Krishna in the Srutis

[Guest guest]

Are there references about Lord Krishna in the srutis?

by Hare Krisna Das, (Horacio Fco. Arganis Juárez)

Student of Lingüistic and Literature in the U A de C

in Saltillo City Coahuila, Northest of México.

Kim vidhate kim âcaste

Kim anûdaya vikalpayet

Ity asyâ hrdayam loke

Nânyo mad veda kascana

Mam vidhate 'bhidhatte mâm

Vikalpyâpohyate hy aham

"What is the direction of all Vedic literatures? On whom do they set focus? Who

is the purpose of all speculation? Outside of me (Krishna)) no one knows these

things. Now you should know that all these activities are aimed at ordaining

and setting forth Me. The purpose of Vedic literature is to know Me by

different speculations, either by indirect understanding or by dictionary

understanding. Everyone is speculating about Me." (Srimad-Bhagavatam

11.21.42-43.)

Around 300 years ago, at the start of Indology, British scholars werevery much

influenced by the Judeo-Christian paradigm of time. In theirestimation, the

creation took place around 6000 years ago. Having foundtestimony in vedic

historical accounts that the texts are over 5,000 yearsold, they fabricated

many academic devices to obscure the traditionaldating method. For example,

John Bentley, feeling his own concept of time being questioned, employed his

knowledge of astronomical science to discredit the vedic dating formula:

"By his attempt to uphold the antiquity of Hindu books against absolute facts,

He (?) thereby supports all those horrid abuses and impositions found in them,

under the pretended sanction of antiquity, ... Nay, his aim goes still deeper;

for by same means he endeavours to overturn the Mosaic account, and sap the

very foundations of our religion: for if we are believe in the antiquity of

Hindu books, as he would wish us, then the Mosaic account is all be a fable, or

a fiction." ((Bentley, John, 1825, Historical View of the Hindu Astronomy,

Osnabruck; Biblio Verlang, etd 1970 pp. xxvii)

Another interesting point is, how these learned men formulated the borrowing

hypothesis. Such tentative speculation, guised by so-called academicism, stated

that Lord Krishna was a Hinduized Jesus Christ. The logical consequence of this

idea would lead the intelligence to believe thateverything about Lord Krishna,

such as His religion, hagiography like theBhagavata, Visnu and the Harivamsa

Puranas, were also derived fromChristianity. Therefore, all of these works

would be attributed to AfterDominomaking them post-Christian. Dr. Thomas

Hopkins indicates this academicdevise to be systematically denigrating. (HK p.

111)Even though Dvyapayana Vyasa wrote that Krishna: vedaih

sanga-pada-kramopanisadih "Whose glories are sung by verses of the Vedas,of

whom the singers of the Sama sing, and of whose glories the Upanisadsproclaim

in full choir." (Srîmad Bhâgavatam. 12.13.1); whenever they foundany references

about Lord Krishna in the srutis, they were automaticallyrejected by virulent

hypercriticism from the scholars.

The problem with this paradigm is that the archaeological discoveriesdisproved

this borrowing lucubration. But even today, some conservativehardcore scholars

reluctant to reconsider and mentions of Krishna in thesrutis. Of course, like

the Berkeley Ph. D. Sanskrit student, Beatriz Reusch wrote:"Things have changed

quite a bit since then. Those were times oforientalism' and colonialism.

Nowadays many scholars try their best to berespectful of traditions they are

studying as well of the people in everypart of world. Nowadays, also, no sober

scholar will endorse Max Mueller'sideas on the Aryan invasion." (Email-letter

3-II-2000)We will make few observations suggesting that the above hypothesis

[LordKrishna is not in the Veda srutis] has not at all been proven. We shall

notattempt an exhaustive treatment of the many arguments presented byscholars,

since this would require a voluminous book. Rather, we shall make a few points.

 

Epistemological problems

When we study a body of empirical evidence, we always evaluate it withour

limiting assumptions. In the end, the conclusions we derive from theevidence

reflect our paradigm. If the assumptions change, evenWhen we study a body of

empirical evidence, we always evaluate it with ourlmiting assumptions. In the

end, the conclusions we derive from suchevidence reflect our own paradigm. If

the assumptions change, evenhough the evidence remained the same, the results

shall different.Considerwhat would happen if the traditional history of the

Puranas, accepted as real and accurate possibility, was the only available

evidence about the history of Indian literature to be studied? The result would

be acompletelydifferent picture of the past, contrary to the one now accepted by

somewestern scholars.In other words, there are ways to comprehend historical

processes throug the Vedic texts. That this is so can be graphically observed

if one performs the mental experiment of looking the world from a radically

different perspective.But is necessary to point out that now the epistemology

of science demands,as the first step, the suspension of any predisposition.

This is called theepoje. In fact, to be objective, it is necessary to leave

aside the entirepreconception and observe the phenomenon under scrutiny without

anyprejudice, after enumerated the qualities. Only in this way, the processcan

be objective and realistic. Because, theistic, atheist, agnostic,

sceptic,materialistic speculation, academicism, dubitivism or relativism (

socalled rationalism) etc., are considered to be subjective postures. In

otherwords, the methodology of science is realistic, quantitative and is

limited toobservation and describes the phenomena in an inductive way to arrive

at ageneral theory. But the results of the science are relative;

approximations,probabilities and never absolutes. Ultimately, there is no

absolute truthin science. Nowadays words like laws axiom are already being

eliminated in the dobjective fields of science. All subjects can be revised

objectively. Scienceis self-critical and constantly changes through new

realistic and objective reviews.

Evidences from the Upanisads:

Regarding the Upanisads, the following eleven Upanisads are considered to be the

topmost: Isa, Kena, Katha, Prasna, Mundaka, Mandukya, Taittiriya, Aitareya,

Chandogya, Brhad-aranyaka and Svetasvatara. However, in the Muktikopanisad,

verses 30-39, there is a description of 108 Upanisads. They are as follows: (1)

Isopanisad, (2) Kenopanisad, (3) Kathopanisad, (4) Prasnopanisad, (5)

Mundakopanisad, (6) Mandukyopanisad, (7) Taittiriyopanisad, (8)

Aitareyopanisad, (9) Chandogyopanisad, (10) Brhad-aranyakopanisad, (11)

Brahmopanisad, (12) Kaivalyopanisad, (13) Jabalopanisad, (14)

Svetasvataropanisad, (15) Hamsopanisad, (16) Aruneyopanisad, (17)

Garbhopanisad, (18) Narayanopanisad, (19) Paramahamsopanisad, (20)

Amrta-bindupanisad, (21) Nada-bindupanisad, (22) Siropanisad, (23)

Atharva-sikhopanisad, (24) Maitrayany-upanisad, (25) Kausitaky-upanisad, (26)

Brhaj-jabalopanisad, (27) Nrsimha-tapaniyopanisad, (28) Kalagni-rudropanisad,

(29) Maitreyi-upanisad, (30) Subalopanisad, (31) Ksurikopanisad, (32)

Mantrikopanisad, (33) Sarva-saropanisad, (34) Niralambopanisad, (35)

Suka-rahasyopanisad, (36) Vajra-sucikopanisad, (37) Tejo-bindupanisad, (38)

Nada-bindupanisad, (39) Dhyana-bindupanisad, (40) Brahma-vidyopanisad, (41)

Yoga-tattvopanisad, (42), Atma-bodhopanisad, (43) Narada-parivrajakopanisad,

(44) Trisikhy-upanisad, (45) Sitopanisad, (46) Yoga-cudamany-upanisad, (47)

Nirvanopanisad, (48) Mandala-brahmanopanisad, (49) Daksina-murty-upanisad, (50)

Sarabhopanisad, (51) Skandopanisad, (52) Mahanarayanopanisad, (53)

Advaya-tarakopanisad, (54) Rama-rahasyopanisad, (55) Rama-tapany-upanisad, (56)

Vasudevopanisad, (57) Mudgalopanisad, (58) Sandilyopanisad, (59)

Paingalopanisad, (60) Bhiksupanisad, (61) Mahad-upanisad, (62) Sarirakopanisad,

(63) Yoga-sikhopanisad, (64) Turiyatitopanisad, (65) Sannyasopanisad, (66)

Paramahamsa-parivrajakopanisad, (67) Malikopanisad, (68) Avyaktopanisad, (69)

Ekaksaropanisad, (70) Purnopanisad, (71) Suryopanisad, (72) Aksy-upanisad, (73)

Adhyatmopanisad, (74) Kundikopanisad, (75) Savitry-upanisad, (76) Atmopanisad,

(77) Pasupatopanisad, (78) Param-brahmopanisad, (79) Avadhutopanisad, (80)

Tripuratapanopanisad, (81) Devy-upanisad, (82) Tripuropanisad, (83)

Katha-rudropanisad, (84) Bhavanopanisad, (85) Hrdayopanisad, (86)

Yoga-kundaliny-upanisad, (87) Bhasmopanisad, (88) Rudraksopanisad, (89)

Ganopanisad, (90) Darsanopanisad, (91) Tara-saropanisad, (92)

Maha-vakyopanisad, (93) Panca-brahmopanisad, (94) Pranagni-hotropanisad, (95)

Gopala-tapany-upanisad, (96) Krsnopanisad, (97) Yajnavalkyopanisad, (98)

Varahopanisad, (99) Satyayany-upanisad, (100) Hayagrivopanisad, (101)

Dattatreyopanisad, (102) Garudopanisad, (103) Kaly-upanisad, (104)

Jabaly-upanisad, (105) Saubhagyopanisad, (106) Sarasvati-rahasyopanisad, (107)

Bahvrcopanisad and (108) Muktikopanisad.

There are 108 accepted Upanisads which are generally accepted, of whicheleven

are the most important, as previously stated. Now let us see howthey allude to

Lord Krishna:Chandogya III.17.6 Almost all scholars have assented that

DevakiputraKrishna is described here as the disciple of Ghora Angirasa. But

thesceptics reject this attribution because the teachers of Krishna

wereGargamuni and Sandipani in the Puranas. But the biggest problem with

thisassumption is that the original text does not say so. It is

Sankaracarya,who in his commentary on the above-mentioned Upanisad, said that

Krishnawas the disciple of Ghora Agirasa. The passage has to be studied in

referenceto its context, which is given below. The Chandogya describes here

man's lifein the form of soma-sacrifice; the natural function: eating,

drinking,procreating and the cardinal virtues are described as the rewards of

thesacrifice. When Ghora Angirasa said (Uktva) this, he also told

(uvaca)Krishna Devakiputra- for he had become free from desire--. "In the

finalhour one should take refuge in these tree thoughts: You are

theIndestructible (asita); Your are the unshaken (acyuta); Your are thevery

essence of life (prana)."The teachings which Krishna heard from Ghora Angirasa,

is more or less thesame which He taught to Arjuna in the Gita [XVI 1-2]. Ghora

too alreadyaddressed Krishna as Acyuta, the infallible. In the Gita we find

this termbeing used thrice, and each time Arjuna addresses Krishna as Acyuta,

[bg.1.2, 11.42. 18.73.] Therefore, the self-evident quality of the

quotedemonstrates the analogy. But there is not any evidence in other texts

ofany Krishna, as the son of Devaki, besides our Krishna Yadava. The same

workhas another mention, 8.13.1: syama cavalam prapadye savalac syama

prapadye.Here, Krishna is mention by his epithet Syama which means blackish,

used inthe puranic literature for the Lord. The Sanskrit word

prapadye-surrender,appears two times, in the same sense as the Gita.The epithet

bhagesam is found in the Svetasvatara 6.6: bhaga-opulence;Isa-Lord. This

Sanskrit word is a synonymous with Bhagavan, a title usedfor Krishna in the

Gita and Puranas.The Mundaka 1.3 reads: kasmin bhagavo vijnate sarvam idam

vijnatambhavati: "When Bhagavan becomes known, then everything knowable becomes

known." Herethe word Bhagavan is clearly used in the same ontological sense that

the Puranas and Gita use for Krishna.In the above quoted list of Upanisads ,

there is the Narayana, which says:atha puruso ha vai narayano 'kamayata prajah

srijeti.- "The PurusaNarayana, desired to create the living being." (1) The

same sruti text (4), says:brahmanyo devakiputra. - "The Brahman absolute is the

son of Devaki(Krishna)." Here the same devakiputra epithet is ascribed to

Krishna as inthe Chandogya and smriti literature. Also the Rig Veda's Purusa

isidentified with Narayana and then with Krishna. The same

ontologicalderivation is found in the Gita and Puranas. Indications of

devakiputraKrishna are in the Vâsudeva upanisad: devaki-nandano 'khilam

anadayat"-"The son of Devaki fills the entire world with delights bliss" The

words areindicatives and the same name of the text considers Krishna the same

asVâsudeva. By a direct reading of these verses, show analogy is drawn

withVâsudeva-Krishna and Devaki's son.The Mahanarayana Upanisad mentions

Vâsudeva Krishna, recognised asVishnu-Narayana: nârayanaya vidmahe vâsudevaya

dhimahi tan no visnu>pracodayatWe meditate on Narayana who is the son of

Vasudeva and on Himwe should contemplate. Because He is Visnu".In the Purusa

bhodini Upanisad: eko devo nitya mukto bhakta vyaoi hrdyantarama "The one

Godhead is eternally engaged in many sports (pastimes) inrelation with His

devotees". But how is this eko devo who performed lilas?The same book explains:

gokulasya manthura-mandale...dve parsve candravaliradhika ca.-"His place is the

land of Gokula in the Mathura mandala. On twosides he has Radha and

Candravali." The quote alludes to the samegeographical area and the gopi

associates of Krishna lila indicated in thepuranic

texts.Gopala-tapany-upanisad, a treatise of Krishnalogy that it's own theme

ofthis work is Krishna in the same way that puranic texts:Sac-cid-anada-rupaya/

krsnayaklista-karine/ namo vedanta-vedyaya/Guravebudhi-saksine: "I offer my

respects unto Krishna, who has a form of bliss,eternity and knowledge.

Understanding Him means understand the end of Vedasand He is the supreme Guru"

(1.1). This Upanisad is part of theAtharva-veda.Another interesting work from

the above list of Upanisads, is theKrsna-upanisad, this krisnaite text is part

of Rig-Veda: Om Krsno vaisac-cidananda-ghana krsna adi-purusah krsna

purussotamah...Kaly-upanisad or Kali-santarana: in this text is record:hare

hare krsna krsna, krsna krsna hara hare, hare rama hare rama, ramarama hare

hare iti sodasakam namnam kali-kalmasa-nasanam natha parataropayah>Sarva-vedesu

drsyate: "These sixteen Words -Mahamantra HareKrishna-Rama-are especially meant

for counteracting the contamination of Kali. To saveoneself from the

contamination of Kali, there is no alternative but thechanting of this

Mahamantra, even after searching through all the Vedas."Hare is the vocative of

Hari, which means "Oh Lord Hari!." another meaningis the vocative of the word

hara, which means Radha, the internal sakti ofHari. However the word is used,

the direct reading of the text indicates arelationship with Krishna because the

epithet Hari is used for Krishna.Therefore the literal translation means, "Oh

Lord Hari -Krishna!" or "Ohthe energy of Lord Krishna!"Brahmanas, Samhitas and

AranyakasThe Maitreniya samhita of Yajur Veda, makes allusions to Krishna in

theNarayana gayatri similar to the Mahanaraniya Upanisad. (There are

otherreferences of the same Narayana gayatri in the Narayana sukta, that it

hasanother verse: rtum satyam param brahma purusa krsna pingalam/

urdhvaretamvirupaksam visuarupaya vaim namo namah: The text has the adjectives

forKrishna satyam-truth; param- supreme; brahma-Absolute;

purusam-Male,personality, used in the same ontological sense as in the

Bhagavata puranaand the Gita. Unfortunately, we do not have an accurate

reference of thisquote on hand.Indications that the Vrisni dynasty is part of

the Yadu clan, to whichKrishna belonged, are found in the Taittiriya Samhita

3.2.93, theTaittiriya Brahmana 3.10.9.15 and the Satapatha Brahmana 3.1.1.4. We

find otherevidences that disclose the identity of Krishna in the srutis, which

referto Radha, the principal gopi girlfriend of Krishna; in the

followingSamhitas: Vasajana 1.4.83, Katha 6.34, Taittiriya 3-10 y Mandhayandina

3.9.Jaiminiya Upanisad-brahmana: we find evidences that indicate names

ofdevotees of Krishna: Krsna Harita - "Captivated by Krishna" (The

teacherKrishna-Harita is also mentioned in the Aitareya Aranyaka, 3.2-6, and

theSankhyayana Aranyaka 8. 10.); Krsna-datta - "Given by or to

Krishna";Krsna-dhrti -" Determined in Krishna"; Krsna-rata Lauhitya -

"Delighting inKrishna, who is dark and reddish" (Lauhitya). And there is

anotherevidence: The epithet of Krsna-dhrti is adjective of Satyaki, the Yadava

hero friendand relative of Krishna. (KLD P: 268). Later, there is another

reference[1.6.1] that indicates the relation with Krishna in which the Vrisni's

andAndhakas, Krishna's family stemming from the Yadava clan, are mentioned inthe

same text.Kausika Brahmana 30.9 also mentions Krishna in relation to the

sageAngirasa, the same sage mentioned in the Chandogya upanisad quoted

before.The Vajasaneyi Samhita, 32.11 and the Satapatha Brahman, 2.1.5,4,

mentionthe appellation of Krishna as Gopala. The hagiographic puranic works

usethis name for Krishna in his boyhood activities in the company of the

Gopasin Vrindavana.The Vedas suktas"Dr. A.L. Bhasam, the doyen of historians,

recently observed in the courseof a lecture that Krishna existed many centuries

prior to Bharata War,because he has found his name occurring in the

Atharva-veda. On being askedby the present writer to substantiate this, he

explained that theAtharva-veda is much early than the Mahabharata where his

exploits aredescribed, and the Chandogya Upanisad, which contains his teaching"

(KHLp.i.)We have already quoted from different brahmanas and Upanisads of

theSama-veda and Yajur-veda. In the context of Atharva-veda (1.3.3) are

foundmentions of Radha with Candravali, the principals Gopis in the

Krishna'shistory: radha visake sahabhanu radha. Other records about Krishna

arefound in the same book, in the section containing Pipalada's questions. It

isdesignated as Caitanya Upanisad by the Gaudiya teachers. In verse (5)

thisreference states: golokakhye dhamni govindo... "Goloka, the home

ofGovinda". In number (7): namo vedanta-vedyadya krsnaya paramatmane - Ioffer

my respectful obeisance unto Krishna, the supersoul, who is understood bythe

study of Vedanta philosophy". There is a explanation of the MahamantraHare

Krishna in (11): sa eva mula mantra japati harir iti krsna iti ramaiti.- "The

mula mantra is murmored, containing the names of Krishna andRama." Its excerpt

also makes a semantic explanation of the Mantra (12):harati hrdaya-granthim

vasana-rupam iti harih krsh samrane tac ca nastad-ubhaya-melanam iti krsnah

ramayati sarvam iti rama ananda-rupa atrasoloko bhavati - The names may be

explained in the following way: harimeans He who unties harati the knot of

material desire in the hearts of theliving entities; Krishna is divided into

two syllables Krs and na. Krsn means hewho attracts the minds of all living

entities. na means the supremetranscendental pleasure. These two syllables

combine to become the nameKrishna; Rama means he who delights -ramayati- all

living entities, and italso means he who is full of transcendental bliss."

In the Rig-veda, we can discover references that indicates that the Bhojas, from

Krishna's clan; were connected with the Angirasa family of priests Rig 3.53.7.

This is appointing why Krishna heard the sage Ghora in the Chandogya and the

Kausika quoted before. The Yamuna region, the playground of Krishna in the

puranic literature, is also mentioned in the Rig-veda: I.22.18, I.154.6, I

anuvak 22. Sukta 164. Rig 31. There are other indicius that suggests: The Rig

I.56, VIII.64.5, Av. Iv.7.8, VI. 12.3 and 17.3, IX.I.18., shows the

Giri-parvata, the favourite hill in Krishna's lila in the Puranas. The epithet

Gopa of Krishna is used for Visnu in the verse VI.7.7: adabdho gopâ amrtasya

raksita. Other reference is I.21.54.6: tam vam vastuny usmi gamadhye yatra gavo

bhuri-srnga atraha tad urugasya vrsna paramam padam. "O both of you. We desire

to attain Your supreme abode full of splendid surabhi cows with beautiful

horns. This spiritual realm is the abode of You Uragaya, who are glorified by

liberated soul and whose lotus feet fulfil all the devotees desires." Jiva

Goswami already give the etymological purport of this verse, tam- from tani

means them; vam yuvayoh-of You two; vastuni -place of lilas; ga-madhye- from;

gatum, to go to; parpatum to attain; usmamsi- we desire; yatra -upon the

surabhi cows (gava); bhuri-srngah- beautiful horns or many. Ayasah; splendid;

atra in he earthly Goloka; Urugasya- the original personality of Godhead",

epithet of Krishna in the Bhagavatam ( 2.3.15), vrsnah- means Of Him whose

lotus feet fulfil all desire, also it is a derive word that come from Vrishni

the family of Krishna. Paramam - beyond of reaches of material energy; padam-

abode, bhuri- many ways; and avabhati-manifested. This verse from the Rig-veda,

is in praise of Vishnu and indicate the relation of Visnu like a Gopa with the

cows, the same topic of Krishna ' lila..

Other mention in the Rig-Veda about Krishna is, VIII. 96-13-15, that explain how

Krishna encamped on the banks of the river Amsumati with the thousand soldiers

and Indra told his friends, the Maruts, to fight against him. Sceptical

thinkers reject the identification with Krishna Yadava, under the assumption

that this verse referred to a demon namely Krishna. But the flaw with this

common idea is that the text never said that. Was the interpreter Sayana from

XIV century A. D., who invented this. But unfortunately, we haven't the

Sanskrit quote. But there are similarities in the name, the fight with Indra,

like passed in the Krishna lila, in the banks of river Amsumanti that suggest

the Yamuna river of the Puranas. The soldiers are anologus to the gopa narayana

mention in the Mahabharata. Therefore some scholars, counter to the common

believe from Sayana, saying:Krishna of the Rig-veda (8.96.13-16), who lived

on the banks of Amsumati (Yâmunâ) and fought against Indra, might have been a

tribal god.." (BG.S p. xv) Other hymns of the Rig-veda (I.116.23 and 117.17)

indicate the existence of Krishna's devotees or his family members, using the

word Krsnîya, that means the genitive case or patronymic used of the word- "of

Krishna or belong to Krishna." There are other quotes, in the Rig-Veda, that

mentions directly to Krisna's name, that taking them under the context analysed

in this paper, demanded serious reconsideration: (VIII.85.3, I.116.23, 8.74.4,

VIII. 85.16, VIII. 36.87).

Krishna and Radharani are described in the following statement of the

Rik-parisista-sruti: Râdhayâ mâdhavo devo, mâdhavena ca râdhikâ, vibhrajante

janesu â: "Radha and the God Mâdhava, are splendid manifest in company of their

associates."

Epistemological flaws and pollutations in the conservative scholarship

Although the objective and liberal modern researchers are more openly to

reviews. There are a class of conservative scholars and men of his stamp,

proudly on their platform of knowledge, it should be pointed out for the

benefit of members of the public not expert —in the sophistry—,

that men like them, whose poses as the guardian of "logic", "reason" and the

"scholarship", are sailing on a sinking ship when they, addle in matters that

lie beyond the poorview of their limited paradigm. In fact, the Indilogy isn't

a unified field. Everyone in this area has his own theory about the history of

Vedic literature. They assume, usually correctly his multiples versions because

the scholar's reputation, for so called probing research and analysis. When

discrepancies become obvious, the scholars usually represent their own views as

the objective picture of Vedic history.

If compared the version of Vedic texts inside themselves, as we already did

that, we often find the two at opposites poles. Nevertheless, scholars have

reconstructed various historical periods, which they theoretically assign to

the thousands of unaccounted years. Pioneer Indilogist Max Mueller devised a

system of classifying the Vedic civilisation into periods called "Chandas,

Mantra, Brahman and Sutra and a number of scholars have concurred. Others have

also given their own divisions as Vedic, Epic, Sutra and Scholastic. Generally,

the high conservative academics base their answers to these questions upon the

historical order in which they believe the Vedic books appeared. Thus, there

has arisen the hypothesis that the Rig-veda appeared before the Upanisads and

the Puranas. As hundreds and thousands of years passed and the people's

attitudes changed, concluded that around 200 B. C. monotheism arose, with

Krishna deification like Visnu. Handbooks on Vedic history differ on specific

dates. Indeed, Morris Winternezt, one of most respect chronologists, argues

that any attempt to reconstruct the Vedic periods is unscientific. He wrote:

"The chronology of the history of Indian literature is shrouded in truly

terrifying darkness"...."But every attempt of such a kind is bound to fail in

the present state of knowledge, and the use of hypothetical dates would only be

a delusion, which do more harm that good". (Cit. for RVL C. III.)

The Dr. Richard L. Thompson, Mathematical researcher write:

"We have discussed the arguments of Pingree, Toomer, and Van der Waerden

(Indologist historians) in detail to show the kind of foundations that underlie

scholarly conclusion about the origins of Indian astronomy. The main

characteristic of these foundations is that they are composed almost entirely

of unsupported assumptions, unbased interpretations, and imaginary

reconstructions. It is unfortunate, however, that after many scholars have

presented arguments of this type in learned treatises, the arguments accumulate

to produce an imposing stratified deposit of apparently indisputable authority.

In this way, supposedly solid facts are established by fossilisation of

fanciful speculations whose original direction was determined by scholarly

prejudice. Ultimately, these facts are presented in elemetary texts and popular

books, and accepted by faith by innocent people." (VCC p. 198)

The Dr. Hridayananda Goswami, Sanskrit PhD from Harvard write too: "...therefore

the occasional practice of commentators to force on it extraneous doctrines

often renders the text obscure where it is bright, esoteric where it is

literal, and impersonal where it is intensely personal...I should note at once

that this principle does nor away with intellectual response to the scriptures.

Rather it is a call for sober practices for understanding, in which we firsts

struggle to comprehend a scriptural message on its own terms, through careful

study of its internal structures of meaning." (K Bg. p21.)

Fallacious examples of evidence rejection

In this part we show some tactic instances of evasion for cloud the evidences

from conservative scholars: A) means my self. B) One conservative scholar.

B) Here I want to comment that my remark (cited above) about thename Krishna as

found in the Chandogya Upanisad are not onlythe view of "the first indologists"

but in his highlyacclaimed translation of the Upanisads from the 1990's also

acceptthat this Krishna is not the Krishna of the epics. After all, so

manypeople by the name Krishna must have lived in India.

.. But we appointed like false concotion, asseverations like this. For instance,

some scholar siad: "In the VI century BC or before, some compilators, felt the

necessity of inserting the Devakiputra Krishna". Here, the question is, ¿how

did he travel to the past for know the literary necessities (inside of the

mind) of unidentified authors that he never observed?— like the farce of

unknown genius author of Gita—. May be, he can give us the secret formula

of past travels to verify his claims. The Mr. Patrick Olivelle holds, it is a

proof of the how even the modern idology is contamined by the influence of the

speculative concepts from firts indologists Attempts have been made to shif the

date earlie the Bhagavata Purana still by refering to Gaudapada's bhasya on the

Uttara Gîta where he mentions the Bhagavatam, and quotes this work form the

verse 10.14.4. But this Gaudapada is supposed to be a later author of the same

name as that of Sankara's grand theacher. On the contrary, it can be argued

that Bhagavatam borrowed words and ideas from the Mandukyas-Karikas of

Guadapada. Plainly speaking, the Bhagavata as of quotationes for works of

Sankara and Gaudapada, has not been conclusively proved, as Bhagavatam can be

said to be borrower from Gaudapada or both might have quoted from different

common source.

A: One of more used sophisms by seudoscience is when you show literary evidences

of Krishna and the Puranic works from srutis and other sources; the so-called

scholars said, "it is doubitive, interpolated" or make other interpretation

like you. Because, besides from the words jugglery the questions arise: What is

the proof of other Guadapada, for observing this? What this proof that

Dvaipayana-vyasa borrowed from the Karikas of Gaudapada??? What is the proof of

one different source existing in these times? I should accept these fanciful

speculations like absolute truths without any evidences? This is an oracle.

Also we can see, that Gaudapada already mentions the Srimad-Bhagavatam in his

works, therefore I can not understand your seudoscientific concoctions.

B: Why is considering that passages may be interpolated pseudo-scholarship?

Madhva, one of the Vaisnava acaryas, says veryclearly in his commentary of the

Mahabharata (the Mahabharata-tatparya-nirnaya) that the verses have been

interpolated into theMahabharata. He says that in some places verses have

beenadded, and at other places verses have been removed. Madhvabelieved the

sacred texts to be really indestructible, but headmitted that they are now

mostly altered.Also, Jiva Gosvamin of the Gaudiya Vaisnava group says in

hisBhagavat-sandarbha that puranas such as the Skanda-purana are"full of

errors."If the Vaisnava acaryas accept that the scriptures are altered and full

of errors, why is it unreasonable that modern indologists also believe this?

A) The big problem with your argument is, that any of the vaisnavas acaryas

reject the quotes that show the Puranas and Krishna's mentions in the vedas.

Therefore, if you want accept his opinions, you can no be arbitrary, and you

should accept all his body of evidence and not only that wich support you

whimsical ideas. Also, let me correct to you,that the acaryas never said that

"all the sastras are full of errors". Jiva Goswami said in the Krishna

sandharba Anuccheda (28. 69): iti siva-sastriyatvac ca natra

vaisnava-siddhanta-viruddhasya tasyopayogah. Yata uktamskanda eva sanmukham

prati sri -sivena. That the Skanda Purana is not like that; but the Sivaites

puranas should be accept only if they are confirmed in the vaisnava puranas.

You are like one indologist, who was so honest in recognising his inability to

arrived to a conclusion on the topic. And later created a trinket hypothesis.

Where He adulteres the age of Ghata jataka and the Puranas for He transfers

them to the Christian era. This has been a bogus thing, because the Ghata

jataka date of the III century B.C., and the Puranas are mentioned in the old

Upanishads like Chandogya 7.1.14, Brhat-Aranyaka 2.4.10 and others archaic

texts.

B) Certainly the words "purana" and "itihasa" are mentioned in the two Upanisads

you mention. But what is meant by these words in these texts? We have to

consider this carefully, for one of the greatest scholars and intellectuals of

India, Sankara, does not accept that the words refer to the texts known as

Puranas and Itihasas. In his commentary on Brhadaranyaka Upanisad 2.4.10.

Sankara says, that "purana" refers to passages such as Taittiriya Upanisad 2.7,

and "itihasa" to stories such as the dialogue between Urvasi and Pururavas in

the Satapatha Brahmana. This is also accepted by the Mimamsaka School.

A: However, a close observation proof, that your argument is simply a fanciful

interpretation from Sankara and mimansa school, and not in line with the spirit

of the Upanisads verses themselves. At respect, others of the most serius

authoritys in this matter, Dr. Thomas Hopkings, recognized that such hostility

upon the evidence of the puranic literature in the srutis are: "such objections

are mere pedantry..." (RVL p. ix.) And other expert in the Vedic text, Dr.

Michael Witzel from Harvard openly said: "Still, there is some evidence that

there may be ample reason for calling these things (Puranas) "the fifth Veda".

(V p.23) This is probed by a direct reading in the text. Because, if you know

the more elementary literary preceptive, you can observe that the words are

used in numeration statement, and the other sustantives, like Rig, Yajur,

Atharva and Sama, are sacred books, and the same categorical status is given to

the Puranas and Itihasas. You can read the same fact, with open eyes, in other

sources, like Atharva veda XI.7.24, Saptapatha Brahman XI. 5,6,8, etc.

Therefore, even the late scholar Rapson admits that, the Puranas have preserved

an independient tradition, which supplements the prestly tradition of the Vedas

and Brahmanas and which goes back to the same period. (CHI, I.902) So, on the

face of such an elaborated record, it is absurd to build up hypotheses on basis

of vague suspicions and unbridled imaginations.

B: In the Ujjvala-nilamani by Rupa Gosvamin there is a reference to a passage in

an appendix of the Rgveda (Rk-parisista) where the name Radha is mentioned in

connection with the name Madhava (considered a name of Krsna). The passage

where Rupa Gosvamin mentions this is Ujjavala-nilamani 4.4. However, Rupa

Gosvamin seems to ignore the context in which this passage occurs in the

Rk-parisista. This context dictates that Radha is theconstellation Visakha, and

Madhava is the month in spring (now known as Vaisakh) that coincides with that

constellation.

A: The Big problem with this argument is the fault of historical observation.

For example, in the other cultures, the constellation of Taurus is namely

because the bull existed before on earth and the men assigned this name to the

constellation. Other instance is the month of July or August; this months are

called by the influences of Romanic Kings figures. The Egyptians conceive a

cocodrile in a constellations and the Milk Way they called the celestial Nilo

river, and we can observer that there are many alligators in the river Nilo.

Therefore, the names Radha and Madhava might be also the names of a month in

spring and the constellation of Visakha, however, these objects have been named

after the personalities of Radha-Madhava, and not viceversa. After all, Vishakha

is an intimate friend of Radha in the spiritual realm of Goloka.

Bibliography

Bentley, John, 1825, Historical View of the Hindu Astronomy, Osnabruck; Biblio

Verlang, etd 1970.

(RVL) Goswami, Sartsvarupa, dasa. Reading in the Vedic literature. The tradition

speak by itself. Bhaktivedanta Books Truths , 1977.

(K Bg.) Goswami Hridayananda Ph. D. Krishna in the Bhagavad-Gîta, Starling an

Exploration in the meanings. Conference in the UCLA. Editade in the BTG. (Part

I, BTG, IX-X p.21, y Part III, BTG, I-II, pp.32).

(HK) Gelberg, Steven J. ed., Hare Krishna Hare Krishna. FIVE DISTINGUE SCHOLARS

ON KRISHNA MOVEMENT, Groves Prees, N.Y.1983.

(V) Rosen, Steven, Vaisnavism, Cotemporary Scholars Discuss the Gaudiya

Tradition N. Y. Folks Books, 1992.

(VCC) Thompson, Richard L. Ph D, VEDIC COSMOGRAPHY AND ASTRONOMY, The

Bhaktivedanta Book Trust. 1991.

(KHL) Majumdar, Bimanbehari. KRISHNA IN HISTORY AND LEGEND. University of Calcuta 1969.