part 3 (krishna)

8/22/2019 Part 3 (Krishna)

1/228

Boo k - I I I

Th e Ved a s


2/228

The Gr ea t Revea l ed Scr i p t ur es -

Th e Ved a s

It is believed that the Vedas belong to srutior revealedliterature.

Radhakrishnan writes: The Vedas were composedby the seers when they were in a state of inspiration.He who inspires them is God. Truth is impersonal,apauruseyaand eternal, nitya. Inspiration is a joint activity,of which mans contemplation and Gods revelation aretwo sides. The Svetasvatara Upanishad says that the sageSvetasvatara saw the truth owing to his power ofcontemplation, tapah-prabhava, and the grace of God,deva-prasada. The dual significance of revelation, its

subjective and objective character, is suggested here.At another place he writes that The Naiyayikas

maintain that the Vedas were composed by God, whilethe Mimamsakas hold that they were not composed atall either by man or by God, but have existed from alleternity in the form of sounds. It is perhaps a way ofsaying that the timeless truths of eternity exist from

everlasting to everlasting. Aristotle too regards thefundamental truths of religion as eternal andindestructible.

With reference to the Prophets, Athenagoras says:

While entranced and deprived of their natural

powers of reason by the influence of the Divine

Spirit, they uttered that which was wrought in them,

the sp irit using them as its instrument as a flute-

pla yer might blow a flute.

APOL. IX.

We have already proved the true identity of thatDivine Spirit, which was not only responsible for the


3/228

revelation of Vedas but several similar revealed scripturesin all parts of the world. Be it Aristotle or Athenagoras,

or the sages of ancient Mesopotamia, China, India and

Egypt, at all places it has been these devas, who togethercomprise the spirit, who used the pious and pure bodiesof sages as instruments, as a flute player uses a flute,at all times endeavouring to lead mankind and all othercreatures to one path, that of worship of the Absolute

God.

You may say that there is no proof that the devasor the Divine Spirit had any role in revelation of theVedas and Upanishads. Fact is that proof does exist andit can be derived from the words of Athenagoras andSvetasvatara.

It is to be noted that the Svetasvatara Upanishadstates that the sage Svetasvatara saw the truth owing to

his power of contemplation, tapah-prabhava, and thegrace of God, deva-prasada. The original word wasdeva-prasada, which has been wrongly translated asgrace of god. We are sure that by now you alreadyknow a lot about the real identity of these devas or theDivine Spirit of God.

You want more proof. Read these words of Jesus:Cp. Howbeit, when he the Spi rit of truth is come

he sha ll guide you unto a ll the truth; for he sha ll

not speak from himself, but wha tsoever things he

sha ll hear, these sha ll he speak.

JOHN XVI, 13.

It is the universal belief of Muslims that Mohammadnever spoke unless it was the will of God.

We have already shown in Book 2 that by Spiritof truth, it is the Prophet Mohammad and his Ahlebaytwho are meant. Individually, neither Prophet Mohammadnor Ali nor Husain forms the spirit, as they are all parts


4/228

of that One Spirit created by God as His ManifestedSelf. We know now that this spirit divided into 14 parts.

However, Jesus is right in saying that the spirit of truth

would come on earth, as not one, not two, but all thefourteen parts would take birth in human form one afteranother.

From this it is evident that the devas, who tookbirth in human form as Mohammad, Ali, Fatima, Husain,

etc. to lead us to the worship of one God, had a role inrevelation of Vedas and at least some, if not all, of theUpanishads as well. Vedas are the most sacred of thedivine books for Indians. We invite you now to study theVedas with us and see what they contain.

As usual, we again forewarn you to be attentiveand prepared for certain conclusions that may not bein your wildest imagination. However, we wish to tell in

advance that our conclusions are not concocted theories,but are based on hard facts, and substantiated by theUpanishads and the Gita, not at a place or two, but intheir entirety. In fact, if you remain patient, and continueto read further, you will find that all those mysteriesrelated to the Vedas, the Upanishads and even the Gita,which have confounded the minds of commentators tilldate, are getting solved, by relying on our theory.

Conf l i ct i ng I n t e r p r e ta t i ons o f Ved i c Tex t

Rishi Dayanand Saraswati (RDS), the founder ofArya Samaj, has categorically stated that the Vedas areoriginal and the word of God, containing eternal and

true knowledge. Devi Chand endorses the same viewin his introduction of the commentary of The Yajur Veda.He writes: Vedas are the word of God, revealed in thebeginning of creation, for the moral, spiritual, and physicalguidance and uplift of humanity. They are replete withthe eternal truths and throw a flood of light on variousaspects of life to make a man perfect and ideal. God


5/228

out of His infinite source of knowledge reveals in thebeginning of creation a part of it, adequate for the

requirements of the soul, its spiritual satisfaction, fulfillment

of its thirst for truth and making its journey of lifesuccessful.

A part of knowledge was revealed at the beginningof creation, as per Devi Chand. If the remaining partwas revealed later in the form of Taurait, Zuboor, Injeel

and Quran, we should not doubt it. Surely, neither theGod nor His devas stopped working from that timeonwards.

We do not doubt a word of what RDS or Devi Chandsays above. In fact, our view is that not even a matra orvowel in Vedas can be without a meaning or significance,now that we know it is to be the word of God. God isthe source of all knowledge and it is not His Nature that

He performs errors of speech, even though it is of thedegree of a useless matra or for the purpose of rhetoricalone. Any where during our study of the Vedas, or forthat matter, the Gita, if we are able to find a verse thatdoes not gel with our understanding, we are nobody todoubt the text or point errors in it, that most commentatorshave done. In fact, in a situation like this, we shouldhumbly accept our lack of knowledge and pursue withrenewed vigour to get to the real meaning, as was intendedby God.

Throughout the course of this book, we will citeinnumerable instances where the commentators haveraised a finger at The Word of God, which is sin in our

view and need to be severely condemned. In fact, thisbecame the reason that prompted us to go deeper intothe real content of the Vedas and the Upanishads.

We are all aware that the Vedas are replete withmention of Indra, Vayu, Agni, etc. The Vedas, in actuality,are the real source of all information that we possess


6/228

about these names and also formed the basis of all themyths and legends that came into existence subsequently,

which were to find place in later period works like

Puranas, Ramayana and Mahabharata.RDS is considered one of the greatest commentators

of Vedas, along with Sayanacharaya, It is RDSscommentary that we took up for study and hence wouldlike to talk about it first.

A true reformist that he considered himself to be,

RDS concluded that the Vedas talked of airplanes, carsand steam engines. RDS was perhaps distressed at theallegations raised by various Western scholars that theHindu scriptures were merely mythology and ritual, whichno longer had any living truth or force for the thinkingminds and were therefore fit to be put away among therelics of the past as an antique record of semi-barbarous

worship. This distress is also visible in the writing ofAurobindo Ghosh, who shared RDSs view, and whichyou will read in a short while. Therefore, he re-wrotethe entire commentary, saying that the names of Indra,Vayu, Agni, etc. that were so often used in the Vedas,and which have been taken as divine persons, or devas,by most commentators, to be sun, air, fire, etc. andnothing else. In the course of this, where Vayu and Agniwere mentioned together, he concluded them to be steamengines and so on. This was done with the purpose ofmaking these scriptures fit for the thinking mind, withoutrealizing that we were only leading to further deviation.

To tell you the truth, when we picked up the Vedas

for study, we were of the opinion that if it is Godsrevealed text, then it must be of the nature of a torchbearer,that would show that path to the human beings, thatwould lead them to the worship of One God and savethem from the scourge of sin and troubled existence.The moment we started reading it, it was apparent thatthis could not be digested, as it is beyond reason that


7/228

God would use His energy and time, send Prophets andemissaries, to tell that in future there would be airplanes

and steam-engines to carry us or tell us what oils to put

in ritual fire, what kind of ladle to use during suchoblations, and so on.

Our view was further substantiated when we readManu, who is largely believed to be the first lawgiverafter the Vedas, singing the glory of the Vedas in such

un-ambiguous terms as:

The Veda is the source of a ll Dharma i.e. relig ion,mora lity, righteousness and good conduct.

(MANUSMRITI 2-6)

It is unfortunate that the later day translators ofthe Vedas inferred the value of Vedas from the valuegiven to them by revered sages of earlier times, butforgot the true meaning of the Vedas. Instead of whatManu described Vedas to be, they found rites and rituals,electricity, steam engines and airplanes in the Vedas.

How foolish of us that we claim Vedas to be havinga universal appeal due to the reason that they talk about

future when steam engines would role and electricgadgets would be part of our life. The fact that several

Vedic hymns talk in the future tense and carry wordslike Vayu and Agni, that made us conclude this. Buthave we ever thought that the same Vedas, of whoseuniversal nature we are boasting of, would becomeredundant for the man of the period when they wererevealed, in case we were to translate them in such amanner.

To counter this argument, those very people whotalk of the scientific and logical nature of Vedas, saythat people of that period were aware of steam engines

and electric cars. They are of the view that people ofthe time knew the art of making airplanes and steamvehicles, which was lost with time. Would any person


8/228

with a scientific and logical bent of mind ever believethis? Did we ever unearth a plane while digging or ever

found a picture of it on the walls of a cave or a mention

of it in any of the historical or religious books? Hanumansvisit from Lanka to Himalaya in a very short time iscited but we will prove later that his visit was not owingto a fast-moving vehicle but to something that is farloftier than the flight of our materialism-inflicted minds.

As we have said, if there were cars and airplanes,where have they disappeared? Why is it that in theexcavations, no trace of engine or airplanes is foundand only things to be found are crude utensils, traditionalinstruments of warfare and life bereft of all the so-calledmodern luxuries and modes of quicker transportation?

Even for a moment, if we suppose that there wereindeed such vehicles existing during the time, then what

about the middle ages, when airplanes were surely notplying? Were the Vedas redundant during that time period?Or were they only for our times, and the people of thepast were merely reciting the hymns so that they areremembered and reach us without any change? Weare sure you wont agree to this as Vedas truly are Godsown words and are for all times.

With such an explanation, Vedas would also becomeredundant in the 21st century, when steam engines, carsand airplanes have become common knowledge. Whyshould we look at the Vedas now when we gave gonefar ahead in terms of progress, from the days of steamengines and airplanes?

We are sure your curiosity is aroused! Some ofyou may be thinking that only a handful of commentatorslike RDS have translated the Vedas with steam-enginesand airplanes in them, whereas the rest of thecommentators have certainly not done so. MaharshiPatanjali writes in the Mahabhasya, that there are 101


9/228

shakhas(schools of thoughts) of the Yajur Veda. All thesecommentaries are not available at present except the

Kanva, Madhyandini, Taittiriya, Maitrayani, Kathak and

Kapishthala. Only six available to us out of the 101versions!

It can therefore be inferred that RDSs commentaryis either 105th, 110th or any such version but certainlynot lesser than the 102nd. Since commentaries or schools

of thoughts are based on the understood meaning, thiswould amount to saying that Yajur Veda alone (containingmerely 1984 verses in comparison to Rig Vedas 10,522)has been understood with at least 102 meanings. If thisis so, then what is the real meaning that God intended?God surely must have talked about one straight path,

even if He had to send His Messages through variousApostles and emissaries, and not diverse ones as the

various Schools of Thoughts suggest.From this reasoning, you will have to agree that

out of the 102 Schools of Thoughts, 101 are surelywrong and not carry the meaning that God intended.Only one may be the right path that God truly intendedto show us. But what if the right path was one amongstthe 95 schools of thoughts that are lost? Are we gropingin the dark then? And the light of illumination that weconsider to be from God, is from other source, perhapshas its source in Satan (devil) itself.

Here we would like to say that since we believethe Vedas to be Gods words, we must be prepared toaccept it as it is, without getting into a sort of inferiority

complex. The fact that we faced this problem onlyhighlights our lack of faith in God. We should have keptcomplete faith in God that each and everything He sayshas to be correct and based on certain reason and thenmade the translations with utmost sincerity. We musthave accepted that since He is Creator and Knower of


10/228

all that will transpire till the end of this world; His wordscannot be termed as lacking foresight or wisdom. On

the other hand, we wish to see Gods word in the way

we want it to be. That is why, all those people who satwith preconceived notions to prove something have erred;we will also find later that RDSs view is misleading andbaseless.

If we believe that God has created us and it is He

who has made arrangements for showing us the rightpath, if we believe that not a single leaf falls withoutHis wish, and if we believe that we are like scrap in thesmelting unit of an iron or steel factory that keeps movingon a chain towards inevitable destruction of its materialform, then we must accept Gods Word as final, whatever

it is. Yes, sincere endeavours to understand that Wordin the true sense should be an endless pursuit.

Whether truth is in RDSs inference or in that ofcommentators like Sayana and other Western scholars,all should be checked and rechecked on the basis ofour reasoning, before we come to believe them. Nothing,not even the arguments carried in this book itself, shouldbe accepted until we find them based on logic and reason,after a sincere study.

Let us now see how Sayana and others hadinterpreted the Vedas, and what was there that wasunacceptable to RDS, Aurobindo Ghosh and others.Commentators like Sayana and others (there are several)have taken Indra, Vayu, Agni, etc., to mean divine personsor devas, whose meaning is taken as god. The Western

scholars too have interpreted Indra, Agni, Vayu, etc. asNature Gods residing somewhere in the heavens. Theproblem of accepting this argument in the way it ispresented is that it seems to give a ritual, mythologicaland polytheistic interpretation, which surely wont beacceptable to any one of us.


11/228

Unable to digest this, Aurobindo Ghosh had nochoice but to fall back on RDSs commentary, even though

it is apparent from his writing that he is not accepting it

because he perfectly agrees with it, but has no choicein the face of other existing translations which are farmore non-acceptable. He says: In any case we haveto make one choice or another. Either the Veda is whatSayana says it is, and then we have to leave it behind

for ever as the document of a mythology and ritual orwhich have no longer any living truth or force for thinking

minds, or it is what the European scholars say it is, andthen we have to put it away among the relics of the pastas an antique record of semi-barbarous worship or elseit is indeed Veda, a book of divine knowledge, and then

it becomes of supreme importance to us to know and tohear its message.

Ob j ect i on s t o RDS s Ver si on

Devi Chand, who otherwise justifies RDSs view,agrees that a large many people object upon RDSsview. Says he: People at all times have raised objectionsto the philological and etymological method by whichRDS arrived at his results, especially in his dealing with

the names of god-heads (devas). Those adhering to RDSsschool, have given several reasons to justify their standbut adherents of other school have always found themas baseless.

Even RDS and Aurobindo Ghosh are unable todiscount that Vedas hymn the One Deity of many namesand powers, but say that it is meant for the One God.

However, when puzzled by that One Gods name beingdescribed as a mortal human being, or two or moresuch names described together, they take the literalmeaning of fire or air or sun and carry on the discussionto include fire-sacrifice, oblations, airplanes, steamengines, cars and what not. They are confounded to


12/228

such an extent that the same word that at one pointstands for the One God, is interpreted as meant for

wind, air, fire or sun at another place and for learned

sages or even common men like us, at yet another place.For instance, at a place RDS takes Saraswati as

God, out of her one hundred names enumerated inthe first chapter of the Satyartha Prakash, but interpretsthe word as wife when discussing marriage, as instructive

speech elsewhere and knowledge and learning at someother place. Why cant he give one meaning to the wordSaraswati that is accepted throughout? This is so becauseone meaning would not have fitted everywhere.Perplexed indeed must he be but at no instance did heconfess that his understanding and not God were the

cause of this confusion.

In order to endorse RDSs commentary, Aurobindo

Ghosh writes: According to etymological formation oftheNirukta, all so-called historical names denote ordinarythings according to science of rhetoric. We might haveaccepted this logic as true had the so-called historicalnames were of ordinary nature. Instead, we find Indra,Vayu, Agni, Saraswati, etc., mentioned in almost allscriptures of Hindus. Not just the Vedas, but Upanishadsare full of their mention. Puranas go to the extent ofassociating myths and legends to their names, so muchso they are talked about as siring children. Hanuman isVayuputra. Rama is said to have given Sita in the custodyof Agnideva. Krishna in Gita talks of Indras Heaven.Arjuna sees various devatas in the revealed image of

God shown to him, as per Gita and is also believed tohave received weapons and training from devatas, asper Mahabharata. And even today, Saraswati isworshipped as Goddess and Indra is prayed to, whentoo less or too much of rain comes.

It is clear from our study of various Upanishadsand Puranas that people worshipped Indra as a superior


13/228

devata, Agni was chief deity of all sacrifices, and talkedof Vayu reverentially. With such profound literature

abounding on them, prior to Gita and during the time,

how could the commentators ignore all this? In thebackdrop of all this literature, it is seems illogical thateven Vedas would have used the terms like Indra asmeaning the material sun, without giving clear indicationsthat it is meant for the material sun.

And it is not that there are only a few names.Vasishtha, Bharadwaja, Jamadagni, Viswamitra, Devas,Angiras, Gautama, Kashyap, Urvashi, Bhrigu, Bharata,Parashara, etc. are not just mere historical persons,but are sure to have some significance, in imparting ofGods Message. Lest you have forgotten, we remind

you that we are talking of Vedas, which is believed tobe a word of God. Parasara may be denoting some

ordinary thing, as per RDS or Aurobindo Ghosh, butwe must remember that it is Parasara who teaches theentire Vishnu Purana.

Moreover, if you have seen any of the translationsof Vedas, you must have seen that each Veda comprisesof several hymns. We were of opinion that each hymnmust be pertaining to a particular subject and wereexpecting some sort of continuity in meaning. What wefind from RDSs translation though is that there is nocontinuity and the subject keeps changing so much sothat it is better to treat every verse separately. It maymove from a religious sacrifice to an airplane and fromthere to subject of God, to cars, to oblations by the

fire, and vice versa. We were unable to digest this aswe had expected God to stick to some logic or subject.

There is no denying the fact that most commentatorsincluding RDS have tried to mould the translation asper their liking. They have given their own translation,though the ideal approach would have been to stick tothe real translation and then write whatever they wanted


14/228

in the commentary that followed. This has led to grosserrors in translation, thereby clouding the entire work.

A very clear example of our claim that RDS has

not relied on the real meaning but devised his ownmeanings can be seen from RDSs translation of Mantra14 and 19 in Chapter I of Yajur Veda. In the Sanskrittext, the first half of both the Mantras is exactly thesame. The second half is different but it has several

common words. This should have meant that themeanings of the two should have been similar. And sincethe Mantra consists of only 2 lines, then half or at leasta portion of the translation should have same meaning.But since the meaning that RDS derived for the firsthalf of Mantra14 was not fitting with his meaning of the

second line of Mantra 19, he gave altogether differentmeanings. See for yourself, while keeping in mind that

first half of both the mantras is identical.Man t ra 1 4 : May your hou se be com for tab l e . I t shou l d a f fo r d

no shelter t o the wick ed and th e uncha ri tab le. May your hou se

serve on as sk in of t he Ear th . May a l l per son s acqu ir e such a

house through the grace of God. C louds receive mois ture

fr om for ests, resid e in the vast spa ce, and receive water f r om

air. May God im par t you this k nowl edge of clou ds and b ui l din g

hou ses. May the learn ed un derstan d th e bui ld i ng o f hou ses,

wh ich serve as sk in of t he ear th.

Man t ra 19 : The ya jna i s the g i ver o f h app i ness, pu ts an end

to the sel f ish an d m iser ly hab i ts an d pr otects the m id- regi ons

as sk in protec ts the body. May the per former of the ya jnareal ize i ts s ign i f i cance. The proper rec i ta t ion of the Vedic

hymns is the ya jna i tse l f . The ya jna per formed on spec ia l

occasions also protects truth as skin protects the body. The

yajna is the susta i ner of t he i l l ust r iou s sun , the em bodi m ent


15/228

of Vedic lor e. May we real i ze the ya jn a as the br ing er of r a in ,

and th e g iver o f sp i r i tua l kn ow ledge.

Tr ue Con t en t o f t he Veda s

Writes ADDVM (Acharya Dharma Deva VidyaMartanda) in his commentary of RDSs translation ofRig Veda: According to the unanimous opinions of theseers and sages of India, including the authors of theSix Systems of Philosophy known as Darshan Shastras,

the Vedas were revealed by the Omniscient God in thebeginning of the human creation. The meaning of theword Veda is knowledge. It is derived from the root(Vid) to know. By Veda we mean the knowledge givenby the Omnipotent and Omniscient Lord of all Creationfor the harmonious development and guidance ofmankind.

Fact is that even the learned and wise authors ofUpanishads have regarded Vedas as Revealed Scriptures.Sage Kapila says:

The Vedas having been produced by His (God s)

own power, carry their authority within themselves.

(SANKHYA SHASTRA 5-5-1).

Jain Acharya Kumudendu said on the Vedas:

The Rig Veda is eterna l and the word of the

Omniscient in the beginning. Various languages

have been derived from i t. The message of the

Omniscient Supreme being is and the same for

the speakers of al l languages.

Even Mahatma Buddha who is erroneouslyconsidered to be an atheist or opposed to the Vedashas stated in Sutta Nipata, 292:

He who a ttains true knowledge of Dharma or

righteousness through the Vedas, atta ins a steady

position . He does not waver.


16/228

This shows that the content of the Vedas was asmuch regarded by Buddha as by Krishna. However, it

is to be noted that that Budha too, like Krishna, agreed

to the sanctity of the Vedas and its content and knew itsimportance as part of Dharma (religion), they both sharedthe view that the followers of Vedas had got deviatedfrom the original teachings. Therefore, both Krishnaand Buddha tried to propagate teachings as per the needs

of time and their stress depended on the social life andbelief of the people. When materialism had corrupted

the thinking and rites and rituals had permeated thesociety, stress was given to leave all and seek reclusein hermitage. When evils of sannyas grew so extensivelythat people left all chores of life to live in forest, then

Narada had to tell people to come back to social life.

Now we are close to revealing the true content of

the Vedas. But before we do so, we would like you tokeep this book aside for a while and ponder that if Godwas to directly give you some knowledge, what it wouldbe. We are sure that all those in sincere pursuit of

spirituality and the consequent salvation would agreethat God cannot be expected to teach us mundane things,that have little significance in our spiritual life. It is this

reason that we discounted RDSs commentary the momentwe saw it talking of steam engines, airplanes, ingredientsfor sacrifice and similar other subjects.

Rather than this, Gods books have to light thetrue path that leads us to God. There are already somany misleading paths in front of us, and in the confusing

haze, it is surely difficult to trace the true path that wouldlead man to God. Therefore, knowledge imparted byGod must surely talk about the shortest path to reachGod, which has got blurred with time due to deviationsand mans nature to mould the shown path as per hisown whims and likings.

How are we to know what God wants from us unless


17/228

we hear from Him Himself? Either He should Himselftell or appoint Divine Representatives to tell the purpose

of creation, what the Almighty expects from his creation,

how to worship Him and how to treat relations, friends,humans and animals. All this should be mentioned inthe Gods book.

However, we have seen that several books writtenby humans are so complex that they cannot be understood

without a teacher or a guide. What if we are unable tounderstand Gods book, or confusion arise as regardto their understanding and interpretation. Who will bethe teacher in such a case? Who will be the guide? Arewe to consider ordinary human beings or apparentlypious sages as our guides, when we all know that each

of us is governed by material senses and modalities ofnature and, therefore, each one of us is fallible? Surely,

the guides to Gods teachings must be those who areidentified by God Himself. They should be ones whoare not fallible, who show us the true path always andshow how to lead that path in practicality.

Such divine beings should take birth as humans,live as humans and die as humans, so that none of uscan say that Gods path cannot be treaded. In theirlives as humans, if they show certain superhumancharacteristics, it should be either as sign to indicatetheir position in relation to God or because of theirperfect knowledge of all sciences and spirituality. It isto them that we should look at our hour of crisis andfind solutions to our problems only through making an

access to them. These are men who are identified byGod as devatas in the Vedas so that we recognize themwhen they come to show us the way in future.

You might say, what was the need of identifyingthem in the beginning? Why didnt they took birth onearth right at the beginning? This was so because theman of earlier times was not prepared to accept them,


18/228

because of his inferior mental capabilities. Mere mentionof them in the Vedas astounded them so much so that

they assigned divinity to them. What if the devas were

physically present in front of them? Moreover, if theyhad come at the time when Vedas were revealed, therewas a greater chance that modern man would havediscounted the incidents of their life as myths of pre-historic men. They came when the language had

developed and man was somewhat prepared to receivethem. Also Arabia was chosen for them as the place for

various reasons. First, it was located at the centre of allmajor civilizations. Secondly, in spite of all the evils thatthey carried, Arabs had a language that was far moredeveloped than all the languages of the time. More

importantly, Arabs had an elaborate method of narratingincidents and even mentioned the chain of narrators.This ensured that it was always possible to know theauthenticity of narrations.

Yes, devatas are those who are being identifiedby the Vedas. They are the saviours. They are described

as rulers of our organs of action and senses. It is theywho pervade inside our atma. They are going to bethose who would be the real guides, when they come

in human form to live in this world. It is they who wouldconclude the Gods teachings and show us the rightpath and also how to tread on it.

How would we identify them when they come tolive in this earth? This is exactly what the God is doingin the Vedas. God is identifying them by telling us the

incidents that would happen in their lives. They were tobe our saviours and it is them that those who believedin the Vedas were being told to wait for.

We knew that it is beyond Gods Nature to talkabout mere historical characters or about material thingslike steam engines, airplanes, etc. To come to theconclusion ourselves, we tried to do a fresh translation


19/228

of few select verses of Vedas that were chosen randomly.And we came to such startling conclusions that at first

we ourselves couldnt believe what we had found.

As we proceed, you will find our conclusion perfectlyfitting not only with the entire Vedic literature, but alsoconfirming to the Upanishads and Gita and also withother revealed books like the Old Testament and theQuran. But you must be prepared to make certain

compromises with your existing beliefs, as we willconclude that not only the present day Hindus, but theMuslims, the Christians and the Jews all have digressedfrom one common source. The source of all of them isone, all of them are following certain religion but noneis following Gods religion. Muslims too are far deviated

from the true path and not one of their sects today isstrictly practicing the religion that was intended by God.

Gods religion or the true path to God is far differentfrom all that the Muslims, the Hindus, the Christians,the Jews, the others are doing in the name of God.

To understand what we are saying, draw a straightline on a piece of paper. Then draw another straightline with half-degree deviation from this straight lineand touching it at one point. Now suppose that the twolines continue stretching for about 1000 feet each. Atthe end of 1000 feet, you will find that the two linesare separated so much so that they appear to be toodifferent lines. The same has happened with our religions.The seemingly small deviations from the straight pathoccurred, on all sides, there were deviations within

deviations, and after some gap of time, they appearedas distinct religions.

This will become clearer when you proceed withthis book. If you are receptive to reason, you will findthat all of us were in dark. Not only the Vedas, but theancient Egyptian, Mesopotamian, Chinese and Greekliterature, all tried to identify the devas but we didnt


20/228

understood. In fact, we understood and then got deviated.

As Quran says:

No misfo rtune strikes the ear th nor your selves

unless it has been wri tten in a book before We

bring it into existence; that i t is easy for G od

(QURAN: LVII, 22)

And Vedas are nothing but a living proof of thisclaim of God!


21/228

St udy o f t he Ri g Veda

The Holy Rig VThe Holy Rig VThe Holy Rig VThe Holy Rig VThe Holy Rig Vedaedaedaedaeda

You have seen how our study of various Upanishadshad shown that they mostly talk of only one subject.The sole subject being discussed by them is to narratethe importance of the fourteen Divine Persons createdby God, as His Manifested Selfs. All creatures moving

and non-moving - were created out of their power andfor the purpose of worshiping God. They even say thatthe light of Divine Beings comprise a part of our Souls.When man deviates, it is these Divine Persons, who tookupon them the task of leading all creatures to the worshipof One God.

The Upanishads talk of One Self, how it was dividedinto two, and then became five and fourteen. They aredescribed as the fourteen rulers of the fourteen spherescreated by God and also as the rulers of our organs of

sense and action, and as Prana (Life) in us. Variousterms like the 12 Adityas, the 11 Rudras and the 14Devas or Divine Lords are used along with the relationship

between five, seven, twelve and fourteen.Indra is described as the king of devas. The One

Self in its original state is described as Brahma or Prajapati

and Indra is also referred to as Vaisvadeva during certainstage of his creation. We have also described how peopleremembered these Divine Personalities by various names,

though some like Indra, Vayu, Agni, Saraswati, etc. aremore commonly referred to.

Moreover, it is stated that there is only one path toreach God; that is through knowing them. Also, oneattains salvation through realization of the Self and theSelf comprises of none other but these fourteen devas.As per Upanishads, the sacred syllable Aum is said to


22/228

refer to these devas alone, meditating on whom, onereaches Vishnu the God. Hindus, with Aum start all

sacred work; it is prescribed that they meditate on Aum

alone to attain unity with God.Our study of the beliefs of the Shia sect of the

Muslims showed that an exactly similar relationship isfound in the fourteen Ahlebayt (People of the House),believed to be Masooms (Pure persons kept pure by

God himself). The light (noor) of Mohammad was createdin the beginning, Ali has been described being createdfrom the division of the noor of Mohammad by noneother than Mohammad, thereby making two; Ali wasmarried to the daughter of Mohammad, from whomthere were two sons, Hasan and Husain, thereby making

it five. Allah (God) in Quran and Mohammad in histraditions narrated to us, both have extensively talked

about the importance of these five, and they themselveshave claimed at times that God created the world andthe entire beings because of them. Subsequently, nineillustrious sons were born in Husains progeny, thereby

making it fourteen Ahelbayt (People of the House) whoare also believed to be Masooms or Gods pure creations.Also, we have shown from Quran in Book 2 that it states

of the seven names who became seven and seven fourteen.

Prophet Mohammad was the last of the countlessProphets who came on earth to lead us to the right path.It was explicitly stated that there would be no more Prophetin future. However, Prophet Mohammad on several

occasions said that Ali would be his Caliph and successorand Imam (vicegerent) and there would be 11 moreImams in Alis progeny, thereby making it a total of 12.Remember there are 12 Adityas or Suns.

Also, the time when God asked Prophet Mohammadto announce that the teachings have been completedwas the same when, a moment prior to it, Mohammad


23/228

had announced that:

O f whoever am I the Lord , Ali too is the Lord .

Muslims were instructed on countless occasions to

hold them dear and to cling to the Quran and Ahlebayttightly, if they wished to achieve salvation.

Mohammad informed that the last of these Imamswill also be named Mohammad and will be rememberedby the people as Mahdi. Mahdi would disappear from

public view at a young age, but will appear towards the

end of the age, to get rid of all the evil and injusticefrom the world. A sect of Muslims believe that Mahdihas already taken birth about 1200 years back and ispresently awaiting Gods command to appear. At thesame time, various Puranas talk about the Kalki avatar,

who would appear towards the end of this world. A largepart of their respective descriptions is similar, which we

will be giving later in this book.

The Dictionary gives the meaning of Rudra asfollows:

Name of a group of gods, eleven in number,supposed to be inferior manifestations of Siva or Sankara,who is said to be the head of the group.

The word Rud means to cry, weep, lament, mourn,shed tears. Perhaps they were called Rudra becausewe had to eventually cry, weep, lament or mourn them,as eleven of the twelve Adityas (the twelfth being stillalive) were brutally killed by the people. The term Rudrais also used for Siva as per the dictionary, which states

that Rudrani is the name of wife of Rudra, also knownas Parvati. You will find, as you proceed with Vedas thatParvati is the name used for Fatima and Rudra has beenused for Ali, who naturally is the chief Rudra, becauseof being the first Imam.

These are enough similarities to show that thefourteen refers to Mohammad and the rest of the


24/228

Ahlebayts in the Upanishads; Indra is none other thanMohammad. Upanishad say that five who constitute Life

or Prana are sky, fire, earth, air and water. They are

the five Panjetans (Five Persons) of Shias, viz.Mohammad, Ali, Fatima, Hasan and Husain.

Despite all these evident proofs, we are sure thatthere would still be a few who would not like to believeit, either out of their egos or false pride, or various

other reasons related to their attachment with the worldand worldly things. Such persons could still call all theseas lacking evident proofs.

While talking about the importance of devas, allthe Upanishads also talked about the importance of Vedason countless occasions, and cited a direct relationshipbetween the Divine Self that created the devas to theVedic knowledge. The importance of the Vedas was talked

about on several occasions, lest we forget them, and itwas said that it is the Vedas that show the way.

Therefore, we picked up the Vedas to see if wefind some more proofs of our claim in them. We pickedup The Holy Veda translated by Acharya Dharma DevaVidya Martanda (ADDVM) with Rishi Dayananda

Saraswatis (RDS) commentary and The Yajur Veda,translated by Devi Chand M.A. based on the commentaryof RDS (b. 1824 - d.1884 A.D.) We will recount ourviews on various verses as we proceed with the readingof the English translation.

H y m n 1

As a rule followed at the beginning of all the sacredliterature, The Rig Veda too commences with Aum, whichwe have mentioned was used to meditate on the DivinePersons of God, so as to reach the God. Mantra I ofSukta I starts with the mention of the Self, which weknow from our study of Vedas, as the Manifested formof God, through which the fourteen devas originated.


25/228

See how this has been translated by ADDVM:

I g lo r i f y the Se l f -e f fu lgent ( Devam or m y deva) the Supr eme

Leader, the Etern al Sup por t o f the Uni verse, the I l l um in ator

of al l n oble a ct iv i ty, the onl y object of ador at ion in al l seasons

an d th e m ost Boun teous an d th e Great est Bestower of splen di d

weal th.

In the commentary, RDS writes: There in the firstverse, instruction is imparted by God regarding His own

self and the physical signification of the word agni (fire).The Sanskrit text had used the word devam which

ADDVM has translated as Self-effulgent, which is wrong.Some commentators have translated deva as godwhich too is wrong, as on many occasions, more thanone deva is being mentioned, which would then meanthere are more than one god. Some also say that they

are lesser gods, but since our view is that there is onlyO ne God, we have also discarded this. Variouscommentators have tried to clarify the meaning of theterm devas, and few have also concluded that devacannot be reference to God. Yaskacharya says the worddeva is derived from the root of the word daan i.e.

The Giver; deepan or ghotan illuminator. It isevident from this that the word deva comes very closeto the Quranic noor meaning light; deepan alsosuggesting light. Deva would therefore mean DivineLight or Divine Lord. It is this meaning that we woulduse at various places. We know from Upanishads andPuranas that there are fourteen devas or Divine Lords

or Divine Lights, created by God as rulers of the fourteenspheres. As per Yaskacharyas interpretation, devas wouldmean the givers of knowledge or illuminators of truepath, which too is not far from our interpretation ofdevas.

We request you to read the translation again, as it


26/228

clearly appears that only one deva is being talked aboutwho is the supreme leader, the eternal support of the

universe, the illuminator of all noble activity, the only

object of adoration in all seasons and the most bounteousand the greatest bestower of splendid wealth. We donot understand how RDS came to the conclusion thattwo different subjects, God and the material fire (agni)are being talked about. What word is there in the verse

that makes him think that the material fire is mentioned?Fire is clearly ruled out as it is beyond logic to consider

material fire as the Supreme Leader and the illuminatorof all noble activity. Moreover, the word vipashchitamis used with Agni, which would amount to saying thatthe material fire is also full of wisdom. Fire may be

an important creation of God but not so important tobe called the all-important. Agni surely means somethingelse, a person who is referred to as Agni.

Even in Shatapath 1.1.1.2-5, it is stated that Agnithe Self-effulgent Lord (this is the translation given byRDS here) is the protector of the enlightened persons.

Can fire be a protector of the enlightened persons?Has any enlightened person said that fire has protectedhim against vices or helped him reach the right path?

Therefore, it is clear that Agni is not material fireas RDS has taken. One probability is that Agni could bereference to God. However, if we can give such simplelogic to prove that material fire cannot be meant here,why is it that RDS says that fire and God, both are meanthere? Reason is simple. The fact is that in this verse,

the adjectives used for the deva can also be taken tomean God. But RDS and ADDVM knew that if they takeonly God as the implied meaning, they would faceproblems in describing some of the later mantras.Therefore, by saying that God and material fire bothare meant here, they are preparing ground for the future,lest they get into trouble in explaining. Taking both the


27/228

meanings here would enable them to conveniently shiftfrom God to material fire and back to God if one or

the other does not fit properly. However, it is evident

that material fire, taken as meaning here is totally outof place.

See how, at a later stage, it was only thispreparation that helped them. God was not fitting intothe meanings of Mantra 3.125.14 of Rig Veda, therefore

energy or fire is taken as meaning. However, even thistranslation is absurd and incorrect. We accept that theword Agni was there so they had every right to translateit as fire or energy. But would they explain what wordwas there that they translated it as mechanical engineersand also mechanized transport vehicles. Look at their

meaning:

When b y m echan ica l engin eers, th is therm ic energy (Agn i ) i s

in stal led an d set abla ze in the engi nes of m echa ni zed tr anspor tvehi cles, then t h i s car r i er o f lear ned p assenger l i k e a bu l l or

a horse swi f t l y conveys the learned people s i t t ing in the

con veyances to di stan t p la ces, wh erefo r e m en con cern ed w it h

m echa ni zed tra ffic eagerl y desir e for their bu sin ess thi s ther m ic

energy (Agni ) qu ick l i k e a horse to be em ployed in t ra nspor t .Also see how RDS while talking of Shatpath verse

1.3.4.12. refers to the thermic energy (Agni) beingthe plier of conveyances to their destinations and quickin motion is called the quick carrier of transport.

This has been taken as the meaning despite the

Rig Veda saying in 3.5.6 that Agni knows the actions ofall beings or in 3.55.10, Agni is full of all knowledge.He is the wisest seer. Note that seer and not God isused. And in no way can the material fire be the meaning.

But since it was not possible to stick to taking Agnias God in the aforementioned verse (3.125.14), RDS

had no choice but to take fire as the meaning, thereby


28/228

enhancing the comic nature and incomprehensibility ofthe translation.

This explains why people today only regard the

Vedas as sacred but no longer stick to their reading.Who would read all that we already know in this age.RDSs translation seems to be talking of elementaryPhysics, as if this is what we expect God to tell us. Infact, it should be expected that Gods teachings should

reveal the right path, following which we attainenlightenment and freedom from continuous cycle oflife and death, rather than movement in fast-movingvehicles that we already know of, owing to taking birthin this period.

Our view is that since Sanskrit text has used theword devam, My Lord, and since it is evident fromreading of the mantra that it refers only to one Person,

then the Lord with the appellation Agni is meant, andnot fire or God. Take this meaning as true and it will fitin all the mantras of the Vedas. Also, we wont have tofall in difficulties of translation as is happening with RDSand ADDVM. Eventually, the Rig Veda would becomefar more meaningful, far more contemporary for alltimes, including the ones in which we are living.

For a moment replace Agni with the name of oneof the devas in the first verse, who were believed to beliving in heaven during those times and people prayedthat they would come to earth at sometime in future.See this mantra now: I glorify the illuminator (of mypath) Agni deva, the Supreme leader, the eternal support

of the universe, the illuminator of all noble activity, theonly object of adoration in all seasons and the mostbounteous and the Greatest Bestower of splendid wealth.

Now see what Shatapath 1.1.1.2-5 says:

Agni is the Protector of the vows of the enlightened.

Isnt it a proof of our view?


29/228

So we see that the translation of Vedas itself beginswith absurdities and deva is a person who enjoys very

important position, not in the view of mortal human

beings, but in the view of the God, who is the creatorof the devas. The same is mentioned in Upanishadsrepeatedly thereby revealing that people knew the trueknowledge of the verses of Rig Veda during the past.When people started forgetting their true meaning, sages

like Yajnavalkya and others are described in variousUpanishads going to places where the rituals were being

performed and telling the people including the priestsof the true reason why each ritual was performed orwho were the people being invoked through each ritual.Despite these attempts, we lost this vital link, either due

to some adverse circumstances in the intervening periodor due to willful sabotage by some people.

The comic situation is further enhanced in thecommentary of verse 2. RDS gives two different meaningsto the verses, one in which Agni is taken as god and theother in which it is taken as electricity. See the two

meanings yourself:

(1 ) God the Se l f -e f fu lg ent an d Om niscien t Supr em e Leader

shou ld b e g lor i f ied a nd sough t a f ter by both the exper iencedsag es an d p r ecepto r s an d b y the stu den ts of t he Vedi c Lor e.

May He bestow on us f rom a l l s ides a l l d iv ine v i r tues l i ke

learnin g and wisdom , perfectly h ealthy lim bs, beneficent seasons

and a ppr eciab l e mean s of leg i t i m ate enj oym ents.

(2 ) Fire in the for m of electri city etc. is ever fi t to be in vestig ated

in to an d h ar nessed in wor k s of ar ts an d cra f ts, so th at i t m ay

be the source of innumerable des i rab le objec ts of r ight fu l

en joyment fo r a l l .

Can it be true that two meanings are meant by asingle sentence? Is the God trying to confuse us, by


30/228

unnecessarily saying two things in the same sentence,when He could have easily said them in two different

sentences? There are already more than 10,000 verses

in the Rig Veda, and had there been a few hundredmore, it would not have made a difference. Fact is thatthrough giving two different meanings, the translator iscleverly hiding his inability to understand the true meaningof the verses. The problem is also compounded by the

fact that he perhaps does not wish to accept this fact.Therefore, he is beating around the bush by opening

up two paths, which would facilitate him in switchingfrom one to the other, if the need be.

God is the All-Supreme and the material fire isjust a small and insignificant part of Gods creation

the two having no parallel at all. Yet he takes twomeanings, to avoid any embarrassment. We will see

later how these two meanings too cannot help him muchand he will have to give other meanings to the wordAgni, owing to his inability to understand the truemeaning. Here itself, he has added electricity as the

meaning of word Agni.

See how he is trying to tread on two ships at atime: Hence if Omnipotent and Omniscient God is thusworshipped and if the thermic energy or fire in the formof electricity etc. is harnessed in our daily transactionsof life, the most excellent merits and enjoyment of blissshall fall to our lot. Here the ancient is known in contrastwith the modern and vice verse. This is how ShriYaskacharya the author of Nirukta interprets. The

well-known culinary fire; however, that is utilized bythe general public for the purpose of preparing food isnot meant in this Mantra. But here is meaning the allilluminating, self-effulgent and the subliminal thermicforce or electricity as the subject of all scientific knowledgeand means of all arts, crafts and industry by the termAgni.


31/228

We have no intention of doubting the integrity ofShri Yaskacharya, RDS or ADDVM that they willfully tried

to lead us in an opposite direction when all the Upanishads

and Puranas were clearly talking about devas like Indraand Agni as Divine Beings. However, fact is that theirtranslations are misleading. In case we do not doubttheir integrity, the only plausible explanation for suchtranslations is that they were done in order to attune

the Vedas with modern times. We have pointed outelsewhere in this book that the Western scholars were

ridiculing the Vedas by saying that they talk of mythicalpersonalities of the past, and hence have no relevancein the present times. That is why, perhaps, these peopledecided to make the Vedas more contemporary and

brought in electricity, motorcars, airplanes as part ofthe translations.

If this is the reason why this was done, then it wasthe most unfortunate thing to be done. Why this inferioritycomplex, when we are confident that Vedas are revealedscriptures? Does that mean that God said something

and we can mould it in any way we want? Who are weto change the meaning implied by God, even if He wishesto talk about certain characters of the past? Who are

we to raise a finger of doubt on Gods scriptures; thatis if we regard them in their original form? In order toplease a few Western scholars, if we displease the God

by changing His intended meaning, would we call suchtranslators as sincere?

All these great scholars did not take the meaning

as they saw but tried to prove those things that werenever intended. Eventually, they ended up giving atranslation that several Hindus find incomprehensible.They read it and when they find it not fitting with theirreason, they stop reading it, yet continue to maintainthem as divine scriptures. Arent these people responsiblefor all this farce?


32/228

If they were very sincere, why didnt they give theexact meanings of the verses? They had all the opportunity

to interpret them, as they liked, while writing the

commentary. There may not be any word in the originaltext which would mean mechanical engineers but theyused that word in the translation itself, thereby showingthat the translations too are not exact and what theyought to have said in the commentary has been said in

the translations.

Wilson has translated this verse differently:

May tha t Agn i wh o i s to be ce lebra ted by bo th ancien t an d

m oder n sag es con du ct th e God s ( r ead d evas) h ere.(WILSONS TRANSLATIO NOFTHE RIG VEDA, PG. 1).

This translation seems closer to reality. The discussionthat started with praising the deva Agni in the first verse,

continues here in this prayer which confirms that thedeva Agni has remained a respected/celebrated figureduring all times, who is prayed to come to this earthand bring other devas too to live in this world.

Now see how two different translations of Mantra3 have been given.

(1) By fervent adora t ion of God who is Sel f -ef fu lgent Supr emeBeing , a devotee obt ai ns f r om Him day by day such excel len t

possession s as im par t h app in ess thr oug h the st r ength enin g

of the body, mind and soul possess ions which br ing great

fame and inc lude the s t rongest , the bravest and the most

accom pl i shed ch i ldr en an d oth er r e la t i ons.

(2 ) The word Agn i u sed in th e Mant r a a l so stand s fo r f i re ,

heat an d e lect r i ci ty e tc. by pr oper l y usin g whi ch for persona l

benef i t , a man ob ta i ns m uch m ate r i a l wea l th and fam e by

ut i l i z ing i t fo r char i tab l e pur poses.

If you have read the Gita, you must have seen


33/228

how materialism has been discounted. Here, all theprayers are being performed with material benefits in

sight, thereby revealing the mindset of the commentators.

Moreover, it is said that by fervent adoration of God,we would get happiness and excellent possessions, fameand strongest, bravest and the most accomplished childrenand other relations. How are we to know what is theway to adore God? Who would tell us that prostrating

in this manner one reaches God? Whether this adorationalone is sufficient, or whether we need to work as well

to achieve wealth? Whether adoration while intoxicatedis permissible? Whether being intoxicated itself ispermissible? Whether facing east is better than facingwest? A lot many questions could come to mind!

Clearly, merely a book is insufficient, as it is believedthat there were more than 100 schools of thought in

existence of Yajur Veda itself, because of differingtranslations. Though majority of them are now lost, wedo not know whether we have lost the one that told usthe true meanings. If you see this commentary, you will

find that one translator himself is not able to come toone meaning. How are we to know whether ferventadoration of God is to be done or fire is to be properly

utilized or whether the adoration of God is to be doneby utilizing the fire, something that several people dothrough rituals? It is difficult to fathom why God would

refer only to material fire, as means for obtaining materialwealth and fame, in lieu of more apparent means forachieving it like righteousness or good conduct.

Had RDS been in front of me, I would have askedfrom him what is the best way to properly utilize fire,heat and electricity for benefit, and how can a manobtain wealth and more importantly fame by utilizingfire, heat and electricity for charitable purposes. Doesthis mean that all the Hindus should give free supply ofelectricity at alljagransand religious congregations and


34/228

also to those who are poor and bear the expense ontheir pocket rather than connecting the cable to the

Corporations supply? Or does it mean that electricity

is to be utilized in arts and crafts, as RDS has said, tocreate modern appliances? Whether it is permissible tobuild electric meters that show less reading? Also RDSis silent on how the people of the time when these Vedaswere first revealed utilized electricity in their arts and

crafts. Clearly, the book is not sufficient enough to giveanswers to all our questions and that is one reason why

the devas were created by God. It is evident from readingof Upanishads that people believed that devas are theones who are to show us the right path to reach God,not only through words, but by practice too, when they

come to live in this word at an appropriate time in future.

Carrying this absurdity further, RDS again talks of

two altogether different subjects in Mantra 4. RDS hasgiven two meanings to this verse as well; in one of themhe has taken deva to mean truthful enlightened personswhile in the second instance the same word has been

taken to mean scientists and artists. Did you see howtwo more meanings have been added for the worddeva? Likewise, Agni is again taken as God in the

first meaning and is described as the protector of allsacrifices and in the next, it is taken as material fire,said to be instrumental in the very performing and

propagation of all Yajnas (non-violent sacrifices), as wellas propagation of arts and crafts by wise scientists andartists. And the words, Agni and deva, which appearsonce each in this mantra, have been taken with differentmeanings, contrary to the earlier position.

The two meanings are as follows:

(1 ) O Om ni scient God , being Om ni pr esent, Thou dost pr otect

f r om al l sid es the n on -v i olen t Yaj na (sacr i f ice) w hi ch consists

o f the contem pla t ion a nd a dora t ion o f Thy D iv ine Majesty


35/228

an d r espect for t he t r ut hfu l enl ig ht ened per sons, associa t i on

wi th the v i r tu ous and char i ty to th e deserv ing and the needy.

I t i s ord ain ed by Thee that these r ig hteous wor k s shou ld be in

the hands o f t he en l i gh tened fo r t he good o f a l l . (Such

enl i gh tened persons app rove of on ly non -v io l ent , benef icia l

acts don e in the n am e of Yaj na s) .

(2 ) The fir e in var iou s form s of heat, electr icity etc. is instrum ental

in p erfor m in g th e Yaj na s (n on- violent sacri f ices) an d benefi cia l

acts an d th e pr opa ga t i on o f ar ts an d cr af t s by wi se scien t i stsan d a rt ists.

Isnt it apparent that the same deva and his linkwith various sacrifices or some particular sacrifice is

being talked about? Yet the knowledgeable sages takeit to mean truthful enlightened persons and scientists

and artists in the two different meanings.

The translator of this book writes further: In detailedcommentary on this first hymn Rishi Dayananada statedthat the commentary of Sayanacharya and Dr. Wilsonon this Mantra is not correct, as they think it applicableto material fire which being inanimate cannot protect

the Yajna and is not Omnipresent. Thou art all pervadingis the attribute of God only.

The following is Dr. Wilsons English translation ofSayanacharyas commentary on the Mantra:

Agn i , th e un obst r ucted sacr i f i ce of wh ich t hou ar t on every

sid e th e pr otector, assur edl y r eaches the God s.

We do not intend to justify Sayanacharyas or Dr.Wilsons commentary as they both have not understoodthe true identity of Agni and other devas. Yet it seemsthat they are doing a sincere attempt in doing so. However,their inability to understand that the deva Agni is meanthere who would come in this earth and give sacrifices,


36/228

including the sacrifice of his life for the sake of humanity,has led them to wrong conclusions. For instance, Skanda

Swami concludes that: Even the animals that are killed

in the Yajna are shown mercy or kindness, as it is saidby the learned that they go to heaven etc. See howthe great sacrifice by a deva has been reduced tounreasonable and mundane descriptions.

On the other hand, ADDVM and RDS have tried

to invent meanings, and in the process they havecontradicted their own statements. They both wereunanimous in criticizing Sayanacharya and Dr. Wilsonby saying that material fire which being inanimate cannotprotect the Yajna and is not Omnipresent. Fact is thatmaterial fire is never the intended meaning. If RDS and

ADDVM have not got in a similar situation, it is becausethey have cleverly taken two meanings and dilly-dally

between the two. Further, in order to avoidembarrassment, they do not give the literal, exactmeanings, but add their own views while giving themeanings. Had they not done so, it would have been

even more difficult for them to explain sentences likeAgni knows the action of all beings; Agni is full of allknowledge; and various other places where they have

translated Agni as God and at others where they takeAgni as material fire, as electricity, as steam or by variousother meanings.

You must be expecting to find some harmony andcontinuity within the various mantras comprising a hymn,particularly so because Vedas are said to be linked with

God. However, from the meanings that are given, wehave seen that the subject keeps changing so abruptlythat it appears it is wrong to place a group of mantrasunder one hymn, as there is no apparent consistency inmeaning.

Likewise in mantra 5, two different meanings aregiven; the first is said to be describing Gods attributes


37/228

while the second is a prayer to comprehend this fire,which possesses divine attributes itself.

Dr. Wilson has translated mantra 5 as follows:

May Agni the presenter of oblat i ons, the attainer of kn owledge,

he who i s t ru e , renown ed and d i v ine , com e h i ther w i th th e

Gods ( rea d d evas).

Dr. Wilson is surely close to true meaning, but isalso groping in the dark, without knowing what is actuallymeant by Agni. But RDS has criticized this commentaryof Dr. Wilson by saying: How can the appellationkavikritu which even Wilson translates as attainer of

knowledge be applicable to material fire? Despite thisstatement, RDS is silent on why he himself has takenmaterial fire as the meaning. However, it is for the firsttime that RDS is right in his statement that attainer of

knowledge cannot be used for fire. But see for yourself,how he too is far of the mark.

Note that RDS has not criticized Dr. Wilson by sayingthat attainer of knowledge is not the implied meaning.His subject of criticism is that kavikritu cannot be usedfor material fire. Therefore, RDS has not translated theverse with material fire as the meaning but has usedelectricity instead, thereby, in his view, removing the

absurdity. Can the appellation attainer of knowledgebe applicable to electricity? Note that the verse doesnot talk of the person who attains the knowledge ofelectricity, but electricity is the attainer of knowledge,but RDS has reversed the meanings.

The two meanings given are as follows:

1. May the Self- efful gent God , the Giver of peace, and happiness,

the Om ni scient Creat or o f th e wor l d , the Benefactor o f th e

r i ghteous person, whose g lor y is m ost won der fu l to h ear a nd

kn ow abou t the L igh t t ha t i l l u m ina tes a l l -b e accessib le to


38/228

us Hi s devotees.

2. May we get the k now ledge of th is f i r e whi ch i s the pr incipa l

of ar ts an d cr af t s an d wh ich possesses di v in e at t r ib ut es.Even if we accept for a moment that material fire

and God are both meant by the term Agni, why is itthat nobody ask RDS how altogether different meaningscan be derived. If there was no such word that talkedof art and craft in his first translation, what word wasthere by which he came to this conclusion while giving

the second translation. This is why we say that the laterday Hindu scholars had ceased to apply their reasonwhile studying religious scriptures.

Now comes Mantra 6, where RDS has given onlyone meaning. Clearly, this verse had nothing that hecould relate it to material fire, and feared that people

wont accept that translation, if he did it. See his translation:O God, Fr i end o f a l l , O Inn er Sou l o f the Un iverse and the

hu m an soul , O l i f e of our l i fe, to the person wh o gives hi m sel f

up to Thee offers to Thee everythi ng th at h e has sur rend erin g

hi m sel f to Thee com plete ly, Thou dost confer a l l good th i ngs

( inc lud ing the b l iss of emanc ipat ion) . To grant such great

g i f t s i s qu i te i n accorda nce w i th Thy D iv ine Na tur e tha t i s

Thy vow.

Wilson and Sayanacharya has translated Angirahas The designation of a Rishi, the founder of a familyor of a school, while RDS maintains that God is called

Angirah because He is the very Life of the worlds andas Inner Self of all beings is Life of our life.

Isnt it clear that the deva Agni (Husain) and notGod or fire are meant? Again Wilson is close yet faraway, when he equates it with a Rishi, the founder of afamily or of a school. We have seen in Upanishadsthat our soul is regarded as being associated with the


39/228

Self and Self is an extension of the God. God is notdirectly inside us. Also Self comprises of fourteen devas.

It is Agni deva alone who is described as friend of all,

the inner soul of the universe and the human soul, thelife of our life, the person who gives himself up andoffers everything that he has to God, thereby surrenderinghimself to Him completely.

It is this deva alone who is referred to in Mantra 7

in a spirit of humility and fervent sincere devotion formaking obeisance to him. It is said: We approachyou day and night with our intellects and good actions,so that you will bless us with the light of true knowledge.

We have mentioned that the purpose of the creationof these devas was to show us the true path and lead uson the way to emancipation. It is he alone who isaddressed in Mantra 8 when it is said:

We app roa ch you in a spi r i t o f sin cere hu m i l i ty, you ar e decay

less an d i n you r b l issfu l sta te th ere is an end t o a l l m iser ies.

You a re the pr otector of al l ou r sacr ifi ces an d r ig ht eous per son s,

the constan t i l l u m ina tor o f t ru th an d the t r ue e tern a l Vedas,

and the e terna l d i v ine laws opera t ing in the un iverse .

Isnt it been said that the world was commencedfrom out of these devas, therefore the entire natureand the divine laws that are part of it, are owing to thedevas? It has also been mentioned in Puranas that they

are decay less; Puranas have referred to their presencein various Manvantaras (creations) prior to this one.And who else can be the protector of our sacrifices

than one who has given everything that he possessed,including the lives of his near and dear ones andsubsequently his own life as sacrifice to God. He alone

is the protector of all righteous persons.

Mantra 9 prays to this Agni deva (who in our viewis Husain) to be easily accessible to or attainable by us


40/228

by bestowing upon us such beneficent knowledge aswill enable us to obtain the excellent objects and means

necessary to attain happiness here and hereafter, as a

father is to his son. Also it is prayed that he will grant usthe grace to be united with him for our happiness andwelfare.

See the translation of RDS now, who was givingtwo different meanings of Agni till now but has taken

God alone as the meaning in mantras 7 to 9 and dueto his inability to relate these verses with material fire,and has silently removed the second meaning with fire.See mantra 7 and 8:

O God; i n a sp i r i t o f h um i l i t y and fe rvent sincere devot ion

m ak in g obeisan ce to Thee, we app roa ch Thee day and n igh t

w i t h ou r i n te l lects an d go od a ct io ns, so th at Thou wi l t b l ess

us w i th th e l i gh t o f t r ue kn ow ledge.O God, we ap pr oach Thee in a sp i r i t o f sin cere hu m i l i ty, as

Thou ar t ever decay less in Thy Bl issfu l Sta te wh ere th ere i s

an end of a l l miser ies , Sel f -e f fu lgent , the Protec tor o f a l l

non -vi olen t acts an d ri gh teous persons, the constan t Il l um in ato r

of Tr ut h, th e Tru e Eter na l Vedas an d th e Etern al D iv in e Laws

opera t ing in the un iverse .

Our view is that Husain or Agni deva is beingprayed, who is the constant illuminator of truth, decayless and protector of our non-violent acts andrighteousness, due to his being the lord of organs ofaction and senses. See mantra 9:

O Om ni scien t God, b e easi l y accessib le t o or at t a i na bl e by u s

by bestowi ng up on u s such b eneficent k now ledge as wil l ena ble

us to obtain al l excel lent objects and means necessary to

at t ai n h app in ess her e and h ereaft er, as a fa ther is to h is son.

Do thou gra n t u s the gra ce to be un i ted w i th Thee fo r ou r


41/228

hap pin ess and wel far e.

H y m n I I

This hymn will further highlight the inconsistencywith RDSs translations as more devatas are introducedhere. Vayu, Indra, Mitra and Varuna are described. Wehave seen in Upanishads and Puranas that Indra is referredto on several occasions as the Head of the Devas. TheVishnu Purana has even stated that Indra was the chiefof the devas in other Manvantaras as well, prior to thecreation of this world. Vayu or Marut too is highly praisedin the Upanishads. Yet, RDS has ignored all the greatmass of literature in the form of Upanishads and Puranasthat clearly defines them as Divine Persons created asManifested forms of God, if not God Himself. Instead,he continues to see them by their material interpretations

as well as God.O Alm igh ty God! L i fe Pr incip le o f a l l l i ves, en l i ven in g the

wh ole an im ate wor ld , o f Gran dest Maj esty, ma yest Thou be

ever accessibl e to us be m ani fest in our hear ts an d h ear ou r

sup pl icat i ons. O Lor d, a l l the ob jects of na tur e are m ade by

Thee a ccessibl e to a l l Th y cr eat u r es. We beseech Th ee, pr ot ect

their pr operti es befitt in g them for th e daily l i fe of Thy creatu res.

RDS has also quoted from Yaskacharya who toohas taken this verse also to mean air. He praises variousvirtues of air and says that it is with the help of the airtaken in the process of Pranayama that a man can knowGod, as his intellect becomes sharp to grasp such subtle

subjects.

Fact that RDS has played with case, person, grammaretc. while making the translation can be understood bythis view of the translater ADDVM: In the case of Vayuas air, the commentator (RDS) has changed the cases,persons etc. Vayu-Vayu aayahi-a agaccha tijust to make


42/228

the meaning clear, so that ignorant persons may notthink that inanimate objects are being addressed, but it

was not necessary to do so for intelligent persons, as is

clearly stated in the Nirukta 7.2 ache tnanyap ichetanvatstuyante. Even animate objects are sometimesmentioned as animate. In poems the mountains, rivers,flowers, etc. are addressed by the poets. It does notmean that they consider these inanimate objects as

conscious beings. This is just a way to express onesideas in an impressive manner. The same is the case

with the Grandest Vedic Poetry of the Master Poet-God.But Rishi Dayananda thought it proper to explain it clearlyby changing the case, person etc. according to the VedicGrammar.

It is clear from this itself that the language used inthe Vedas treat them as conscious beings.

Wouldnt it be better if ADDVM had given the exactimplied meaning and then explained its inferred meaningin the commentary? Instead, he translates the commentaryby RDS as if it was the translation of Vedic mantras. Atthe same time, RDS has interpreted the verses withchanged case, person, etc., without even mentioningthat he has done so. Is it ethically correct? Moreparticularly when you are playing with the Gods text!

We notice that two meanings are given again, onefor Vayu as God and other as air and it is said that boththe sciences the science of God and the science ofphysics should be studied and honoured. It is not explainedwhy this fetish for physics, when physics too, like all

other sciences, is the study of the nature of the universe.If Vedas can talk about this subject, why is it that theydo not talk on the science of the Self, which is describedin Gita as the best of sciences? Fact is that all our so-called sciences are just the study of the Nature of theDivine Self.


43/228

We must admit that through these translations, RDSsucceeded in depicting the contemporary aspect of Vedas

to some extent. So much so that we can find several

quotes like those of Mrs. Wheeler Willox an Americanlady who says: We have all heard and read aboutthe ancient religion of India. It is the land of the greatVedas the most remarkable works containing not onlyreligious ideas for a perfect life, but also facts which all

the science has since proved true. Electricity, Radium,Electrons, Airships, all seem to be known to the sires

who found the Vedas.

If this is the case, why is it that nobody has till datesucceeded in making an invention on the basis of theteachings of the Vedas. Had RDS been alive today, he

might have also found a mobile phone to be existing inthose times, from seeing Sanjaya narrate the happenings

of the battlefield to Dhritarashtra, just as they have derivedthe existence of airplanes from the story of Hanumantraveling from Sri Lanka to Himalayas and back withina night. Why has he not found a television or a movie

screen when Arjuna was shown the vision of God? Orthat of a computer when the detailed accounts weregiven!

Truth is that none of these material devices existed,and a person who has truly cognized the Self, gainscontrol over all material forces so much so that the aircan take him to the Himalayas, he can make a visionappear on the sky itself, he can cure the mortally sickor even make the dead come to life, and also gain

knowledge of past or future happenings. Since the devascomprising the Self possess these virtues, a person whohas attained unity with them too starts showing some orall of these traits. These Divine Persons alone, whocomprise the Self, are being described in the Vedas,whose study has already been mentioned as the highestscience by Krishna in Gita.


44/228

Mantra 4 heightens the problem of RDS further.Apart from Vayu, it also talks of Indra, who has been

described by Upanishads in such great esteem. Naturally,

it was not possible to take Vayu for God as RDS haddone in the previous mantra because he would have toshow Indra in the company of Vayu. And if he had takenIndra to be God as well, that would have created a stillmore awkward situation, where there were two gods.

Therefore, he decided to shift to the literal meaning,treating Vayu as air and Indra as sun. Not for a moment

did he realize that at most places, where the materialsun is referred to in the Upanishads and Vedas, it iscalled Surya, and Indra, though also meaning sun, isan appellation for the Head Deva. Even Aditya means

sun, but is used for the twelve shining lights (devas)created by Brahma. We wish you to see the translationdone by RDS, so as to highlight what kind of silly meaningshave been given to Vedas; whats worse is that theyhave been accepted as true.

Becau se Yaj na s pr od ucin g wa ter w i t h var io us act i v i t i es an d

al l at ta i nab le enjoym ents shi ne on a ccoun t of th e sun an d th e

ai r an d wh en they com e, al l bein gs desi r e happ in ess wi th th e

food m ater i a ls and o ther a r t i cles.Isnt it the case of degrading the sanctified scriptures

from God to suit our own taste and meaning? Next verse(no. 5) still compounds the problem further. Vayu istaken as God again while the sun and air as materialobjects are still there. Yet there is attempt to give still

another meaning when it is said: By Vayu and Indramay be taken in Adhibhautikor social sense enlightened

men who like the sun are dispellers of the darkness ofignorance and strong men like the wind. Such men getwealth (material and spiritual) soon. The translationgiven by RDS is as follows:

O Om ni scient God, the sun an d th e air creat ed by Thee uph old


45/228

an d g i ve to a l l the ob jects of u n i verse whi ch Thou m ak est .

They soon com e to th ese obj ects to m ak e them m or e usefu l .

Clearly, there was a mention of the devas comingon earth here, which has been in such a manner as

above.

As if the physics being talked about till now wasnot enough, the verse 7 is even interpreted as tellingthe chemical composition of water. Unfortunately, thismeaning was derived by RDS when the scientists had

already found the composition of water. See how thetwo terms Mitra and Varuna are described to bemeaning hydrogen and oxygen.

I who am desi r ous o f acqu i r i ng th e know ledge o f a r ts and

cra f ts, accept t he sun of p ur e v igou r in th e sk y wh ich g ives us

ha ppi ness in our da i ly act iv i t i es on a ccoun t o f h is l i gh t an d

the Pr ana r esid in g in the body wh ich i s the devour er of d iseases,

as th ey accom pl ish t he a ct of com po sin g w at er. In t he sam e

way, I acqu i re th e science o f p r ana and apan a ( inh a la t i on

an d exhal ati on etc.) wh ich i s the destr oyer of var iou s m al adi es.

In this regard RDS has quoted from Nighantu 5.4

to show that the word Mitra stands for the sun. Also apassage from Shatapath 8.2.5.6 is cited as per whichthe word Mitra is used here to denote Prana and the

word Varuna Apana. If you have read this book fromstart, you must be remembering how Prana (life) isdescribed as comprising the five devas. Yet, RDS is contentgiving it new meanings!

RDS further writes: As on account of the sun andthe air, the water goes to the sky from oceans and it

causes rain preserving and protecting all, in the sameway, the Prana and apana also preserve and protectthe body. Therefore people should thoroughly acquirethe science of the sun and the air, as well as the Science


46/228

of the Prana and apana (vital breaths) in order to dogood to all.

ADDVM adds: The Vedic words have got several

meanings from the Adhyatmik(spiritual) Adhibhaut ik(Social) and Adhidaivikor scientific and cosmic pointsof view. Pandit Guru Datt MA is a great scientist and adistinguished scholar of the Vedas the founder andthe editor of the Vedic Magazine explained the above

Mantra in the following manner from the Adhidaiv ik(Scientific and Cosmic) standpoint. This Mantra Mitranhuve pootdakshamdescribes the process or steps (Dhiyam)whereby the well known of liquids, water, can be formedby the combination of two other substances (ghritachimSadhanta). The word Sadhanta is in the dual number

indicating that it is two elementary bodies which combineto form water. The words used to indicate those two

substances are Mitra and Varuna. The first liberal meaningof Mitra is measurer. The name is given to a substancethat stands as it were, as a measure of density or ofvalue otherwise known as quantivalence. The other

meaning of Mitra is associate. Now, in this Mantra,Mitra is described as an associate of Varuna. It will beshown how Varuna indicates Oxygen Gas. Now it is

well known that hydrogen is not only the lightest elementknown, nor is it only monovalent, but that it has strongaffinity for Oxygen, hence it is described as an associate

of Varuna. Many other analogies in the properties ofMitra and Hydrogen go to suggest that what is in theVedic terms styled as Mitra is in fact identical withhydrogen, Mitra for instance occurs as synonymous withUdana, in many parts of the Veda, Udana is wellcharacterized by its power to lift up.

The second element with which we are concernedis Varuna. Varuna is the substance that is acceptable toall. It is the element that every living being needs tolive. Its well-known property is r ishadasi.e. it eats away


47/228

or rusts, all the base metals, it burns all the bones etc.and physiologically purifies the blood by oxidizing it,

and thereby keeping the frame alive. It is by these

properties Varuna is in general distinguished, but it isespecially characterized here as r ishadas. No one willfail to perceive that the substance thus distinctlycharacterized is oxygen gas. Another word used in theMantra is Putadaksha, Putais pure, free from impurities.Dakshameans energy. Putadakshamis a substance pure,possessed of kinetic energy. Who that is acquainted with

the Kinetic theory of gases, cannot see in Putadakshathe properties of gas highly heated?

The meaning of the mantra taken as a whole isthis Let one who is desirous to form water by the

combination of two substances, take pure hydrogen gashighly heated and Oxygen gas possessed of the property

r ishadasand let him combine them to form water, (Pt.Guru Dutt MA in Wisdom of the Rishis).

Did you see how wherever there was a mentionof the devas and their activities when they would cometo live in this earth, it has been changed by such absurdarguments? And they maintain this absurdity throughoutwithout bringing their intelligence into play. Upanishadshave used the names, Mitra and Varuna on severaloccasions, and included these names in the list of 14devas.

Such long interpretations are given when everybodyknows that Puta means progeny and Daksha is an oft-used term in the Upanishads. Puta Daksha would therefore

mean son or grandson of Daksha.In next verse, the importance of these devas in

leading us to God and their role in the creation of theuniverse was discussed. Instead, Hydrogen and Oxygenas augmenters of truth and the cause of establishingcontact with God, Veda and water is what it has been


48/228

taken to mean. Nobody has explained how are they thecauses of establishing contact with God and Veda. If

this has been said because of their role in the very survival

of life, then there are other things that are equallynecessary for survival of the body.

Also Putadakshai.e. free from impurities too wasmentioned for the two devas. We already know fromPaingala Upanishad that the devas were created from

pure (sattvik) essence. Later, Mitra and Varuna aredescribed as givers of happiness or famous on accountof many qualities and refuge of multitude. To think thatall this has been said for Hydrogen and Oxygen isridiculous. Mantra 8 is translated in the following manner:

Above m ent ioned Mi t r a an d Varu na a re crea ted by God who

is absolute Truth. They are augmenters of t ru th and water

and causes of establ ishing contact wi th God, Veda and thewat er. They pervad e thi s vast Yaj na in th e form of th e un iverse.

Not sticking to their earlier meaning, it is said laterby ADDVM that the word Mitravaruna has been clearlyused for the King and the Prime Minister who sit in athousand pillared Assembly Hall. Rishi Dayananda alsohas taken in this sense of teacher and preacher.

Again we would reiterate what we have alreadysaid. The meaning given to a word should remain thesame in the succeeding verses, at least when the namesare talked about in succession. Unable to find a properexplanation, commentators like RDS have given onemeaning at one place and another in the very next verse.

At times, they have tried to give more than one explanationto a verse. For ex. Mitra and Varuna standing for PrimeMinister and King and Hydrogen and Oxygen, as wellas teacher and preacher.

Contrary to this view, Sayanacharya has gone tothe extent of taking Vayu, Indra, Mitra and Varuna as


49/228

the names of gods living somewhere in heaven andaccording to his interpretation, they are being worshipped

and prayed to through these hymns. Our view is that

since Sayanacharya was not aware of the true identityof these devas, and he saw through

part 3 (krishna)

Documents