Earliest known 'division' of Veda

[Viswanath B]

Respected Friends,

It is widely held by vaidikas that the veda is originally is a single one, and was divided in to four by Vyasa. I am a bit curious about when this event happened. One way of finding out in an approximate form is to look at our itihasa etc, and see if they mention the veda by names. For example,

1. In bhagavadgIta , krishna says "vedAnAm sAmavEdOhaM". So a division of veda happened before that time.

2. In bharata, when paNdava were leaving for forest having lost the 'match', they are accompanied by their purohita dhoumya who is said to be chanting the atharvaNavEda mantras. So a division of veda happened before that time.

I somehow believed earlier, wrongly, that such a division happened around the beginning of kaliyuga. But now I have reason to believe it happened much earlier. By the time of Kaurava/Pandava, the system is already in place.

Can you site any examples from other epics / otherwise ? Or is it known as to when vyasa did what he did ?

Thanks a lot,

Viswanath

[ajit Gargeshwari]

Hi,
Vedas are Apaurusheya and anadi. Vedas were never created and always exists. It has neither a beginning or end it timeless. At the beginning of every new Kalpa  Vyasa who is immortal ( Cheranjeevi some says an incarnation of Shiva) divides the Vedas for easy transmission and assimilation, for the benefit of all mankind.
I hope this rather short explanation helps. For technical details one can read Mimamsa texts . For non scholarly undersatnding onecan read epics. One can also read many modern books written on the subject for greater clarity.
Regards
Ajit Gargeshwari

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "samskrita" group.
To post to this group, send email to sams...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to samskrita+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/samskrita?hl=en.

[Vidya R]

Namaste!

"At the beginning of every new Kalpa  Vyasa who is immortal ( Cheranjeevi some says an incarnation of Shiva) divides the Vedas " - Interesting.... Can you please specify the basis for making this statement, if available?

"incarnation of Shiva" - I have the heard the following, indicating a relationship with Vishnu :

          व्यासाय विष्णुरूपाय    व्यासरूपाय   विष्णवे  |

          नमो    वै ब्रह्मनिधये   वासिष्ठाय नमो नमः  ||

dhanyavAdAH |

vidyA

---

From: ajit Gargeshwari <ajit.gar...@gmail.com>
To: sams...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Friday, September 16, 2011 12:27 PM
Subject: Re: [Samskrita] Earliest known 'division' of Veda

[Viswanath B]

Hi,

I do believe that veda (notice the singular) is aupaurusheya, fully agree. I was looking for the time when this single veda is divided into four by vyasa. You mentioned that this division done at the begining of every kalpa. Could you please let me know the source for this ?

Thanks
Vissu

[ajit Gargeshwari]

Namaste vidyaji,

The same verse you have quoted one can use
vyasaya shivarupaya shivarupaya vyasave
Vysaysasya hrudayam vishnuhu vishunasya hrudayam vyasaha

Please ignore my typo errors. I can elaborate further but I would desist myself

Regards
Ajit Gargeshwari

[ajit Gargeshwari]

Hi ,


My apologies for the error in my previous mail. at the beginning of each Kalpa, a Bramha is born. Bramha through his Manasica Putras ( mind born Children) and the first progenitors of mankind re-communicate the Vedas.  At the end of every Kalpa the entire universe ( Brmahanda) dissolves back to its source and from the source the Bramhanda evolves back.  The Puranas are the source for this information. 

The source for  of this theory of evolution and involution can be traced back to the Upanishads or  to even earlier texts of Bramhanas ( a division of vedas)   or some Samhita texts of Rig Veda.In short nothing is created exists or evolves apart from the source which can be called "Brahman" from a philosophical perspective.

Strictly speaking  The Vedas  were one unit. Vyasa ( literally means a compiler)  also called Veda Vyasa compiled the Vedas ( His real name according to Mahabaratha was Krishna Dwaipayan).

When Vyasa compiled the Vedas he divided them into 4 Samhitas and further divided the Samhitas in to four parts. The time of this compilation and division  is said to have been done at the end of Dwapara Yuga according to mythology.

Historical perspective offered by modern scholars are different from this



Regards
Ajit

[ajit Gargeshwari]

PS : In continuation of my previous mail. The reason that the division of Vedas already appears to be  already in place is due to the fact that Vyasa not only compiled the Vedas divided them he wrote the Mahabaratha and all the Puranas. Vyasa plays an important role in the story of Mahabaratha.
Please keep in my mind that the entire Mahabaratha is written in the form of a flash back of events narrated at the Sacrifice of Janmejaya.

Hope this clarifies what I have written earlier

Thanks
Ajit Gargeshwari

[hnbhat B.R.]

On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 11:05 PM, ajit Gargeshwari <ajit.gar...@gmail.com> wrote:

Namaste vidyaji,

The same verse you have quoted one can use
vyasaya shivarupaya shivarupaya vyasave
Vysaysasya hrudayam vishnuhu vishunasya hrudayam vyasaha

Please ignore my typo errors. I can elaborate further but I would desist myself

Better decision. Otherwise, like the forms like above ones would have swarmed throughout our संस्कृत group which every member would have had to suffer.

Thanks once again.

 

-- 

Dr. Hari Narayana Bhat B.R. M.A., Ph.D.,
Research Scholar,

Ecole française d'Extrême-OrientCentre de Pondichéry

16 & 19, Rue Dumas

Pondichéry - 605 001

[Arvind_Kolhatkar]

<vyasaya shivarupaya shivarupaya vyasave
Vysaysasya hrudayam vishnuhu vishunasya hrudayam vyasaha>

Could we have this in DevnagarI, so that we can understand it better
and see the grammar behind it?
As quoted in Roman, it looks a tad strange to me...

Arvind Kolhatkar, Toronto, September 17, 2011.

[ajit Gargeshwari]

Hi

शिवाय विष्णु रूपया शिव रूपया विष्णवे
शिवस्य हृदयं विष्णोर विश्नोश्च  हृदयं शिवः 
The letter is ण in the last pada
In  the above mentioned famous verse vishnu is replaced by vyasa and recited in our family.
Regards
Ajit Gargeshwari

[hnbhat B.R.]

On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 7:52 PM, ajit Gargeshwari <ajit.gar...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi

शिवाय विष्णु रूपया शिव रूपया विष्णवे
शिवस्य हृदयं विष्णोर विश्नोश्च  हृदयं शिवः 
The letter is ण in the last pada
In  the above mentioned famous verse vishnu is replaced by vyasa and recited in our family.
Regards
Ajit Gargeshwari

Here quoted verse only identifies विष्णु with शिव. It is popular that there are many हरि-हर temples as such compromising वैष्णव and शैव cults, a new phase as it represents was existent during the history of Hindu schools/ cults.

 But I do not think of the other verse you had quoted (even if you claim to be recited in your family) transplanting विष्णु by व्यास, I could not imagine of such forms as you have typed in the other message because of the forms. But शिव can be easily transplanted by व्यास as it can fit conveniently in the verse without affecting the structure metrically or grammatically as quoted by R Vidya, which is found in most of the विष्णुसहस्रनामस्तोत्र texts. It can be attested in the text available in this link and as I used to recite the Stotra daily. 

विष्णुसहस्रनामस्तोत्रम्

Now it is up to you to support your quoted verse from any reliable source than one typed in your earlier message. Hope all the best. As it is typed in roman script, I could not make out any meaning of it and what you have typed in Devanagari here, has nothing to do with the one typed in your previous message. 

[hnbhat B.R.]

On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 7:52 PM, ajit Gargeshwari <ajit.gar...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi

शिवाय विष्णु रूपया शिव रूपया विष्णवे
शिवस्य हृदयं विष्णोर विश्नोश्च  हृदयं शिवः 
The letter is ण in the last pada
In  the above mentioned famous verse vishnu is replaced by vyasa and recited in our family.
Regards
Ajit Gargeshwari

I could not make out the sense in the above highlighted words in the context.

 

[ajit Gargeshwari]

Can one write
शिवाय व्यसरुपाया  शिव रूपया व्यासः
व्यासस्य हृदयं शिवः शिवस्य ह्रुद्रयम  व्यासः
would this verse be grammatically correct? 
If incorrect please correct me

This was quoted by me in the context in which a member, wanted to know whether Vyasa was an incarnation of Vishnu by quoting a verse that supports that he was an incarnation Vishnu. All I wanted to say was,  in that particular verse a variation can be made made that will make Vyasa an incarnation or Shiva or any God. His message is for one and all.
PS  Sri  Arvindji asked for a Devanagari version and I tried to type the same
Dr. Hari Narayana Bhat says" I could not imagine of such forms as you have typed in the other message because of the forms. "
My answer I am not a Grammarian, so thank you for pointing out the error.
Regards
Ajit Gargeshwari

--

[shankara]

Ajitji,

I think you could make it grammatically correct by changing it into the following form (I am not sure if it is metrically okay).

शिवाय व्यासरूपाय व्यासाय शिवरूपिणे
शिवस्य हृदयं व्यासः व्यासस्य च हृदयं शिवः

Still, it is our own creation. Not from the scriptures. So, it will lack the scriptural authority.

 

regards
shankara

---

From: ajit Gargeshwari <ajit.gar...@gmail.com>
To: sams...@googlegroups.com

Sent: Saturday, 17 September 2011 9:47 PM
Subject: Re: [Samskrita] Re: Earliest known 'division' of Veda

[ajit Gargeshwari]

Shankaraji,

Thank you for correcting the verse.

As far as scriptural authority is concerned,  Please see the quotes below

All the quotes are from Shiva Purana which is one among the 18  Puranas ( I am not disputing the popular belief the Vyasa was an incanation of Vishnu though not among the 10 Dasha Avataras)

So if the Purana says Shiva incarnates in every Kali yuga to save Dharma it means that he devides the Vedas as a Vyasa Avatar as Vedas is nothing but Dharma.
 
Quote 1
"There are 4 Vedas in Hinduism, Rig, yegur, samam, adharvana which was composed by Veda Vyasar and he was born as Veda Vyasar who composed Mahabaratha. He was also Lord Shiva's Incarination of Dhakshanamoorthy who initiated the 4 Sanagathi Sages. He was also the incarnation of Lord Hayagreeva who was the Lord Of Wisdom. He has taken numerous incarnations like the above mentioned and has been confirmed by these Nadi's. Likewise Oracles, horoscope experts and Samuthriga Lakshna experts and Siddha and Seers have confirmed that he is the Supreme Lord's true Avatar. "

Quote 2
The Shiv Purana says that Bhagwan Shiv incarnates in every Kali Yuga for the purpose of “conferring the Dharm of the Vedas to disciples”. “Shulapani himself incarnates upon the earth through the yugas to spread knowledge for the liberation of those in his protection”. (Shiv Purana, Vayaviya Samhita).

Quote 3
The names of all the incarnations of Lord Shiv are given in the Shatrudrasamhita and Vayaviya Samhita of the Shiv Purana (Chapters 4&5, Chapter 9). They are similarly given in Chapter 51 of the Poorva Vibhag of the Kurm Purana. The Puranas also record that in each incarnation the Lord shall have four yogi disciples who shall be adept Yogis and shall attain liberation. The names of all these and those to come in the future are also given. We also know from the authority of these Puranas that these incarnations occur in all the Kali Yugas and that the purpose always is “to assist Vyas” or to “spread” or “strengthen” yoga or the ‘nivrutty marg’ the path of renunciation.

References

http://www.neelkanthdhaam.org/Srspu.html
http://forums.about.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=2&nav=messages&webtag=ab-hinduism&tid=1930
http://swamishivapadananda.typepad.com/swami_shivapadananda/2011/06/index.html

[Vimala Sarma]

Origin of the Vedas

For those interested in a non-traditional explanation, the vedas arose  because, as the vedic yajna ritual became more complicated, there was a division of labour between the officiating priests so that four distinct roles emerged and each of these classes of priests had their own hymn books; ie samhitas.  The priests were:

UgAtR – responsible for singing and his chants were the sAmaveda

HotR – responsible for all recitations and his “book” (read memory) was the Rgveda

Adhvaryu – is responsible for all sacrificial actions, including making oblations etc, and he was the priest of the Yajus – Yajurveda

There was a also a supervising priest, the Brahman,  who was the most learned and his role was to correct any mistakes.

 

These classes of priests were then responsible for maintaining all the hymns correctly and families arising from them (shakas) learnt by heart specific passages, and so on through the generations.  These then became more complicated as there were families who “remembered” passages differently so there were splits into recensions of the vedas or “schools”– such as he shukla and kRSNa yajurveda, which in turn gave rise to kaTHa taitterIya etc.  The Arthava which was a book of magic and spells became accepted as the fourth veda much later.  The vedas a still referred to as traiyI.  Each of the hymn collections (samhitas) of vedas grew by having sections added to them subsequently dealing with specific matters – first the brAhmaNas dealing with details of rituals, then the AraNyakas dealing with mysticism and finally the upaniSads ( in some cases embedded in the Aranyakas) dealing with philosophical speculation.  Many of the 108 “traditional” upaniSads were not written until the middle ages (16-17 centuries); and so only 12 are identified as being “early” ie authentic part of the vedic corpus – these are bRhadAranyaka, ChAndogya, TaittirIya, Aitareya, KauSItaki, Kena, KaTHa, IshA, MuNDaka, Prashna, MAndUkya, ShvetAshvatara,

 

Hope at least some of you may be interested in this explanation.

Vimala

 

From: sams...@googlegroups.com [mailto:sams...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of hnbhat B.R.
Sent: Saturday, 17 September 2011 9:56 PM
To: sams...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [Samskrita] Earliest known 'division' of Veda

 

 

On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 11:05 PM, ajit Gargeshwari <ajit.gar...@gmail.com> wrote:

--

[ajit Gargeshwari]

Hi,

Regarding the Origin and growth of Of Vedas and related literature theories propounded by Various scholars can be broadly classified into four

• Historical Methods: Working hypothesis of Max Muller and others which were assumed correct without reading that he proposed dates sating that this there are tentative and a working hypothesis. One can read Subash C Kak's and other scholars rebuttal of this theory. This also includes archeological methods.
  
• Astronomical Methods: Propounded by Bala Gangadhar Tilak . Theories of Shyama Shastri Subash Kak's interpretation etc.
• Linguistic and Comparative methods.
  
• Mythological Methods: Reading studying and understanding our Puranas and expressing the views contained believed and expressed in Puranas and allied literature.

There may be more and better methods not ruling out such a possibality.

Those who are interested in this subject can read different scholarly contributions made by different scholars and undestand the problems and difficulty involved in all or any one of these methods. There is still no unanimity about Vedic dates and when and how the Vedas were divided and classified.

I hope some discussion can be by this Group members and arrive at a woking hypothesis on this difficult and complex subjects involved on this subject

Regards
Ajit Gargeshwari

[Vimala Sarma]

Namo NamaH

Krishna dvipAyana (drinking twice) could also be “black elephant” and dvaipAyana could be the patronymic – son of black elephant.

But I am not certain of this as I am not versed in purANas. Your explanation breaking to dvIpe + ayana – ‘island abode’ could also work.

Vimala

 

From: SL Abhyankar [mailto:sanskr...@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, 18 September 2011 3:58 PM
To: sams...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [Samskrita] Earliest known 'division' of Veda

 

नमो नमः !
एतद्विषये चालिता: सर्वाः विचाराः बहु ज्ञानवर्धकाः खलु ।
सन्ति काः शङ्काः अपि -
(१) व्यासः "वि + आ + अस्" इति धातुतः ?

• "विशेषेण आकृष्टतया च अस्तुं = व्यास्तुम्" कृताः वेदाः येन सः वेद-व्यासः ?
• "अजित गार्गेश्वरी"-महोदयः लिखति "Vyasa ( literally means a compiler)  also called Veda Vyasa compiled the Vedas ( His real name according to Mahabaratha was Krishna Dwaipayan)."
• व्यासः तु पाराशरः पराशर-मुनेः पुत्रः । माता सत्यवती तस्य ।
• तस्य वर्णः कृष्णः । सुविदितं एतत् ।
• द्वीपे अयनं यस्य सः द्वैपायनः ?
• आपटे-महाभागेन शब्दकोशे विवृतमस्ति द्वैप = relating to, living on an island;
• द्वैपायनः"The island-born"
• ततः कृष्णः च द्वैपायनः च इति कृष्णद्वैपायनः ?

(२) पुराणानि "पुरा + अन् (अण्)" ? = पुरा अभवत् ?

• अतः पुरा यद्यदभवत् तस्य वर्णनं येषु ते पुराणानि ?
• ततः पुराणानि इतिहासाः एव ? न तु मिथ्य-विचाराः (mythology) ?
• अपि शक्यमिदं यत् पाश्चिमात्यैः विद्वद्भिः पुराणानि (mythology) इति संबोधितानि ?
• पाश्चिमात्य-विद्वज्जनानां एतद्देशीय-वाङ्ग्मयस्य विषये पूर्वग्रहाः तु विख्याताः एव ?

(३) विमला-महोदया लिखति "Many of the 108 “traditional” upaniSads were not written until the middle ages (16-17 centuries);"

• कः संदर्भः अस्य middle ages (16-17 centuries) इति उद्धरणस्य ?
• एताविधाः समयसंदर्भाः अपि पाश्चिमात्य-विद्वज्जनैः एव प्रसृताः खलु ?

(४) वेदाः अपौरुषाः । तथापि ये वेदाः अधुना लभ्यन्ते ते व्यासमुनिना यथा व्यास्ताः तथैव खलु ?

• कः समयविग्रहः वेदानां षड्दर्शनानां च ?
• योगः अपि एकं दर्शनम् । एतद्दर्शनं अपि पुराणम् । पश्यताम् "इमं विवस्वते योगं प्रोक्तवानमहमव्ययम् । विवस्वान्मनवे प्राह मनुरिक्ष्वाकवेऽब्रवीत् ।।(गीता-४-१) 
• यः योगः "दर्शनम्" इति ज्ञायते सः सांख्ययोगः ? "सांख्ययोगो नाम द्वितीयोऽध्यायः" । तस्य सृजनसमयः गीतायां उल्लेखितः अस्त्येव । पश्यताम् - सांख्ये कृतान्ते प्रोक्तानि (१८-१३)" यदि युगानि "कृत-त्रेता-द्वापार-कलि"-एताविधेन क्रमेण सांख्ययोगः तु अतिपुराणः !!
• यथा "बी विश्वनाथ"-महोदयेन प्रस्तुतं वेदाः महाभारतात् पूर्वमेव यतः अस्ति उल्लेखः "वेदानां सामवेदोऽस्मि (गीता-१०-२२) । वेदानां उल्लेखाः गीतायां स्थाने स्थाने दृश्यन्ते
• "वेदेषु यज्ञेषु तपःसु चैव (८-२८)
• वेद्यं पवित्रमोंकार ऋक्-साम-यजुरेव च (९-१७) अत्र अथर्ववेदस्य न कोऽपि उल्लेखः ।
• त्रैविद्या माम् सोमपाः पूतपापाः (९-२०) "त्रयाणां वेदानां विद्या यस्य सः त्रैविद्यः !" अत्र त्रयाणां वेदानामेव उल्लेखः ।
• न वेदयज्ञाध्ययनैर्न दानैः (११-४८) 
• गीतायां ब्रह्मसूत्राणामपि उल्लेखः दृश्यते "ब्रह्मसूत्रपदैश्चैव हेतुमद्भिर्विनिश्चितैः (१३-४)

सस्नेहम्
अभ्यंकरकुलोत्पन्नः श्रीपादः ।
"श्रीपतेः पदयुगं स्मरणीयम् ।"

[hnbhat B.R.]

@ Abhyankar & Vimala:

द्वीपम् अयनम् = उत्पत्तिस्थानम्, यस्य स - द्वीपायनः, द्वीपायन एव - द्वैपायनः - प्रज्ञादित्वात् स्वार्थे अण्।

Mahābhārata

MBh, 1, 57, 71.

इति सत्यवती हृष्टा लब्ध्वा वरम् अनुत्तमम् / (६९.१) 

पराशरेण संयुक्ता सद्यो गर्भं सुषाव सा / (६९.२) 

जज्ञे च यमुनाद्वीपे पाराशर्यः स वीर्यवान् / (६९.३) 

एवं द्वैपायनो जज्ञे सत्यवत्यां पराशरात् / (७१.१) 

द्वीपे न्यस्तः स यद् बालस्तस्माद् द्वैपायनो ऽभवत् // (७१.२) 

||shrImadbhagavadgItA || 
भगवद्गीता - ९.१७
पिताहमस्य जगतो माता धाता पितामहः ।
वेद्यं पवित्रमोंकार ऋक्साम यजुरेव च॥

वेदानां सामवेदो-स्मि ---

is a separate theme than the main इतिहास theme of महाभारत which claims everything being part of कृष्ण as the all pervasive spirit and need not be taken as a proof for the division of महाभारत. as the below quoted lines show महाभारत also composed at the time of compilation of 4 Veda-s as the fifth one. So no hasty decision can be drawn.

@ the main issue raised in this topic by Vishwanath:

MBh, 1, 57, 73-75

ततः स महर्षिर् विद्वाञ् शिष्यान् आहूय धर्मतः / (७३.२) 

विव्यास वेदान् यस्माच्च तस्माद् व्यास इति स्मृतः // (७३.३) 

----------

वेदान् अध्यापयामास महाभारतपञ्चमान् / (७४.१) 

सुमन्तुं जैमिनिं पैलं शुकं चैव स्वम् आत्मजम् // (७४.२) 

प्रभुर्वरिष्ठो वरदो वैशंपायनमेव च / (७५.१) 

संहितास्तैः पृथक्त्वेन भारतस्य प्रकाशिताः / (७५.२) 

When व्यास taught to his four शिष्य-s the four Veda-s, महाभारत was considered as the 5th as the above quoted line highlighted seems to imply. There are sources when he taught the four to the four, they were sub-divided and taught to their own शिष्य-s in different शाखा-s, for which there is also Puranic reference. The ascription of reclassification of Veda-s in the above quoted portion can be limited to classifying and spreading into different शाखा-s.

By the time of महाभाष्य, they were available in their full-fledged recessions:

 चत्वारः वेदाः साङ्गाः सरहस्याः बहुधा विभिन्नाः एकशतम् अध्वर्युशाखाः सहस्रवर्त्मा सामवेदः एकविंसतिधा बाह्वृच्यम् नवधा आथर्वणः वेदः । (पस्पशाह्निक प-१२; अकि-१,८.२३-१०.३; रो-१,३५-३९; भा-४९/६२) 

शाब्दिकाभरणम् -

एकशतमध्वर्यो: शाखा: सहस्त्रवर्त्मा सामवेद:। एकविंशतिधा बाह्वृच्यं नवधाथर्वणो वेद:।

वेद-s are called त्रयी, "त्रैविद्याः सोमपाः वेदपारगाः" relates to the three होतृ, अध्वर्यु, उद्गातृ main participants in the sacrifices like सोमयाग, while ब्रह्मन् supervises all of their activities, according to the compiled manual of rites अथर्ववेद. Hence the compilation of the manual of rites using the mantra-s in the main three compilations is considered as separately as it contains the same verses.

More in the next in case needed. I abstain from entering into details in this question as the information is important than the date of composition/compilation as far as I am concerned.

@ Ajit Gargeswari:

LiPur, 1, 24, 125-130

पाशरसुतः श्रीमान् विष्णुर्लोकपितामहः / (१२५.१) 

यदा भविष्यति व्यासो नाम्ना द्वैपायनः प्रभुः // (१२५.२)

तदा षष्ठेन चांशेन कृष्णः पुरुषसत्तमः / (१२६.१) 

वसुदेवाद्यदुश्रेष्ठो वासुदेवो भविष्यति // (१२६.२) 

तदाप्यहं भविष्यामि योगात्मा योगमायया / (१२७.१) 

लोकविस्मयनार्थाय ब्रह्मचारिशरीरकः // (१२७.२) 

श्मशाने मृतम् उत्सृष्टं दृष्ट्वा कायम् अनाथकम् / (१२८.१) 

ब्राह्मणानां हितार्थाय प्रविष्टो योगमायया // (१२८.२) 

दिव्यां मेरुगुहां पुण्यां त्वया सार्धं च विष्णुना / (१२९.१) 

भविष्यामि तदा ब्रह्मंल्लकुली नाम नामतः // (१२९.२) 

कायावतार इत्येवं सिद्धक्षेत्रं च वै तदा / (१३०.१) 

 

The above are the words of Shiva himself incarnating along with द्वैपायनव्यास, as लकुली(शः) expounding लकुलीश-पाशुपत cult who declares द्वैपायनव्यास is the incarnation of विष्णु himself. 

KūPur, 1, 18, 25.a-b

द्वैपायनाच्छुको जज्ञे भगवानेव शङ्करः /  

No need for explanation as it is clearly शुक was the incarnation of शंकर according to Kūrmapurāṇa.

cited. Now it is up to your will and pleasure to replace विष्णु with शिव in the verse of विष्णुसहस्रनाम. 

[murthy]

I for one agree that the process of differentiation in the Vedas as lucidly given by Vimalaji is very plausible.

As regards number of authentic Upanishads, one needs to check references made to Upanishads in later works before believing that only 12 are authentic. Recently I came across reference to an Upanishad outside this twelve in a work dated to 10th to 12th century. I need to search and spend much time to give more details.

REgards

Murthy

[Viswanath B]

Hi,

I am sorry, but this discussion is veering into some direction, not anticipated by me. 

My question, to be more precise, is which of our epics / itihasas / otherwise mention the 'vedas' by their name ? We know mahabharata does so. Any others ?

As far as the other direction goes, We all have our opinions and beliefs. These are influenced by the books we read first, the teachings we hear first, probably in the early part of life. IMHO, none of us are the historians who could say these things since they know it.  This means that any such discussion won't converge.

Some of you may remember the Men-In-Black movie. The junior agent before he is recruited, says he believes that there are no aliens. The senior counters him - " 1000 years ago people believed that the earth is flat, 100 years ago, people believed that earth is the center of universe". The beliefs, in either direction, are only as long as they are 'proven' wrong.

Science has this bad attribute/nature, that it can't believe what it can't prove. This doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It could just mean science doesn't have the ability to prove it yet. May be some time in future, science acquires the ability to do so. Science is open to that. Unfortunately, we as humans tend to form our beliefs on what science believes today.

Veda say, the Paramatma is nirakara, nirguna swaroopa. Science needs some guna, some characteristic to prove paramatma's existence. Can they converge ?

Apologies for this long diatribe,

Viswanath

On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 6:17 AM, Vimala Sarma <vsa...@bigpond.com> wrote:

[hnbhat B.R.]

On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 11:27 AM, Viswanath B <vegav...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi,

I am sorry, but this discussion is veering into some direction, not anticipated by me. 

My question, to be more precise, is which of our epics / itihasas / otherwise mention the 'vedas' by their name ? We know mahabharata does so. Any others ?

Dear Viswanath,

I had been observing the responses and had time only to reply the ones I immediately drew attention, as others uninteresting to me.

Now once again you are making it more diverging. What do you want? If you want to confirm that व्यास was the classifier or compiler of the Veda-s taught to him by Brahma or Shiva (according to different sources)? Or want to collect the names in all the epics that name the 4 Veda-s? Or to clarify the limitation into त्रयी while others enumerate as Four? Or the history of Vedic Literature, on which different views have been propounded by many Indian and European Scholars as summed up by Ajit Gargeswari? when you put forward the question when the Veda-s are divided into four? 

 

You can clear put forward your questions and what do you want to know?  

पुरुषसूक्त cites the three Veda-s 

पशून्ताँश्चक्रेवा यव्यानारागयान्ग्राम्याश्च ये ।।6।। 

तस्माद् यज्ञात्सर्वहुत ऋचः सामानि जज्ञिरे । 

छन्दाँसि जज्ञिरे तस्माद् यजुस्तस्मादजायत ।।7।। 

तस्मादश्वा अजायन्त ये के चोभयादतः । 

गावो ह जज्ञिरे तस्मात्तस्माञ्जाता अजावयः ।।8॥

गोपथब्राह्मण:

(१,१.६) तेभ्यः श्रान्तेभ्यस्तप्तेभ्यः संतप्तेभ्यस्त्रीन्वेदान्निरमिमीत ऋग्वेदो यजुर्वेदः सामवेद इति

(१,१.६) अग्नेरृग्वेदं वायोर्यजुर्वेदं आदित्यात्सामवेदम्

(१,१.६) स तांस्त्रीन्वेदानभ्यश्राम्यदभ्यतपत्समतपत्

(१,१.६) तेभ्यः श्रान्तेभ्यस्तप्तेभ्यः संतप्तेभ्यस्तिस्रो महाव्याहृतीर्निरमिमीत भूर्भुवः स्वरिति

(१,१.६) भूरित्यृग्वेदाद्भुव इति यजुर्वेदात्स्वरिति सामवेदात्।

Brihadaraynaka Upanishad 2.4.10 names the four also:

….अस्य महतो भूतस्य निश्वसितमेतद् यदृग्वेदो यजुर्वेदः सामवेदोऽथर्वाङ्गिरस ...

तैत्तिरीयोपनिषत् - ॥ ब्रह्मानन्दवल्ली ॥ द्वितीयो ऽनुवाकः।

अन्योऽन्तर आत्मा मनोमयः । तेनैष पूर्णः । स वा एष पुरुषविध एव । तस्य पुरुषविधताम् । अन्वयं पुरुषविधः । तस्य यजुरेव शिरः । ऋग्दक्षिणः पक्षः । सामोत्तरः पक्षः । आदेश आत्मा । अथर्वाङ्गिरसः पुच्छं प्रतिष्ठा । तदप्येष श्लोको भवति ॥ १ ॥

This is from भृगुसंहिता -

सामवेदो घृतेशस्स्यादुपस्नाने तु वत्सराः   । । २२.११७  । ।

ऋग्वेदो मधुदेवस्स्यादुपस्नाने तु वायवः   ।

यजुर्वेदो दधीशोऽभूदुपस्ना कपर्दिनः   । । २२.११८  । ।

क्षीरे त्वधर्ववेदश्च उपस्नानेऽश्विनौ तथा   ।

गन्धोदके षडृतवो मरुतस्तदनन्तरे   । । २२.११९  । ।

naming the four Veda-s.

मुण्डकोपनिषत् -

॥ प्रथममुण्डके प्रथमः खण्डः ॥

द्वे विद्ये वेदितव्ये इति ह स्म

यद्ब्रह्मविदो वदन्ति परा चैवापरा च ॥ ४॥

तत्रापरा ऋग्वेदो यजुर्वेदः सामवेदोऽथर्ववेदः

शिक्षा कल्पो व्याकरणं निरुक्तं छन्दो ज्योतिषमिति ।

अथ परा यया तदक्षरमधिगम्यते ॥ ५॥

Is this enough for you to confirm the existence of 4 fold division of Veda-s?  Of the other PurANa-s ascribe the division to VyAsa- but some others ascribe  the origin accounted for differently to either शिव or विष्णु according to their inclination.

The dates you can confirm from others' messages with different theories put forward and decide yourself if the question is made from the historical perspective. This much I can gather for your question as I understood it. 

[hnbhat B.R.]

In continuation to my previous message, precise answer to your question :

भागवतपुराण accounts for the belief which can also be substantiated with statements from other Puraana-s also:

द्वापरे समनुप्राप्ते तृतीये युगपर्यये / (१४.२) 

जातः पराशराद्योगी वासव्यां कलया हरेः // (१४.३) 

स कदाचित् सरस्वत्या उपस्पृश्य जलं शुचिः / (१५.१) 

विविक्त एक आसीन उदिते रविमण्डले // (१५.२) 

परावरज्ञः स ऋषिः कालेनाव्यक्तरंहसा / (१६.१) 

युगधर्मव्यतिकरं प्राप्तं भुवि युगे युगे // (१६.२) 

भौतिकानां च भावानां शक्तिह्रासं च तत्कृतम् / (१७.१) 

अश्रद्दधानान् निःसत्त्वान् दुर्मेधान् ह्रसितायुषः // (१७.२) 

दुर्भगांश्च जनान् वीक्ष्य मुनिर्दिव्येन चक्षुषा / (१८.१) 

सर्ववर्णाश्रमाणां यद् दध्यौ हितम् अमोघदृक् // (१८.२) 

चातुर्होत्रं कर्म शुद्धं प्रजानां वीक्ष्य वैदिकम् / (१९.१) 

व्यदधाद्यज्ञसंतत्यै वेदम् एकं चतुर्विधम् // (१९.२) 

ऋग्यजुःसामाथर्वाख्या वेदाश् चत्वार उद्धृताः / (२०.१) 

इतिहासपुराणं च पञ्चमो वेद उच्यते // (२०.२) 

तत्रर्ग्वेदधरः पैलः सामगो जैमिनिः कविः / (२१.१) 

All references of Rigveda: from DCS chronologically (according to their classification) arranged:

(unclassified)
Garuḍapurāṇa3/75641

पूर्वादिभ्यो मुखेभ्यस्तु ऋग्वेदाद्याः प्रजज्ञिरे // (३४.२) 

States the origin of the 4 Veda-s from the 4 faces of Brahma himself. This corroborates with others too like MarkandeyaPurana etc. (from other sources):

early

Chāndogyopaniṣad4/8495
Gopathabrāhmaṇa9/9526

epic
Mahābhārata5/751226
Manusmṛti3/37542

classical
Bhāgavatapurāṇa1/42634
Kūrmapurāṇa4/81754
Liṅgapurāṇa2/127384
Matsyapurāṇa2/122412
Nāṭyaśāstra1/2631
Suśrutasaṃhitā1/146319

medieval
Agnipurāṇa2/8325
Āyurvedadīpikā1/38321
Mṛgendraṭīkā1/21992

late
Skandapurāṇa (2)7/113973

The above listing is tentative as Ajit Gargeswari has suggested and need not be taken final and conclusive. 

[Vasu Srinivasan]

Bhat-ji thanks for excellent references...

Also here is one from Ramayana, where Rama (talking to Lakshmana) heaps praise about Hanuman's knowledge in all 3 vedas:

नानृग्वेदविनीतस्य नायजुर्वेदधारिण: । नासामवेदविदुष: शक्यमेवम् विभाषितुम् ।  (Kishkinda kaanda, 5.3.26)

To re-iterate the original question, Vishwanath had mentioned that he had wrongly believed that the division happened at beginning of Kali yuga. (Which is not the case). So the question was simply what did Vyasa "compile" ?

The "when/timeframe" answer is best accepted traditionally. Non-traditional "explanations" will merely be opinions.

@Vishwanath

Though this is side tracking - im not sure if Vedas directly mention that paramaatma is nirguna -- the acharyas schools are different...isnt it. (shankaracharya says is nirguna, but not ramanujaacharya and madhvacharya)

dhanyavaadaH
Vasu Srinivasan
-----------------------------------
vagartham.blogspot.com
vasya10.wordpress.com

2011/9/18 hnbhat B.R. <hnbh...@gmail.com>

[Vimala Sarma]

Viswanath Mahodaya

I agree with Bhat Mahodaya – the earliest reference to the three vedas is in puruSa sUkta in Rgveda.  There is nothing before this. But even here we do not know if the reference is to Rk chants, mantras and chandas (accent and metre) which are said at the sacrifice, rather than to the collections – samhitas.

Vimala

 

From: sams...@googlegroups.com [mailto:sams...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of hnbhat B.R.
Sent: Monday, 19 September 2011 12:00 AM
To: sams...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [Samskrita] Earliest known 'division' of Veda

 

 

On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 11:27 AM, Viswanath B <vegav...@gmail.com> wrote:

--

[ajit Gargeshwari]

Hi
Never heard Krishna dvipAyana (drinking twice) could also be “black elephant”  The meaning is novel.

Explanation breaking to dvIpe + ayana – ‘island abode’  would be the apt meaning is Puranic context in line with stories

Regards
Ajit Gargeshwari

[Narendra Sakhalkar]

Dear Shri Shankarji, Namaskar.
The shloka quoted by you needs only two minor corrections in the
second line, which should be,Shiwasya hridayam vyaso,vyasasya hridayam
shivaha.
Kindly excuse my inability to write the shloka in the Devanagari
script, in this electronic medium.
Ram,Ram.
Narendra Sakhalkar

>>Hiशिवाय विष्णु रूपया शिव रूपया विष्णवे

[Viswanath B]

Thanks to the lucid references put forth by Shri Bhat Mahodaya, My question is answered. I think Mm Vimala summarized it nicely saying " the earliest reference to three vedas is in puruSha sUkta".  Had I been little careful I could have known this myself. 

Like I mentioned, I wanted to find out the approximate time of 'division' of a single veda into the three/four we see today. Since we roughly know the time of our epics- ramayana in treta yuga, mahabharata in dwapara yuga etc, I hoped that by soliciting references to any occurrences of veda names, I could get some timeline.  

My question is not whether vyAsa being the compiler / person responsible for a division. It was more on the time line. Of course I assumed any division was done by vyAsa. 

The reference to the names in puruSha sUkta is the ultimate reference. (My personal belief is that of) the veda being the apauruSheya, it implies that we had four / three veda from the 'beginning'. 

Yet it is usually attributed to Vyasa that he has compiled/divided. So, something he has done that is similar to such an activity, but we don't know what it is -

Thanks for all the answers, The depth and bread of our group and people in it is truly amazing. 

Thanks a lot,

Viswanath.

2011/9/18 Vasu Srinivasan <vas...@gmail.com>

[R. Sivaramakrishna Sharma]

Namaste,

Is'nt that purusha sukta hymn referring to the three classes of
mantras in the Chandas? i.e. Riks, Yajus and Samans ? The Atharvan, of
what is left today is primarily made up of Riks. So Atharva is
included in RichaH just as is the others aswell.

To the best of my knowledge, if the classification were to be
mentioned in the Vedas itself - what would be the root/adhara of the
idea of One Veda as expounded traditionally. The following shloka is
quoted by Sri Adi Shankaracharya in the Sharirika Bhashya 1.3.19 and
attributes it to Vyasa.

वेदमेकं स बहुधा कुरुते हितकाम्यया ।
अल्पायुषोऽल्पबुद्धिश्च विप्रान् ज्ञात्वा कलावथ ॥

Logically, if the Shruti itself expounded the idea of many vedas, and
Shruti itself being the paramapramANa, I doubt if anything else would
be the root of such a line of thought.

Nevertheless, I have not considered shlesha for the word Veda in the
verse. That would be different altogether.

Sd/-

On Sep 18, 6:59 pm, "hnbhat B.R." <hnbha...@gmail.com> wrote:

> *Dr. Hari Narayana Bhat B.R. M.A., Ph.D.,
> **Research Scholar,
> *

[shankara]

Sakhalkarji,

Thanks for the corrections.

 

regards
shankara

---

From: Narendra Sakhalkar <naren...@gmail.com>
To: sams...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sunday, 18 September 2011 7:51 PM

>> samskrita+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

>>For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/samskrita?hl=en.
>>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "samskrita" group.
> To post to this group, send email to sams...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

> samskrita+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/samskrita?hl=en.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "samskrita" group.
> To post to this group, send email to sams...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

> samskrita+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/samskrita?hl=en.
>
>

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "samskrita" group.
To post to this group, send email to sams...@googlegroups.com.

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to samskrita+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

[Sunder Hattangadi]

From the discourses of Kanchi Mahaperiyaval (1895-1994)

 

http://www.kamakoti.org/hindudharma/part5/chap38.htm

"..............

The sage who was to carry out Bhagvan Krsna's resolve was not then called Veda Vyasa. His name too was Krsna and, since he was born on an island, he had the appellation " Dvaipayana" ( Islander). Badarayana is another name of his. Krsna Dvaipayana knew all the 1, 180 sakhas( recensions) of the Vedas revealed to the world by various sages. They were mingled together in one great stream. Being remarkably gifted, our ancestors could memorise all of them. For the benefit of weaker people like us, Vyasa divided them into four Vedas and subdivided each into sakhas. It was like damming a river and taking the water through various canals. Vyasa accomplished the task of dividing the Vedas easily because he was a great yogin with vision and because he had the power gained from austerities.

The Rgvedic sakhas contain hymns to invoke the various deities; the Yajurvedic sakhas deal with the conduct of sacrifices; l the Samaveda sakhas contain songs to please the deities; and the Atharvaveda sakhas, besides dealing with sacrifices, contain mantras recited to avert calamities and to destroy enemies. The Samaveda had the largest number of recensions, 1, 000. In the Rgveda there were 21; in the Yajus 109( Sukla-Yajur veda 15, and Krsna Yajur veda 94); and in the Atharvaveda 50.

While, according to one scholar, the Visnu Purana mentions the number of sakhas to be 1, 180, another version is that there were 1, 133 recensions- the Rgveda 21, the Yajurveda 101, the Samaveda 1, 000 and the Atharvaveda 11.

Considering that people in the age of Kali would be inferior to their forefathers, Krsna Dvaipayana thought that it should be sufficient for them to learn one sakha of any one of the four Vedas. It was the Lord that put this idea into his head. Vyasa assigned the Rgveda sakhas to Paila, the Yajurveda sakhas to Vaisampayana, the Samaveda sakhas to Jaimini and the Atharvanaveda sakhas to Sumantu. ]

Krsna Dvaipayana came to be called "Vedavyasa" for having divided the Vedas into four and then having subdivided them into 1,180 recensions. "Vyasa" literally means an "essay" or a "composition". Classifying objects is also known as "vyasa".

.............................."

 

 

Regards,

 

sunder

From: R. Sivaramakrishna Sharma <arunagi...@gmail.com>
To: samskrita <sams...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Monday, September 19, 2011 6:09 AM
Subject: [Samskrita] Re: Earliest known 'division' of Veda

[ajit Gargeshwari]

Hi
The Quote mentioned by Suderji from the Book Hindu Dharma published by Bharati Vidya Bhavan is available for free download at scribd

Please click on the below link

http://www.scribd.com/doc/50006646/HinduDharma
Regards
Ajit Gargeshwari

--

[Viswanath B]

अल्पायुषोऽल्पबुद्धिश्च विप्रान् ज्ञात्वा कलावथ

Wonderful, I feel humbled. I have this feeling that there is some force (who else ?) who will make sure our feet are constantly grounded. How grateful I am ..

Viswanath

[Arvind_Kolhatkar]

It is said that if you look upon Mahabharata and Ramayana as
mythological works, you discern history in them. If you treat them as
history, you are confronted with mythological elements.

The same principle applies to the quotation extracted by Sunderji.

A great mass of oral literature, created by countless generations, had
come down from generation to generation through collective memory. At
some stage, a scholar, or perhaps several scholars, not necessarily
working to a pre-ordained design, and not necessarily
contemporaneously working together, decided to systematize this
compendium of oral literature for its better preservation and this,
over a period of time, created the 3-fold division of Vedas.

Arvind Kolhatkar, Toronto, September 19, 2011.

[hnbhat B.R.]

2011/9/19 Vimala Sarma <vsa...@bigpond.com>

Viswanath Mahodaya

I agree with Bhat Mahodaya – the earliest reference to the three vedas is in puruSa sUkta in Rgveda.  There is nothing before this. But even here we do not know if the reference is to Rk chants, mantras and chandas (accent and metre) which are said at the sacrifice, rather than to the collections – samhitas.

Vimala

 

Thanks Mm. Vimalaji.

Even though casually, you have touched the question raised by Vasuji in his reply. The point raised was if the Veda-s were four, even before कृष्णद्वैपायन s/o पराशर, what did he compile as the पुराण-s claim him as वेदव्यास (the compiler/expounder of Veda-s). As I had quoted in earlier messages, there are many other Purana references that he is the वेदव्यास in this 28th द्वापरयुग, in the current वैवस्वतमन्वन्तर. (the 7th of मन्वन्तर-s i.e. 7x4 - 28) (a rough calculation) of the present श्वेतवराहकल्प and in each the different sages will be वेदव्यास and the list up to the current one and the candidates for the post in the subsequent ones also are given in the Puranic sources. It seems that these व्यास-s compile the ऋक्, यजुः, साम and अथार्वाङिरः mantras, into separate collections for the purpose of their utilization in the चातुर्होत्र sacrifice in each मन्वन्तर-s and in each Yuga-s. Otherwise, the earlier references 

KūPur, 1, 27, 50.2

 एको वेदश्चतुष्पादस्त्रेतास्विह विधीयते /  
वेदव्यासैश्चतुर्धा तु व्यस्यते द्वापरादिषु // (५०.२) 

And coming to the ascription to Vyasa, as their re-organizer into four, it comes also in the same line as in the Purusha, which refers to a यज्ञ. According to the sources quoted in शब्दकल्पद्रुम -  वाचस्पत्य, Veda-vyasa, received the 4 Veda-s by the grace of  Shiva himself (according to कूर्मपुराण- sources), and taught to his four disciples who were already adept in Veda-s वेदपारग-s - सुमन्तु (अर्थर्ववेद), जैमिनि(सामवेद) , पैल (ऋग्वेद), वैशम्पायन (यजुर्वेद) again सूत लोमहर्षण was taught इतिहास as the 5th Veda (who narrates us all the महाभारत and पुराण-s).

The combined was यजुर्वेद, Vyasa divided into 4 according to their utilitarian basis the combined body of the text चातुर्होत्र (the mantra-s recited by the 4 participants of a  यज्ञ)   while he performed a यज्ञ:

एक आसीद् यजुर्वेदस्तं चतुर्धा व्यकल्पयत्।

चातुर्होत्रमभूद् यस्मिन् तेन यज्ञमथाकरोत्॥

This has been already listed by Mm. Vimalaji, in her posting. Only the last ब्रह्मा is authorized with अथर्ववेद.      

आध्वर्यवं यजुर्भिः स्याद् ऋग्भिर्हौत्रं द्विजोत्तमाः।

औद्गात्रं सामभिश्चक्रे ब्रह्मत्वं चाप्यथर्वभिः॥

All the Rik-s, Yaju-s, sAma-s and atharva-s separated and again classified into different शाखा-s as we know from different sources today, including the महाभाष्य 21 ऋक्शाखा, 100 यजुःशाखा-s, 1000 सामवेदशाखा-s and  9 अथर्व-शाखा.

Considering the wording वेद - in बृहदारण्यक and गोपथब्राह्मण  related with the statement of पुरुषसूक्त with the concept of मनोमयः पुरुष with the 4 ऋग्-यजुः-साम-अथर्वाङिरः as his components (The references already quoted in my earlier posts with exact location) and the later statement of वाल्मीकिरामायण quoted by Srinivasan, apart from the mutually contradictory statements of पुराण-s one is really confronted with the question when did the 4 fold division exist? If before, the question is pointed what did कृष्णद्वैपायन as व्यास did? If not existed earlier, what does the statements of ऋग्वेद, यजुर्वेद, सामवेद, and अथर्ववेद in मुण्डक and बृहदारण्यक refer to? How to account for it taking as produced earlier than Mahabharata? The the statements of पुराण-s are also divided as some ascribing the origin of the 4 Veda-s and all the विद्या-s from the 4 faces (respectively) of ब्रह्मा, the creator at the time of each cycle of creation i.e. his working hours a कल्प. And we have come across already many statements ascribing the division to कृष्णद्वैपायन as the व्यास in this 28th द्वापर and many allude to one more व्यास in the next as the अश्वत्थम - द्रौणि in the Kali.(LingapuraNa). and some more in later द्वापर-s.

So I agree with Aravindji's opinion that leaving apart the mythological considerations, we can safely say at some time in the history, they were classified into four divisions irrespective of mythological statements. The other way, interpret the verses accordingly that कृष्णद्वैपायन as

 व्यास taught and spread the four Veda-s he received from ब्रह्मा himself, to his 4 disciples who spread them widely through different disciples. For each शाखा is named after a ऋषि probably disciples of these four and totally ascribed the credit of spreading to their teacher as  व्यास a  title of honor. This seems to be the possible explanation of the verses ascribing the division to कृष्णद्वैपायन accepting their statements tentatively and reconciling them with the Vedic statements especially in the उपनिषत्-s. I couldn't reckon the 28th द्वापर and 28th कलि in the कल्प, मन्वन्तर (१४), युग (४) system of calendar.

Taking this Seventh वैवस्वर Manvantara as comprised of 4 युग-s, this 28th द्वापर and कलि seems to work our 7 x 4 - 28. In the next मन्वन्तर it would be 29th द्वापर for the व्यास to come to re-organize.

Hope this converges the question to some direction. 

[Vasu Srinivasan]

Bhat-ji

Thanks for the detailed analysis. The fact that vyaasa exists in each kalpa sounds the most convincing explanation as he is also considered one of the 7 chiranjeevi-s.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "samskrita" group.
To post to this group, send email to sams...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to samskrita+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/samskrita?hl=en.

--
Regards,

[hnbhat B.R.]

I forgot to add the definitions for the four class of मन्त्र-s as some references contain only the names without naming them as वेद as in पुरुषसूक्त and तैत्तिरीयोपनिषत्:

The following are the related portions of जैमिनीयमीमांसा is quoted which also refers to a division differently:

अनाम्नातेष्वमन्त्रत्वं आम्नातेषु हि विभागः  । । सूत्र २,१.३४  । ।

साम - 

गीतिषु सामाख्या । । सूत्र २,१.३६ । । अथ साम्नः किं लक्षणम्? विशिष्टा काचिद्गीतिः सामेत्युच्यते, प्रगीते हि मन्त्रवाक्ये सामशब्दं अभियुक्ता उपदिशन्ति, सामान्यधीमहि, 

ऋक् -

तेषां ऋग्यत्रार्थवशेन पादव्यवस्था  । । सूत्र २,१.३५  । ।

ऋच इत्यस्ति वेदे, अहे बुध्निय मन्त्रं मे गोपाय यं ऋषयस्त्रयीविदा{*२ ।१४४*} विदुः ऋचो{*२ ।१४५*} यजूंषि सामानीति{*२ ।१४६*}. कथंलक्षणिका ऋचः? तेषां ऋग्यत्रार्थवशेन पादव्यवस्था, यत्र पादकृता व्यवस्था स मन्त्र ऋग्नामा, यथा  अग्निं ईल इति{*२ ।१४७*}, एवंजातीयकेषु मन्त्रेष्वभियुक्ता उपदिशन्ति, ऋचोऽधीमहे, ऋचोऽध्यापयामः, ऋचो वर्तन्त इति. यद्यर्थवशेनेत्युच्यते, यत्र वृत्तवशेन तत्र न प्राप्नोति, अग्निः पूर्वेभिरृषिभिरिति{*२ ।१४८*}, यतो नार्थवशेनेति वृत्तादिवशव्यावृत्त्यर्थम्, किं तर्ह्यनुवाद एष प्रदर्शनार्थः. अवश्यं चैतदेवं विज्ञेयम्, वृत्तादिनिर्वृत्त्यर्थे सति वाक्यं भिद्येत. तस्माद्यत्र पादकृता व्यवस्था, सा ऋगिति.

यत्रार्थवशेन पादव्यवस्थितिः  = एकान्वयित्वेन अनुष्टुबादिपादस्थितिः ।

शेषे यजुःशब्दः  । । सूत्र २,१.३७  । ।

अथ यजुषः किं लक्षणं इति. यजुषो लक्षणं न वक्तव्यम्, ऋग्लक्षणसामलक्षणाभ्यां एव यजुर्विज्ञास्यते वैपरीत्येन, या न गीतिर्न च पादबद्धम्, तत्प्रश्लिष्टपठितं यजुरिति.

अथ निगदो नाम किं यजूंष्युत यजुषोऽन्य इति?

____________________________________________

निगदो वा चतुर्थं स्याद्धर्मविशेषात् । । सूत्र २,१.३८  । ।

निगदाः न यजूंषि. कुतः? धर्मविशेषात्, उच्चैः ऋचा क्रियते, उच्चैः साम्ना, उपांशु यजुषा, उच्चैर्निगदेनेत्येष धर्मविशेषः, उच्चैर्निगदेनेत्यनूद्यते, यदि यजुषो निगदत्वं [१३०]{*२ ।१५१*} स्यात्, न च तस्योच्चैस्त्वं धर्मो दृश्येत. दृश्यते तु. तस्माच्चतुर्थं मन्त्रजातं निगदो नाम.

शेषे ==

ऋक्सामभिन्ने मन्त्रजाते ततश्च यन्मन्त्रजातं प्रश्लिष्य पठितं गानादिविच्छेदरहितम्, तद् यजुरिति।

इति जैमिनिः।

Credits due to Dhaval Patel who made the text available for search in Devanagari.

Now still the use of वेद is to be solved. This is one of many uses of the word वेद in the text:

यद्येवम्, न तर्हि वेदाध्ययनं पूर्वं धर्मजिज्ञासायाः{*१ ।११*}. एवं हि समामनन्ति  वेदं अधीत्य स्नायादिति{*१ ।१२*}. इह च वेदं अधीत्य स्नास्यन्धर्मं जिज्ञासमान इमं आम्नायं अतिक्रामेत्. न चाम्नायो नामातिक्रमितव्यः.

which can be expected to cover all the 4 class of मन्त्र-s.

[Vimala Sarma]

Namo NamaH
No it is not valid to conclude Atharva is included in PuruSa sUkta. The verse just mentions hymns, chants, metres but we are not sure if the reference is to the collections (vedas) or to what happens at a yajna. One should be careful in not jumping to conclusions. It is not clear if the vedas all existed as complete works at the time. It is strange that one hymn in the Rk should mention itself as complete and all the others, so scholars regard the puruSa hymn as being one the latest in Rgveda. Another reason for thinking this is that it also has the only reference to the four castes in the Rgveda. Rk means hymns of praise to gods. The Atharva has spells, curses and rememdies etc. Also not valid to think the supervising priest in the yajna - the brahman - knew the atharva. This collection came much later and many communities still regard the vedas as being "threefold - trayI"
Vimala

[Vimala Sarma]

Namo NamaH
No it is not valid to conclude Atharva is included in PuruSa sUkta. The verse just mentions hymns, chants, metres but we are not sure if the reference is to the collections (vedas) or to what happens at a yajna. One should be careful in not jumping to conclusions. It is not clear if the vedas all existed as complete works at the time. It is strange that one hymn in the Rk should mention itself as complete and all the others, so scholars regard the puruSa hymn as being one the latest in Rgveda. Another reason for thinking this is that it also has the only reference to the four castes in the Rgveda. Rk means hymns of praise to gods. The Atharva has spells, curses and rememdies etc. Also not valid to think the supervising priest in the yajna - the brahman - knew the atharva. This collection came much later and many communities still regard the vedas as being "threefold - trayI"
Vimala

-----Original Message-----
From: sams...@googlegroups.com [mailto:sams...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of R. Sivaramakrishna Sharma
Sent: Monday, 19 September 2011 8:10 PM
To: samskrita

[Vimala Sarma]

Arvind Mahodaya
Did you see my post on the origin of the vedas?- This is the view of many
scholars. It was because of the division of responsibility of tasks between
the priests at the yajna; not because some scholar later decided to divide
it up. However I note and respect the traditional view put forward re VyAsa
by others in this group drawing on the purANas. I think people in this
group already know from my posts that I do not necessarily regard these
stories as being historical facts and will be tolerant of me!
Vimala

-----Original Message-----
From: sams...@googlegroups.com [mailto:sams...@googlegroups.com] On

Behalf Of Arvind_Kolhatkar
Sent: Tuesday, 20 September 2011 6:51 AM
To: samskrita
Subject: [Samskrita] Re: Earliest known 'division' of Veda

--

[ajit Gargeshwari]

My question, to be more precise, is which of our epics / itihasas / otherwise mention the 'vedas' by their name ? We know mahabharata does so. Any others ?

 My answer All epics Purans and shastra mention Vedas. Vedas are the Basic texts for all Shastras

Veda say, the Paramatma is nirakara, nirguna swaroopa. Science needs some guna, some characteristic to prove paramatma's existence. Can they converge ?

What you say is incorrect is this your own hypothesis or is it backed by any reading if so please let me know the source from which you deducted these conclusions.

Doesfundamental particles of Quantum Mechanics have any Guna is it not not a Mathematical hypothesis

The concept of Nirguna, Saguna and Bramhan are not within the scope of this thread. If you would like i can give you the correct and right explanations if you can rise appropriate thread

These questions have been discussed in Advaita mailing list

Regards
Ajit Gargeshwari

Indian Philosophy and vedas are not based on any beliefs. Sayings of Vedas are Apourasheya and need no proof. Its in a sense Axiomatic

[ajit Gargeshwari]

Hi,

The Aryans had with them from time immemorial verses which were handed over to them, which were used to perform simple Sacrifices( Yagnas). With the passage of time sacrifices became elaborate and complex. A need was felt to organize the verses in to several books. The  three Samhitas Rig, Yajur and Sama came into existence. The principal behind the division of the Vedic mantras was to arrange it in a fashion that would make it easy for its usages and applications in sacrifices.

The Samhitas of Rg veda were large. They were first divided in to eight Mandalas and each of this Mandalas have hymns predominantly attributed to one Rishis. One can see some hyms in these Mandalas attributed to other Rishis as Well. The miscellaneous hyms were put into first and tenth Mandala of the Rig Veda. Some scholars are of the opinion that hyms especially in the tenth Mandalas are late Hyms. Hence Purusha Sukta which forms a part of the tenth Mnadala already knew about the classification of Hyms in to Samita.

Before reciting any hymn it is customary to Say the name of Devata, Rishi, and the Chandas used in the Hymns. If one asks to prove this on rigorous historical methods it might be difficult.

Over a period of time questions were asked who and when did this classification took place. Traditionalists said they were done by the Sage Veda Vyasa. These legends were included in Mahabharatha and other allied Puranas. Why they Sage Vyasa and not a group of Sages might be difficult to answer.

Over a course of time concepts of Avatars or the theory of Avatara came in to existence and was accepted. Vyasa was declared as an Avatara of Shiva or Vishnu.

The claims of Puranas may not always have rigorous historical backing in the modern sense but they do have a lot of historical facts in them embedded with myths and legends.

Please note this one possible theory used by experts to explain. I am not saying this is the only theory and has to be accepted in Toto.

Regards
Ajit Gargeshwari

2011/9/19 Vimala Sarma <vsa...@bigpond.com>

[Anilkumar Veppatangudi]

I do not know if this will contribute to the debate but this is the reference I found in Shaunaka's Charanavyuha Sutram:

सर्वे वेदा सर्वे घोषा एकैव व्याहृतिः प्राण एव प्राण ऋच इत्येव विद्यात्- ऎतरेय आरण्यकं २ खं १० ।

चोक्तं द्वादशस्कन्धे षष्ठाध्याये भागवते-

तेनासौ चतुरो वेदांश्चतुर्भिर्वदनैः प्रभु: ।

सव्याहृतिकान्त्सोङ्कारांश्चातुर्होत्र विचक्षणाः ॥

पुत्रानध्यापत्तांस्तु ब्रह्मर्षीन्ब्रह्मकोविदान् ।

ते तु धर्मोपदेष्टारः स्वपुत्रेभ्यः समादिशन् ॥

ते परम्परया प्राप्तास्तत्तच्छिष्यैर्धृतव्रतैः ।

चतुर्युगेष्वथ व्यस्ता द्वापरादौ महर्षिभिः ॥

क्षीणायुषः क्षीणसत्वान्दुर्मेधान्वीक्ष्य कालतः ।

वेदान्ब्रह्मर्षयो व्यस्यन्हृदिस्थाच्युतचोदिताः ॥

अस्मिन्नप्यन्तरे ब्रह्मान् भगवाँल्लोकभावनः ।

ब्रह्मेशाद्यैर्ल्लोकपालैर्याचितो धर्मगुप्तये ॥

पराशरात्सत्यवत्यामंशांशकलया विभुः ।

अवतीर्णो महाभाग वेदं चक्रे चतुर्विधम् ॥

ऋगथर्वयजुःसाम्नां राशीनुद्‌धृत्य वर्गशः ।

चतस्रः संहिताश्चक्रे मन्त्रैर्माणिगणा इव ॥

तासां स चतुरः शिष्यानुपाहूय महामतिः ।

एकैकां संहितां ब्रह्मन्नेकैकस्मै ददौ विभुः ॥

पैलाया संहितामाद्यां बह्‌वृचाख्यामुवाच ह ।

वैशम्पायनसञ्ज्ञाय निगदाख्यं यजुर्गुणम् ॥

साम्नां जैमिनये प्राह तथा छन्दोगसंहिताम् ।

अथर्वाङ्गिरर्सीं नाम स्वशिष्याय सुमन्तवे ॥

2011/9/20 hnbhat B.R. <hnbh...@gmail.com>

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "samskrita" group.
To post to this group, send email to sams...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to samskrita+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/samskrita?hl=en.

--

V.R.Anil Kumar

http://www.kalpaheritage.com

[ajit Gargeshwari]

Hi,
The Pursusha Sukta hymns are not aware of a rigid caste system as present in the Indian society today. Many scholars think the castes these Hymns suggests or  talks about were for the purpose of division of labor.

 Vedas have a class of Suktas called Khila suktas ( or supplementary verses) some scholars are of the opinion that this may be some very old verses

As far as Atharvana veda is concerned vimalaji is right. Some scholars think it is an early veda but definitely later than the Rig veda as The Atharvan hymns contains  spells, curses and remedies etc.

How the Hyms and chants are to be used is clerly mentioned in the Bramhanas and the Kalpa Sutras. These are slightly later works and are not as early as the Vedas. The supervising priests had to know all the vedas, its usages and procedure of sacrifices or Yagnas. (Shistachar conduct of the wise is a source of Dharma)

It is clear at least during the Sutra period the three vedas as Trai existed. Not much is mentioned about the Atharvana veda as its use was restricted. The Atharvana Veda has also Bramhana called Goptha Bramhana and several upanishads are attached to this veda.

The division of vedas were complete long before Chankaya as he speaks about Trai a, Dandaniti etc.

Traditional scholars do not accept this division and history and say all the Vedas, Bramhans Arnyakas upanisads, Kalpa sutras and Dharma Sutra form a single unit. This may be a reason for divegence of opinion between a traditionalist and a modern scholar.

Regards
Ajit Gargeshwari

[Narendra Sakhalkar]

Sunderji, Namo namaha.
Thank you so much for the excellent articulation of a complex
problem.Anugruheetosmi bhawatbhhi.
Ram,Ram.
Narendra Sakhalkar

[Viswanath B]

Dear Ajit,

Veda say, the Paramatma is nirakara, nirguna swaroopa. Science needs some guna, some characteristic to prove paramatma's existence. Can they converge ?

What you say is incorrect is this your own hypothesis or is it backed by any reading if so please let me know the source from which you deducted these conclusions.

Its a good question about how I could say what I said. Its true that I have not learnt the veda to be able to quote from there, just learning my own sakha is taking lots of time. I could have been correct. What I wrote is my understanding  from my readings of teachings of paramacharya.  There was one beautiful excerpt of an interaction between paramacharya and a school teacher about sandhya vandana. Ofcourse, there is the ekam sat, vipra bahudha vadanti.  I have believed that there are all various forms of the brahma padartha. Rudradhyaya praises various forms of eshwara. Like somebody mentioned in the thread, this may be an advaitin point of view.  What I have also learnt, is that there is no such thing as an incorrect or a correct thing,  Every thing is relative and has a context. To be precise, this is my own hypothesis, which helped me in my life so far.

Doesfundamental particles of Quantum Mechanics have any Guna is it not not a Mathematical hypothesis

Off topic, but my understanding is that there are theories and likely working models exist about such particles.  At least, the scientists are trying to validate these theories.  Any scientist trying to prove the existence of God ? Nobody, IMHO.

The concept of Nirguna, Saguna and Bramhan are not within the scope of this thread. If you would like i can give you the correct and right explanations if you can rise appropriate thread

Fair enough, I will probably join the advaitin thread soon, seems lot of good discussions over there. But my understanding is that there will be no answers to these questions, As one learns more, you will have newer definitions. 

I sense that i am construed as a non-traditionalist based on my email. If that is the case, its not true. I am a traditionalist, I was trying to avoid the discussions on origins of veda since there will be divergent views, but confining to known sources of....

Thanks
vissu

[Vidya R]

"vyaasa exists in each kalpa":

My thought process and questions ->
Vedas are eternal.  Vyasa codifies them in each kalpa. Does this indicate the possibility that in each kalpa, different portions of the Veda get revealed to the various seers (of that kalpa), and different versions of the 'jagat' happen?  The 'dashAvatAra's could be a different line in each kalpa (or maybe even in each mahAyuga)...  (All within the Vedic umbrella). ...

What is expected to survive across 'yuga's, 'mahAyuga's, 'manvantara's, 'kalpa's ...?  Is total-and-absolute 'pralaya' expected to happen when the current 'brahma' withdraws unto himself (at the end of the 2nd parArdha), only for the whole thing to start all over again ('ananta')?  

Much obliged,

Vidya

---

From: Vasu Srinivasan <vas...@gmail.com>

Bhat-ji

Thanks for the detailed analysis. The fact that vyaasa exists in each kalpa sounds the most convincing explanation as he is also considered one of the 7 chiranjeevi-s.

On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 9:08 PM, hnbhat B.R. <hnbh...@gmail.com> wrote:

...Even though casually, you have touched the question raised by Vasuji in his reply. The point raised was if the Veda-s were four, even before कृष्णद्वैपायन s/o पराशर, what did he compile as the पुराण-s claim him as वेदव्यास (the compiler/expounder of Veda-s). As I had quoted in earlier messages, there are many other Purana references that he is the वेदव्यास in this 28th द्वापरयुग, in the current वैवस्वतमन्वन्तर. (the 7th of मन्वन्तर-s i.e. 7x4 - 28) (a rough calculation) of the present श्वेतवराहकल्प and in each the different sages will be वेदव्यास and the list up to the current one and the candidates for the post in the subsequent ones also are given in the Puranic sources. It seems that these व्यास-s compile the ऋक्, यजुः, साम and अथार्वाङिरः mantras, into separate collections for the purpose of their utilization in the चातुर्होत्र sacrifice in each मन्वन्तर-s and in each Yuga-s. Otherwise, the earlier references 

[hnbhat B.R.]

Here are the links that explain the concept of Kalpa, Manvantara, etc.

http://oldthoughts.wordpress.com/ancient-indian-calendars/kalpas-yugas-manvantaras/

Vicki source:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manvantara

The same creation exactly is created after a day-break (each kalpa) as in the earlier according to reliable sources. So in each "dvapara" a व्यास (appears in each Manvantara) and divides Veda. Only in this present वैवस्वत मन्वन्तर of the current श्वेतवराहकल्प that कृष्णद्वैपायन re-organized the Veda-s in this 28th द्वापर युग and we are still enjoying the divisions yet. No more details of other मन्वन्तर-s than the name of the sages acting as व्यास-s are available, up to 36 मन्वन्तर-s (and not beyond that is available). No more details of the other कल्प-s and their creation is available than their names and the corresponding मन्वन्तर-s (some times listed).

The question is simply answered as at the युगान्त pralaya  ब्रह्मा sleeps and next day break is his creation. At the final प्रलय he also retires into ब्रह्माण्ड and again he is the first born in the next cycle of ब्रह्मा. Here Vaishnavite tradition maintain नारायण in his cosmic body absorbs every thing into his stomach and in the next cycle it is created as it is in the earlier Kalpa.

This is confirmed by the statement:

धाता यथापूर्वमकल्पयत्

(अहोरात्राणि विदधद्विश्वस्य मिषतो वशी॥ सूर्याचन्द्रमसौ धाता यथापूर्वमकल्पयत्। दिवं च पृथिवीं चान्तरिक्षमथो स्वः॥ -ऋग्. १०.१९०.१-)

re-taken in Mahanarayanopanishat also.

http://sanskritdocuments.org/all_sa/mahanarayana_sa.html

[श्रीमल्ललितालालितः]

श्रीमल्ललितालालितः
lalitAlAlitaH

On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 21:21, Vidya R <imar...@yahoo.com> wrote:

"vyaasa exists in each kalpa":

My thought process and questions ->
Vedas are eternal.  

What do you mean by veda-s ?
Tradition takes fixed bunch of words as veda-s.
According to some people, knowledge is veda. Tradition has not said this ever.
 

Vyasa codifies them in each kalpa.

OK.
 

Does this indicate the possibility

Those things, which are out of grasp of our eyes, etc., if not determined by any authority become victim of possibilities without base. So is here.
I mean you must present some proof from scriptures itself to support your possibility.

that in each kalpa, different portions of the Veda get revealed

Someone in advaita-l group said as "anantA vai vedAH", so only a portion gets revealed always and rest is kept in heart of Ishvara.

And the portion useful for this thread is :

> In a particular kalpa, one small set of veda mantras is revealed from the
> infinite knowledge-bank of Jagat-kAraNam brahma.


Any proof ?
I heard it just now.
It will prove that veda-s which are revealed in different kalpas are
different.
Ishvara gave brahmA veda-s - is known to all, but he gives specific part in
specific kalpa is a new idea.
Moreover, if different veda-s(mantra-s for your clarity) are revealed in
different kalpa-s, they must create non-identical kalpa-s and each kalpa
must miss some entities, as some specific animals, etc., to be different.


This is from another post : 
> To
> say that exactly the same finite set of mantras are manifested in every
> kalpa while some other mantras are never "breathed" out and are permanently
> resident in Ishvara, seems a little far-fetched.
>

We say that whole veda is given to brahmA and he gives different shAkhA-s to
R^iShis.
We have never said that un-breathed  veda-s even exist.

 

to the various seers (of that kalpa), and different versions of the 'jagat' happen?

See reply of shrI H N Bhat.
 

 The 'dashAvatAra's could be a different line in each kalpa (or maybe even in each mahAyuga)...  (All within the Vedic umbrella). ...

Don't just go on imagining.
Give us reasons to believe.
 

What is expected to survive across 'yuga's, 'mahAyuga's, 'manvantara's, 'kalpa's ...?  Is total-and-absolute 'pralaya' expected to happen when the current 'brahma' withdraws unto himself (at the end of the 2nd parArdha), only for the whole thing to start all over again ('ananta')?  

See shrI H N Bhat's reply.
 

[ajit Gargeshwari]

Hi

It seems that these व्यास-s compile the ऋक्, यजुः, साम and अथार्वाङिरः mantras, into separate collections for the purpose of their utilization in the चातुर्होत्र sacrifice in each मन्वन्तर-s and in each Yuga-s. Otherwise, the earlier references

May i ask a question
So do the sacrifes the way they are conducted and the mantras, drvayas etc used are they different in each मन्वन्तर-s or do they change as per the compilation of Vyasa in each मन्वन्तर
Thank you
Regards

Ajit Gargeshwari

[hnbhat B.R.]

On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 9:48 PM, ajit Gargeshwari <ajit.gar...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi

It seems that these व्यास-s compile the ऋक्, यजुः, साम and अथार्वाङिरः mantras, into separate collections for the purpose of their utilization in the चातुर्होत्र sacrifice in each मन्वन्तर-s and in each Yuga-s. Otherwise, the earlier references

May i ask a question
So do the sacrifes the way they are conducted and the mantras, drvayas etc used are they different in each मन्वन्तर-s or do they change as per the compilation of Vyasa in each मन्वन्तर
Thank you
Regards

As I have replied in my earlier post, it is identical in each "kalpa" the creation is done as in the earlier "kalpa" according to the statement of पुरुषसूक्त. The process of creation according to philosophical schools and Upanishad-s differ from that in पुराण-s though they have some common elements. The main objective of each Purana is condensed in the following popular definition of it:

 'सर्गश्च प्रतिसर्गश्च वंशो मन्वन्तराणि च। 

वंश्यानुचरितं चैव पुराणं पंचलक्षणम्।'

as recorded by Amara पुराणं पंचलक्षणम्।. There is no reason to believe that they should be different in each Kalpa. If any proof to the effect, that they are different, were welcome.

With regards

 

[Shambhu]

A few differing points of view:

The rik-yajus-sAma characteristics (lakSaNas) of the Veda are not the
same as the 'classification', 'division', or 'compilation' of the
Veda. Several samhitA mantras in the Rigveda (ex.: puruSa sUkta quoted
in the thread) and the Yajurveda (ex.: chamaka) may be cited - they
only state these three characteristics, not classifications. These
lakSaNa-s are apauruSeya just as the Veda mantras are.

The classification of the Veda into four Vedas (into four ‘books’) is
pauruSeya. Its purpose was pedagogical – to teach, transmit, and
retain through the kaliyuga when the human capacity for memory is
weak. From very early times in the tradition, after vedArambha (of
8-16 year olds), reciting the Vedas is the first task in the learning
process. In fact, the proper recitation itself is the Veda (mantra).
prayoga, viniyoga, paddhati, and the rituals are learnt after a few
years of vedAbhyAsam, and not the other way. The rituals are also the
means of learning the truths conveyed in the mantras (by and large, it
is Vedic cosmology). Ritual usage through hotr`, adhvaryu, etc. is the
result, not the cause. These days, a typical karma kANda practitioner
makes use of all the four Vedas in a typical ritual, such as a
gaNapati havana. Even in the daily sandhyA vandana or the nitya pUjA,
Rigveda and Yajurveda mantras are employed.

The four Vedas referred to in some Upanishads quite likely allude to
the 'classification' into four 'books', but we have little pramANa to
claim that it was after the last such work attributed to Paraashara's
son Kr`shna Dvaipaayana during the last dvAparAnta. Tradition holds
that there were earlier classifications by earlier Vyasa-s.

Nonetheless, there is no confusion in the vaidika tradition on the
above two aspects of the Vedas, i.e., the three apauruSeya lakSaNas
vs. the four pauruSeya pedagogical divisions.

Is a brahma born at the beginning of each kalpa? Not quite – a kalpa,
by definition/usage of the word, is brahma’s one day. The kalpa in the
shAstras is specifically to our local brahma – the ruler of the solar
system (cf. “Aditya maNdalAdhipataye brahmaNe namaH” in the nitya
pUjA). All our yuga chronology is limited to our Aditya maNdala.
Stretching this to the universal pitAmaha brahma is the feat of the
purANa commentators. It has no shAstra basis. Is there?

There is no such view in the tradition that Vyasa ‘codified’ the Vedas
or received them from brahma. Tradition and vaidika practitioners hold
that kr`SNa dvaipAyana and his shishya-s gathered all the Veda mantras
that were in use in their time and arranged them in the current four-
book form for ease of pedagogy. However, some mantras we use now
(appearing in the baudhAyana sUtras) are not in these four Vedas. The
most recent chChandodarshana (with 450 new rik mantras) is also not in
them.

On Sep 20, 10:39 pm, श्रीमल्ललितालालितः <lalitaalaali...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> *श्रीमल्ललितालालितः <http://www.lalitaalaalitah.com>
> lalitAlAlitaH <http://about.me/lalitaalaalitah/bio>*

>
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 21:21, Vidya R <imarch...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > "vyaasa exists in each kalpa":
>
> > My thought process and questions ->
> > Vedas are eternal.
>
> What do you mean by veda-s ?
> Tradition takes fixed bunch of words as veda-s.
> According to some people, knowledge is veda. Tradition has not said this
> ever.
>
> > Vyasa codifies them in each kalpa.
>
> OK.
>
> > Does this indicate the possibility
>
> Those things, which are out of grasp of our eyes, etc., if not determined by
> any authority become victim of possibilities without base. So is here.
> I mean you must present some proof from scriptures itself to support your
> possibility.
>
> that in each kalpa, different portions of the Veda get revealed
>
>
>
> Someone in advaita-l group said as "anantA vai vedAH", so only a portion
> gets revealed always and rest is kept in heart of Ishvara.
>
> And the portion useful for this thread is :
>

> >* In a particular kalpa, one small set of veda mantras is revealed from the*>* infinite knowledge-bank of Jagat-kAraNam brahma.*

>
> Any proof ?
> I heard it just now.
> It will prove that veda-s which are revealed in different kalpas are
> different.
> Ishvara gave brahmA veda-s - is known to all, but he gives specific part in
> specific kalpa is a new idea.
> Moreover, if different veda-s(mantra-s for your clarity) are revealed in
> different kalpa-s, they must create non-identical kalpa-s and each kalpa
> must miss some entities, as some specific animals, etc., to be different.
>

> This is from another post :>* To*>* say that exactly the same finite set of mantras are manifested in every*>* kalpa while some other mantras are never "breathed" out and are permanently*>* resident in Ishvara, seems a little far-fetched.*>**

[ajit Gargeshwari]

Dear Dr. Bhat,

Thank you for the detailed explanation and clarification.

Warm Regards
Ajit Gargeshwari

--

[Shambhu]

Whatever is written in the linked pages has no shAstra basis.

If Vedas were revealed in each kalpa, who were the revealers and who
heard them, and did the humans somehow get them later? Humans came
along only in this kalpa, starting from Svaayambhuva Manu. No purANa
or shAstra differs on this issue. shAstras claim that Svaayambhuva
first received the Vedas from Brahma in this kalpAdi. They don't claim
anything for the prior kalpas. Do they?

If we accept the view that a Vyasa incarnates in each dvAparAnta and
compiles the hitherto revealed/retained Vedas for pedagogical reasons,
since Svaayambhuva Manu, there have been (following Manumsr`ti's math)
71x6 + 28 = 554 dvApara-s and therefore that many Vyasa-s.

A little reflection would indicate that this pedagogical need would
arise only during the avarohaNa part of the 4 + 4 yuga cycle, and no
such need would arise in an ArohaNa part. This would lead to the
conclusion that there were 227 Vyasas to date, kr`SNa dvaipAyana being
the last, and the divisions of the accumulated/retained Vedas have
been done 227 times in this kalpa. We have no basis to say that each
compilation or division was identical, but the earlier divisions would
have had bearings on the latter ones. Based on this view, we cannot
weigh in that, for example, tattirIya Upanishad is later to kr`SNa
dvaipAyana, or atharvaNa is of this kaliyuga. The idea or work of the
four divisions of the one Veda could have been there well before
Kr`shna Dvaipaayana, way far back in the first dvAparAnta of the
present kalpa itself.

On Sep 20, 9:30 pm, "hnbhat B.R." <hnbha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Here are the links that explain the concept of Kalpa, Manvantara, etc.
>

> http://oldthoughts.wordpress.com/ancient-indian-calendars/kalpas-yuga...

>
> Vicki source:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manvantara
>
> The same creation exactly is created after a day-break (each kalpa) as in
> the earlier according to reliable sources. So in each "dvapara" a व्यास
> (appears in each Manvantara) and divides Veda. Only in this present वैवस्वत
> मन्वन्तर of the current श्वेतवराहकल्प that कृष्णद्वैपायन re-organized the
> Veda-s in this 28th द्वापर युग and we are still enjoying the divisions yet.
> No more details of other मन्वन्तर-s than the name of the sages acting as
> व्यास-s are available, up to 36 मन्वन्तर-s (and not beyond that is
> available). No more details of the other कल्प-s and their creation is
> available than their names and the corresponding मन्वन्तर-s (some times
> listed).
>
> The question is simply answered as at the युगान्त pralaya  ब्रह्मा sleeps
> and next day break is his creation. At the final प्रलय he also retires into
> ब्रह्माण्ड and again he is the first born in the next cycle of ब्रह्मा. Here
> Vaishnavite tradition maintain नारायण in his cosmic body absorbs every thing
> into his stomach and in the next cycle it is created as it is in the earlier
> Kalpa.
>
> This is confirmed by the statement:
>
> धाता यथापूर्वमकल्पयत्

> (अहोरात्राणि विदधद्विश्वस्य मिषतो वशी॥ सूर्याचन्द्रमसौ *धाता
> यथापूर्वमकल्पयत्*। दिवं च पृथिवीं चान्तरिक्षमथो स्वः॥ -ऋग्. १०.१९०.१-)

>
> re-taken in Mahanarayanopanishat also.
>
> http://sanskritdocuments.org/all_sa/mahanarayana_sa.html
>

> *Dr. Hari Narayana Bhat B.R. M.A., Ph.D.,
> **Research Scholar,
> *

[ajit Gargeshwari]

I feel The views of Shabhuji in message: "A few differing points of view"  is the right view as per Mimasa Shastra.

• Vedas are not revealed at beginning of Kalpa it always exists by itself as it is apurusheya

• The rishis transmit the Vedas to Mankind.
• The rishis are referred to as mantra drashta and NOT Mantra Karta
  
• The Prayogas of Veda mantra are fixed. ( it might vary slightly depending on which Kalpa text is used)
  
• The concept of Brahmha as the creator is not directly mentioned in Vedic texts
• The name Veda Vyasa is not mentioned either
• Puranic legends have no place in the vedic texts
• Puranas are Smriti and not Shruthi
• Smritis changes with time and not Shruthi

This is my understanding

Regards
Ajit Gargeshwari

[Viswanath B]

Humans came along only in this kalpa, starting from Svaayambhuva Manu. No purANa
or shAstra differs on this issue

Bhagavatha mentions history, for lack of better words, across manvantars, and I don't think it mentions anything to this effect that there were no humans before the svAyambhuva manu. Can you please quote a source for this ?

Viswanath

On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 2:13 PM, Shambhu <bhaa...@yahoo.com> wrote:

[Shambhu Shastry]

Countless manvantara-s have passed (manusmr`ti 1-80), but only seven Manu-s have been created so far (manusmr`ti 1-36), named as svAyambhuva, shArochiSa, uttama, tAmasa, raivata, chAkSuSa, and vivasvatsuta (manusmr`ti 1-62, 63), each one's era being a manvantara in duration. We are in the seventh manvantara of this kalpa. A little over 14 manvantara-s equal to a kalpa duration. There has been no 8th Manu, although purANas have named the future Manu-s.

 

Manu-s are created beings; manvantara or kalpa is a time duration. If the humans were around in the last kalpa, who was their Manu, when a shAstra informs that only seven have been created so far?

 

The conclusion is evident.

[Viswanath B]

It seems a more a drawn conclusion from what is not stated, as opposed to something that is stated in the shastra as such. My conclusion, from your context below, is that we have insufficient information to make any conclusion. Just drawing a conclusion from manusmriti which is intended to be a dharma shastra doesn't seem correct IMHO.

To the best of my knowledge, it is one of the lakshana of the puranas that they describe time. From whatever I have read, there has been no mention of humans not being there in any kalpa.

I have a definitive quote from bhagavata to say humans existed in previous kalpa as well. (and so for the other passed kalpas)

Here is how things are described in bhagavatha tritiya skanda -

The day of brahma is called Kalpa, night is the nimittika pralaya, Each kalpa has 14 manvantaras. End of each kalpa, his day time,  Brahma goes to sleep and we will have pralaya where all the three lokas, bhuloka, bhuvarloka, suvarloka, sun & the moon will be destroyed.

...

Narayana tells Bramha at the begining of the kalpa - "Do your shrusti just like you did in last kalpa"
....

Brahma started creating ....Devas, Humans, Animals, birds,,,...

.......

So the answer to you question is probably clear. Manwantaras are only with in each Kalpa. Do we know who is the Manu in previous Kalpa, we don't know. All of that is destroyed, and created a fresh in the beginning of each kalpa.

From this, my inference to the " countless manwantara passed " , must be across the kalpas, where as only seven manus being created is for this current kalpa, shweta-varaha-kalpa.

Viswanath

[Ram Kumar Krishnan ராம குமரன்]

I am reading Vishnu puran and it also says the same as vishwanath as told. But I have a general doubt do all the events repeats as such in each chathur yuga ie in every dwapara yuga there will be rama avatara and in each thretha yuga there will be krishna avatara? 

2011/9/22 Viswanath B <vegav...@gmail.com>

[hnbhat B.R.]

2011/9/23 Ram Kumar Krishnan ராம குமரன் <ramku...@gmail.com>

I am reading Vishnu puran and it also says the same as vishwanath as told. But I have a general doubt do all the events repeats as such in each chathur yuga ie in every dwapara yuga there will be rama avatara and in each thretha yuga there will be krishna avatara? 

NO.

According to Kamoti Jagadguru's statement: here:

Aspromised by Vishnu, Swayambhu was born in Raghukula as King Dasaratha and became the father of Shri Rama in Treta Yuga, as Vasudeva in Yadava Kula in DwaparaYuga  

http://www.kamakoti.org/kamakoti/details/padmapurana28.html?PHPSESSID=905fafae41ff3257c12e2c7c198bb1b0

I think reverse is is the case. Now you can produce evidence to support your statement. In द्वापर Vyasa-s born to simplify the huge mass of Vedic Literature by re-distributing them 1/6 amshta of Vishnu, while PurNa avatara is Krishna himself. 

द्वापरे समनुप्राप्ते तृतीये युगपर्यये / (१४.२) 

जातः पराशराद्योगी वासव्यां कलया हरेः // (१४.३) 

LiPur, 1, 24, 125-130 makes it more clear both existed in Dvapara.

पाशरसुतः श्रीमान् विष्णुर्लोकपितामहः / (१२५.१) 

यदा भविष्यति व्यासो नाम्ना द्वैपायनः प्रभुः // (१२५.२)

तदा षष्ठेन चांशेन कृष्णः पुरुषसत्तमः / (१२६.१) 

वसुदेवाद्यदुश्रेष्ठो वासुदेवो भविष्यति // (१२६.२) 

 

--

Dr. Hari Narayana Bhat B.R. M.A., Ph.D.,

Research Scholar,

[श्रीमल्ललितालालितः]

श्रीमल्ललितालालितः

lalitAlAlitaH

2011/9/23 Ram Kumar Krishnan ராம குமரன் <ramku...@gmail.com>

I am reading Vishnu puran and it also says the same as vishwanath as told. But I have a general doubt do all the events repeats as such in each chathur yuga ie in every dwapara yuga there will be rama avatara and in each thretha yuga there will be krishna avatara? 

These things need scriptural proof.
So, if you get any about anything, you should accept and not otherwise.
So, sun, moon, etc. are created as they were before because we have a shruti - sUryAchandramasau dhAtA yathApUrvamakalpayat.
If you get any support in shrutI, purANa-s etc. about avatAra, then you should accept that these will happen as before too and not otherwise.

[Ram Kumar Krishnan ராம குமரன்]

thanks bhat ji,

my bad got confused with the names tre,dva for 3,2 etc,

but the question still remains does the events repeats the same in every chathur yuga

2011/9/23 hnbhat B.R. <hnbh...@gmail.com>

[hnbhat B.R.]

2011/9/23 Ram Kumar Krishnan ராம குமரன் <ramku...@gmail.com>

thanks bhat ji,

my bad got confused with the names tre,dva for 3,2 etc,

but the question still remains does the events repeats the same in every chathur yuga

2011/9/23 hnbhat B.R. <hnbh...@gmail.com>

Again you are reading PuraNa-s, and got confused with the names of the yuga-s which are well-defined, with your own interpretation as 3,2 etc. counting.

अथ वक्ष्ये लघूक्तेन युगधर्मांस्ततः परम्।
कृतं त्रेता द्वापरश्च कलिश्चेति चतुर्युगम्॥ भृगु संहिता ३७।१॥

Here is the link to the भृगुसंहिता of वैखानसागम - dealing with the description of the three Yuga-s:

http://srivaishnavism.yuku.com/topic/455/vaikhanasa-Agama-bhR-igu-saMhita?page=3

विष्णुधर्मोत्तरपुराण listing:

कृतं त्रेता द्वापरं च  कलिश्चेचतुर्युगम्  १०४.००९ along with these references:

⇒कृतं त्रेता द्वापरं च कलिश् चेति चतुर्युगम् / (भागवतपुराणम् 3, 11, 19.)

⇒ कृतं त्रेता द्वापरश् च कलिः सर्वामराश्रयः / (महाभारतम्  3, 3, 22, 1)

⇒ कृतं त्रेता द्वापरं च कलिश्चेति चतुर्युगम् / (मत्स्यपुराणम् 114, 57, 2)
⇒ कृतं त्रेता द्वापरं च कलिश्चैवं चतुर्युगम् // (मत्स्यपुराणम्, 142, 17, 2)
⇒ कृतं त्रेता द्वापरं च कलिश्चेति चतुष्टयम् // (मत्स्यपुराणम् 142, 23, 2)
⇒ त्वं कलिर्द्वापरं देव त्रेता कृतयुगं तथा / (स्कन्दपुराणम् (2), रेवाखण्ड, 20, 31, 1)
⇒ कृतत्रेतौ द्वापरश् च कलिश् चेति चतुर्युगाः / (गोकर्णपुराणसारः, 11, 38, 2)
⇒ कृतं त्रेता द्वापरं च कलिश्चेति चतुर्युगम् / (कूर्मपुराण, 1, 27, 1, 2)

⇒ कृते त्रेतायुगे चैव द्वापरे च कलौ तथा // (महाभारतम् 12, 224, 18, 2)
⇒ कृतं त्रेता द्वापरं च कलिश्चान्यत्र न क्वचित् // (कूर्मपुराण, 1, 45, 43, 2)
⇒ कृतं त्रेतायुगं चैव द्वापरं कलिरेव च / (मनुस्मृतिः , 9, 298, 1)
⇒ कृतं त्रेता द्वापरं च कलिर् इत्येषु केशवः / (भागवतपुराण  11, 5, 20, 2)

In all the above references you will find the description and more details. Specifically the Bhagavata reference gives the 

कृतं त्रेता द्वापरं च कलिश्चैवं चतुर्युगम् // (17.2)
पूर्वं कृतयुगं नाम ततस्त्रेताभिधीयते / (18.1)

द्वापरं च कलिश्चैव युगानि परिकल्पयेत् // (18.2)
चत्वार्याहुः सहस्राणि वर्षाणां तत्कृतं युगम् / (19.1)

More information on the time measurement in this:

http://kjc-fs-cluster.kjc.uni-heidelberg.de/dcs/index.php?contents=texte

Hope this will be helpful.

[Shambhu]

I don't see that. You are mixing up the various brahma-s. Also,
anumAna based on valid pramANa(s) is also a valid pramANa; hence
analysis and deduction must be accepted or its basis must be
contested, not anumAna itself.

Chapter 1 of manusmr`ti has little to do with Dharma shAstra – it
outlines the creation, created species’ classifications, and
kAlagaNanA (in the first 84 verses), and then only summarizes (in the
remaining 35 verses) the Dharma shAstra appearing in the succeeding
chapters. Have you studied the first 84 verses?

Anyway, we are deviating from your original questions. I hope the
learned members won't get irritated - here is another long note for
those who may kindly check me out:

The kalpa you are referring to is the mahA kalpa where the entire
universe including the primordial Apa submerges cyclically -
pertaining to the universal pitAmaha brahma. purANa-s use the word
kalpa and mahAkalpa interchangeably, and the right meaning must be
assigned from the context. Manusmr`ti refers to the pitAmaha brahma as
one born from svayambhu but does not give a time frame for or even a
notion of this mahA kalpa. svayambhu first created Apa, placed his
seed in it (he entered it and resided in it - so he is nArAyaNa, since
nArA is Apa). That seed is the brahma pitAmaha. He received (heard in
his ears) the Veda(s) from nArAyaNa in his 'first year' when he
resided in samAdhi inside the golden egg. ‘hiraNyagarbha’ of shruti is
this brahma: hiraNyagarbhaH samavartatAgre bhUtasya jAtaH patireka
AsIt (Rik 10-121-1). As per shruti, rudra pre-dated him: yo devAnAm
prathamaM purastAdvishvAdhiyo rudro maharishi; hiraNyagarbhaM
pashshyata jAyamAnagm sa no devaH shubhayA smr`tyA samyunaktu –
mahAnArAyaNopanishad. But the purANa-s describe 11 rudra-s as having
born from the pitAmaha brahma.

Shruti recognizes seven paridhi-s in this golden egg. Ten secondary
eggs are inside the brahmAnda egg, a few more eggs inside these
secondary eggs, and a few more inside the tertiary, and so on till the
chandra maNdala(s). Starting from the lowest, these paridhi-s are:
chandra maNdala, agni (pr`thivI) maNdala, sUrya (nakSatra) maNdala,
vAyu (galaxy) maNdala, indra (galaxy cluster) maNdala, br`haspati
maNdala (local group), and prajApati maNdala (these are ten), all
within the brahmANda. Our agni maNdala was named as the bhU maNdala
(we are on it), our sUrya maNdala as Aditya maNdala (with a brahma as
its adhipati), our vAyu maNdala as soma maNdala (with a viSNu as its
adhipati), our indra maNdala as vahni maNdala (with a shiva as its
adhipati), our br`haspati maNdala as parameSTi maNdala (with parameSTi
prajApati brahma as its adhipati), and our prajApati as vasiSTa who is
also a prajApati brahma. Modern astronomy has grasped the universe up
to the local group; beyond that the picture is hazy like the ancient
Greeks' 'flat earth.’ (As congruence, yoga texts recognize in our body
seven maNdala-s with similar names.)

A side-note: Agni, sUrya, and vAyu devatA-s exist in each paridhi’s
pr`thivI, dyau, and antarikSa. These are the three in the triH sapta
samidhaH kr`tAH (puruSa sUkta), corresponding to the three vyAhr`ti-s
bhU, bhuva, and suva.

Up to the vahni maNdaala we offer our namaskAra-s during our nitya
pUjA (in the pITa pUjA section of the panchAyatana pUjA paddhati); so
this is in the paddhati, and we can accept it:

aum Aditya maNdalAya namaH | Aditya maNdalAdhipataye brahmaNe namaH |
aum soma maNdalAya namaH | soma maNdalAdhipataye viSNave namaH |
aum vahni maNdalAya namaH | vahni maNdalAdhipataye shivAya namaH |

Some paddhati-s have ‘arka’ in place of 'Aditya’ but this description
of the pITa in the pUjA room is common in the vaidika tradition.

We don't know who but some shAstrakAra had figured this out. Let us
not equate the saptAsyAsan paridhayaH (rik - puruSa sUkta) to 7 darbha-
s around the homa kuNda and lose their cosmological content. Thinking
so would be primitive. The ritual of homa is to learn the story of the
brahmANda and its creative process. Therefore we pray – in every homa
- to aditi, anumati, and sarasvati (to grant the wisdom) and to Savita
(to create): aditenu manvasva, anumatenu manvasva, sarasvatenu
manvasva, deva savita prasuva.

The mahA kalpa notion is for svayambhu's brahmAnda. sveta varAha, etc.
30 (or 34) kalpa names are of the brahma of our own Aditya maNdala.
Stretching our local kalpa to brahmANda's kalpa is the feat of the
purANa commentators; purANa-s per so don’t claim so. We do bow to
these great commentators for their enormous analytical depth and
spiritual heights, but we need not shy to disagree or, worse, get
stuck in a primitive mould.

The same purANas you and Ram Kumar ji quote claim that brahma lives
for 100 years, not for one kalpa, with a parArdha having passed (i.e.,
360x50 kalpas, according to the purANas, and I haven't seen any
shAstra pramANa for this 360 factor). From the day-kalpa to the night
kalpa our local brahma stops his active work and takes rest
(manusmr`ti 1-74). He does not die but sleeps in the night kalpa. So
losing knowledge from (our local) kalpa to kalpa does not happen.
Going by the purANa-s, it will happen, within our solar system
neighborhood, after about a parArdha.

For an idea of the various brahma-s, the first 84 verses of manusmr`ti
must be studied. This requires some analysis. A one-liner quotation
may not help much. purANas may be examined, but they too agree with
Manusmr`ti on this issue, provided we understand which brahma’s kalpa
the purANa-s narrate. As noted above, we are dealing with four brahma-
s (hiraNyagarbha, vasiSTa, parameSTi prajApati, and brahma), one
viSNu, and one shiva in our 7-paridhi chain. The choice of viSNu and
shiva may convey this: galaxies sustain, galaxy clusters encourage
collisions and annihilations, and the other maNdala-s are
characterized by creative processes.

Another side-note: The prAta smaraNa shloka ‘brahmA murAri
tripurAntakAri, bhAnuH shashi bhUmisuto budhascha, guruscha shukraH
shani rAhu ketavaH, kurvantu sarve mama suprabhAtam‘ depicts our
neighborhood till the galaxy cluster.

Now, to manusmr`ti, chapter 1 (verse numbers noted in brackets):

One Manu was approached by Bhrugu and other sages. This Manu, referred
to as svAyambhuva Manu, characterized the first creator as svayambhu
(1 to 6).

This svayambhu, Himself the ParamAtman, created Apa (also known as
nArA), entered it (He is therefore called nArAyaNa), and He Himself
was then born as Brahman. In the golden egg he was in, he meditated
and received the full Veda. He is famously known as puruSa (7 to 12).

This Brahman created the subtle mind, the ego, and the five great
elements. From these seven very powerful puruSas springs this world
(13 to 21).

He created the deva-s, sAdhyA-s, and the sanAtana yajna (22).

For obtaining the fruits of the yajna, from agni, vAyu, and ravi, He
milked ‘trayam brahma sanAtanam’ having the rik, yajus, and sAma
lakSaNa-s (23).

He created time, time divisions, nakSatra-s, graha-s, the material
world (rivers, mountains, oceans), tapa, vAk, kAma, krodha, dharma,
adharma, etc. in order to create living creatures next (24 to 31).

This is the narration till verse 31. Creation outlined thus far is all
by tapas (heat/energy and material amalgamations).

He divided His own body and became half male and half female, and with
that female, He produced virAj (32). We see the similarity with the
model seen in the puruSa sUkta.

virAj engaged in tapas and produced ‘aham’, and ‘aham’ then created
the ten prajApatis, who, except nArada prajApati, in turn created
seven brilliant Manu-s, deva-s and deva-gaNas-s, and maharishi-s of
limitless power (33 to 36). I take the word ‘aham’ here as a technical
term denoting a brahma (ahamasmi brahmAhamasi – shruti), not the
generic “I”. Otherwise, there is room for confusion. Note that only
seven Manu-s were created.

The chaturyuga-s, manvantara-s, and brahma ahorAtri in the manusmr`ti
apply to the solar system (Aditya maNdala) only, since verses 1-64
through 1-73 take the time division scheme from our ahorAtri to that
of the pitr` (our one lunar month), deva-s (our one year), and brahma
(our 24,000 years) all in units of our ahorAtri. Therefore the
manvantara scheme is also within the solar system. If the manvantara-s
and the kalpa-s are only for the universal brahmANda, why has the
shAstra missed the time divisions of the soma maNdala, vahni maNdala,
parameSTi maNdala, and the prajApati maNdala? On kAlagaNana, this
shAstra, or any other shAstra, does not say anything for the entire
brahmANda (which is over the 7th paridhi). All we find is the
stretching by the numerous commentators – from Kalluka Bhatta to
present. These are logical absurdities.

There is no Dharma shAstra in any of the above verses. Further
examination of the Manusmr`ti is not needed to clarify the issue.

Therefore seven Manu-s only have been created (so far) through the
last parArdha. Verse 79 defines the era of each Manu as spanning a
manvantara, comprising of 71 chaturyuga-s (each chaturyuga = 12,000
earthly years) and the seven Manu-s during their eras created
‘prajAH’ (63). Some purANa-s change this 71 to 72 to make14 manvantara-
s = 1 kalpa = 1008 chaturyuga durations. The celestial movements do
not change with such fudging.

Since the duration of 1000 chaturyugas is defined as brahma’s one day
(verses 71 and 72), and equally brahma’s one night, a kalpa of the
purAna-s is a little more than 14 manvantara-s. 14 + 14 manvantara-s
form one sidereal day-night cycle of the Aditya maNdala (our local
brahma) and 12 more chaturyuga durations make up his one ahorAtri.
purANas also inform that the present kalpa commenced with svAyambhuva
Manu at a kr`ta yugAdi..

Thus, as per the primary shAstra, since only seven Mnau-s have been
created so far, and that there was no communication breakdown from
last kalpa to the present (through the deva-s, sAdhya-s, mahariSi-s,
gandharva-s, kinnara-s, etc. who have been in the Aditya maNdala from
its inception), it stands established that there was no human race on
earth in the earlier (our local) kalpa. If there were, more than seven
Manu-s must have been already created. No shAstra claims so.

purANokta kalpa-s must be understood in line with the shAstra, not the
other way.

On Sep 23, 12:35 am, Viswanath B <vegavah...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It seems a more a drawn conclusion from what is not stated, as opposed to
> something that is stated in the shastra as such. My conclusion, from your
> context below, is that we have insufficient information to make any
> conclusion. Just drawing a conclusion from manusmriti which is intended to

> be a *dharma shastra* doesn't seem correct IMHO.
>
> To the best of my knowledge, it is one of the *lakshana* of the puranas that

> they describe time. From whatever I have read, there has been no mention of
> humans not being there in any kalpa.
>
> I have a definitive quote from bhagavata to say humans existed in previous
> kalpa as well. (and so for the other passed kalpas)
>
> Here is how things are described in bhagavatha tritiya skanda -
>

> *The day of brahma is called Kalpa, night is the nimittika pralaya, Each

> kalpa has 14 manvantaras. End of each kalpa, his day time,  Brahma goes to
> sleep and we will have pralaya where all the three lokas, bhuloka,

> bhuvarloka, suvarloka, sun & the moon will be destroyed. *
>
> ...
>
> *Narayana tells Bramha at the begining of the kalpa - "Do your shrusti just

> like you did in last kalpa"
> ....
>
> Brahma started creating ....Devas, Humans, Animals, birds,,,...
>
> .......

> *

> So the answer to you question is probably clear. Manwantaras are only with
> in each Kalpa. Do we know who is the Manu in previous Kalpa, we don't know.
> All of that is destroyed, and created a fresh in the beginning of each
> kalpa.
>
> From this, my inference to the " countless manwantara passed " , must be
> across the kalpas, where as only seven manus being created is for this

> current kalpa, *shweta-varaha-kalpa. *
>
> Viswanath

>
> On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 10:54 AM, Shambhu Shastry <bhaar...@yahoo.com>wrote:
>
>
>
> > Countless manvantara-s have passed (manusmr`ti 1-80), but only seven Manu-s
> > have been created so far (manusmr`ti 1-36), named as svAyambhuva,
> > shArochiSa, uttama, tAmasa, raivata, chAkSuSa, and vivasvatsuta (manusmr`ti
> > 1-62, 63), each one's era being a manvantara in duration. We are in the
> > seventh manvantara of this kalpa. A little over 14 manvantara-s equal to a
> > kalpa duration. There has been no 8th Manu, although purANas have named the
> > future Manu-s.
>
> > Manu-s are created beings; manvantara or kalpa is a time duration. If the
> > humans were around in the last kalpa, who was their Manu, when a shAstra
> > informs that only seven have been created so far?
>
> > The conclusion is evident.
>

> >  *From:* Viswanath B <vegavah...@gmail.com>
> > *To:* sams...@googlegroups.com
> > *Sent:* Thursday, September 22, 2011 12:06 AM
> > *Subject:* Re: [Samskrita] Re: Earliest known 'division' of Veda
>
> >  *Humans came along only in this kalpa, starting from Svaayambhuva Manu.

> > No purANa
> > or shAstra differs on this issue

> > *

>
> > Bhagavatha mentions history, for lack of better words, across manvantars,
> > and I don't think it mentions anything to this effect that there were no
> > humans before the svAyambhuva manu. Can you please quote a source for this ?
>
> > Viswanath
>

> >http://groups.google.com/group/samskrita?hl=en.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[dhaval patel]

Dear Shambhuji,

Very detailed analysis indeed..

Some further clarifications are needed in this regard to clarify the issue:

1. सप्तास्यासन् परिधयः and सप्त समिधः कृताः - this refers to the cosmic egg and other events of cosmologic importance.. Kindly give the source / commentary which would benifit us sir...

2. Can this 360 / 365 factor be the number of days?

3. Whether brahmANDa or the egg of brahmA theory is also a later puranic theory or a vedic one ? 

4. Any mention of time factors such as kalpa, manvantara, parardha etc.. in vedic literature ?

Sincerely yours,

Dr. Dhaval Patel

www.sanskritworld.in

[Nityanand Misra]

I have heard there is a Ramavatara in each chaturyugi. There are verses in scriptures which are interpreted in some traditions to mean that there have been 100 crore Rama Avataras and 100 crore Ramayanas.

Vishmamitra says in Ramarakshastotra

चरितं रघुनाथस्य शतकोटिप्रविस्तरम् ।
एकैकमक्षरं पुंसां महापातकनाशनम् ॥

Tulsidas's testimonies in Ramcharitmanas

नाना भाँति राम अवतारा । रामायन शत कोटि अपारा ॥ 1.33.6 ॥
कलपभेद हरि चरित सुहाए । भाँति अनेक मुसीशन गाए ॥ 1.33.7 ॥

Nabhadas' Bhaktamal says of Valmiki

त्रेता काव्य निबंध करि सत कोटि रामायण ।

It is believed that in his reincarnation as Tulsdias, Valmiki combined the essence of 100 crore Ramayanas in the Ramcharitmanas.

Nityanand

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "samskrita" group.
To post to this group, send email to sams...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to samskrita+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/samskrita?hl=en.

--
Nityānanda Miśra
http://nmisra.googlepages.com

|| आत्मा तत्त्वमसि श्वेतकेतो ||
(Thou art from/for/of/in That Ātman, O Śvetaketu)
     - Ṛṣi Uddālaka to his son, Chāndogyopaniṣad 6.8.7, The Sāma Veda