From: Vaj
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2005
7:35 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re:
soma .. was: New Vedic Translation?
Good morning:
On Mar 15,
2005, at 10:56 PM, mark robert wrote:
> I'm not
sure your points on fragmented Vedic history really
> address
the integrity of RV-Soma texts regarding the main theme.
> Do you
feel that the texts were so corrupted by the time they
> were
written, by a chaotic mixture of influences, that the basic
> message
of something external being prepared to produce an
>
enlightenment is a distortion?
No that's
not really the point I am making. The point is that Vedic
recitation
of Rig Veda exists really just as that: Brahmins reciting
Rig Veda. It
does not contain a lineal set of practices along with it
regarding
soma. The upanishads do talk somewhat on this, but they do
not provide
a set of spiritual practices for realization via "soma".
It's not
really about fragmented history either, because at some point
in history
"Hinduism" became a blend of Agamic and Vedic. What it is
about is not
claiming something is Vedic when it is well known that it
is not. What
it is about is Brahmin domination--and since the early
middle ages,
the rise of the merchant castes. It's also about the
Hindatva
movement. It's also about Vaishnavism and the mix of
puritanical
religions brought by the British Raj.
What I seem
to be coming up against is an entire movement of people who
have been
brainwashed into believing certain things are "Vedic" when in
reality they
never were. No matter what you say or explain, there
response is
"it's all Vedic". It's the Ved. As I said so many times
before,
there is very little left of Vedic religion.
> I would
like to suggest a better perspective. All "religions" are
> far
more fluid than they would like to "believe". According to
> them,
they are a finite set of inflexible doctrines. According to
> us,
there is little coherence to them. But it is looking more and
> more
like, amongst all the chaotic fluidity, there remains a
> common
theme hidden deep within them. As counterintuitive as it
> is, the
common theme would appear to be: "Take a drug and have a
>
religious experience". Sorry for the message being so depraved
> and
devaluing to human spirituality, but that is the essence of
> the
research that I continue to see more and more. I know it's
> not a
pleasant thought for many, but truth trumps all preference.
Again this
is simply not the case. There is a huge literature
surrounding
the use of some lunar, soma-substance and a corresponding
set of inner
practices. The two are always linked together, unless it
is simply a
substance for medicinal use. The practices are all Tantric,
Agamic or of
Dravidian origin--not Vedic.
----------------------
Vaj,
Maybe no “set of spiritual practices”
are needed for realization via RV-Soma. Are you claiming that since the RV
contains no “lineal set of practices” that you think should attend the
consumption of the Soma, then the Soma and any enlightenment claims made about
its consumption are untrue? It may be true that other Soma literature contains
corresponding sets of inner practices, but does that fact disqualify the
legitimacy of the RV-Soma texts? (and I would bet the latter pre-dates the
former.)
OK, we agree that a lot of “Vedic”
literature is not really Vedic at all. But does that discredit the content of
the RV-Soma texts? Do any of your points (inc. Brahmin recitation) really
discredit their content? Or is it just that you feel that since RV-soma texts
do not include something you would prefer, they MUST not be valid. You have
been supplying direct translations on this list; what do you think they are really
saying?
-Mark
