Asura in the Rigveda
rniyengar
I read with interest the discussion on the word Asura in another post.
I am presenting here some of my views on this issue. In my humble
opinion proper understanding of the words "deva and asura" in the
Vedic texts is important for appreciating the origins of astronomy in
our country.
Who are Asuras or what is the meaning of this word in RV is an
interesting question for a variety of reasons. W.E.Hale has a book on
the topic which is his Ph.D thesis from Harvard.
The word and its derivatives occur more than eighty times in RV. My
interest was to understand Asura in relation to Deva in RV. The two
are like the two faces of the same coin. My arguments in brief are as
follows:
In RV the word Sura is not used. Hence the equation deva=sura is a
later mathematical type development since deva and asura were
opponents in the earliest layers of RV. Deva is derived from div to
shine, these were the celestial luminaries mainly the nakshatras (deva
grihaavai nakshatraaNi Tai.Br. ). Quite intriguingly in many places
Shining objects are also qualified as Asura. For example in 3.3.4;
4.2.5 Agni is called asura. As is well known VaruNa is also asura. In
some places Indra is asura. Hence asura was not a pejorative word till
something special happened. The clue is with Maruts who are also
asurah. SayaNa in most of the places accepts the derivation of the
word from asu kshepaNe = to throw, to put, to keep. The action of the
Maruts was to throw stones at earth. They in fact killed Prajapati’s
creation once. Please see:
Tai. Br. (1.6.2.2 -3-4) : Samvatsaro vai prajāpatih|
samvatsarenaivāsmai prajāh prājanayat| tāh. Prajā jātā maruto’ghnan
asmānapi na prāyuksateti| sa etam prajāpatirmārutam
saptakapālamapaśyat| | Yāh pūrvāh prajāh asrksī| marutastā
avadhisuh
Tai. Br. (1.3.4.4) : maruto yajnamajighānsan prajāpateh
|
People had to worship Maruts to protect themselves. These were
meteorites and also connected with dhumaketu the celestial agni, the
comet. I have presented details in my paper
http://www.scribd.com/doc/17520618/Comets-and-meteoritic-showers-in-the-Rigveda-and-their-importanceIJHSMarch2010
This work was first presented as “deciphering the vedic sky” at the
archaeoastronomy brain storming meeting of TIFR. The participants;
both scientists and Vedicists had some reservation about maruts being
meteorites but had no difficulty in agreeing to the celestial fire
dhumaketu, agni with tail (vaaravantam) to be a comet. The slides
used by me are available at
http://www.scribd.com/doc/17322591/Deciphering-the-Vedic-Sky
In RV the eclipse shadow Svarbhaanu is called Aasura (one belonging to
asura). This is so because the original Visvarupa Tvaashtra could once
cover up Sun. To cut a long story short the original asuras were
throwers of stones towards earth sometimes falling on the houses/
ashrams/vedis/lakes. Even some devas such as VaruNa (star in Draco or
Shishumaara) could do this and hence was an Asura. The word Rahu
appears first in the Atharvana veda. My suspicion is this should be
word connected with the Rigvedic maruts who are in one place called
Va-raahu (RV1.88.5).
The worship of asura (Rahu and Ketu) has continued to this day in the
navagrahapuja.
Only these two original Asuras could get their place among the
immortals; the later Suraas!
I like to be corrected wherever I am wrong
regards
RN Iyengar
sadasivamurty rani
Humble Pranams to all Scholars,
The discussion on Asuras in progress is very interesting. I too would like to add some of my observations.
I. The word Asura in the Text of Nirukta
Scholars say that the word Asura was used in Nirukta for Devas. But the following lines are seen the NIrukta in the words of Yaska differentiating them from Devas.
1. तदद्यवाच: परमं मंसीय येअनासुराऩ् अभिभवेम देवा:। असुरा: असुरता:। स्थनेष्वस्ता: स्थानेभ्य इति वा. अपि वासुरिति प्राणनाम। अस्त: शरीरे भवति। तेन तद्वन्त:। (निरुक्ते ३.८)
"सोर्देवान् असृजत तत़् सुराणां सुरत्वम्। असोरसुरानसृजत तदसुराणामसुरत्वम्।"(तै.ब्रा.२.३.८.२,४)
२. "देवाश्च वा असुराश्चास्पर्धन्त नेमे देवा आसन्नेमेऽसुरा:।" (निरुक्ते ३.२०)
II. Now some more Vedic citations which differentiate Asuras from Devas or Suras
१. तेनासुनासुरानसृजत। तदसुराणामसुरत्वम्। (तै.२।३।२।१॥)
२. दिवादेवान्सृजत नक्तमसुराऩ् अद्दिवा देवनसृजत तद्देवानं देवत्वम्; यदसूर्य्यं तद्सुराणामसुरत्वम्॥(षद्विंशब्राह्मणम्४.१.)
३. देवाश्च वाऽअसुराश्च। उभये प्राजापत्या: प्रजपते: पितुर्दायत्वमुपेयुरेतावेवार्धमासौ (शुक्लकृष्णपक्षौ)॥ (श.ब्रा.१.७.२.२२)
३. देवाश्च व असुराश्च प्रजपतेर्द्वया: पुत्रा आसऩ्। (तां.ब्रा.१८.१.२)
४.कानीयसा एव देवा ज्यायसा असुरा:. (श.१४.४.१.१.)
५. अहर्वै देवा आश्रयन्त रात्रीमसुरा: (ऐ.४.५)
६.अर्वाग्वसुर्ह देवानां ब्रह्मा पराग्वसुरसुराणाम्. (गोपथ - उत्तरभागे १.१)
असुराणां देवानां च उत्पत्ति विषये।
स: (प्रजापति:).....अकामयत प्रजायेयेति। स तपोऽतप्यत> सोऽन्तर्वानभूत्। स जघनादसुराऩ् असृजत......स मुखाद्देवानसृजत..तै.२.२.९.५-८)
III Now some Post Vedic Instances:
i. Some Derivative Meanings of the Word Asura:
अ) अस्यति देवाऩ् क्षिपति इति(अस्+उरऩ्)
आ) न सुर:। (विरोधे नञ् समास:)
इ) नास्ति सुरा यस्य स:।
ई) "सुराप्रतिग्रहाद्देवा: सुरा इत्यभिविश्रुता:। अप्रतिग्रहणात्तस्या: दैतेयाश्चासुरा: स्मृता:॥" (इति रामायणे)
एते चत्वा्रोऽर्था: हलायुधकोशात् स्वीकृता:।
IV) About the Geneology of Asuras
There is an account In the Adiparva of Mahabharata which gives a detailed Geneological Description of Daityas and Danavas (Asuras was the common name for both Daityas and Danavas)
a) Daityas
Diti and Danu were the two wives of Kashyapa Prajapati. Hiranyakashipu was the only son of Diti. He had fives sons: Prahlada, Samhlada, Anuhlada, Sibi and Bashkala. Prahlada had three sons:Virocana, Kumbha and Nikumbha. Virocana had only one son named Bali. Bali son was Bana, the Great Asura. He was a follower of Rudra hence called Mahakala. On parallel lines the sons of Samhlada (Prahlada's brother) were Sunda and Nisunda. Kala was the son of Anuhlada. Besides Bana there were hundred sons for Bali : Dhritarashtra, Surya, Candrama, Indrataapana, Kumbhanaabha, GardabhAksha and others.
b) Danavas
Danu was another wife of Kashyapa Prajapati. She had 40 sons. Vipracitti was the eldest of them. Shambara, Asiloma, Keshi, Durjaya, Asvashira, Ayahshira and others were among the others of her 40 sons.
From 10 sons of Danu 10 Clans of Demons were born. EkakSha, Amrtapa, Pralamba, Amaraka, Vatapi, Shatrutapana, Shatha, Gavishtha, Vanaayu andDirghajihva were their names. All the innumerable demons were the descendants of These 10 sons of Danu.
All the descendants of both Daityas and Danvas are known by the common name Asuras.
Many more interesting details of Asuras can be had from the account of Adiparva of Mahabharata.
I humbly submit that these few observations of may be useful for further analysis of this present discussion.
With Warm Regards to All,
Dr. Rani Sadasiva Murty --- On Sat, 25/9/10, rniyengar <narayana...@gmail.com> wrote: |
|
hn bhat
१. तेनासुनासुरानसृजत। तदसुराणामसुरत्वम्। (तै.२।३।२।१॥)
"सोर्देवान् असृजत तत़् सुराणां सुरत्वम्। असोरसुरानसृजत तदसुराणामसुरत्वम्।"(तै.ब्रा.२.३.८.२,४)
EFEO,
PONDICHERRY
S. Kalyanaraman
--
sadasivamurty rani
Humble Pranams to All the Scholars!
Thanks to Shri HN Bhat ji for his affectionate appreciation. Sri Kalyana Raman Ji's lines also need some special attention in this context.
At first I shall try to find out a suitable reply to the questions of Shri HN Bhat ji to the avaialble extent.
1. About the word "Su" in the SurAh
"Soh jAtAh SurAh" is the derivative meaning given in Nirukta. An account in connection with the origin of Suras and Asuras from Taittiriya has been given by me in my earlier posting. As it has been mentioned there Devas or Suras were born from the Mukha or Face of Prajapati and the Asuras were from his Jaghana part (स जघनादसुरानसृजत। स मुख्हाद्देवानसृजत। तै. २.२.९.५-८). Another name of Mukha is UttamAnga. The word "Su" according to the Koshagranthas has many meanings.
"सु प्रशंशानुमतिपूजाभृशकृच्छ्रशुभेषु" is a statement form Ganaratna...As mentioned here Mukhasthana is a Pujasthana and Shubhasthana also. Hence in the statement
|
|
|
|
Dr. Rani Sadasiva Murty --- On Sat, 25/9/10, S. Kalyanaraman <kaly...@gmail.com> wrote: |
S. Kalyanaraman
S. Kalyanaraman
rniyengar
There are several geographical locations mentioned in RV correlated
with maruts. In the first book hymn (1.186) mentions maruts to be
flying over Irina with their sparkling missiles. Irina, a place or
a region named six times in RV, is traditionally translated as desert.
Later Vedic texts identify Irina with disaster. Recently it has been
shown that this region, during the time of RV, should have been
spatially contiguous with the present day Rann-of-kutch . The spatial
extent of the spread of maruts, even if these were at different
periods of time is quite wide. In (5.52.9) maruts are described to
crush the hills near River Parusnī, which is identified with River
Rāvi in Punjab. In book eight we read
susome śaryanāvatyārjike pastyāvati | yayuh nicakrayā narah ||
(8.7.29)
Maruts went downwards to Susoma, Rjīka, Śaryanāvati, full of
dwellings.
This verse has clear geographical information about where maruts were
supposed to have gone prior to the composition of this hymn. Sāyana
takes this to be the Rjīka country, full of Soma (plants), where
Śaryanāvatī was a lake. This is in line with Vedic tradition where
the horse’s head was hit by vajra, the weapon of Indra
(vide:Brhaddevata). Maruts are addressed in the past tense and one
gets the impression the poet is referring to past events in this
laudation. In RV (10.75.5) Ārjikā and Susomā are listed along with a
river named after maruts as Marudvrdhā. These rivers are generally
identified to be in Punjab. In RV (5.52.17) maruts are connected with
River Yamunā, which almost surely would not have been following the
course of the present day river of the same name. Maruts are also
mentioned linked with rivers Indus, Krumu, Kūbhā, Sarayū further north-
west of greater India. A wide region is covered if the connection
between the maruts as showers of meteoritic objects and the river
names are taken together in a physical sense. Precise delineation of
the region is difficult without some logical basis for organizing the
RV hymns chronologically. An interesting reference in this regard is
to the famed River Sarasvatī. In RV (2.30.8) this river is said to
have been followed by maruts. In the famous prayer to Sarasvatī by
Vasistha, first the river is addressed asuryā and in the next verse
her friends are said to be maruts (7.96.1, 2). The word asuryā has
been rendered in several translations as divine, but the connection
with maruts indicates the epithet to be a physical description of the
flowing river affected by maruts who were always called asurāh:
throwers (of stones). Significantly, in the tenth book (10.17.8-9)
goddess Sarasvatī is invoked seated in the same chariot as the
ancestor deities. This in vaidika parlance means the river had dried,
which, in the language of RV should have been after frequent sightings
of maruts in the visible sky above the River Sarasvatī(circa 1900BCE).
The two events might have been broadly contemporaneous even if
meteorites were not the primary reason to dry up the river. There
should have been something fiery about the river Sarasvati before
dessication. Later PuraNa particularly Skaanda-prabhaasa kshetra
maahaatmya elaborates celestial fire as the reason for the drying up
of Sarasvati.
Regards
RNI
On Sep 25, 4:40 pm, "S. Kalyanaraman" <kalya...@gmail.com> wrote:
> धन्योस्मि
> धन्यवादः कल्याणरामन
>
> आसुरी सरस्वती How to explain this praise in RV? Asura-tva is praiseworthy,
> it appears.
>
> namaste. kalyan
>
> 2010/9/25 sadasivamurty rani <ranisadasivamu...@yahoo.com>
>
>
>
> > Humble Pranams to All the Scholars!
> > Thanks to Shri HN Bhat ji for his affectionate appreciation. Sri Kalyana
> > Raman Ji's lines also need some special attention in this context.
> > At first I shall try to find out a suitable reply to the questions of Shri
> > HN Bhat ji to the avaialble extent.
> > *1. About the word "Su" in the SurAh*
> > "Soh jAtAh SurAh" is the derivative meaning given in Nirukta. An account in
> > connection with the origin of Suras and Asuras from Taittiriya has been
> > given by me in my earlier posting. As it has been mentioned there Devas or
> > Suras were born from the Mukha or Face of Prajapati and the Asuras were from
> > his Jaghana part (स जघनादसुरानसृजत। स मुख्हाद्देवानसृजत। तै. २.२.९.५-८).
> > Another name of Mukha is UttamAnga. The word "Su" according to the
> > Koshagranthas has many meanings.
> > "सु प्रशंशानुमतिपूजाभृशकृच्छ्रशुभेषु" is a statement form Ganaratna...As
> > mentioned here Mukhasthana is a Pujasthana and Shubhasthana also. Hence in
> > the statement
>
> > "सोर्देवान् असृजत तत़् सुराणां सुरत्वम्। असोरसुरानसृजत
> > तदसुराणामसुरत्वम्।"(तै.ब्रा.२.३.८.२,४)
> > the word SoH means Mukhasthana.
> > Similarly the नञ् effect in the Asura shbada is to be take in the spirit of
> > सुरविरोधिनो असुरा:।
> > *2.* *About PurveDevah*
> > To the question who is elder and who is younger between Gods and Demons we
> > have reply from Tandya brahmana which in this context says: कनीयस्विन इव वै
> > तर्हि देवा आसऩ् भूयस्विनोऽसुरा: । ता>१२/१३/३१॥
> > कानीयसा एव देवा ज्यायसा असुरा: श.१४.४.१.१.॥ is antoehr statement supporting
> > this view.
> > In additon to this as mentioned in the TaittiriYa First Demons were born
> > and then the Gods. Hence "Purvedeva" may be taken in the sence "Devebhya
> > Purve jaataah.".
> > *3. KshiraSagara Mathana:*
> > The KShirasagaramathana instance in the Balakanda of Ramayana is a very
> > clear instance from the Epic Source to how the two words Sura and Asura are
> > derived. The sloka was already mentioned by me. As for as the Dinial a share
> > in the Sura for Demons in the Vedic Context may have some relation with
> > Sautramani Yajna. According to Katyayana Srauta Sutras A vipra has to
> > perform "Sautramani Yajna" after performing "Soma Yaga". In the Soma Yaga he
> > drinks Somarasa after offering it to the Gods (In this Context Asuras are
> > prohibited from having a share in the Soma). Similarly he has to drink
> > "Sura" in the Sautramani Yajna. *"SautrAmanyAm surAm pibet" *is the Sruti
> > Vakya. Details of this can be had from Srauta granthas. Interestingly Srutis
> > compare Soma and Sura to Man and Woman. "पुमान् वै सोम: स्त्री सुरा।" -
> > तै.१.३.३.४.
> > *II. About the Questions of Sri Kalyanaraman Ji*
> > a) I don't have a ready answer for the first question of Sri Kalyanaraman
> > ji about the authorship of Suryasiddhanta by Maya - Asura. I shall deal with
> > it soon after my search is over.
> > b) Now I take up the. task of dealing with his second statement taken from
> > Manusmriti.
> > Wasn't samudramanthanam a cooperative enterprise by all dasyu? (According
> > to Manu 10.45 both aaryavaacas and mlecchavaacas were dasyu)
> > Here is a small problem with the statement given by Sri Kalyanraman ji in
> > the brackets. Here the 45th Sloka from the 10th Adhyaya is partly taken and
> > translated. Hence it is giving a misrepresentation that Both Aaryavaacas and
> > Mlecchavaacas were dasyus. If the complete sloka is translated it doesn't
> > give such meaning. The complete sloka with its vykhayana is like this.
> > मुखबाहूरुपज्जानां या लोके जातयो बहि:।
> > म्लेच्छवाचश्चार्यवाच: सर्वे ते दस्यव: स्मृता:॥ १०अध्या.४५ तमश्लो.॥
> > व्याख्यानम् -
> > ब्राह्मण-क्षत्रिय-वैश्य-शूद्राणां क्रियालोपदिना या जातयो बह्या: जाता:
> > मेल्च्छभाषायुक्ता: आर्यभाषोपेता वा ते दस्यव: सर्वे स्मृता:। The Meaning of
> > the sloka and its commentary is very clear.
> > Instead of taking the entire sloka if we take the only later half of it,
> > it misleads the minds.
> > *A humble question to Sri Kalyanraman ji!*
> > Sir! Is there any reference (Eitehr in the Vedas or in the Puranas) t0 the
> > *paraticipation of Dasyus in the Samudra Manthana? *
> > *Can we have the Source text of such reference?*
> > The tertiary writings like those of Max muller, Weber, Winternitz and
> > others may be avoided in this context. If any Direct sources from our
> > Ancient Indian Literature are avaialable it shall highly be appreciated and
> > we can proceed further to think about the participation of Dasyus in the
> > Samudramanthana.
>
> > With Humble Regards,
>
> > *Dr. Rani Sadasiva Murty*
>
> > --- On *Sat, 25/9/10, S. Kalyanaraman <kalya...@gmail.com>* wrote:
>
> > From: S. Kalyanaraman <kalya...@gmail.com>
> > Subject: Re: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} Asura in the Rigveda
> > To: bvpar...@googlegroups.com
> > Date: Saturday, 25 September, 2010, 2:11 PM
>
> > What is the textual tradition related to the authorship of Surya
> > Siddhanta by Maya-asura?
>
> > Wasn't samudramanthanam a cooperative enterprise by all dasyu? (According
> > to Manu 10.45 both aaryavaacas and mlecchavaacas were dasyu).
>
> > kalyanaraman
>
> > 2010/9/25 hn bhat <hnbha...@gmail.com<http://in.mc947.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=hnbha...@gmail.com>
> > निराशीर्निर्ममो भूत्वा युध्यस्व विगतज्वरः।। (भ.गी.)- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
S. Kalyanaraman
sadasivamurty rani
To
Sri Kalyanraman ji,
Sir!
Namaste!
My Question is not just about Sagaramathanam. That account is available in The Ramayana's Balakanada and also in the Mahabharata which are earlier to Bhagavata Purana. In most of the Mahapauranas also we have that account. If we seriously search we may get that account even in any of the 10 major Upanishadas and Brahamanas also.
But my question is about the instance of SAMUDRAMATHANAM BY DASYUS as it was mentioned in your afternoon's mail.
With Warm Regards, Dr. Rani Sadasiva Murty |
S. Kalyanaraman
S P Narang
From: S. Kalyanaraman <kaly...@gmail.com>
To: bvpar...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sat, September 25, 2010 5:02:05 PM
rniyengar
pouring in. However my curiosity is about how scholars think the words
Asura, Asuratvam, Aasura, Aasuryam etc should be understood in the
Rigveda Samhita as is available to us now. I accept meanings that have
come down to us through tradition are naturally important. But my
question is should we be satisfied with them? Do the Nirukta,
BrahmaNa, PuraNa explanations (not all of them are etymologies)
explain consistently Rigvedic Deva and Asura? One can easily point out
conflicts and inconsistencies, but I will not do that here. I like to
argue within the bounds of tradition only. Tradition accepts
adhidaiva, adhiyanjna and adhyatma as three possible modes of
interpretation. Adhiyajna and Adhyaatma are very well preserved in the
Yaajnika and Upanishadic (purva and Uttara miimaamsa) literature. But
what happened to the adhidaiva? In my humble opinion PuraaNam (in
singular) to some extent preserved this. But with too many puraaNas
cropping up with additions over time, including regional variations it
is very difficult to interpret RV using PuraNas (except for the
Visvedeva nivid of 3339 devas with the help of BrahmaaNDa puraaNa).
But this can not be a reason for us to give up the exercise. I am
convinced that there is no proper scholarly adhidaiva tradition that
has come down to us (please correct me, if wrong). Its reflection is
seen here and there in the Nirukta, SayaNa Bhashya and perhaps in
other places unknown to me. For example the adhidaiva meaning of Soma
is said to be Moon. Hence why should we always harp on Somayaaga as a
ritual for Somapaana? This happens because we are conditioned to take
only the adhiyajna meaning. Somapaana as per adhidaiva would be
drinking of the moon by the gods that is a reference only to the
KrishNapaksha waning moon. In other words a picture of the sky
(however incomplete it may be) as perceived by the Rigvedic seers can
be approximately figured out with a consistent adhidaiva approach.
Another example: The famous hymns (RV 1.162 & 1.163) on Aśva by
Aucathya are traditionally taken to refer to Aśvamedha. But these
hymns primarily describe a bright horse-like object moving in the sky.
I concede the horse-sacrifice is inspired by this hymn. But what was
it that was moving in the sky? An adhyatma meaning may be available in
the Upanishads. But the sky picture is very interesting and perhaps
can be used to say that the horse-like object was seen near aapade-goh
(cow’s foot) which should be the nakshatra later known as
Proshthapada. If this is consistent at other places (3.39.5) where the
cow’s-foot (earth as per adhiyajna) is located in the sky, a small
progress would have happened since beyond Aghaa & Arjuni one more RV
nakshatra would have been deciphered.
The yaajnika and adhyatma meanings are self consistent within
themselves. I am quite convinced on that count. In other words, the
sacrificial deva and asuras were not same as the mystical ones of the
Upanishads and were not same as the ones meant in the PuraaNa. In one
place they were mostly symbolic, in the other place psychic entities
and in the third (adhidaiva) place real observed physical objects. My
question about ‘Asura’ was from the above view point. Similarly when
agni is said to be moving in the SKY with smoke (dhuumena dhaavate
divi|| RV 6.48.6) however one may argue for sacrificial and mystical
meanings the simple primary picture of a fire-ball or meteor or comet
in the sky is logically more likely since it needs minimum
explanations (Naiyaayika principle: Laaghavaat).
It is possible even within RV a word like ‘asura’ modified its
meaning. This would have happened as the RV samhita corpus represents
some 800-1000 years of time span or more. Nevertheless ‘Asura’ is not
used as an exact opposite of ‘sura’ which does not find place in RV
(like to be corrected if wrong). Hence I submit there should be a
study of RV from the point of view of the ‘actions’ performed by the
‘deva’ and ‘asura’. If we list all of these as a table, those actions
which fit in with the context of the hymn in the maximum number of
cases is the most likely major attribute assigned to Deva/Asura by the
composers.
kind regards
RN Iyengar
On Sep 27, 6:15 am, S P Narang <spnar...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> ...
>
> read more »
>
> My request is : Regarding the etymologies, one must be very vigilant. Kenaapi
> vRttisaamaanyena is not a good principle particularly for historical etymology.
> The Brahmanas and epics and puranas in a number of cases are trying to make the
> etymology on the similar sound and suitable to their context also. Even Nirukta
> gives a number of etymologies which may be suitable or not suitable to the
> original Vedic text. I think the works of Walde, Pakorney and Myerhofer are
> useful for historical etymologies. They must be used but with caution. Regards,
> spnarang
>
> ________________________________
> From: S. Kalyanaraman <kalya...@gmail.com>
> To: bvpar...@googlegroups.com
> Sent: Sat, September 25, 2010 5:02:05 PM
> Subject: Re: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} Asura in the Rigveda
>
> धन्योस्मि
> धन्यवादः कल्याणरामन
> I do not know if there is a reference to samudra manthanam in RV. Sure, samudra
> is referred to. Maybe, the earliest reference to this episode is in
> Srimadbhagavatam. See the bas-relief of Angkor Wat
> (नगर वाटिका) http://www.veloasia.com/library/buckley/churning_milk.html
>
> http://www.clas.ufl.edu/users/vasu/cambodia/angkorthom/ent02.jpg
>
> kalyanaraman
>
> 2010/9/25 sadasivamurty rani <ranisadasivamu...@yahoo.com>
> --- On Sat, 25/9/10, S. Kalyanaraman <kalya...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> >From: S. Kalyanaraman <kalya...@gmail.com>
> >Subject: Re: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} Asura in the Rigveda
> >To: bvpar...@googlegroups.com
> >Date: Saturday, 25 September, 2010, 2:11 PM
>
> >What is the textual tradition related to the authorship of Surya Siddhanta by
> >Maya-asura?
>
> >Wasn't samudramanthanam a cooperative enterprise by all dasyu? (According to
> >Manu 10.45 both aaryavaacas and mlecchavaacas were dasyu).
>
> >kalyanaraman
>
> >2010/9/25 hn bhat <hnbha...@gmail.com>
> >अथ चेत्त्वमिमं धर्म्यं- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Dr. S. Ramakrishna Sharma
interpretation.
adhi-praja and adhi-atma aspects which can be derived according to the context, as the case may be.
Perhaps, the asura, asuryaa reference in the context of adhi-loka can be seen in the
pondering/soliloquy of Nachiketa in another Upanishat, viz. "asuryaa naama tE lokaa:.."
>My question about ‘Asura’ was from the above view point.
of the IshAvAsya Upanishat.
Pranams.
--
Aangirasa/Dr.S.Ramakrishna Sharma. M.A.,Ph.D.(Eng.Lit.),Ph.D.(Sanskrit.).
hn bhat
Dr. Yadu Moharir
| Dear Respected Scholars: One of the reason why had inquired about "asuraa" was to try and understand the other related names / terms which are often used used interchangeably. viz. "raakshsa" and "daanava" when describing "asura" Now having learned thing or two about this term any input on "raakshsa" and "daanava" would be highly appreciated. R^gveda (2.11.10), vR^itra is called daavnava. What I have gathered from various sources that they were expert in yaatuvidyaa, they were courageous, and determined folks. They use to observe austerities and often received blessings and protection from brahmaa and rudra. vaayupuraana (68.1.16) states that they accepted maanavadharmaa.. In bhaagavata puraaNa (2.7.13 & 25.24.30) gives a clue that they resided on shveta mountain. Mmahaabhaarata aadiparva (65) gives a list of some of the prominant daanavaa's. (viz. - bali, shalva, diirghajihva, drjaya, khara, hiraNyakaShyapuu, ilvala, madhuu, karThabha, mada, masiiSha, maya, naraka, piiTha, pralhaada, pulomaa, raahuu, taaraka, vivindhyu, vR^itra, .. etc. (some of theses names were also listed in this tread of "asura" by the scholars.) raavaNaa's sister kumbhanasii was married to madhuu. From raamaayaNa one gets a picture that daanavaa's were more inclined and compassionate towards "maanava". They rejoiced when lakshamaNa defeated indrajiita and were heartfelt when rama was in trouble at the handas of raavaNa. They rejoiced when ravana was defeated. vaalmiki raamaayaNa states that they playing (enjoying) with their women on the vindhya mountain. Now about raakshasa in similar context of R^igveda 10.155.2 stabbing of a female raakshasi is requested to brahmaNasapati. As far as I know & understand, nivR^ittii, a deity of death, was considered and classified as raakshsa. Fome the vedic texts one gets a general idea about them as well. They were always opposite to deva and maanava. they were worse than dasyu (duShkR^ita), dvayuu (one one two faces), kravyaada (raw meat eaters), druha (torcher of enemy), yatumat, rebha (making loud noises and frighten animals), havirmatha (attack yaj~na), adhash.nsa (proponents of paapa / antisocial activities), R^gveda in rakshoghna suukta there is a prayer to Gods for destroying them. M.B. aadi (155.36) states that raakska women would deliver their newborn immediately after conception and could acquire any form they desire. valmiki raamaayaNa (1.25.12) talks about taaTakaa, a yakshiNii but she became man eating raakshasii after a curse from sage agastya. Her son maariica was classified asa a raakskasa. Could the confusion of above terms may have further contributed to interpret our ancient texts? Any additional information would be highly appreciated. I am delighted to have been part of this elite group who have openly shared their understanding without any reservation. Thank you, Yadu --- On Mon, 9/27/10, Dr. S. Ramakrishna Sharma <d.ramak...@gmail.com> wrote: |
Dr. S. Ramakrishna Sharma
in the Maha Kavyas, commentaries and vishva koshas may be of help.
Consider the expressions like nara-raakshasa, naraadhama and nara-pishaacha.
A collateral correlative like terms are : barbarians, man-eaters, cannibals, giants
and the like.
"इतिहासपुराणाभ्यां वेद: समुपबृंहयेत् " is a traditional claim which ought to help
the scholars stand/withstand the test of concord and clarity
Pranams..
--
Aangirasa/Dr.S.Ramakrishna Sharma. M.A.,Ph.D.(Eng.Lit.),Ph.D.(Sanskrit.).
S. Kalyanaraman
--
Dr. Yadu Moharir
| Respected scholars, There is a good review Monograph entitled, R^igvedic Soma by Dr, N.R. Waradpande, Published in 1995 by Sanskrit Bhasha Pracharini Sabha, Nagpur. That contains lot of information regarding Botany and various Sanskrit interpretations of term Soma. Reading this in original may be helpful Regards, Yadu |
--- On Mon, 9/27/10, S. Kalyanaraman <kaly...@gmail.com> wrote: |
|
VKG
I have been following the discussion about the term ASURA.
These are some of my observations:
1. सोः सुरानसृजत - is quoted by Dr. Rani Sastry. That is said to be
Yajurveda. I would like to know the instance. To the best of our
knowledge, no such instance is found.
2. Dr. Yadu quotes - Nivrutti. Actually it should have been Nirruti.
(Probably a type). This is a typical deity, referred with Feminine
Gender. (Yatte Devee Nirrutir, Deveemaham Nirrutim Vandamaanah).
Skaanda Puraana describes, he was born in the community of hunters and
he got elevated to the position of Dikpaalaka due to his sacrifice and
austerity.
3. The term is Sura is rarely used in Veda in the context of Deity.
Deva - asuraa sSamyattaa Aasan, is the normal parlance to describe
Deities and Demons. Sura (Pum- linga, Akaaraanta) is not normally
found in Yajurveda. (Please provide reference, if found)
4. Asura is the contextual term. This is not absolute. At instances
such as , Swasti No Mimeetaam ... Poosha Asuro Dadaatu Nah; it shall
be attributed to a deity. At instances such as Deva-Asuraah - it
should be demon or progeny of Diti etc.
5. Similarly, the term though used in the context of a Deity, it is
used in many contexts. Adhi - Daivam refers to some Celestial Body/
Natural Forces; Daivam - is Fortune/ Fate/ Destiny; Deva - is also a
deity.
Similarly, many words such as Soma (Soma Rasa, Lataa, Moon, Shiva
etc.) are contextual.
Regards
Vamshi
Yougika Vyutpatti (etymology) can be derived, as needed to the
context. If nothing works out, Roodhi is always there as bail out.
On Sep 28, 7:30 am, "Dr. Yadu Moharir" <ymoha...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Respected scholars,
>
> There is a good review Monograph entitled, R^igvedic Soma by Dr, N.R. Waradpande, Published in 1995 by Sanskrit Bhasha Pracharini Sabha, Nagpur. That contains lot of information regarding Botany and various Sanskrit interpretations of term Soma.
>
> Reading this in original may be helpful
>
> Regards,
>
> Yadu
>
> --- On Mon, 9/27/10, S. Kalyanaraman <kalya...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> From: S. Kalyanaraman <kalya...@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} Asura in the Rigveda
> To: bvpar...@googlegroups.com
> Date: Monday, September 27, 2010, 7:20 PM
>
> धन्योस्मि धन्यवादः कल्याणरामन
>
> I can cite one instance. Chandogya Upanishad interprets Soma, the core subject of the Rigveda in the following metaphors:
> एष सोमो राजा
> तद देवानां अन्नंतम देवा भक्क्ष्यंन्तिkalyanaraman
> 2010/9/27 hn bhat <hnbha...@gmail.com>
sadasivamurty rani
| To Shri Vamshi Krishna Ghanapathi Ji!. Pranamas! Please find the sentence "Asordevaanasrjata......" in the attachment of this mail. I have sacanned the content of Nirukta and sending it for your verification. The third line from the bottom in the text part is the required text. And the 13th reference in the foot notes is relevant to it. It may not be possible for me if I am asked to show the references for the rest of the etymological notes given by me as I have taken the other references from various other Vedic Texts and Dictionaries. Scanning all those pages may be a task for me. But I have given reference numbers after each etymological notes for the convenience of the search. Thanks for emloying me in a good task like this. With warm regards, Dr. Rani Sadasiva Murty --- On Wed, 29/9/10, VKG <vkghan...@gmail.com> wrote: |
sadasivamurty rani
Dear Sri Vamsi KRishna Ghanapathi ji!
Pl. find the attachment for the details of "Sordevaanasrijat....." I did not say "Soh Suraan asrjat..." Pl. go through my past mail about the etymological notes on "Asura" shbda. There I have given "Sordevanasrijat..." etc., |
rniyengar
My subject title was about "Asura in the Rigveda". As we go beyond
RV, meanings can be several. In RV the word is used to address
deities such as agni, indra, varuNa, (not just maruts)considered
usually as Deva. Vrtra eventhough an Asura he is qualified as 'Deva'.
(as'vyo vaara abhavaatad indra sr.ke yattvaa pratyahn deva ekah.| Rv
1.32.12) SaayaNa-bhaashya explains this 'deva' as 'dipyamaanah.'
Hence my curiosity about the adhi-daiva meanings, which appear to be
quite realistic. There was a question whether all the three types of
interpretations are available. In my humble opinion the BrahmaNas and
the Yajurveda Samhita+Brahmanas devlop the adhiyajna in great detail.
Upanishads have taken care of the adhyatma. The celestial Daiva based
practice (religion?) is the popular Hinduism. AraNyaka, at least
Tai.araNyaka provides some Daivika information about seasons and as I
said in another post about Abhaya-Dhruva in the group of 14 stars
called Shishumaara. It also mentions about Meru and Kshyapa not
setting. The tripartite meaning is of course only an academic approach
of discussion to preserve the knowledge and culture. [All the three
are perhaps to be combined in actual day to day life. But I was not
discussing this practical aspect in my posting.]. I had mentioned
about 'Svarbhaanu' in RV being correlated with 'Aasura'. This is
perhaps a Vr.ddhi on 'asura'. I would like to know the view of the
scholars whether 'asura' could be interpreted as 'one having several
lives'. Is "bhvarthe ra pratyayah." applicable?
Regards
RN Iyengar