I am not so learned like you.But why are you using the wonderful learning
for a trivial fight?
YM

On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 11:12 AM Rajaram Krishnamurthy <
[email protected]> wrote:

> VEDA FEATURES 1 dated 22 9 23 from KR IRS
>
> Dear folks
>
> It is not at all surprising that totally uneducated know-nothing
> dustbin-raider and garbage-collector,plus propagator of fallacy after
> fallacy and untruth after untruth should come out with truckloads of
> blasphemous garbage and try to muddy the clear waters of our scriptures,
> especially r'g-vedam and yajur-vedam, neither of which he has studied
> under competent, reliable, known or learned preceptors.
>
> First of all, he does not even know that both the samhitha and the
> braahmanam are integral parts of the same yajur-vedam.
>
> Second, he does not know that manthrams occurring in the yajur-veda SAMHITHA 
> also
> are found in r'g-vedam.  As  I have already pointed in the manthram,
> "ganaanaam thvaa ganapathigu havaa mahe", and am today pointing out in the
> manthram, "agnimeede purohotham".
>
> Third, the thaiththeeraya braahmanam of yajur-vedam has the following
> ashtakams and prapaadakas, contrary to what he lamely pontificates:-
>
> prathama ashtakam:-
>
> 1. agnaadheya braahmanam
>
> 2. gavaamaya braahmanam
>
> 3. vaajapeya braahmanam
>
> 4. somaadi braahmanam.
>
> 5. nakshthreshti kaandam
>
> 6. raajasooyaanu braahmanam
>
> 7. raajasooyaanu brahmanam
>
> 8. raajasooyaanu braahmanam.
>
> dvitheeya ashtakam:-
>
> 1. agnihothra braahmanam
>
> 2. hothru btaahmanam
>
> 3. hothru braahmana shesham
>
> 4, upahomam
>
> 5. upahoma shesham
>
> 6. sauthaamanihi kaukilee hothram cha
>
> 7. savaa ekaahavisheshaaha
>
> 8. kaamrupashuyaajaanuvaakyaa brahmanam
>
> thritheeya ashktakam:-
>
> 1. nakshathreshteenaam yaajyaanuvaakyaa braahmanaani
>
> 2. darshapoornamaaseshti braahmanam
>
> 3. darshapoornamaaseshti braahmanam
>
> 4. purushamedhaha
>
> 5. ishtihauthram
>
> 6. paashuka hothram
>
> 7. achidram
>
> 8. ashvamedham
>
> 9. ashvamedham
>
> 10. kaatake prathamaha prashnam
>
> 11. kaatake dvitheeya prashnam (including naachiketham)
>
> 12. kaatake thritheeya prashnam
>
> Fourth, r'g-vedam is like Swiss cheese -- full of large holes throughout.
> These holes are stuffed with chunks of filched yajur-veda manthrams.
>
> Fifth, r'g-vedam DID NOT precede yajur-vedam.   All three vedams --  r'g,
> yajur, and saama -- first emerged as one complex of manthrams from the
> aadhi-braahmam.  What "all vedic scholars had assured", as my unqualified
> biased critic puts it, was just that there were about 24 pandithars all
> calling themselves "vyaasaas" who laboured to chop up the vast complex of
> Vedic manthrams into three as name.  Atharva came long, long after.
>
> As I wrote earlier in these columns:-"The atharva-vedam simply did not
> exist during the threthaa yugam of Lord Sree Raama and of hanuman.  Only
> the r'g, saama, and yajur did."It is said that the atharva-veda was
> composed by two groups of rishis -- the atharvaans and the aangeerasas.
> That vedam has at least five upanishads:  ganesha-atharvasheersha, mundaka,
> mandukya, prashna, and kaivalya.
>
> "In kaivalya upanishad, rishi ashvaalaayana approached Lord Brahma (the
> parameshti) directly and asked, 'O bhagavaan, teach me the highest science
> of Reality, cultivated by good beople always, which is ever a hidden secret
> from man, a knowledge by which a wise man, discarding all sins, can reach
> the highest purusha.' "
>
> "Pithaamaha (grandfather) Brahma replied:- You can know this only by
> faith, devotion, and meditation  --  by shraddha, bhakthi, and
> dhyaana-yogam.  Not by work, nor by progeny, nor by wealth, but by
> renunciation alone is immortality achieved.  Higher than heaven, seated in
> the cave of the intellect, it shines, which the seekers attain."
>
> *Sixth, twist and turn and perform somersaults as the unprincipled,
> unlettered, illiterate detractor may, the inescapable resplendent** sathyam
> is that r'g-vedam is a copious pilferer of Vedic manthrams from yajur-vedam
> -- from both samhitha and braahmanam.  *S Narayanaswamy Iyer
>
> II    Dear Sri Gopalakrishna Why are you putting the cart before the
> horse? The manthrams I highlighted were copied from yajur-vedam to
> r'g-vedam, and not vice versa. S Narayanaswamy Iyer
>
> III     *agnimeede purohitham yajnyasyadeva mruthvijamm  l*
>
> *hothaahaara rathna dhaathamam  ll *(thaiththireeya samhithaa TS
> 4.3.13.3) (R V mandalam 1, ashtakam 1, cap I, sooktham 1, vargam 1)meaning
> --  My pious prostrations to divine agni, the celestial being who fulfils
> our desires, who exists perpetually in the form of the aahavaneeya
> sacrificial fire, who invites and calls all the celestials to attend fire
> sacrifices, who assembles the participants of the fire-sacrifice, who wears
> the preious gem, and who is the celestial being resident in the consecrated
> fire.
>
> My comments:- Just as the "thachcham yoraa vruneemahe" mantram from
> yajur-vedam concludes the r'g-vedam text, so this manthram from the
> yajur-vedam is the very first manthram in r'g-vedam. In between, we find
> many chunks of yajur-veda manthrams stuffed into Swiss-cheese-like holes in
> r'g-vedam. S Narayanaswamy Iyer
>
> xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Narayanasamy should have kept quiet as he never knew to himself that he is
> revealing his ignorance as a Swiss cheese is. What I write is not that of
> Rajaram, even though I can humbly say < I am better erudite than the idiot
> Narayanasamy.
>
> What I wrote was from the scholars write up who were proclaimed on print
> as scholars and whose research the world over read and accepted; they never
> wrote anywhere that THERE ISONE SCHOLAR BY NAME NARAYANASAMY; so, Narayana
> write up comprising 15 lines of abuses out of 45 lines, has the least
> value. Narayanasamy can pretend; can have his findings; no one has any
> right to intervene; all idiots of the earth including the Hitler called
> themselves as the greatest, who are now unknown, so be one day Narayanasamy
> also would be dead and gone; but these scholars will live on the history
> sheets. So, I believe more on them based on evidence, rather than NETI NETI
> denial unobjective erosions of Narayana.
>
>        Right from day one which is long ago, Narayana is whimpering on KYV
> is the opening and Not Rig vedam, since I always quote RV; he had also said
> sometimes back that I am a Rig vedists. I AM A PURE KYV holder of my entire
> ancestry; and still I speak only about the Ric because truth is not the
> property of a jihadi like Narayabnasamys.  Jihadi is not only a Muslim; but
> one who without any reasonable basis hangs to certain unfounded theory like
> Man is born only to impregnate woman 2 Yajur vedam that too only Krishna YV
> (Sukla YV Yajnavalkya according to him Narayana is a fool!!) is the
> opening; and will say Rig vedam is SWISS CHEESE FILLED UP ONLY BY
> YAJURVEDA; then will add that all the three vedams came together also!!!.
> WHICH IS CORRECT? SWISS CHEESE OR TOGETHER?; Narayana-asamy is always
> confused and called a scholar by only one person, his younger brother who
> does not know anything except Gusti. A MAN AT 98 CANNOT DISTINGUISH
> ANYTHING CLEARLY A SCHOLASTIC LUST ABUSING IN SO MANY WORDS WITHOUT ANY
> MEANING WHO CANNOT QUOTE ANYTHING RIGHTEOUSLY. The list of anubandham in
> Sanskrit he wrote, I gave in English to Kapali sastry, a Sanskrit college
> professor. I DO NOT EVEN TRY TO EQUATE UGLY NARAYANASAMY WITH KAPALI
> SASTRI. Whom is he trying to hoodwink?
>
>           Vyasa means writers; but Veda Vyasa means only one; not
> Narayanasamy; Nor Sujatha; 24 Vyasa? Where is it stated? let Narayanasamy
> quote the evidence. Shankara are too many and that is why AADHI SHANKARA is
> the only one. Bhagavan is 33 million; so only AADHI BHAGAVAN. Narayanasamy
> shall think before inking. Veda is told by names of rishis not just 24; 52
> in a small groove and more than that number. I had given those lists long
> back.
>
>            The verses I avoided for the obvious reasons that many may not
> even read it: PROOF OF AGE IS EMBEDDED IN THE VEDIC VERSES BY THEMSELVES.
> IT IS IN THIS ORDER ONLY: RIG VEDAM, SAMAVEDAM AND THEN KRISHNA YAJURVEDAM,
> THEN SUKLA YAJURVEDA AND FINALLY ATHARVA VEDAM. THEN ALONE THE REST EVEN
> THOUGH ALL WRITTEN AS EXPLANATIONS WERE BASED UPON ONLY THE VEDAS. B g
> SPEAKS ABOUT IT BETTER.
>
> “*Rig Veda*: The Rig Veda is the oldest of the works comprising 10 books
> (known as mandalas) of 1,028 hymns of 10,600 verses. These verses concern
> themselves with proper religious observance and practice, based on the
> universal vibrations as understood by the sages who first heard them, but
> also address fundamental questions regarding existence. Koller comments:
>
> Vedic thinkers asked questions about themselves, the world around them,
> and their place in it. What is thought? What is its source? Why does the
> wind blow? Who put the sun – giver of warmth and light – in the sky? How is
> it that the earth brings forth these myriad life-forms? How do we renew our
> existence and become whole? Questions of how, what, and why are the
> beginning of philosophical reflection. (5)
>
> This philosophical reflection characterizes the essence of Hinduism in
> that the point of personal existence is to question it as one moves from
> the basic needs of life toward self-actualization and union with the
> Divine. The Rig Veda encourages these kinds of questions through hymns to
> various gods – *Agni* <https://www.worldhistory.org/Agni/>, Mitra,
> Varuna, *Indra* <https://www.worldhistory.org/Indra/>, and *Soma*
> <https://www.worldhistory.org/Soma/> notably – who would eventually be
> seen as avatars of the Supreme Over Soul, First Cause, and source of
> existence, Brahman. According to some schools of Hindu thought, the Vedas
> were composed by Brahman whose song the sages then heard.
>
> *Sama Veda*: The Sama Veda (“Melody Knowledge” or “Song Knowledge”) is a
> work of liturgical songs, chants, and texts meant to be sung. The content
> is almost wholly derived from the Rig Veda and, as some scholars have
> observed, the Rig Veda serves as the lyrics to the melodies of the Sama
> Veda. It is comprised of 1,549 verses and divided into two sections: the
> *gana* (melodies) and the *arcika* (verses). The melodies are thought to
> encourage dance which, combined with the words, elevates the soul.
>
> *THE YAJUR VEDA CONSISTS OF RECITATIONS, RITUAL WORSHIP FORMULAS, MANTRAS,
> & CHANTS DIRECTLY INVOLVED IN WORSHIP SERVICES.*
>
> *Yajur Veda*: The Yajur Veda (“Worship Knowledge” or “Ritual Knowledge”)
> consists of recitations, ritual worship formulas, mantras, and chants
> directly involved in worship services. Like the Sama Veda, its content
> derives from the Rig Veda but the focus of its 1,875 verses is on the
> liturgy of religious observances. It is generally regarded as having two
> “sections” which are not distinct parts but characteristics of the whole.
> The “dark Yajur Veda” refers to those parts which are unclear and poorly
> arranged while the “light Yajur Veda” applies to the verses which are
> clearer and better arranged.
>
> *Atharva Veda*: The Atharva Veda (“knowledge of Atharvan”) differs
> significantly from the first three in that it concerns itself with magical
> spells to ward off evil spirits or danger, chants, hymns, prayers,
> initiation rituals, marriage and funeral ceremonies, and observations on
> daily life. The name is thought to derive from the priest Atharvan who
> allegedly was well-known as a healer and religious innovator. It is thought
> that the work was composed by an individual (possibly Atharvan but not
> likely) or individuals about the same time as the Sama Veda and Yajur Veda
> (c. 1200-1000 BCE). It is comprised of 20 books of 730 hymns some of which
> draw on the Rig Veda. The nature of the work, the language used, and the
> form it takes has caused some theologians and scholars to reject it as an
> authentic Veda. In the present day, it is accepted by some but not all
> Hindu sects on the grounds that it deals with later knowledge which is
> remembered, not the primordial knowledge that was heard.
>
> Embedded in each of these works are the other types mentioned above – the
> Aranyakas, Brahmanas, Samhitas, and Upanishads – which could be considered
> glosses, extensions, or commentaries on the actual text.
>
> The Upanishads are considered the “end of the Vedas” as in the last word
> on the texts. The term *Upanishads* means to “sit down closely” as a
> student would with a master to receive some information not intended for
> the rest of the class. The Upanishads in each of the Vedas comment on the
> text or illustrate it through dialogue and narrative thereby clarifying
> difficult or obscure passages or concepts.”
>
>        KR:  when Konar wrote text based only on the original text, how
> can the konar become earlier to Text? WHERE BRAHMANAA, ARAHYAAKAA,
> UPANISHAADS AARE ONLY BASED ON VEDAS, HOW CAN TB CAN PRECEDE THE VEDAS? An
> old insane writes out of anger and should we not show him his place? HE
> HIMSELF INADVERTENTLY ACCEPTED Rig, Sama and Yajur vide red green mark I
> had given to his write up above. THEN WHY WOULD HE WASTE HIS TIME? CAN ANY
> VEDA WORSHIPPER WRITE THAT ONE VEDA PILFERED ANOTHER? CAN ABY VEDA LEARNT
> USE THE WORDS THAT HE ISS SHUDRA AND THAT IS UNWORTHY AS HE MENTIONED SO
> MANY 10000 BCE ELDERS AS SHUDRA AND YET CLAIM RESPECT AS ELDER?
>
>          Let him write anything authentically without personal opinions. I
> write the real elders’ notes; Narayanasamy is aged but never an elder to be
> respected.  Will continue.  K RAJARAM IRS 22 9 23
>


-- 
*Mar*

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Thatha_Patty" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CACDCHC%2BTodGLN-%3D7TstuF-xZMjA7dBn6%2B8u206V2CQYc4Rv4xA%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to