Personally I disagree with the SC decision on Saribmala Court.
https://twitter.com/Neelnabh/status/1054919876668743680
I hadn’t heard of Justice Nariman, the only famous lawyer I knew about in India is the Sindhi chap of whom Vidhi is particularly proud of.
At any rate I googled him a bit further and immediately stumbled on this drivel:
https://www.news18.com/news/india/even-my-religion-has-been-hinduised-says-justice-rohinton-f-nariman-1846315.html
I’m sufficiently woke enough to spot humble bragging and the below is as good an example of it as one can find:
“There is no caste in the mother country of my religion. But here, we have it. It doesn’t matter there, where you are born, but here you have to take birth in a priestly family to become a priest. I couldn’t have become a priest, if I was not born in a priestly family,” Justice Rohinton Nariman said.
A quick google search of Caste in Sassania yielded this:
I think the ulanghan of the Sabrimala verdict shows how devoid of real issues the Hindu ‘dolt’ right is. Is there are any mandir where upper caste Hindu males are denied entry, on any pretext ?
This is the level of their intellect:
https://twitter.com/rishibagree/status/1054771924704718848
Bro no one on the right gives a shit about Malyalees. Specially Malyalee hindus, who are already considered non hindus by them.LOL
Vikram, some males are denied access to female only places at some specific times in Mandirs.
In practice, Mandirs rarely ask people about their background and allow almost anyone into their Mandirs. The same is true of many of India’s ancient muslim and Christian places. And is of course true of Parsi, Buddhist, Sikh, Jain, Bon places.
Saurav, why do you think Malayali Hindus are not respected? Many of the greatest saints come from Kerala, including Shankaracharya. Great Christian and muslim saints also come from Kerala.
Erachi ularthiyathu?
Kolaveri di?
Hello Zack Zavidé,
Just in case you did not google sufficiently and found out the meaning of the term girmit wrote above, I’d like to write the etymology of the words here. (I’m horribly urged to do the damn thing so I’ll do it anyway lol. Please forgive me.)
er̲acci ularttiyatu, literally ‘meat dessicated-one/dried-one’ apparently refers to a particular type of dry-roasting (or something like that) cooking style when applied to various types of meats like chicken, beef, pork, etc. One of the more standard Malayalam words for ‘meat’ seems to be the one listed in dictionaries and I’m familiar with: ir̲acci with the word-initial i vowel. The word er̲aci/er̲acci of some Malayalam dialects seems to have undergone a development exactly identical to the old South Dravidian umlaut (i, u vowels changing to e, o vowels respectively if they are followed by a consonant which is then followed by the vowel a) seen in items like the same word now archaic in Telugu: eraci, ‘meat’ (Dravidian Etymological Dictionary (DEDR) entry number 529). Now theoretically the Tamil-Malayalam ir̲acci is supposed to be a result of a dissimilation process (the reverse of the above-mentioned umlaut process) private to the development of Tamil-Malayalam after all the other South Dravidian-I and South Dravidian-II languages separated, in which case this seemingly Malayalam dialectal word er̲acci, if the data is correct, is a result of a re-emergence of the umlaut sound change in the Malayalam language, independently, after all these years. I read on Quora in some brilliant linguist’s answer that languages do the same things again and again. Looks like it is at work here. So fascinating.
Then *ul-ar- (DEDR entry number 674) is a verb meaning ‘to become dry, wither, parched up’, etc. apparently, in Tamil. In Malayalam, ularuka means ‘to dry (intransitive)’ and ularttuka means ‘to dry (transitive)’. So ularttiyatu should literally mean something like ‘that which is dried’, a coinage created to refer to the ‘entity resulted after applying a particular cooking style to the ingredients that involves dry-roasting (or something like that – Santosh)’ at some point in the history of Malayalam. This etymon seems to be very private to Tamil-Malayalam and there are no cognates in any other Dravidian languages apparently.
Man proposes, Google disposes, haha.
“Sounds suspiciously like Caste to me! It seems he’s using Pars privilege (which is Parsi in the Hindu community and Shi’ite Persian in the Muslims community) to pontificate and exploit the host society.”
Lol, exaggeration much, in the last one you said the state is against Hinduism. I know the right has some legitimate grievances but even they dont go this far(or perhaps sometime they do)
I think he is doing a reverse Jaggu. 🙂
It’s a very good decision by Supreme Court of India. The decision is according to vedic and puranic principles of Hinduism where blood was never considered impure. Infact, sacrificial blood was offered to gods. It’s the Aatma {soul} that’s matter and not the blood, flesh and bodily fluids that envelopes it. Menstrual blood is no bar for true quest for the divine.
South Indian Hinduism may be different from Vedic Hinduism?
I don’t know about north or east. In south India, menstruation has tremendous social and psychological complex built around it. It’s presense is verboten for ritual occasions. When I was growing up, anyone in the period was kept separate in the family, in some large houses confined in an outhouse ,flip side being they have holiday from all domestic duties and others have to look after them.
Yes it is quite similar in our house too. But to a lower degree than above though, the reasons for which I don’t very much know: it could be that people of my particular historical sub-cultural background have been doing this with the current level of intensity for a long time or it could be that things have been changing somewhat slightly in this domain, gradually as time passed, over the centuries. It is limited to a menstruating lady not going to temples, not performing daily puja, not touching the money box of the house and any new clothes. That’s about it. As far as I know, cooking of normal day-to-day food is not disallowed and never felt there were any rules about touching (this is stupid untouchability lurking here again lol, though a minimised version of it)- people don’t tend to touch each other normally also, anyway. I may not know a few other things but I’m sure they are quite minor and not very high in number.
I’m horribly conditioned to all the above things. I think it would be shocking for me for at least a few days if anything visibly changes from the old order (which is quite unlikely in my own case). Indicates that we don’t even tend to think about some potential problematic issues that surround us in the daily life. I am not saying that it is a problem now already (I don’t personally know; it may be one) but that it may become one at some point in the future. If it happens to become one and causes genuine grievance and distress to even a single person in the eyes of God, it has to be very thoroughly thought through by a lot of knowledgeable and gifted and blessed individuals possessing divine grace. But in my view, at the very real risk of rationalising, this seems like an issue that is not very much like many other much more problematic issues that plagued Hindu women till recently. It seems the spiritual needs of the women are not being awfully uncared for with this setup, though I will probably never know as I’m not a woman. A genuine hypothetical variant issue that both myself and my mother would have instantly recognised and protested against and gotten rid of (if possible; we both are not that powerful in reality lol; very mediocre, meek and conforming-type) would have been one in which my mother would not be allowed to work and go to her office during menstruating. That is a lot of days less pay. And knowing my mother who seems to abhor sitting and sleeping in the house for the whole day on Sunday (she is not a very home-happy person and a rather office-happy person; or so she says lol immediately after which my maternal grandmother gives her a nice bashing (sometimes very hatefully) that she is saying those things just to escape work at home (my mother is really a bit incompetent and psychologically averse when it comes to some important things haha; just like me); I suspect that she is just unhappy everywhere; just like me (we both are so alike that it is objectively scary), increasingly because of me, etc. etc.), all of those days with no usual daily work would be very problematic for her and infinitely more genuinely. I don’t know if I’m right but I believe that this above potential issue (the one that exists and not the hypothetical variant I imagined) (when happening in some type of reasonable manner as opposed to in extremes) is quite separate to issues like the problems faced by widows historically in Hinduism in several areas and several castes and such, for example, and others like child marriage.
Or it may be the case that I’m just shamelessly rationalising everything off to the exact level of my own cosy-rosy personal conditioning. In which case I apologise to everybody and wholeheartedly accept that my thought process is very wrong and pray that superior people kindly think about the problem more and that people who don’t want to suffer don’t suffer, if possible.
Unfortunately this is sign of our time. People live in bubble and so sure of themselves that no attempt is made to understand opposite point of view before passing judgment.
First of all, Subrimala is not about Menstruation. It is about ”naishtika brahmacharya” which is part of Hinduism’s Tantric tradition and very well supported by scriptures. It’s not North vs South either . Pls read people of dharma submission in Suprime court for better understanding. http://peoplefordharma.org/sabarimala-case-written-submissions/
Hinduism today anywhere is different from VH.
Hello VijayVan,
Could you let me know if possible, more details about the identity and genealogy of Vedic Hinduism as you view it? Like the place of its origin, its initial geographical extent, its maximum geographical extent and the timestamps and other such important things associated with it?
Thank you very much for this (as well as for being such a positive force in my life)!
Hi Santosh
Thanks for your comments. The questions you have raised are vast and more studious people than me have written volumes about it . Suffice it to say that the vedas were composed in India , Old India, if you prefer which extended upto Afghanistan. As to dating , I am not an expert nor too enthusiastic about claiming ‘oldest’ , ‘most ancient’, etc . Many modern scholars give a date of 3000 to 4000 Before Present and that is good enough for me .
Thank you very much VijayVan!
I of course perfectly understand what you say; it’s just that am a lazy idiot and tried to be sneaky enough there to extract some easy information and juice from the hardwork of individuals like you lol. I am in the process of forming a basic picture about this topic based on my own studies but I think (and I hope) it will take a lot and lot more time.
So just one final question (again with the intent of greed but I’m very tempted lol, sorry!): what is the fate of this Vedic Hinduism? Did it go extinct or did it get admixed with any other contemporary religion(s) and/or culture(s) of the time period and survives in a mixed form today or do we also have any modern-day descendant religions with predominantly Vedic-religion ancestry? Please do share your thoughts about this if you are inclined.
Thank you very very much again!
@Santosh : what is the fate of this Vedic Hinduism?
Hi Santosh
VH has not gone anywhere and it lives directly and through it’s influence till date.
Just few days back, Tamraparani Pushkaram ended in the southern tip of the country. Worship of rivers started with Nadi Stuti in the vedas and Tamraparani is also celebrated with millions participating, vedic and other Hindu chants , etc. These great Pushkarams are reminiscent of Srauta rituals i.e. public ceremonies in which the whole population participated
The ritual structure of vedic yagnas i.e. god/goddess are invited , given food, boons asked for (and hopefully received) and given send-off is repeated in any modern day puja . Any Hindu sect seeks ultimate recognition and legitimacy by calling itself ‘vedic’ and how vedic gods and rishis are part of the sect’s mythos. At a thought level like Vedanta , Vedas and Smiritis are the ultimate pramana .
If you look around , many habits and mangalam/ amangalam (auspicious/inauspocious) complexes can be traced to vedic hinduism.
Vedic Hinduism’s idea of nature and landscape based religiosity is still largely the case. That’s why rivers, mountains, ponds , and even animals are given religious significance. The idea of Dharma is a continuation of ‘rta’ in early vedic times ; this idea of ‘rta’ as the governing force of the universe has been downgraded in favour of Dharma ; this happened in Upanishadic time itself .
There are still shakas of vedic chanting i.e. brahmin families entrusted with keeping alive some portions of the vedas , even though their number of dwindling . Many shakas have been lost since the practitioners stopped practicing for whatever reason.
There is Dhanastuti i.e. celebration of wealth. That is why Hindus have never shied away from wealth unlike west asian Abrahamic religions which were ambivalent to money.
Even though danastuti is the praise of donors, basically poets are happy they have been compensated with income
Okay thank you very much VijayVan!
“South Indian Hinduism may be different from Vedic Hinduism?”
Just like Sub Continental islam is different than Arbian Islam. But then it s expected right, one is place of its “birth” (N-India) one is the place of its adoption(S-India)
Saurav, I have always regarded South India as the Hindu heartland. Most of the ancient pure streams of Hinduism are practiced in the south. South Indians are more religious and spiritual. South Indians generally believe that Rama was a real person who walked the south long ago.
Its not my intention to disrespect you, but i disagree with everything you said. The language , the scriptures and the major gods all originated in N-India. Just like last time when i said in India all hindu communities are so large, they feel that what they practice is real “Hinduism”. But any dispassionate study of the history of the religion wouldn’t come to your conclusion.
Saurav, most of the people who know chant Vedas and other Sanskrit poems are south Indians. Most of the people who know a little Sanskrit are South Indians. The most Sanskritized people in the world are South Indians (Milan . . . I respect that you think they might be Serbs . . . maybe you are right).
The temples are real and vibrant.
A linguistic clarification if I might. Do you consider Marathi (Maharashtra), Kannada (Karnataka), Telegu (Telengana, AP), Hyderabad Urdu, Pondicherry to be partly North Indian?
By South Indian do you only mean Tamilian peoples (who were the heart of the former Madras Presidency) ? If so, how do you regard Tirumurai? Is it authentically Tamilian?
Tirumular’s Tirumantiram (one of the twelve volumes of Tirumurai) is one of my all time favorites books. When do you think Tirumantiram was written? Wikipedia (admittedly a horrendous source) says 1000 BC.
Is Agasthyar (Agasthya Brahma Rishi for non Tamilians) authentically Tamilian?
>”The most Sanskritized people in the world are South Indians…”…..> Ceylon.
I would like to know which language is dominant in South India, what is the percentage of its similarity to Sanskrit (or, the number of words, or any other comparison measure). I wrote yesterday that (according to AM – R.Tagore’s grand-daughter) modern Serbian language and Sanskrit are 20% identical and 10% are very similar.
My mother’s Hinduism is different from my Hinduism.
Zack, which darshana do you consider Vedic Hinduism to be?
Of course they are different. No two Hindus are alike. In private life they can practice any rituals which they think fit- even untouchability (unless the other party feels aggrieved; untouchability with mutual consent is perhaps ok in private home). But, temple is a public place. Rules of public places like temples must conform to highest dharma shastra ( liturgical text) of Hindus, I.e. Constitution of India.
Pranjal, in India only Hindu organizations are regulated by the government. Christian, Muslim, Sikh/Buddhist/Jain, Zorastrian, Jewish, Taoist are not. Do you favor all religious institutions in India being regulated by the Supreme Court of India?
Either the government should control all religious and spiritual institutions or none.
Pranjal, temples and their practices are not places of worship but are thought to be places where certain technologies are performed that affect the brain and nervous system. If incorrectly practiced, people can be harmed. This is why rules are strictly enforced, except where subtly bent by a spiritually evolved Apta (few of which are alive). For example Buddha and Jesus were super Apta squared and could safely bend all the rules.
Temples are about improving the brain, nervous system, physical health, mental health (Chitta Shuddhi), intelligence (Buddhi) so that humans have greater capacity to do whatever they want . . . including temporal and spiritual things.
There are very few Brahmacharya or celibacy temples and they have different rules. For that matter there are times when temples become female only.
Vedic Hinduism: Approx. 1500 BCE to 500 BCE : Blood is pure
Puranic Hinduism: Approx.500 BCE to 500 CE: Blood is pure
Pre- modern Hinduism: From when ? until 27 September 2018 CE: Blood is impure.
Modern Hinduism: 28 September 2018 CE onwards: Blood is pure again
Make no mistake. It’s an epoch making decree given by highest ‘dharmacharyas/ rajpurohits’ (royal priests) of Hinduism- I.e. Supreme Court. Like any ‘ yug parivartan kari’ ( epoch making) step, this will also take a little bit of time to sink in the masses. For 50% of Hindus, untouchability has been just abolished.
Pranjal, your timelines are increasingly disputed by mainstream historians.
Have you seen the 2017 published evidence that Gunung Padang (ancient pyramid that is over 1 million tons) organic samples are C 14 dated between 13,000 and 28,000 years old?
Expect an article series on ancient civilizations.
I don’t know about north or east. In south India, menstruation has tremendous social and psychological complex built around it. It’s presense is verboten for ritual occasions. When I was growing up, anyone in the period was kept separate in the family, in some large houses confined in an outhouse ,flip side being they have holiday from all domestic duties and others have to look after them.
In the matter if female entry in Sabarimala, I don’t think a consistent policy in place.
I realised it just a while ago but isn’t the specific PIL regarding the allowing of women of menstruating age to the most well-known Dharma Shasta temple of Kerala that Rohinton Nariman ruled upon quite separate from the currently materially (i.e. in the form of any PILs or the like) non-existent question of allowing menstruating women to temples? I quite strongly believe that these two are separate because the latter would be an extremely more explosive issue potentially than the former (the former is actually quite close to a non-issue it appears even to very religious people speaking in terms of theological matters because I have read some Malayali and Tamil people on Quora who noted that the Sabarimala temple is only one of the Shri Dharma Shasta temples in Tamil Nadu and Kerala and because all of them except this one did not and don’t have such a policy, they seem pretty okay-ish that this temple is also now becoming like the other Dharma Shasta temples. But I may be wrong though and it may be the case that a significant portion of the Kerala Hindus are against this on theological grounds. I advise that we (or rather I) research and learn more about the response to this in Kerala). Both of your twitter guys seem to be talking about the second issue and your second guy’s attribution of hypocritical motives and actions to Rohinton Nariman does not seem to be situated on a strong basis, because we don’t know how Mr Nariman would have ruled if the latter was the case running in court.
Or am I mistaken here and the case deals with the second issue as well?
Just to clarify my muddied thinking earlier for myself and for others as well: I do realise now that I don’t have specific information about whether there are any specific laws, in various Devaswom boards for example, against allowing women into temples when menstruating or it is just a religious and cultural principle followed by most Hindus to adhere to this. But I believe that my point about the Nariman issue still stands regardless, because we don’t know how Mr Nariman would have reacted to that other problem, in principle.
I just wanted to note that I have made quite a big mistake in my first post: boy did I not know about the quite strong opposition to this ruling from the Hindus of Kerala when I wrote that post. It turned out that the logic that I remembered and reproduced in there I took from just one individual on Quora, the very well-known Balaji Viswanathan (see his answer at http://qr.ae/TUh1JH and the comments to that answer also, importantly of people named Vineet Menon and the other well-known Kiron Krishnan). There are other views which I took note of, now. It appears that there are quite a few types of Dharma Shasta (who is apparently himself a type of Shasta) and some Dharma Shasta temples have him with consorts (and these allow women of all ages) and some like the Sabarimala don’t. So that is one incorrect, or at least very certainly incomplete, characterisation earlier, by Mr Viswanathan and me, in my view.
The above little comment thread exchange between Mr Viswanathan and Mr Krishnan is actually very interesting. Mr Krishnan identifies the heart of the problem all at once correctly (like did several other commentators on Brown Pundits itself on an earlier post, I remember) and asks “Why should all traditions in Hinduism conform to the so-called monochromatic version dictated by great reformer progressive gurus?” His response might be that they should not and I don’t personally know the answer or am too cowardly to take any stance, but my emphasis is on the fact that this is indeed the heart of the issue. Best exemplified by the fact that the same Ayyappan and Aiyanar (Ta-Ma names for the deity called Shri Dharma Shasta; again note that there are internal differences between Ayyappan and Aiyanar) combo deities are worshipped in different formats in different places and people who do something in one temple don’t do that thing at another temple but a slightly different thing. Universalist Enlightenment’s clash with a mind-boggling Diversity and importantly, a diversity the entities of which constitute its structure are all as irreconcilable with each other as four and six.
In another answer (http://qr.ae/TUh1VD) to the question, another person called Krishna asks “Why only men priests in Triplicane or in Tirumala? (Discrimination of women)” in the following context (again quoting him): “There are thousand other restrictions and practices followed in thousands of places of worship. I think Law can’t enter everywhere. Why only men priests in Triplicane or in Tirumala? (Discrimination of women)…” While I am probably incapable of thinking through this very properly and evaluate if the comparison of this with the case at hand be made (my personal inclination, at least an initial one, is that they are indeed very similar), but I majorly want to use this to illustrate the grand complexity mentioned in the last paragraph. One can instantly observe here that a near-opposite of the situation at Triplicane or Tirumala as presented by Mr Krishna most definitely exists somewhere in India, such as the female priests at several village mother-goddess temples in some places in south India like one close to my home in Hyderabad. So it can be noted here that on the broad and general level, there is no discrimination (or is, but in low amounts) against women speaking with respect to the problem of representation in this priest profession as women priests most certainly exist, but when taken up individually, there is discrimination against women in one case and discrimination against men in another (though it can perhaps be plausibly argued that a hypothetical change of the gender of the priest one fine day for no apparent reason can be much more easily effected in the mother-goddess-temple case than in the Triplicane-Tirumala case)! I don’t know about a lot of these things to any large degree but I’m inclined to think that it’s better that the Universalist aspect of Enlightenment and the Diversity-Internal Irreconcilability aspect of Tradition should talk to each other more and know more sincerely about each other and this may make the trajectory of history perhaps more smooth and let the collective spirit of the people face as minimal a damage as possible.
Haha, I’m done with this topic for now. So much stress for a gODa-mIda-pilli type (‘cat on the wall’) guy like me. My little depressed world was rocked like anything with this one lol.
“So just one final question (again with the intent of greed but I’m very tempted lol, sorry!): what is the fate of this Vedic Hinduism? Did it go extinct or did it get admixed with any other contemporary religion(s) and/or culture(s) of the time period and survives in a mixed form today or do we also have any modern-day descendant religions with predominantly Vedic-religion ancestry? Please do share your thoughts about this if you are inclined.”
We know a ton about it. Have you studied the 10 darshanas?
Can you define what “Vedic Hinduism” means to you? Are you talking about Hinduism as it existed:
—during the Valmiki Ramayana?
—during Jamadagni and Parashurama?
—during Vamana? [technically Vamana was not a human being.]
Hindus believe that Hinduism considerably predates homo sapiens and that homo sapiens were taught by non homo sapiens. Maybe this refers to homo sapiens with different haploid genes (I suspect this explanation . . . I guess today we would say of a different “race”?). Maybe this refers to other homonids (I think this probably happened). Or by some other species (mythic explanations).
If you study the 10 darshanas you will find that there was enormous diversity of thought among ancients. At one time long before the Buddha (who I believe was born several centuries earlier than we currently believe . . . many Hindus and Buddhists believe 1800 BC . . . I am looking for more data about it) there were many vibrant philosophies:
—Ajivika/Chaarvaaka
—Jainism
—Samkhya/Yoga [note I am refering to long before the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali became publicly circulated]
—Vaisheshika/Nyaya
—Puurva Mimaamsaa/Uttara Mimaamsaa
I would add Bon, Sarnaism, Raj Gond, Donyi-Polo, Sanamahism but that is more controversial.
Long ago the Vedas did not dominate all philosophical and spiritual life by any stretch of imagination.
There were also darshanas influenced by Danavas, Daityas, Yakshas/Rakshashas, Kinnaras, Garudas, Nagas, Gandharvas, Adityas, Vasus, Maruts, Rudras, Ganas and an entire panoply of now mostly lost genealogies. Pre Zarathustra Iran/Turin is probably a lost Darshana of Sanathana Dharma. Possibly so are the old Serbian, old Greek and old Anatolian philosophies from pre 1500 BC.
Hinduism was transformed by the arrival of Buddha. Buddhism might have led to the sunset of all other branches of Hinduism other than Uttara Mimaamsaa, Buddhism and to a much lesser degree Jainism. Uttara Mimaamsaa is a subset within the superset of Puurva Mimaamsaa. A reformed Puurva Mimaamsaa if you will. One possible explanation is that Uttara Mimaamsaa gained dominance because of Buddha’s influence. Almost all Hindus living today are Uttara Mimaamsaa, Buddhist or Jain. [Unless someone considers Sikhs to be part of the tradition which many Hindus do . . . and there remain smaller sects such as Bon, Sarnaism, Raj Gond, Donyi-Polo, Sanamahism].
By Vedic Hinduism do you mean Puurva Mimaamsaa or something else?
Have you studied long forms of the Valmiki Ramayana? If you do you will see that Hinduism was practiced quite differently than during the time of Krishna. Many Vedangas are mentioned that appear to be lost by the time Krishna.
As an aside, I don’t know how weddings were performed before Rama. Rama’s wedding was unique. And after Rama . . . future weddings were modeled after Rama’s wedding. One thing I am hoping to learn from Gunung Padang is how weddings were performed pre Rama.
Gunung Padang–one of the two largest known ancient pyramids in the world–has been carbon dated between 13,000 BC and 28,000 BC depending on where the carbon samples were taken.
Another great source of ancient Hinduism would be the oldest part of Jain scriptures, including the Jain Agamas. Another great source would be the Samhitas (oldest part of the Vedas) themselves. Another great source would be the oldest part of the non Jain Agamas [Shaiva, Shakta, Vaishnava, Vaikhanasa, Soura, Ganapatya.]
Hello AnAn,
Thank you for the reply. I do not agree with many specific details in your post but I do appreciate your sixth and the final paragraphs. They are quite helpful for me to try and know more, I think. Thank you very very much again!
And by Vedic Hinduism, I guess I have in mind some of the earliest/most mature phases of the time period when in a particular society in a particular region the Vedas and the deities inside them were the most important ones religiously. Or actually sometime when the people who composed the Vedas (speaking in terms of secular understanding and not religious) lived. May not be that this includes just what we call Purva Mimamsa but also Uttara Mimamsa aka Vedanta as well.
Santosh, I have carefully read the Mahabharata (I got a 12 volume translation when I was 11) and some of the other Puranas and the Valmiki Ramayana, albeit I have forgotten the large majority of what I have read. [And a ton of other texts such as a five volume translation of the Dharma Shastra.] My interpretation is that Uttara Mimaamsaa didn’t seem to be practiced in the stories. Which suggests it is a post Krishna innovation. I am not aware of any scholars who argue differently.
My guess is that Uttara Mimaamsaa (Vedanta) might have been inspired by Buddha. But this is my guess. Buddha literally changed everything (much the way Krishna and Rama and Parashurama/Jamadagni did before). It would take many books to explain all the ways how.
“I guess I have in mind some of the earliest/most mature phases of the time period when in a particular society in a particular region the Vedas and the deities inside them were the most important ones religiously.”
We have descriptions of these times in many old stories and scriptures. Note the vast majority of these stories are not about the modern haploid gene humans of Iran, Turan and SAARC. But about other races (who had different haploid genes), other hominids, other great apes, or other species, or are symbolic of mystical experiences related to the brain and nervous system. They relate to earlier Yugas (Treta, Krita), earlier Chaturyugas and earlier Manvantaras and earlier days of Brahma and previous Brahmas. And those times were very different.
You can read about them directly–albeit they have been edited over thousands of years. As far as when said events might have partly taken place (since they are not fully historically accurate I think), there is a lot of work taking place regarding this. I hope to write an article series about this. Short answer I do not know. Are you speaking of a time before when the Valmiki Ramayana was composed?
” Or actually sometime when the people who composed the Vedas (speaking in terms of secular understanding and not religious) lived”
Every Vedic passage was inspired and revealed by a specific person. They are mentioned along with the passage they revealed. Listen carefully when Vedas are chanted. They are the great saints. When these composers lived is highly debated.
“May not be that this includes just what we call Purva Mimamsa but also Uttara Mimamsa aka Vedanta as well.”
I am confused by this. Technically all of Uttara Mimaamsaa is part of Purva Mimaamsaa. The former is the latter with rituals de-emphasized plus some Bashyas as interpreted by paramparas to over simplify. There is no evidence that I am aware of for Uttara Mimaamsaa in the scriptures. It almost has to be post scriptures.
“Vedas (speaking in terms of secular understanding and not religious)” What does this mean? Do you mean a Chaarvaaka interpretation of the Vedas? If so, this has been around from long before Rama’s time. One of Rama’s and Dasharata’s main ministers was a Chaarvaaka.
If you mean Max Müller’s interpretation, then note that it changed dramatically over time. He translated much of the Vedas as a young man. But in his later years he became deeply spiritual and his interpretation of the Vedas changed accordingly. Sadly from my perspective academia uses young Max Müller’s interpretations rather than older Max Müller’s interpretations.
Do you mean the difference between young Max Müller’s interpretation and elderly Max Müller’s interpretation?
Rig-Veda 10.46
“9 That Agni, him whom Heaven and Earth engendered, the Waters. Tvaṣṭar, and with might, the Bhṛgus, Him Mātariśvan and the Gods have fashioned holy for man and first to be entreated.”
…Anyone knows to explain “Bhṛgus” ?
We can discuss this offline.
Brighu is one of the most important elements of eastern philosophy.
Krishna says in the Bhagavad Gita 10.25:
“maharsinam bhrgur aham”
[Of] Maha rishis Brighu I am
Brighu is this star in the big dipper:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eta_Ursae_Majoris
Brighu I think also refers to an aspect of mystical experience. I look forward to neuroscience studies of the brain and nervous system when someone meditatively absorbs in Brighu.
Brighu is ancient. Brighu is a Sapta rishi from a previous day of Brahma or from more than 6 1/2 billion years ago. “He” doesn’t have gender as we understand it. A mind son or manas putra of Brahma. Brighu is mystery. Brighu partly represents the degree to which everything is pre-destined or the degree to which humans lack free will. Modern neuroscience is finding evidence for the same thing. However in eastern philosophy a human can develop free will. This is the purpose of all religion, spirituality, mental health practice, practices to increase intelligence and all the rest.
Brighu is similar to the Dalai Lama in the sense that he keeps being born again and again across many eons of time. And human beings in the present can be inspired by Brighu. But Brighu is never born a human. Much of the ancient Hindu/Buddhist/Jain science comes from Brighu. For example building and operating temples. Specific rituals. Manu smriti (which keeps being rewritten for each epoch of time)
Many books can be written about Brighu. I could write a series of articles about Brighu. I have been fascinated by Brighu since I was a child.
For Mahabharata shippers . . . one of Karna’s most powerful weapons was Bhargava Astra . . . a weapon of mass destruction for which the Pandavas had no answer. Bhargava Astra was given to Karna by Brighu’s great grandson Parashurama. It possessed the power of Brighu . . . whatever that is.
Another tidbit. Many of the most important people in eastern philosophy are Brighu’s wives (in many of Brighu’s life times he married a wife), children, grandchildren and great grandchildren. In fact many of them are as great or greater than Brighu. Each of them deserves their own book.
Collectively the Bhargavas were extremely influential across all the ancient stories.
Hello AnAn,
Thank you very much for the reply. I’m frankly not in the mood to read and appreciate your comment in entirety because my mind got quite rocked because of the other topic (you will know more about it when the comment that I wrote just a while ago will get approved by the software shortly (hopefully)) and so please let me just note that by secular I meant something like a view held by some person, whether hypothetical or real, who is not an apauruSeyatvavAdin (sorry for any bad Sanskrit there lol). And then let me sign off for today by saying that you seem to be very suspiciously close to at least one particular section of the mainstream thought when you say that the Buddha influenced Hinduism very much lol.
I just wanted to request you to forgive me if the last sentence of my comment above came across as particularly rash and mocking and hurtful towards you. I never had any such intention quite certainly (I would have told you if that was the case and then apologised) and I had only good will in mind; but it is probable that my stupid joke was in poor taste and hurt you (to write in exhaustive detail, I do personally evaluate mainstream scholarship (or my choice of Pramanas you can say) as higher compared to more alternative ways of doing it and do take refuge in the mainstream scholarship but I certainly don’t believe that everyone should believe the same, so that was majorly intended as a little harmless quip only and not at all as mocking), in which case, please forgive me.
Yes, all public temples should be controlled by public bodies, like village council, district council, municipal bodies or state government – depending upon temple revenue. This is as per Hindu tradition of the ‘raja’ (king) being the chief patron, controller, protector of the temples in her jurisdiction.
Pranjal, is the same true of all synagogues, mosques, churches, zorastrian/Buddhist/Jain/Sikh/Toaist/Bon places of worship? Do you believe that all religions should be treated identically?
The Supreme Court of India has to make sure that all institutions–religious or otherwise– are not going against fundamental rights. They found that restricting women’s access to the temple is gender discrimination. Of course, this conflicts with traditional beliefs about purity etc and those issues are also important. But the Indian constitution must be supreme in a secular democracy.
The Indian Supreme Court has also become involved in the religious affairs of Muslims, most recently in the triple talaaq issue. If you are making the argument that the court doesn’t have the right to get involved in religious issues then there should be no problem with a Muslim man giving his wife a divorce through instant triple talaaq. Of course, there are Muslim countries (such as Pakistan) where this practice is not legal. The point is that fundamental rights take precedence over religious beliefs. At least, that seems to be the thinking of the Supreme Court.