Yajurveda: “This battle is the source of thy prosperity; hence we goad thee to that battle”

[paarsurrey]

Namaste,
While I don't think the Satyartha is "rabid and hateful', nor should it be banned, the point is to understand the context of the translations that our friend Paarsurrey is engaged into.
I do consider Griffith translations as "unintelligible", but that does not mean I want it banned or not read.
Dhanyavad

I hold that any or every translation show the original Sanskrit scripture side by side the translation, that will encourage one to go deeper in the original and those knowing Sanskrit could point out the error in translation which could be corrected in the next edition. Please
Regards

 

[Vinayaka]

I hold that any or every translation show the original Sanskrit scripture side by side the translation, that will encourage one to go deeper in the original and those knowing Sanskrit could point out the error in translation which could be corrected in the next edition. Please
Regards

There are never any errors. only opinions that other people may disagree with.

Saying 'you don't understand' usually means 'I disagree with you, or you're not agreeing with me. therefore I think you don't understand.'

 

[paarsurrey]

There are never any errors. only opinions that other people may disagree with.
Saying 'you don't understand' usually means 'I disagree with you, or you're not agreeing with me. therefore I think you don't understand.'

It is one's personal opinion alright. Opinion of Veda may not agree with one.
Veda favors waging war for economic interests, one may like to understand/misunderstand it or agree or disagree with it:
Yajurveda Chapter 17:33-50

33. He is an ideal commander of the army, who is swift, keeps his
arms sharpened, fearless like a strong bull, a zealous killer of foes, strikes
terror in men ; makes the enemies weep bitterly, works day and night,
a sole hero, rends asunder the opponents, and subdues with us a hundred
armies.

34. Ye warriors, win the opposing forces, and bear the brunt of
their speed with the commander, who makes the enemies weep, is ever
exerting, is fond of victory, arranges his soldiers in different divisions,
puts the enemies to inconvenience, is steady, energetic, and strong, with
arms in hand.

35. The Commander of the army, with arms in hand, with well-
trained and armed soldiers, keeper in stock of arms and weapons, the
master of passions, the conqueror of foes, the maintainer of peace in the
country, strong in arms, with sharp shafts fond of fight, discharges his
weapons, kills his enemies, and with his disciplined army achieves victory
over the opposing forces.

36. O protector of the religious minded, the aged and the forces,
the slayer of demons, the remover of our foes, their killer, the^ brcaker-up
of the enemy's forces, their destroyer in the battle with military accou-
trements, be thou protector of our conveyances that are used on the
earth, the sea, and in the air.

37. O Commander of the army, well-equipped with military war-
fare, thou knowest how to strengthen thy army, art an experienced
statesmen, a foremost fighter, mighty, the master of the science of war,
the endurer of pleasure and pain, the fierce slayer of the wicked, the
possessor of nice warriors, and martial intelligent employees, famous for
strength, conquering land, surrounded by victorious heroes, mount thy
conquering conveyance.

38. O friendly countrymen, encourage the commander of the army,
and begin the battle with him, who with his physical, mental and military
strength, cleaves the enemies' families, usurps their land, is armed with
weapons, slay's the foes, subdues the enemy in the battle, and conquers
him.

39. May the commander of the army, who, with surpassing vigour
pierces in the battles the families of the enemies, is pitiless, wild with
anger, unconquerable by foes, conqueror of the enemy's forces, unequalled
in fight, and victor, protect our armies,

40. In battle, the commander, the leader of these armies of the
learned, the conqueror and demolisher of the enemies should march behind.
The organiser of the army should march in front. The leader of
big bands should march on the right. The encourager of the army should
march on the left. The warriors swift like air should march ahead.

41. Musical instruments, to infuse valour and energy shouW be
played upon before the commencement of the battle, by the learned
soldiers of the powerful commander, and mighty king, who possess decent
homes, lofty ideas, are able to conquer the enemies, have led a life of
celibacy for forty eight years, are highly learned and strong, full of
terrible power.

42. O adorable commander the slayer of foes, like the sun of
clouds, make the weapons of our soldiers flourish, excite the spirits of
our warring heroes, increase the speed of our horses, and let the din of
conquering cars go upward.

43. O learned persons desirous of victory, may the commander
nd our forces, under different flags, the emblems of justice and truth,
win in the battle. May our brave men enjoy after war. May ye protect
us everywhere at the time of war.

44. O queen the slayer of foes, organise the bands of thjr army,
that bewilders the hearts of the forces of the enemy, remain aloof from
sin, convey thy aim to thy soldiers, burn down the foes, whereby they
may abide in utter darkness with hearts full of griefs.

45. O' wife of the comraander-in-chief, expert in the art of archery,
trained by a learned person knowing the vedas, on persuasion, go afar,
encounter the foes, achieve victory by slaying them. Let not even one of
those distant foes escape.

46. Advance, O heroes, win the day. May the commander of the
army provide ye with shelter, food and clothes, Exceeding mighty be
your arms, that none may threaten or injure you.

47. O learned persons, the army of our enemies, that comes against
us in a jealous mood, with its might, meet ye and enwrap it harshly in
the darkness of the smoke arising out of the use of cannons so that they
may not recognise one another.

48. There where the flights of arrows fall like boys whose locks
are unshorn, may the Commander, the protector of the big army grant
us shelter, may the entire Assembly adorned with members, grant us a
happy home through all our days.

49. O valiant warrior, thy vital parts I cover with armour. May
this calm, considerate king protect thee with efficacious medicine. May
the exalted King give tbee what is more than ample. May the learned
encourage thee in thy triumph over the wicked.
50. O Commander of the army, well satisfied with ghee, lead this
conquering hero to a high position ; vouchsafe him growth of riches and
multiply his progeny.
https://archive.org/stream/yajurveda029670mbp/yajurveda029670mbp_djvu.txt

Please have patience, it is a longer passage of 18 verses, yet all from Veda.
One may like to join me studying Yajurveda from Chapter 18, no compulsion though whatsoever.
Regards

 

[Satyamavejayanti]

"paarsurrey, post: 4841528, member: 37462"

Namaste,

One question, what does Devi Chand mean by "Veda", does he mean the Books or something else, as i Know what Swami Dayananda and many more other reformers and Gurus meant by Veda.

Can you elighten me

 

[paarsurrey]

Namaste,
One question, what does Devi Chand mean by "Veda", does he mean the Books or something else, as i Know what Swami Dayananda and many more other reformers and Gurus meant by Veda.
Can you elighten me

What does Veda say about "Veda"? Veda existed before Devi Chand and his guru. They are followers of Veda, Veda does not follow them.
Quran describes as to what is Quran. Right? Likewise, Veda must describe. Right? Please
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

Well, at least I have already found the truth and do not need to search for it anymore (no God, no soul, no heaven, no hell, no judgment). However, thanks for the suggestion.

Yajurveda does not support your viewpoint. Does it? Please
Regards

 

[Nyingjé Tso]

Quran describes as to what is Quran. Right? Likewise, Veda must describe. Right? Please
Regards

For the love of all the kittens of the universe...

Quran is not same as Veda.
Hinduism is totally different than Islam.
It is not same.
It will NEVER be the same.
And it is good as it is.
Diversity of thinking is great.
STOP
TRYING
TO
MAKE
THEM
THE
SAME.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Yajurveda does not support your viewpoint. Does it?

I have not read YajurVeda. If I go by RigVeda, there are various different views in it. There is a mention of 33 Gods or more and there is a mention of one Supreme God. YajurVeda also will have a similar collection of views, sometimes many Gods, some time one Supreme God. If some lines differ from my view, so what, my Muslim One-book one-God friend? That is the view of the poet/Rishi who wrote those lines, my view may be different. It is not a crime in Hinduism. I am not a heretic according to Hinduism. If Abramamic regions have their way, Hinduism has its own way. Kindly understand this once for all. The measurements of Islam do not apply to Hinduism. We have already pushed Zakir Naik out of India. He will not dare to come back. His assistant is in jail for contravening Indian law.

 

[Satyamavejayanti]

What does Veda say about "Veda"? Veda existed before Devi Chand and his guru. They are followers of Veda, Veda does not follow them.
Regards

But you are reading Devi Chand translation, don't you want to know what he considers as "Veda",?

Quran describes as to what is Quran. Right? Likewise, Veda must describe. Right? Please

No, not right at all. Because Koran was revelation to one person, but Veda is Apurushay.

 

[paarsurrey]

But you are reading Devi Chand translation, don't you want to know what he considers as "Veda",?

I don't follow Devi Chand and his guru.
It is more valuable to know Veda from the "Veda" itself. Are you against knowing about Veda from "Veda" itself? If yes, it would be very strange to know it! And one would agree with me on it.
If not, then please quote from Veda, in this connection.
I don't see anybody from Arya Samaj, a Hinduism denomination, here. I am not against anybody. Please
Regards

 

[Vinayaka]

It is more valuable to know Veda from the "Veda" itself.

If you can read Sanskrit, why do you even need a translation?

 

[paarsurrey]

aarsurrey said: ↑
It is more valuable to know Veda from the "Veda" itself.

If you can read Sanskrit, why do you even need a translation?

I never ever said that I know Sanskrit. Did I? Please
Well, if there is anything you can quote from Yajurveda in Sanskrit, please do it. Just provide reference in English, may be our friend @Aupmanyav , who knows Sanskrit check it correctness or otherwise. Right? Please
Please go ahead. Please don't forget to provide transliteration, root words and root-letters for which please refer to the contents of posts #54 #56 in this thread.
Who else knows the Sanskrit? Maybe friend @Satyamavejayanti also knows it. Does he? Please
Anybody else here who knows Sanskrit? Please
Regards

 

[Vinayaka]

aarsurrey said: ↑
It is more valuable to know Veda from the "Veda" itself.

I never ever said that I know Sanskrit. Did I? Please
Well, if there is anything you can quote from Yajurveda in Sanskrit, please do it. Just provide reference in English, may be our friend @Aupmanyav , who knows Sanskrit check it correctness or otherwise. Right? Please
Please go ahead.
Who else knows the Sanskrit? Maybe friend @Satyamavejayanti also knows it. Does he? Please
Anybody else here who knows Sanskrit? Please
Regards

The Veda itself is in Sanskrit. So the only way you can read the Veda itself is if you know Sanskrit. All translations therefore are incorrect. Right.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Well, if there is anything you can quote from Yajurveda in Sanskrit, please do it. Just provide reference in English, may be our friend @Aupmanyav, who knows Sanskrit check it correctness or otherwise.

I am not a Sanskrit expert, know just a little of it. Because you requested, I am attaching the image of a shloka in Sanskrit. Do you know a little of Hindi? Can you read it? The English meaning also is given and is absolutely correct. It is from Tilak's book.

English transliteration: Iyameva sā yā prathamā vyaucchadantarasyām charati pravishthā l
vadhurjajāna navagajjanitrī traya enām mahimānah sachante ll 1 ll

Yes, it is very difficult for one who is not accustomed to it. The verse is about dawn.

Wait, there is some mistake. I will correct it. - It is correct now.

 

[Jainarayan]

All translations therefore are incorrect. Right.

You're not far off the mark at all. Some words and concepts have no English equivalent, so something has to be substituted. This often renders the English sounding downright silly and potentially incorrect, or ambuguous. I saw something about this just the other day... I wish I could remember what it was specifically about, but it was a good example of how difficult it can be to translate Sanskrit into English.

 

[paarsurrey]

I am not a Sanskrit expert, know just a little of it. Because you requested, I am attaching the image of a shloka in Sanskrit. Do you know a little of Hindi? Can you read it? The English meaning also is given and is absolutely correct. It is from Tilak's book.
View attachment 13928
View attachment 13929
English transliteration: Iyameva sā yā prathamā vyaucchadantarasyām charati pravishthā l
vadhurjajāna navagajjanitrī traya enām mahimānah sachante ll 1 ll

Yes, it is very difficult for one who is not accustomed to it. The verse is about dawn.

Wait, there is some mistake. I will correct it. - It is correct now.

I don't know Hindi even, unless it is written in Persian/Urdu script.
I have started learning Sanskrit just now from your post. Number "1" of English is like a question mark "?"of English in Sanskrit . Right? Please correct me if I am wrong.
Thanks for providing English transliteration, now, please provide the the root-words and root-letters in the root-words of all the Sanskrit script given by you. Friend @Vinayaka to note it, if she provides anything from Sanskrit Yajurveda.
I become your student for anything truthful one teaches, but not otherwise. And I am proud of you that you become my teacher of Sanskrit.
The first lesson is over, dear teacher.
With all thanks and all regards

 

[Vinayaka]

You're not far off the mark at all. Some words and concepts have no English equivalent, so something has to be substituted. This often renders the English sounding downright silly and potentially incorrect, or ambuguous. I saw something about this just the other day... I wish I could remember what it was specifically about, but it was a good example of how difficult it can be to translate Sanskrit into English.

Malhotra wants to publish a book called '100 Untranslatable Sanskrit words' . They (our better Hindu scholars) talk about it a lot.

 

[Jainarayan]

Malhotra wants to publish a book called '100 Untranslatable Sanskrit words' . They (our better Hindu scholars) talk about it a lot.

Really!? I'd love to see that.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I become your student for anything truthful one teaches, but not otherwise. And I am proud of you that you become my teacher of Sanskrit.

I am always truthful, sometimes very strictly so. You have chosen me as your Guru for Sanskrit. Then you will need to do what I instruct. Read some short book on Ramayana and Mahabharata to get some background of Hinduism. I will soon give you the links on internet. You can start with Wikipedia. Then we can start with other things.

 

[Jainarayan]

I don't know Hindi even, unless it is written in Persian/Urdu script.

Urdu is simply a register (not as differentiated) as a dialect) of Hindi using Arabic script and some Arabic loanwords. It's a political issue, not linguistic. Like Serbian and Croatian... same language written in Latin and Cyrillic scripts, but Serbs and Croats will tell you they speak different languages.