Don't the Hinduism (Dharmic) people need a concise Scripture?

[Jainarayan]

I understand there was only on Veda originally and then people divided/classified the same in four Vedas for their convenience, then the division and classification has been going on, people had been busy doing it, till at one time the number reaches to 1131.

It was Vyasa, a sage who divided the original Veda into four. He became known as Veda Vyasa, "splitter of the Vedas".

Sam Veda has only about 65 new verses, the rest 1810 verses are repetitions from Rig Veda.

"The Samaveda, is the Veda of melodies and chants. It is an ancient Vedic Sanskrit text, and part of the scriptures of Hinduism. One of the four Vedas, it is a liturgical text whose 1,875 verses are primary derived from the Rigveda". Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samaveda

Keep in mind that the Vedas were originally transmitted orally. They were not written down until after at least several centuries of oral transmission. That's probably the single biggest reason for the structure and meter of the verses, and for Sanskrit being as structured as it is (a separate subject and thought on my part). Being so structured, it was easier to remember. Vedic Sanskrit was probably also tonal... it's a lot easier to remember the lyrics of a song in the context of the music.

Anyway, there were no books to flip back and forth through to cross-reference, there were no indices. My best guess, and that's all it is, is that the reason the Sama Veda contains elements of the Rig Veda is because those parts of the Rig Veda are pertinent to the Sama Veda, or the lessons being taught. When chanting what became the Sama Veda, the orator probably orally referred back to the Rig Veda.

At some point someone began transcribing what he (or she, female sages were not unknown) heard. These recitations were transmitted with absolute and incredible fidelity, not visarga or anusvara was lost. Those oral recitations probably contained the parts of the Rig Veda that were pertinent. So now it's set down on banana leaves, bark paper, or what-have-you, and it is now set to writing.

 

[von bek]

The Rishi , whatever was his name, had implored Lord/King/Agni to speak to him:
CHAPTER IX 97*
28. O' King, speak truthfully and kindly to us h^re, be graciously
inclined to us. Winner of thousand warriors, grant us happiness for
thou art the giver of wealth.
https://archive.org/stream/yajurveda029670mbp/yajurveda029670mbp_djvu.txt
* THE YAJUR VEDA ,Translated by,DEVI CHAND, M.A.,Ex. Principal, D. A. V. College* Hoshiarpur,Ex. President, D. A, V. College Managing Committee, Hoshiarpur,Ex. President, Dayanand Dalit Uddhar Mandal, Hoshiarpur, Ex* President, Arya Smaj, Hoshiarpur, Ex. President, Arya Pradeshik Pratinidhi Sabha, Jullundur, Ex. President, All India Dayanand Salvation Mission, Hoshiarpur. 1959

Wouldn't the imploration of the Rishi had been heard/ accepted by Lord/King/Agni ? Please

Regards

I checked out the link to the copy of the Yajur Veda you are reading and skimmed through the introduction. One word of caution to you before you go on to discuss what you are reading with other Hindus here, there are a variety of views on how one should properly understand the Vedas. For some, polytheism is clearly taught while others will maintain that the many gods and goddesses are manifestations of Brahman. I notice in the introduction that you are reading that the latter view is being put forward.

 

[Satyamavejayanti]

"paarsurrey, post: 4818475, member: 37462"

Namaste,

The Rishi , whatever was his name, had implored Lord/King/Agni to speak to him:
CHAPTER IX 97*
28. O' King, speak truthfully and kindly to us h^re, be graciously
inclined to us. Winner of thousand warriors, grant us happiness for
thou art the giver of wealth.

This is what Devta means to Devi Chand, see from his intro:

"Devata is the subject matter of a verse, the topic discussed in it. All good men and beneficent forces of nature like air, fire, water, electricity, months, sun, moon, breaths, lightning, father, mother, teacher, preacher, and soul, which are beneficial to humanity are called devatas. They are not all living, personified beings as some erroneously believe them to be"

Wouldn't the imploration of the Rishi had been heard/ accepted by Lord/King/Agni ? Please

The King should speak kindly and truthfully is a request, i guess it is up to the King to do this.

I really don't understand what the point of quoting Vedas has to do with your idea that Hindus require a "concise Scripture', it seems you have chosen the smallest of the Vedas to read, are you suggesting the Vedas or Hindu texts need to be made smaller so it is easier fro lay people to understand? maybe it makes it easier for you to quote from the Vedas without having to put much effort (Tapasya) into fully comprehending the Vedic literature.

Anyways, what is your point?

 

[paarsurrey]

Don't the Hinduism (Dharmic) people need a concise Scripture?

Further to post #219 I have finished reading one translation of Yajur Veda form a translation which had 20 Chapters in 243 pages of the script translated. Now I will start another translation rendered by Devi Chand and I am reading its introduction to the translation.
There are startling points to be shared with my Hinduism friends if not brothers in humanity with love, if they accept it,while I read!! Right? Please
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

so it is easier fro lay people to understand?

That is one aspect. I intend to read all the four or some say three which were all together only ONE in the origin . My intention is to make them one again with the consensus and the consent, if possible, of my Hinduism friends/brothers and of course others here also.
Regards

 

[Vinayaka]

Why would any Hindu accept a translation filtered through a non-Hindu mind? Besides, everyone here can read. Of what value do you believe it is by reading it to us? Would you like one of us to read the Koran to you?

 

[Satyamavejayanti]

That is one aspect. I intend to read all the four or some say three which were all together only ONE in the origin . My intention is to make them one again with the consensus and the consent, if possible, of my Hinduism friends/brothers and of course others here also.
Regards

Namaste,

You can do whatever you like with them, as Vinayaka said, many Hindus will not really care nor will many accept a non Hindu interpretation based on the translations and interpretations of one source (in this case the Arya Samaj).

If you intend to make them "One" again, to what purpose will that serve? is that not counter productive to your original idea that it should be readable and easily available to the "lay", person, will not combining the Veda again to make one book make it harder for people to read it?

Why only the Samhita portion, what are you going to do about the rest of the Texts?

 

[sayak83]

That is one aspect. I intend to read all the four or some say three which were all together only ONE in the origin . My intention is to make them one again with the consensus and the consent, if possible, of my Hinduism friends/brothers and of course others here also.
Regards

You won't have such consent. The reason being that you have given none of the Hindus here any reason to believe that you have any interest other than to selectively quote-mine and twist Hindu scriptures and force them into your pre-existing Ahmadiyaa worldview. You can do whatever you like, but don't expect consent, even from a liberal Hindu like me.

By consent I mean consent in creating one concise scripture. I already know what it will be. It will be a selectively quote-mined compilation of a few passages which, when one squints hard enough, can be read into the Ahmadiyaa theology, with 99% of everything else omitted, being dismissed as "corruption."

Whatever.

 

[Vinayaka]

That is one aspect. I intend to read all the four or some say three which were all together only ONE in the origin . My intention is to make them one again with the consensus and the consent, if possible, of my Hinduism friends/brothers and of course others here also.
Regards

Have you found a publisher yet?

 

[paarsurrey]

You won't have such consent. The reason being that you have given none of the Hindus here any reason to believe that you have any interest other than to selectively quote-mine and twist Hindu scriptures and force them into your pre-existing Ahmadiyaa worldview. You can do whatever you like, but don't expect consent, even from a liberal Hindu like me.
By consent I mean consent in creating one concise scripture. I already know what it will be. It will be a selectively quote-mined compilation of a few passages which, when one squints hard enough, can be read into the Ahmadiyaa theology, with 99% of everything else omitted, being dismissed as "corruption."
Whatever.

One may be wrong as I don't have any intention to change the Sanskrit original text. I have no intention to translate the original texts myself even if I knew the Sanskrit, which I don't know, not even its alphabetic.

Hinduism Scripture- The Compressed One

I wish that the ordinary man should be facilitated to read and finish the Hinduism Scripture in a reasonable time frame , the hegemony of the Brahmins/priests/clergy on the scripture should come to an end and people get spiritual guidance direct from the scripture itself.
The planning is like:

1. Rigveda, is proposed to be kept as it is.
2. Sam Veda which is a liturgical text whose 1,875 verses are primary derived from the Rigveda and only 65 new mantras/verses are there in Samaveda, so it should be compressed to 65 verses only and a footnote written on the verses in the Rigveda indicating that.

Regards

 

[LuisDantas]

Are you working under the impression that Hinduism must to focus on scripture, @paarsurrey ?

It doesn't really.

 

[Vinayaka]

Paarsurey, I think you should start writing query letters out to publishers. I'm sure there will be many willing to publish this.

 

[Jainarayan]

so it should be compressed to 65 verses only and a footnote written on the verses in the Rigveda indicating that.

You do realize of course that would invalidate the Vedas being apauruṣeya, "not of human origin", "not made by human hands"? To adulterate them in the way you're suggesting renders them useless. It does to them exactly what you claim the "clergy" (which Hinduism doesn't have anyway) has done. I see a singular irony in this.

 

[paarsurrey]

Are you working under the impression that Hinduism must to focus on scripture, @paarsurrey ?
It doesn't really.

Scripture is very important in every revealed religion. Hinduism people believe that Vedas, in its pure and un-corrupted form, are from G-d:

Genesis of the Vedas.

Vedas are the Word of God, revealed in the beginning of creation
for the moral, spiritual and physical guidance and uplift of humanity.
They are replete with eternal truths and throw a flood of light on the
various aspects of life to make a man perfect and ideal. God out of His
infinite source of knowledge reveals in the beginning 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.
INTRODUCTION (of the Vedas) by DEVI CHAND, M.A.
https://archive.org/stream/yajurveda029670mbp/yajurveda029670mbp_djvu.txt​

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

Paarsurey, I think you should start writing query letters out to publishers. I'm sure there will be many willing to publish this.

First we should do it, then we could contact the publishers. Right? Please
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

You do realize of course that would invalidate the Vedas being apauruṣeya, "not of human origin", "not made by human hands"? To adulterate them in the way you're suggesting renders them useless. It does to them exactly what you claim the "clergy" (which Hinduism doesn't have anyway) has done. I see a singular irony in this.

Is it bad that everybody ,at least, could see as to what is written in them in a concise and compressed form?Then they could go ahead reading the whole of it if they cold find time. We are just facilitating the readers of the Vedas.
One has forgotten that in the start there were only one-vedas and the rest came out of it to many of them. Right?
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

You do realize of course that would invalidate the Vedas being apauruṣeya, "not of human origin", "not made by human hands"? To adulterate them in the way you're suggesting renders them useless. It does to them exactly what you claim the "clergy" (which Hinduism doesn't have anyway) has done. I see a singular irony in this.

The Brahmins are just like the Levites, a separate class of the priests, in the Judaism.
Please correct me if I am wrong.
Regards

 

[Vinayaka]

Is it bad that everybody ,at least, could see as to what is written in them in a concise and compressed form?Then they could go ahead reading the whole of it if they cold find time. We are just facilitating the readers of the Vedas.
One has forgotten that in the start there were only one-vedas and the rest came out of it to many of them. Right?
Regards

Paarsurrey, I am simply to busy doing charity work, worshipping God, supporting my family, helping in other ways, to read scripture. As many others have said repeatedly, Hindus are NOT scripture focuseed like this. there is no need, and there will be no publisher that would ever publish something like this, because there is no need. You could be putting all of your time to much more productive things like this, like helping serve food at your local Amaddi mosque.

Still if you feel this action will bear fruit, who am I to stop you?

 

[Jainarayan]

The Brahmins are just like the Levites, a separate class of the priests, in the Judaism.
Please correct me if I am wrong.
Regards

You are wrong. Brahmins are not all priests. Please stop spreading incorrect and incomplete information.

 

[Jainarayan]

Is it bad that everybody ,at least, could see as to what is written in them in a concise and compressed form?Then they could go ahead reading the whole of it if they cold find time. We are just facilitating the readers of the Vedas.
One has forgotten that in the start there were only one-vedas and the rest came out of it to many of them. Right?
Regards

There are already commentaries by Hindu acharya-s who are far more learned than someone who is not Hindu claiming to know better than them. The only justification I can find for wasting my time like this is to, I hope, help someone else understand what's going on here.