioned Dasas [they called] as Black. (Dahiya 16) Cultural and language differences between the populations described in the epic add to this (Ibid. 14-16). Yet this evidence rests on historicity of something we are taking to be at least semimythical. Between this fact, the evidence that Dahiya presents against the hypothesis later in the book (including linguistic evidence and cultural comparison), as well as Talageris early chronological dating of the composition of the Rigveda in The Rigveda: A Historical Analysis and his geographical and linguistic work in The Aryan Invasion Theory: A Reappraisal give a swift and strong rebuttal of the Invasion Theory and suggest very convincingly that there was no such invasion. Whatever migration took place seems to have occurred rather in peaceful waves, and the possibility exists, as Talageri explores, that in fact the Indus Civilization of Mohenjo Daro and Harrapa are one and the same as the Vedic civilization. An Alternate Translation and Interpretation Ghosh, mentioned above, has put together a modern edition of explanations of some of the Rigvedic hymns for the layman. Ghosh does have an agenda- according to him, much of the initial work and subsequently influenced work in the West that has been done on the Vedas has been fundamentally flawed and mistranslated. It has been used to dismiss the Vedas as primitive and barbaric, demanding ritual sacrifice

and promoting immoral values. Ghosh argues that this is soley due to mistakes of the translators, and in fact the true reading (known to the Indian religions) is one of sublime wisdom, fundamental knowledge about the universe, what seems to be essentially monotheism, and a dearth of all the practice that Mueller and later scholars seemed to deride. It is true, however, that Ghosh is not unbiased; and indeed, he tries very hard to make sure the Vedas are compatible with modern science (he mentions Electromagnetism and the Big Bang, as well as modern biology, as explicitly compatible), and so its not entirely clear to me how certain his work is. Yet in any case, I am inclined to ascribe more credence to it than the work the Western translators, especially given that the work seems to receive a lot more meaning and a lot less new-age (sounding) vagueness when this is done. Interesting additions to the readings from Ghoshs interpretation: 129.1: Ghosh reads several lines that differ from the version we have: neither particles of matter nor a protector in the far beyond which could protect those. It is surprising what was it that came along and provided a cover (binding) and what was that power in the depth of deep space which later provided protection (happiness) for a ll. Ghosh interprets this as an immense potential force being described here --- a power that is evidently there and yet not perceptible. This is the almighty power that is the cause of all creation and the source of all happiness (704). Ghoshs translation and interpretation (perhaps selected from a different compilation of the text?) maintains the quizzical attitude of the Doniger Edition, yet it adds the suggestion of a higher power- God- that gives little more direction to the narrative and perhaps limits the interpretation as fully as Donigers edition would have it. 129.2 Ghoshs edition contiues similarly to Donigers, but the original addition of the being makes the introduction of that one less puzzling. 129.4 The desire of Donigers text is explicitly expressed as this desire to expel that vital energy (Heat). (707) 129.5 The cord is identified as the ray of those (particles of Heat issuing from knowledge) in Ghosh. 129.6 Ghoshs text differs significantly- he does not mention the gods, perhaps in accordance with his modern interpretation, but mentions instead the phenomena of lights sliding far away as time passing- evocative of light receding, a familiar concept to cosmology. 129.7 Ghoshs text agrees.

121: Ghoshs main point is that Western translators somehow have failed to capture the sublime thoughts expressed so rationally in this hymn the early thinkers. Tried to locate the ultimate cause of all that exists and the ultimate origin of life. (681) Rather than taking Who (Ka) is the name of the creator, as Doniger follows (in the tradition of the work of Max Mueller) Ghosh says that it is Kah or what? [that is] the normal query with which every scientific mind begins its investigation. (681) 121.1 Ghoshs golden embryo is much more concrete (and less Star Child a la Space Odyssey): In the beginning knowledge in the form of a dazzling seed was stored in a covered=up cell, and it was the one single master force that produced all living beings (integrated matter). That force held the sky (mind) and earth (matter) together, as well as all that is seen here. Hence, for what other light (of knowledge) we must direct all our invocations. (683) The word gold is rather translated as dazzling the glittering quality implies zigzaggin or a vibratory nature similar to the vibrations of sound and light waves. Elsewhere In this Veda, sound has been identified as the bearer of cosmic intelligence which, when coming into contact with inert matter, rattles it, infusing consciousness into it. This is the true origin of life on earth. (683) This is clearly a very, very, different take on it than Donigers (or Muellers, for that matter). 121.2 The answer to the question ending 121.1 in Doniger is the same as the subject of this line in Ghosh- but rather than an external God, it is the bestower of each individual identity and the bestower of its vitality, whose existence within the body remains a distinguishing feature of the dwelling (integrated body), whose lights (in the senses) and whose reflection (in the mind) provide guidance and whose presence and departure (death) are equally immortal; to that light therefore, we must send our invocation. (684) Ghosh interprets this as a sort of universal consciousness that exists within us all which is more explicit, if not fundamentally different, than the god presented in Doniger. 121.3 The connotation is Ghosh is different, although the general expression is the same with different phrasing. Essentially it is not about king hood but becoming a shining one- goodness, exemplary ideal, or perhaps inspiration, rather than the connotation of power or ruler. 121.4 Once more, wild divergence. That whose particles, seemingly so misty (minute), attain such greatness, whose collective entity reverberates through space, whose particles, like arms extended, spread out in all directionsfor that light alone let our invocations be addressed. 121.5 Similar. 121.6 Initially the same (though lacking of metaphor), but with the addition of the one above being where a wise man goes to be illumined.

121.7 Im not sure if they use the same source text here. Ghosh reads: Indeed, it is That One which is invisible but which brings the vital energy into the womb, holding it on and then producing those creatures; it is That One which pervades the universe and with That One alone then the knowledge-endowed lights of intelligence, remain there. For that light, therefore, let us send forth our invocations. (688) It may be the difference in fire vs. intelligence and womb vs. embryo, etc. 121.8 This is different in two respects: Ghosh uses light of all lights instead of god among all the gods; and the tone is different. Ghosh has this verse in the 1st person: This thought of mine [ie the rishi] which had disappeared for surveying the beyond and had faded by expanding And Ghosh interprets this as a hymn to the universal intelligence rather than god. (687-689) 121.9 Completely different. Rather than the fear expressed in Doniger, with the exhortation that Let him not harm us, Ghoshs rishi asks May That One destroy the thoughts produced in our mind for material pleasures only and generate instead thoughts with the attributes of knowledge of the reality. Let the glow of that vast invisible One be reflected in our produced thoughts. Our invocations must be for That Light alone. (689) 121.10 There is similarity here, but the tone is different. Rather than merely embrac[ing] all these creatures (Doniger), Ghosh has that one, that intelligence having, by pervading (fading away), as it were, all around in the universe it is you who became the created onesindeed, you are not different from those. (690) So the fundamental externality present in Doniger is replaced with a complete unity. Thus rather than asking Grant us the desires Let us be lords of riches in Doniger, which is a particular aspect of Western translations that Ghosh considers completely wrong and used to falsely malign the Vedas, Ghosh reads: Whatever desiresthe evil ones among themwe carry in our mind and body and cherish as our valued possessions, may those now reflect with your great light! (690) This is clearly a very different request than asking for riches- in fact, it is essentially the complete opposite one. 90: Ghosh takes a very, very different take on this hymn: The word purusa (pura= before +usas=dawn), misinterpreted by some Western translators as primeval giant, is actually a reference to the ultimate source from where the almighty power of intelligence has emanated and spread out into various modes perceived as natural phenomena. (660). Such an interpretation certainly rings more compatible with science. And I am inclined to give credence to the Indian translating his own text rather than Westerners whose scholarship, while no doubt rigorous and earnest, does not stem from the same tradition of thousands of year, and face an inexorable gulf of cultural understanding of thousands years worth of linguistic and social evolution. Yet at the same time, Ghosh does come from a perspective of correction if not revisionism, and the pressures of science in the modern world is not unlikely to be felt in ways that may bias the interpretation of the text.

90.1 Ghosh reads Purusa (creator of universe) is topped by a thousand (innumerable) rays, each carrying innumerable particles of energy that keep flying all round (in innumerable directions). Coming down to earth and while staying here, it (Purusa) uses its ten modes to span all by spreading over vastly everywhere. (661) This certainly sounds like a more symbolic or at least less easily dismissable interpretation. 90.3 Ghosh does not have a quarter and three quarters, but rather a ray and other rays. Instead of heaven, read space. 90.4 Ghosh notes that the fed and the unfed refers to body and soul, the one nourished with food and the other existing by itself. If this is indeed a correct interpretation, it really elucidates a phrase which seems essentially meaningless in Doniger. The next verses diverge wildly with Donigers edition. Where Doniger translates Viraj as The active female creative principle and a God of some sort, Ghosh lists the word in the vocabulary source as vi-raja: afar, very much --- brilliance, shine (raj = to dazzle). At this point, Ghoshs edition describes the terrifc sound and intense light which dispersed exceedingly afar, and later those permeated inside the physical body(664). In the ongoing interpretation Ghosh makes of concepts like Sound, light, heat, and others referred to by Agni (translated as a mere deity of these things by Western scholars) as this sound that rattles inert matter and instills consciousness into it. The heat is a divine heat that grants life. Then creation continues with the season, natural phenomena, the bestowment of sense-organ to man and animals, and the instilling of knowledge, which separates man from animals. (665-673)

Sources: Dayananda, Swami. Satyarth Prakash: The Light of Truth. Dahiya, B.S. Aryan Tribes and the Rig Veda- A Search for Identity. Ghosh, Shyam. Rgveda for the Layman. Modak, Sahitya Akademi. Sayana, Volume 203. Talageri, Shrikant. The Rig Veda: A Historical Analysis. Talgeri, Shrikant. The Aryan Invasion Theory: A Reappraisal.