The Four Vedas And Their Sub Divisions

[galaxy18]

http://www.leagueofdevotees.blogspot.com/

 

The Veda is divided into four great books:

The Rig-Veda

The Yajur-Veda

The Sama-Veda

The Atharva-Veda

The Yajur-Veda is again divided into two parts:

The Sukla Yajur-Veda

The Krishna Yajur-Veda.

The Krishna or the Tattiriya is the older book and the Sukla or Vajasaneya is a later revelation to Sage Yajnavalkya from the resplendent Sun-God.

The Rig-Veda is divided into twenty-one sections, the Yajur-Veda into one hundred and nine sections, the Sama-Veda into one thousand sections and Atharva-Veda into fifty sections. In all, the whole Veda is thus divided into one thousand one hundred and eighty recensions.

Each Veda consists of four parts:

The Mantra-Samhitas or hymns.

The Brahmanas or explanations of Mantras or rituals.

The Aranyakas (philosophical interpretations of the rituals).

The Upanishads (The essence or the knowledge portion of the Vedas).

The division of the Vedas into four parts is to suit the four stages in a man’s life.

The Mantra-Samhitas are hymns in praise of the Vedic God for attaining material prosperity here and happiness hereafter. They are metrical poems comprising prayers, hymns and incantations addressed to various deities, both subjective and objective. The Mantra portion of the Vedas is useful for the Brahmacharins (celibate; one who belongs to the first of the four Asramas or orders of life; one who lives in purity and studies the Veda; the first 25 years of life).

The Brahmana portions guide people to perform sacrificial rites. They are prose explanations of the method of using the Mantras in the Yajna or the sacrifice. The Brahmana portion is suitable for the householder (Grihastha; one who belongs to the second of the four Asramas or orders of life; from 25 to 50 years of age).

The Aranyakas are the forest books, the mystical sylvan texts which give philosophical interpretations of the Rituals. The Aranyakas are intended for the Vanaprasthas or hermits who prepare themselves for taking Sannyasa. (Vanaprastha = one who leads the third stage of life; from 50 to 75 years of age).

The Upanishads are the most important portion of the Vedas. The Upanishads contain the essence or the knowledge portion of the Vedas. The philosophy of the Upanishads is sublime, profound, lofty an soul-stirring. The Upanishads speak of the identity of the individual soul and the Supreme Soul. They reveal the most subtle and deep spiritual truths. The Upanishads are useful for the Sannyasins. (Sannyasi or Sannyasin = a monk; one who has embraced the life of complete renunciation ; one belonging to the fourth or the highest stage of life; from 75 to 100 years of age).

[Note: Although the division of the Vedas into four parts is to suit the four stages in a man’s life, the study of the four Vedas is done by Brahmacharins or celibate students and the knowledge thus acquired serves as the basis of the goal of life through all the four stages of life. The studies of the Vedas continue throughout one’s life. (Refer also to Dharma, Artha, Kama & Moksha). Thus the knowledge of the Upanishads is not to be confined to the last stage of life. The mind of the Sannyasin is intensely focussed upon the teachings of the Upanishads.]

The subject matter of the whole Veda is divided into

Karma-Kanda

Upasana-Kanda

Jnana-Kanda.

The Karma-Kanda or Ritualistic Section deals with various sacrifices and rituals.

The Upasana-Kanda or Worship-Section deals with various kinds of worship or meditation.

The Jana-Kanda or Knowledge-Section deals with the highest knowledge of Nirguna Brahman. (Nirguna = without attributes or forms. Brahman = the Supreme Reality).

The Mantras and the Brahmanas constitute Karma-Kanda (rituals).

The Aranyakas constitute Upasana-Kanda (worship).

The Upanishads constitute Jnana-Kanda (knowledge).

 

http://www.leagueofdevotees.blogspot.com/

[hindustani]

Nice post which brings some real knowledge on Vedas thank you.

[Matt]

I was disturbed to see that there is a section of the Yajurveda which is called the "Purushamedha". Purushamedha translates literally to "human sacrifice". The Purushamedha relates to another sacrifice also described in the Yajurveda called the Ashvamedha, or "horse sacrifice". According to one source I've read, the purpose of the Ashvamedha sacrifice "was the acquisition of power and glory, the sovereignty over neighbouring provinces, and general prosperity of the kingdom". According to a source I've read:

 

"The bestiality and necrophilia involved in the ritual disgusted the Dalit reformer and framer of the Indian constitution, B. R. Ambedkar and is frequently mentioned in his writings as an example of the perceived degradation of Brahmanical culture. This part of the ritual also caused considerable consternation among the scholars first editing the Yajurveda.

Griffith (1899) omits verses 23.20–31 (the ritual obscenities)

, protesting that they are "not reproducible even in the semi-obscurity of a learned European language" (alluding to other instances where he renders explicit scenes in Latin rather than English)."

 

I find this to be quite disturbing. Can anyone confirm this information or refute it?

[chandu_69]

Ref# 3

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purushamedha

 

The ritual in many aspects resembles that of the Ashvamedha (horse sacrifice), with, according to Griffith (1899)

 

 

man, the noblest victim, being actually or symbolically sacrificed instead of the Horse, and men and women of various tribes, figures, complexions, characters, and professions being attached to the sacrificial stakes in place of the tame and wild animals enumerated in Book XXIV [VS 24].

These nominal victims were afterwards released uninjured, and, so far as the text of the White Yajurveda goes, the whole ceremony was merely emblematical

.

 

The ceremony evokes the mythical sacrifice of Purusha, the "Cosmic Man", and the officiating Brahman recites the Purusha sukta (RV 10.90 = AVS 5.19.6 = VS 31.1–16).

 

 

Regarding the missing verses i am getting the original in sanskrit and will post once they are available.

[Kali_Upasaka]

Aswamedha was a well known sacrifice. Your quotes are regarding the Aswamedha. It is mentioned in the Wikipedia article under Criticism, controversy and propaganda.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashvamedha

 

I have the original translation. I will check it. I will have to see whether if the verses have been omitted.

 

This is the first post of the member after a period of 4 years. I am not convinced of the genuineness of the query. So no more coments from me regarding this.

[Matt]

To chandu_69,

 

Thank you for the information. If you can find the additional quotes, please post.

[Matt]

 

This is the first post of the member after a period of 4 years. I am not convinced of the genuineness of the query. So no more coments from me regarding this.

 

The reason I post this question is due to a communist/atheist I know of who accused the Vedas of human sacrifice. As an attempt to refute his charge, I searched for and posted two of Srila Prabhupada's purports from Srimad Bhagavatam as follows:

 

 

"The tamasic sastras give instructions for the sacrifice of an animal like a goat or buffalo before the goddess Kali, but there is no mention of killing a man, however dull he may be. Even at this time there are many sacrifices being conducted without reference to the Vedic scriptures. For instance, in Calcutta recently a slaughterhouse was being advertised as a temple of the goddess Kali. Meat-eaters foolishly purchase meat from such shops, thinking it different from ordinary meat and taking it to be the prasada of goddess Kali. The sacrifice of a goat or a similar animal before the goddess Kali is mentioned in sastras just to keep people from eating slaughterhouse meat and becoming responsible for the killing of animals. The conditioned soul has a natural tendency toward sex and meat-eating; consequently the sastras grant them some concessions. Actually the sastras aim at putting an end to these abominable activities, but they impart some regulative principles so that gradually meat-eaters and sex hunters will be rectified." - Srimad Bhagavatam 5.9.15 (purport)

 

 

 

"According to the Vedic injunctions, only an aggressor can be killed...killing is not sanctioned in the sastras for other purposes. The killing of animals in sacrifice to the demigods, who are expansions of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, is sanctioned for those who eat meat. This is a kind of restriction for meat-eating. In other words, the slaughter of animals is also restricted by certain rules and regulations in the Vedas... Only thieves and rogues in the modes of passion and ignorance and maddened by material opulence offer a man in sacrifice before the goddess Kali. This is not sanctioned by the Vedic instructions." - Srimad Bhagavatam 5.9.17 (purport)

 

The statements above appeared to me to refute any claims of human sacrifice being endorsed in the Vedic literature. But then I searched further and found these quotes:

 

 

SB 9.7.20: Thereafter, in the sixth year, after wandering in the forest, Rohita returned to the capital of his father. He purchased from Ajigarta his second son, named Sunahsepha. Then he offered Sunahsepha to his father, Hariscandra, to be used as the sacrificial animal and offered Hariscandra his respectful obeisances.

 

SB 9.7.21: Thereafter, the famous King Hariscandra, one of the exalted persons in history, performed grand sacrifices by sacrificing a man and pleased all the demigods. In this way his dropsy created by Varuna was cured.

 

SB 9.7.22: In that great human sacrifice, Visvamitra was the chief priest to offer oblations, the perfectly self-realized Jamadagni had the responsibility for chanting the mantras from the Yajur Veda, Vasishtha was the chief brahminical priest, and the sage Ayasya was the reciter of the hymns of the Sama Veda.

 

SB 9.7.23: King Indra, being very pleased with Hariscandra, offered him a gift of a golden chariot.

 

 

Srimad Bhagavatam 9.16.31: Sunahsepha's father sold Sunahsepha to be sacrificed as a man-animal in the yajna of King Hariscandra. When Sunahsepha was brought into the sacrificial arena, he prayed to the demigods for release and was released by their mercy.

 

Purport: When Hariscandra was to sacrifice his son Rohita, Rohita arranged to save his own life by purchasing Sunahsepha from Sunahsepha's father to be sacrificed in the yajna. Sunahsepha was sold to Maharaja Hariscandra because he was the middle son, between the oldest and the youngest. It appears that the sacrifice of a man as an animal in yajna has been practiced for a very long time.

 

These quotes appear to countenance some human sacrifice, so now I am concerned about how to reply to that.

[theist]

galaxy108 also has a nice blog linked in his post #1.

[theist]

 

These quotes appear to countenance some human sacrifice, so now I am concerned about how to reply to that.

 

The person you are debating is correct. The Bhagavatam is relating a story and not recommending human sacrifice as I read it.

 

I admit it happened in those times and I find it abhorent. I also find animal sacrifice horrible and disgusting and I care not if it is taught in the veda's or not.

 

Just admit the truth of it to your friend and admit that many horrible things have been done in the name of religion.

 

It has no place in Krishna consciousness. Perhaps just present basic God consciousness to your friend. The best and atheist may admit is that there might be some Intelligence behind the universe.

 

Going beyond we are not the body and intelligent Design with such people is a total waste of time.

[bhaktajan]

 

These quotes appear to countenance some human sacrifice, so now I am concerned about how to reply to that.

 

This is such cultural bias ---Our "Ancient Lores of Antiquity" is better than your "Ancient Lores of Antiquity".

 

Oh, The Vedas ---are not about Trans-Alaskan-to-Mexico-to-Peru-type Shaman or Trans-Polynesian-Austrialian-Pan-African-Soothsayers or Trans-Siberia-Sino-Turk-Ural-Romanian-Druid-type conjurers . . . we're talking about mystic yogis of the Emperor Dynasties that ruled the Known-worlds in the antiquity of many milleniums past, in epochs long lost to the collect memory of all cultures and especially frontier neatherlands.

 

(According to my records --per Bhagavata-purana) This Hariscandra was a descendant of the Surya-Dynasty and lived during the last Satya-Yuga 4 Million (4,000,000) years ago.

 

The Vedas purport to expond the awesome & legendary lives of Proto-Warrior-Sage lost Empires and the secrets of "how they did it".

 

The famous Alexandria-Library may have had ancient technologies that were lost for milleniums ---but the Vedas do not hide the "amazing" pastimes of Sages, Mystics & "kung-fu-esque" warrior-sage Ministers-of-State that impress any reader beyond any other surviving Writ of Aniquity that just so happens to have been perserved by none-other-than Brahmanas par excellence.

 

The purpose of those exquisite sublime "Brahmins' sacrifices" ---were performed by extraordinary Mystic Humans of the Golden age ---all explicitly designed to exhibit Brahminical Prowess ---and bring the man back to life with in sight of all present. Also, as usual with stories from the puranas ---the persons & palces & times were prompted by goals that are beyond are preview

---and many times requires scholarly research among other "related-by-six-degrees-of seperation" family-of-Purana volumes.

 

We are not talking about Russia's Stalin marching his Army & Missiles past the Kremlin, but rather, the Vedas are talking about events involving Grand ascended Masters of a Stratum that is sure to impress the onlooker from any nation, along with a ethos that set the standards of What is what & Who's Who among the Sage-Kings and their Sage councilors.

 

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

Or, on the other side of the same coin . . .

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

 

No responsible & respectible & sane Government Head would allow a Public or Privately Owned AirLine Transportation Corporation to gamble on the chance to operate their Passenger [and Frieght too] AirPlanes WITHOUT THE PROPER COVERAGE OF INSURANCE ---so that, in the event of a total lose . . . "Not to worry man" . . . a New Plane can promptly replace the lost ones . . . and then every one else can return back to work-as-usual. With New & Improved Models de jour into the Bargin.

[Kali_Upasaka]

 

These quotes appear to countenance some human sacrifice, so now I am concerned about how to reply to that.

Having lived in the midst of communists most of my life, I am aware of this criticism. Even if you answer this the next question would be about Human sacrifice in the Puranas.

 

How does it concern the modern day Hindus? What happened thousands of years back need not be justified now. Books have been written about Human sacrifice and Judaism. Does the modern Jew bother about that?

 

Accept it as things which happened thousands of years back when society and social norms were different.

 

Even about some present practices, my answer is that I do not believe in such practices. My sampradhaya does not accept such practices.

 

theist is correct in his response.

[sambya]

just pont out the idiocies in your communist friend's philosophy . we have a proverb - "phalena parichiyate" - a tree is know by what fruit it bears . his dearly held communism has perished in its very land of birth and has failed miserably world wide . whereas this hinduism , even with so many burdens and continued attacks is still shining bright without the slightest sign of deterioration .

 

all according to lords will !!

[sant]

 

admit it happened in those times and I find it abhorent. I also find animal sacrifice horrible and disgusting and I care not if it is taught in the veda's or not

HUman sacrifice happened.?.Whos the translator of the verses.

I read that madhwacharya criticised and didnt accept the ashwamedha yagya process shown in the veda.Does the ramayan mention the horrid nature of rams ashwamedha yagya.

[Sephiroth]

Wikipedia is not a reliable source of information. Please do remember that when reading anything related to Hindusm.

 

Thank you.

[sant]

 

Wikipedia is not a reliable source of information. Please do remember that when reading anything related to Hindusm.

 

Thank you.

 

ITs quite good sephiroth.

[theist]

 

HUman sacrifice happened.?.Whos the translator of the verses.

I read that madhwacharya criticised and didnt accept the ashwamedha yagya process shown in the veda.Does the ramayan mention the horrid nature of rams ashwamedha yagya.

 

This is nice to hear.

[theist]

As far as I can see the only true sacrifice that pleases God is the free will sacrifice where one offers himself and his life possessions in the loving service of Krishna and others.

 

Capturing some helpless animal or so-called man/animal and sacrificing them is just incredibly barbaric.

[raghu]

 

As far as I can see the only true sacrifice that pleases God is the free will sacrifice where one offers himself and his life possessions in the loving service of Krishna and others.

 

Capturing some helpless animal or so-called man/animal and sacrificing them is just incredibly barbaric.

 

I guess this means that some great devotees of the Lord were "barbaric," as per Theist.

 

http://vedabase.net/sb/9/4/22/en1

In desert countries where there flowed the River Sarasvati, Maharaja Ambarisha performed great sacrifices like the asvamedha-yajna and thus satisfied the master of all yajnas, the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Such sacrifices were performed with great opulence and suitable paraphernalia and with contributions of dakshina to the brahmanas, who were supervised by great personalities like Vasishtha, Asita and Gautama, representing the king, the performer of the sacrifices.

 

http://vedabase.net/sb/1/8/6/en2 Lord Sri Krsna caused three well-performed Asvamedha-yajnas [horse sacrifices] to be conducted by Maharaja Yudhisthira and thus caused his virtuous fame to be glorified in all directions, like that of Indra, who had performed one hundred such sacrifices.

 

http://vedabase.net/sb/8/18/20/en1 When the Lord heard that Bali Maharaja was performing asvamedha sacrifices under the patronage of brahmanas belonging to the Bhrigu dynasty, the Supreme Lord, who is full in every respect, proceeded there to show His mercy to Bali Maharaja. By His weight, He pushed down the earth with every step.

 

So let me see if I got this straight, Bali Maharaja is a barbarian. Yudhishthira Maharaja was a barbarian. King Ambarisha was a barbarian. And Lord Sri Krishna is a barbarian. All according to the statement of Theist as quoted above.

 

Did I miss anyone?

[raghu]

 

Having lived in the midst of communists most of my life, I am aware of this criticism. Even if you answer this the next question would be about Human sacrifice in the Puranas.

 

Quite true.

 

 

How does it concern the modern day Hindus?

 

 

Because it concerns the Vedas, which are the basis of traditional Hinduism, it is certainly quite relevant to Hinduism. Of course, Neo-Hindus take an "evolutionary" approach to religion and will not care if sinful and grotesque accusations are made about our ancestral beliefs, even when they are not true.

 

 

Books have been written about Human sacrifice and Judaism. Does the modern Jew bother about that?

 

In fact, among scholarly circles, the sacrifice of Isaac by Abraham does present ethical problems to Jews who have to grapple with the idea that their God comes across as whimsical and cruel. They cannot simply dismiss such descriptions as irrelevant because no amount of time will change the fact that this is described in their scripture, which is their authority. Similarly, for traditional Hindus, Vedas are the authority, and they cannot simply ignore whatever seems undesireable because that would be tantamount to rejecting the authority of the Vedas. Again, Neo-Hindus only give lip service to the authority of the Vedas, so such a point is probably lost on them.

[sant]

 

In fact, among scholarly circles, the sacrifice of Isaac by Abraham does present ethical problems to Jews who have to grapple with the idea that their God comes across as whimsical and cruel. They cannot simply dismiss such descriptions as irrelevant because no amount of time will change the fact that this is described in their scripture, which is their authority. Similarly, for traditional Hindus, Vedas are the authority, and they cannot simply ignore whatever seems undesireable because that would be tantamount to rejecting the authority of the Vedas. Again, Neo-Hindus only give lip service to the authority of the Vedas, so such a point is probably lost on them.

 

Would you be ready to sacrifice yourself raghu for purushamedha?If no then you stop deciding who does lip service and who doesnt.

What abraham did was out of devotion and not as a ritual.

You cant call it the same.

[kaisersose]

 

I read that madhwacharya criticised and didnt accept the ashwamedha yagya process shown in the veda.Does the ramayan mention the horrid nature of rams ashwamedha yagya.

 

Where did you read that?

 

I am not aware of him criticizing any material from any Veda. Rather, the common position among all Vedanta schools (yes, the poisonous Mayavadins too), is animal sacrifice is not necessary nor aplicable in Kali-Yuga. Accordingly, they pushed to replace live animals with flour animals.

 

This is fully different from criticizing Yajnas that happened before Kali-yuga.

 

Cheers

[sant]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashvamedha

[raghu]

 

Would you be ready to sacrifice yourself raghu for purushamedha?If no then you stop deciding who does lip service and who doesnt.

 

The Purushamedha did not involve actual slaughter of humans. Chandu already quoted an explanation describing the symbolic nature of it as a reenactment of the sacrifice of the original Purusha as described in the Rig Veda.

 

 

What abraham did was out of devotion and not as a ritual.

 

 

What difference does it make? He was ready to kill his own son. What sort of God demands that you kill your own son?

 

I don't really know what your point is, other than perhaps this desperate need you have to disagree with me at all times over everything, even when such disagreements find you endorsing ludicrous ideas just to argue.

 

 

You cant call it the same.

 

I didn't. I said that it presented problems to Jews just as purusha medha could present problems to Hindus. In both cases explanation is required - not simply sweeping it under the proverbial rug as Kali would have us do.

 

I wish you would work on improving your reading comprehension abilities. Much of the noise on this forum would decrease if you could resist the urge to post knee-jerk responses based on persistent misunderstanding of what others write.

[kaisersose]

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashvamedha

 

?

 

Did you read it closely? The Charvakas criticized the Ashwamedha, which was recorded by Madhva in his work. It does not say, he criticized the Yajna.

 

Cheers

[raghu]

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashvamedha

 

There is nothing in this article about Madhvacharya criticizing the Ashvamedha.