Purusamedha-yajna

[Damodara Dasa]

Respected Vidvaj-janas,

One of my friends sent me this query yesterday. If any of you can
throw some light over it.

--------------------
In connection with the Purusamedha-yajna, it is understandable that
Saivas and Saktas used to perform human sacrifice. But it is startling
that human sacrifice was also present in what could be called
mainstream Vedic culture, though it was probably much less common than
it was in the aforementioned two traditions.

I have recently read the story about how Rohita, the son of
Hariscandra, bought Sunahsepha for the purpose of offering him in a
sacrifice to appease Varuna and saving himself from that unpleasant
fate. Of course, that story had a happy ending as far as Sunahsepha is
concerned because the demigods saved him in the end. Nevertheless, one
thing is obvious: great kings and rsis of the past didn't have any
qualms about sacrificing people, presumably on the condition that the
Purusamedha-yajna is properly performed and that certain requirements
are met. In all likelihood, this type of yajna was quite rare, unlike
its counterpart among the Saivas and Saktas. However, this is
startling, to me at least, for two reasons.
First, I find it strange that there was such a practice in mainstream
Vedic culture because it seems very tamasic, so I find it difficult to
reconcile that with other aspects of mainstream Vedic culture, though
I suppose that the gap between human and animal sacrifice is not so
big. Second, from the point of view of modern society, human sacrifice
is abhorrent and a sign of the primitivity of societies in which it
was present, since no sophisticated civilization would engage in such
a practice. I would appreciate very much if some of you could research
this and address the points I have raised. You can also provide
information regarding this practice that you deem important.
---------------------------

Thank you,
Hari Guru Vaisnava das,
damodara das

[Nagaraj Paturi]

"There is no inscriptional or other record that a purusamedha was ever performed, leading some scholars to suggest it was simply invented to round out sacrificial possibilities." (pg. 237)

Knipe, David M. (2015), Vedic Voices: Intimate Narratives of a Living Andhra Tradition, Oxford: Oxford University Press

 "It should be mentioned that although provision is made for human sacrifice (purusha-medha) this was purely symbolic and did not involve harm to anyone". (page 557)

Oliver Leaman (2006), Encyclopedia of Asian Philosophy, Routledge, ISBN 978-0415172813, 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CABr-jZDxYFO4RwuyU9pEsWEaSqqYeH6LHOAKHP4Efa5234diDA%40mail.gmail.com.

--

Nagaraj Paturi

 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

Senior Director, IndicA

BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, Maharashtra

BoS Kavikulaguru Kalidasa Sanskrit University, Ramtek, Maharashtra

BoS Veda Vijnana Gurukula, Bengaluru.

Member, Advisory Council, Veda Vijnana Shodha Samsthanam, Bengaluru

BoS Rashtram School of Public Leadership

Editor-in-Chief, International Journal of Studies in Public Leadership

Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies, 

FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education, 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

 

 

 

[Nagaraj Paturi]

" In connection with the Purusamedha-yajna, it is understandable that Saivas and Saktas used to perform human sacrifice.   "

This is just an imagination, not a fact.  

[Jammalamadaka Srinivas]

Namaste,

Purushamedha or Naramedha has nothing to do with human sacrifice. Naranarayana or paramapurusha (narayana) is the devata. It does have pasubali (11 no.s).

नराख्यः पुरुषः अपश्यत् । ब्राह्मणराज-
न्ययोरातडाकामयोः पुरुषमेधसंज्ञको यज्ञो मवति ।
सर्वभूतान्यतिक्रम्य स्थानमतिष्ठा । चैत्रशुक्लदशम्यामा-
रम्भः । अत्र त्रयोविंशतिर्दीक्षा भवन्ति द्वादशोप्रसदः
पञ्च सुत्या इति चत्वारिंशद्दिनैः सिध्यति अत्र यूपैका-
दशिनी भवति एकादशाग्नीषोमीयाः पशवो मवन्ति
तेषां च प्रतियूपं मध्यमे वा यूपे यथेच्छं नियोजनम् ।
आज्येन सकृद्गृहीतेन “देव सवितरिति” प्रत्यृचं तिस्र
आहुतीराहवनीये जुहोति” वेददी० । तत्र चाध्याये
चतुर्थ्यन्तेन देवतामेदा द्वितीयान्तेन पशुभेदा उक्ताः 

Regards,

Srinivas

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAJGj9eYsX5b9h9cTK0UEGWLjXwzLzDsEPCQXECMY650Bfr5p3w%40mail.gmail.com.

[Roland Steiner]

See, for example:

-- Upendra Thakur: An Introduction to Homicide in India. New Delhi:
Abhinav Publications 1978.

-- Asko Parpola: "Human Sacrifice in India in Vedic Times and Before".
In: The Strange World of Human Sacrifice. Edited by Jan N. Bremmer.
Leuven [u. a.] 2007 (Studies in the History and Anthropology of
Religion, 1), S. 157–177 (see attached file).
..
- Hans T. Bakker: "Puruṣamedha, Manasarapuruṣa, Vāstupuruṣa. The Image
of Man in the Sacrificial Context", in: Hans Teye Bakker: Holy Ground
– Where Art and Text Meet. Studies in the Cultural History of India.
Leiden, Bosten: Brill 2019 (Gonda Indological Studies 20), pp. 443-462.
Downloadable here: https://brill.com/view/title/54804
https://brill.com/downloadpdf/book/9789004412071/BP000023.xml

Best,
Roland Steiner

[Nagaraj Paturi]

I therefore discuss first a few important textual references and their interpretation, hoping to establish beyond reasonable doubt that Vedic texts do indeed attest to real human sacrifices performed within the memory preserved by the authors, and that by the time of the Brahmana texts, the actual practice of bloody offering had already begun to diminish." Parpola (2007) p. 161

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/20220810140413.Horde.xDIUH7lnqfF93VJMNVwpGAV%40home.staff.uni-marburg.de.

[kamalesh pathak]

Honourable scholars

I will keep silence wether a man or an animal were killed in a Yahya, will like to point (1) शांतिमंत्राः

 सर्वे भवन्तु सुखिनः इत्यादिभिः  (२) a book named क्योंin two volumes has niced explained , if possible be kind to refer, the book is full of references,  long ago I read part two which is a soft copy but part one is missing, 

Regards,

Kamlesh pathak

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAOCH_qv6jMEPR4pNAf%3DobaGA6L3EP_%3DB9kpG_AScLSYd%2BCDT%2Bg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Knipe, David M. (2015) is later to Parpola(2007)

[Damodara Dasa]

Dear Srinivasa ji,

What is the reference of this Sanskrit Text you sent:
-----

नराख्यः पुरुषः अपश्यत् । ब्राह्मणराज-
न्ययोरातडाकामयोः पुरुषमेधसंज्ञको यज्ञो मवति ।
सर्वभूतान्यतिक्रम्य स्थानमतिष्ठा । चैत्रशुक्लदशम्यामा-
रम्भः । अत्र त्रयोविंशतिर्दीक्षा भवन्ति द्वादशोप्रसदः
पञ्च सुत्या इति चत्वारिंशद्दिनैः सिध्यति अत्र यूपैका-
दशिनी भवति एकादशाग्नीषोमीयाः पशवो मवन्ति
तेषां च प्रतियूपं मध्यमे वा यूपे यथेच्छं नियोजनम् ।
आज्येन सकृद्गृहीतेन “देव सवितरिति” प्रत्यृचं तिस्र
आहुतीराहवनीये जुहोति” वेददी० । तत्र चाध्याये
चतुर्थ्यन्तेन देवतामेदा द्वितीयान्तेन पशुभेदा उक्ताः

-----

[Damodara Dasa]

Hare Krishna.

Thank you for your replies.
-----

Knipe, David M. (2015), Vedic Voices: Intimate Narratives of a Living
Andhra Tradition, Oxford: Oxford University Press

Oliver Leaman (2006), Encyclopedia of Asian Philosophy, Routledge,

Upendra Thakur: An Introduction to Homicide in India. New Delhi:
Abhinav Publications 1978.

Asko Parpola: "Human Sacrifice in India in Vedic Times and Before".
In: The Strange World of Human Sacrifice. Edited by Jan N. Bremmer.
Leuven [u. a.] 2007 (Studies in the History and Anthropology of
Religion, 1), S. 157–177 (see attached file).

Hans T. Bakker: "Puruṣamedha, Manasarapuruṣa, Vāstupuruṣa. The Image
of Man in the Sacrificial Context", in: Hans Teye Bakker: Holy Ground
– Where Art and Text Meet. Studies in the Cultural History of India.
Leiden, Bosten: Brill 2019 (Gonda Indological Studies 20), pp.
443-462.

------------


The majority of these cited references seem to be from the books that
are written by non-traditional scholars who see the Indian sastras and
tradition from their viewpoints.

Srinivas ji shared a Sanskrit text which seems to be from some
traditional source.

I would like to know what view the traditional scholars hold in this
matter. By the word traditional scholars I mean scholars who have been
trained in to tradition and sastras by being in age-old gurukula
system like that of Sringeri Matha, Madhva-Mathas as well as
gurukulas, and Sri Vaisnava gurukulas. There would certainly be books
written by old scholars of these schools and their view-point would
also be worth consideration.

[Damodara Dasa]

Of course, we shall also go through these cited references; I am not
against them. But I wanted to also know the view-point of traditional
scholars and sampradayas.

[Jammalamadaka Srinivas]

It is from vAchaspatyam. Probably a part of commentary of 3rd adhyaya in yAjusha samhita. Here is the full content from vachaspatyam - 

पुरुषमेध पु० पुरुषेण परमपुरुषेण दृष्टो मेधः --आधारे घञ् ।
स्वनामख्याते यज्ञभेदे तदुक्तं शत० प्रा० १३ । ६ । १ । १ ।
“पुरुषो ह नारायणोऽकामयत । अतितिष्ठेयं सर्वाणि
मूतान्यहमेवेदं सर्वं स्यामिति स एतं पुरुषमेधं
पञ्चरात्रं यज्ञक्रतुमपश्यत्तमाहरत्तेमायजत तेनेद्वात्य-
तिष्ठत् सर्वाणि भूतानीदं सर्वममवत् अतितिष्ठति मर्वाणि
भूतानीदं सर्वं भवति य एवं विद्वान् पुरुषमेधेन यजते
यो वैतदेवं वेद” । यजु० ३० अ० व्याख्यायायाञ्च
तत्कालाद्युक्तं यथा “इत उत्तरं पुरुषमेधो व्याख्यायते
“नारायव्यः पुरुषोऽपश्यत् । ब्राह्मणराज-

न्ययोरातडाकामयोः पुरुषमेधसंज्ञको यज्ञो मवति ।
सर्वभूतान्यतिक्रम्य स्थानमतिष्ठा । चैत्रशुक्लदशम्यामा-
रम्भः । अत्र त्रयोविंशतिर्दीक्षा भवन्ति द्वादशोप्रसदः
पञ्च सुत्या इति चत्वारिंशद्दिनैः सिध्यति अत्र यूपैका-
दशिनी भवति एकादशाग्नीषोमीयाः पशवो मवन्ति
तेषां च प्रतियूपं मध्यमे वा यूपे यथेच्छं नियोजनम् ।
आज्येन सकृद्गृहीतेन “देव सवितरिति” प्रत्यृचं तिस्र
आहुतीराहवनीये जुहोति” वेददी० । तत्र चाध्याये

चतुर्थ्यन्तेन देवतामेदा द्वितीयान्तेन पशुभेदा उक्ताः ।

Regards

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CABr-jZBDZqSextPsDAipC%2BeFBZA88Zq%2BnuXRck0z%3D4g-JiLnkg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Jammalamadaka Srinivas]

Even in yajna tattava prakasika Pandita Chinnaswami Sastry explains what Naramedha is. That explanation is similar to what I found in vAchaspatyam. 

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Dear Sri Damodara Dasa ji,

1. The message that you brought for discussion through your first mail in the thread reflects a non shaastra based mindset. Hence the contemporary references. 

2. Shaastra references countering a proposition develop only when that proposition was a purvapaksha. 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CABr-jZD5o1swQ9VTNRkCe9S96QWvHM1EKH4DhJLDY70TooUNqw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Damodara Dasa]

>> 1. The message that you brought for discussion through your first mail in the thread reflects a non shaastra based mindset. Hence the contemporary references.

Accepted the logic. Sorry for the inconvenience. The second email was
reflecting my interest while the first email was my friend's question.
Sorry for mixing the both.

[Jay Nityananda Das]

Dear Damodara das (Prabhu ji) and other respected scholars,

Namo Namah.

I like to share my little input on this issue with the intention of getting more insights from the learned scholars. Already we have received some. Many thanks for that.

Kindly take note of the below two observations:

 

[1] The following is from the commentary of Acharya Manidhara on Vajasneyasamhita. For more reading, kindly follow the link  below:

https://archive.org/details/vajasneyasamhita/page/n889/mode/2up

[2] Srimad-Bhagavatam Canto 9, chapter 7 and 16.

https://vedabase.io/en/library/sb/9/7/

https://vedabase.io/en/library/sb/9/16/

My humble Comments: Personally I am not in favor of disturbing even an ant, what to speak of killing it, however, from the references cited above, it does not appear to me at least, (whether or not it was considered by ancient sages as "tamasika" sacrifice) that Human sacrifice was not "symbolic". 

Kindly correct me if I am wrong. 

  

das,

Jaya Nityananda Dasa

("Nandagrama" Varnasrama Community Project)

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CABr-jZAZWXdOK314N474GEKnQhXdkk_9UpZyaOV%2Bpa1PxQDFrQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[BVK Sastry (G-S-Pop)]

Namaste

 

It seems ‘ the technical performance,  technicalities and end-goal of : ‘yajna’ called PURUSHA-MEDHA is kaleidoscopically described to suit one’s own liking and ‘ semantic construction on the terms : ‘Purusha’ and ‘Medha’.  Jammalakhanda Srinivas has  briefly pointed to this line of traditional thinking.

 

When the text is NOT talking about ‘HUMAN SACRIFICE’ and is explicitly clear about, where is the ground for a ‘Personal- doubt’  : < Personally .. however, from the references cited above, it does not appear to me at least, (…) that Human sacrifice was not "symbolic".>

 

Relevant Textual snippets are from the source:  Shukla Yajurveda - Vajasneya Samhita : Commented upon by Sri Mahidhara : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive      https://archive.org/details/vajasneyasamhita/page/n889/mode/1up

 

The ‘Purusha-Medha’ in Mahidhara commentary is to be looked in its totality and the broad picture of ‘Vedanta’ given as ‘ SAARVA-MEDHIKA’ in 32^nd chapter. Another interesting term which comes over here is ‘ NRU-MEDHA’- in 33^rd section , which is ‘GRAHA-YAJNA- PARIHARA’- The utility application of ‘ Veda mantras in a specific mode for health and wellness benefits. These are the practical guidance for practicing Jyotish people and the ‘Archaka- Purohitas’ on Graha-yajna- parihara prescriptions’- a live tradition. The  technicality of  ‘PITRU-MEDHA’ ‘ is meant to explain ‘ Post death rites and Annual rites (Pitru –Karma). Pitru-Medha is NOT –‘ ritual killing , sacrificing father’.

 

               

 

Resource base of debate leading to this confusion: Text debated is ‘Shukla-Yajurveda: Vajasaneya Samhitaa ( dated way back to BCE historicity or mystic traditions )- which carries a ‘practicing practical footprint in the ‘Varna-Ashrama’ accepting –practice society till precolonial shifts in the ‘ interpretations making ‘Veda’ as ‘ tribal panegyric poetry of migrants’.

 

Three interpretation models for sorting out:  Three frameworks at variance  provide the backdrop of text- language- context – end goal construction.  On the top of this, the ‘language-tools, utility-purpose and practice-pedagogy ’ used by each framework for ‘ interpreted –practice and inference of what the text – is supposed to be presenting’ is significantly at variance.   

The resource text is aligned to Yajnika tradition as a continuation of Uvvata and all other accepted norms of ‘how to study – practice vedas for Yajna and Vedanta benefits’.  

 

First is  ‘Shaastra’ framework of ‘Yajna’ – performance.  

Second is ‘Shaastra-framework for Yoga- Meditation.

Third is motivate backed historical interpretation of ‘Veda- Shaastra’ as ‘anthropology, religion studies, Tribal practices……

 

 

(a) ‘Shaastra’ framework of ‘Yajna’ – performance (Meemaamsaa / Darsha poornamaasa First approach).: The Yajnika karma  uses the text /section for a ‘social benefit’.  The sequencing is ‘Darsha-Poorna maasa (Devataa) (Bahir-) yajna first’ before qualifying for ‘ Purusha-Medha’ (for Parama-Purusha/ Brahma / (Antar-yajna – adhyatma yajna).  The way to use ‘ Panini- Yaska : language tools’ in each context- utility –application (VINIYOGA) specificity is placed upfront in the beginning of work with clear annotation for some select mantras.  The snippets are placed below to draw the following understanding:

·         Purusha-Medha is 31^st chapter deliberations after first 30 chapters pre-qualifier.

·         ‘Purusha-Medha’  is a ‘Vedic Yajna’ by that technicality. It is NOT ‘ Ritual of Human Sacrifice’. The ‘oblation is with ‘Ghee’ mainly.

·         The yajna is of about 40 days duration. The starting day is ‘ chaitra-shukla dashami’. There are 33 technical ‘deekshaa’ steps ;

·         The ‘pashu’ (NOT ANIMAL !!  Certainly NOT Human as an animal to be sacrificed !!)  is ‘placed in charge of (= NIYOJANAM / NIYUNAKTI ).

·         The ‘ pashu’ associated people to each ‘yupa’ are worshipped and  ALL ARE RELASED at the end of WORSHIP.

·         Purusha Medha is followed up with ‘VANASPATI –Yaaga’ – another completion complement .

·         After Purusha-Medha , the  FIRST –MAJOR - NEXT step is SANNYASA ONLY.   The optionality to live in a village is also there and reaccept the ‘ Yajnika-life and be a ‘Vaidika – Acharya - Purohita’.

 

 

 

 

 

                       Summary point to note from the text :  There is no ‘sacrifice/ violence’!  or gory killing and ‘blood flow’ as imagined.

 

(b) ‘Shaastra-framework for Yoga- Meditation:   Vedanta Meditation and Ashrama –change.

 

For this goal, guidance on use of ‘ PURUSHA-SUKTA’ –for  ‘PURUSHA- MEDHA’ -  as ‘ Yajna- yoga-MANTRAS’ is given in the following chapter.

 

 

The technicality for this is in Chapter 40 of text. This is called’ Instruction for JNANA-KANDA after KARMA-KANDA.

 

 

                        Summary point to note from the text :  There is no  need to debate ‘sacrifice/ violence’!  as imagined. The purpose is Yoga.

 

(c) Motivate backed history construction and civilizational narrative  interpretation:  This covers all other interpretations differing from ‘traditional ‘shaastra’-constructs as above. The academic names could be western, oriental,  anthropological,   …….

 

There are enough published resources, including ‘ Akso Parpola’s conclusions’ !

 

                        Summary point to note from the text :  The imagined ‘Human sacrifice/ violence’!  or gory killing and ‘blood flow’ is total

                        travesty of bad –translation of Source –Text- language- Tradition’. 

 

Regards

BVK Sastry

====================================