[ramakrishna] Digest Number 98

[Guest guest]

>

> omtatsat [sMTP:omtatsat]

> Friday, June 11, 1999 1:59 PM

> Ramakrishna

> Re: [ramakrishna] Digest Number 98

>

> <omtatsat

>

> On Fri, 11 June 1999, Ramakrishna wrote:

>

> According to the Hindu Code of Manu:........

[Madhava Replies:]

Om Santi!

 

My dear friend, no offence, but I have three words to say about

this: It is wrong.

 

It is tantamount to mis-understanding and mis-representation of our

sacred texts. I would advise, better leave them there, that doesn't harm

much. Other wise, I would advise - read the books written/interpreted by

any "adhikAri".

 

Also, when you want to quote from "Manu" please quote the book in

its entirety. It is a chain of inter linked verses. *Personally*, with

what ever little knowledge I have got in understanding english, I don't even

accept the MaxMuller's translation of vedic texts!

 

Vedas demand that one should be an "adhikari" (Master/he who

deserves) to interpret them. That condition does apply for understanding

our Manu as well !

 

A true adhikari is he who got the following qualities:

 

(1) who has mastered all six aspects of Veda (trayee)

 

sikshavyAkaraNaM chandO niruktaM jyOtishaM tathA |

kalpa ScEti shaDaMgAni vEda syAhu rmaneeshiNaH ||

 

sikaha = Pronounciation

vyAkaraNaM = Grammer

chandaH = Prosody

niruktaM = Explanation of obscure terms (NOTE: My point is based on

this)

jyOtishaM = Astronomy

kalpah = Religious rites

 

(2) He who understood the right usage of Svara (sound) -

"udAttAdyAstrayaH svarAH" - Accute, grave or circumflex accents.

 

(3) He should have knowledge on the "anveekshaki" - anveekshakee

danDaneeti starka vidyArtha SastrayOH - Logic as stated by Gautama and

Politics as taught by cANakya and ancient sages.

 

(4) He should have the knowledge of the "akhyAyika" - That which is

told once upon a time - a true or parable related to that time.

 

Before reading any interpretation of vedas or sacred books, we need

to understand whether the author is an adhikari, or just another mere

translator. I leave this judgement to your discreetion.

 

Conclusively, one has to have full knowledge of "nirukta" in order

to understand the vedic language.

Contrary to the popular belief vedas are written in a language

called "Chanda". Nirukta is the dictionary which could reveal the hidden

meaning of veda by giving you the acces to the root of the word.

 

Let me give you one small example of how nirukta could reveal the

meaning of the word "deva". For us "deva" means "God" in english.

According to Nirukta:

 

"dEva" means "dyOtanAt dEvaH, dAnAt dEvaH, damanAt devaH...."

 

He who reveals (dyOtanAt)

He who donates (dAnAt)

He who controls (damanAt)

 

Our tittiriya upanishad says: "mAtR dEvObhava, pitRdEvObhava, AcArya

dEvObhava" -- according to mullar's translation it is "Mother is God, Father

is God, Teacher is God"! Would this suffice???? Don't we need to know why

a father has become a God for Hindus? The answer is that the father reveals

(dyOtanAt) to his children what is life. He donates his money (dAnAt) to

the children, thinking that is his sacred duty. He controls (damanAt) his

children, fearing that they might tread the unwanted ways of life....

 

Please refer what nirukta says about Manudharma Sastra. "The role

of Women and Sudras in Manudharma Sastra" - written by Swamini

Saradapriyanda, Chinmaya Mission, would be or great help in order to

understand manu. This is a commentary on manudharma based on nirukta. She

has written this in telugu language. I don't know whether Swamini Amma

translated it into English or not.

 

Hari Om! tat sat!

 

prANaMs,

-mAdhava