Vedic Deities

[ajay0]

Same what goes?

Same goes for the information regarding Arya in the internet. There are a number of threads in the religious forums itself discussing the topic.

Here is what Wikipedia states on 'Arya'....

In Sanskrit and related Indo-Aryan languages, ārya means "one who does noble deeds; a noble one".


Sanskrit epics

Arya and Anarya are primarily used in the moral sense in the Hindu Epics. People are usually called Arya or Anarya based on their behaviour. Arya is typically one who follows the Dharma.[citation needed] This is historically applicable for any person living anywhere in Bharata Varsha or vast India.[citation needed] According to the Mahabharata, a person's behaviour (not wealth or learning) determines if he can be called an Arya.[67][68]
Religious use
The word ārya is often found in Hindu, Buddhist, and Jain texts. In the Indian spiritual context, it can be applied to Rishis or to someone who has mastered the four noble truths and entered upon the spiritual path. According to Nehru, the religions of India may be called collectively ārya dharma, a term that includes the religions that originated in India (e.g. Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism and possibly Sikhism).


"O my Lord, a person who is chanting Your holy name, although born of a low family like that of a Chandala, is situated on the highest platform of self-realization. Such a person must have performed all kinds of penances and sacrifices according to Vedic literatures many, many times after taking bath in all the holy places of pilgrimage. Such a person is considered to be the best of the Arya family" (Bhagavata Purana 3.33.7).

"My dear Lord, one's occupational duty is instructed in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam and Bhagavad-gītā according to Your point of view, which never deviates from the highest goal of life. Those who follow their occupational duties under Your supervision, being equal to all living entities, moving and nonmoving, and not considering high and low, are called Āryans. Such Āryans worship You, the Supreme Personality of Godhead." (Bhagavata Purana 6.16.43).

According to Swami Vivekananda, "A child materially born is not an Arya; the child born in spirituality is an Arya." He further elaborated, referring to the Manu Smriti: "Says our great law-giver, Manu, giving the definition of an Arya, 'He is the Arya, who is born through prayer.' Every child not born through prayer is illegitimate, according to the great law-giver: The child must be prayed for. Those children that come with curses, that slip into the world, just in a moment of inadvertence, because that could not be prevented – what can we expect of such progeny?..."(Swami Vivekananda, Complete Works vol.8)

' Arya is not a race; Arya means a noble-minded person. The word Arya is often confused with a race. In the beginning, western historians propounded this theory of the Aryan race. That developed into Hitler's Aryan superiority. And when Hitler died, the Aryan race theory also died ! But the word Arya is used in sanskrit always for the noble-minded person. Take any sanskrit drama. The person will address another character as 'My dear Arya,noble-minded person'. And Buddha spoke of his teachings as Arya-satyani, Noble Truths. Noble is the word for Arya there. The four Noble truths, Arya Satyani. So, the word Arya was used by Buddha, as also by earlier Vedic literature. And this word, Arya is, therefore, a very great word in Sanskrit. Be an Aryan means, be noble-minded. Don't be petty, don't be small. 'Swami Ranganathananda, commentary of the Bhagavad gita ( Volume 1,Chapter 2.88)

What is the significance of the name, “Arya”?The question has been put from more than one point of view. To most European readers the name figuring on our cover is likely to be a hieroglyph which attracts or repels according to the temperament. Indians know the word, but it has lost for them the significance which it bore to their forefathers. Western Philology has converted it into a racial term, an unknown ethnological quantity on which different speculations fix different values. Now, even among the philologists, some are beginning to recognise that the word in its original use expressed not a difference of race, but a difference of culture. For in the Veda the Aryan peoples are those who had accepted a particular type of self-culture, of inward and outward practice, of ideality, of aspiration. The Aryan gods were the supraphysical powers who assisted the mortal in his struggle towards the nature of the godhead. All the highest aspirations of the early human race, its noblest religious temper, its most idealistic velleities of thought are summed up in this single vocable.- Aurobindo

Sri Aurobindo. "Arya" - Its Significance // Essays in Philosophy and Yoga: Shorter Works. - 1910-1950. (BCL-16, CW-13)

New Deities

Western Translations

 

[Srivijaya]

Definitely not the scandinavians who are of recent origin.

They are no more or less 'recent' than anyone else. Scandinavia was inhabited during the Neolithic (stone age). Around 11,400 BCE tribes were moving north following the glacial retreat. There was time enough for northern Europeans to shed melanin in order to avoid vitamin D deficiency, and develop tolerance to lactose in order to supplement their diet with milk. Evolution can't achieve that in a few centuries.

It is not known what language these early Scandinavians spoke, but towards the end of the 3rd millennium BCE, they were overrun by new tribes who many scholars think spoke Proto-Indo-European (or more exactly, the "Pre-Germanic Indo-European" dialect), the Battle-Axe culture. This new people advanced up to Uppland and the Oslofjord, and they probably provided the language that was the ancestor of the modern Scandinavian languages. These new tribes were individualistic and clearly patriarchal with the battle axe as a status symbol. They were cattle herders and with them most of southern Scandinavia entered the Neolithic. Ultimately, the Bronze Age would usher in a time of cultural advance in Scandinavia.

Nordic Stone Age - Wikipedia

 

[Marcion]

Anyway, whether one likes the idea that all the Aryans came from outside of India in the distant and less distant past or not, it was them who brought the Vedic deities and Vedic types of worship with them.
No doubt it is now a part of Hinduism but they were not invented in India. The Tantric side of Hinduism however is indigenous and much older than the time the first Aryans arrived.

As a race the Aryans no longer exist in India because as a minority they eventually intermingled with the more original Indians. And much of their culture has also disappeared because the Indian culture was superior.

But myths around their superiority complex (they imagined themselves as somehow nobler) still exist for all to read and the Brahmin class still believe the religious myth that they are the head of society and the shudra's are the feet and the inferior part of society.

 

[ajay0]

They are no more or less 'recent' than anyone else. Scandinavia was inhabited during the Neolithic (stone age). Around 11,400 BCE tribes were moving north following the glacial retreat.

I meant that they are not considered an ancient civilization like the Egyptian, Chinese, Jewish and Indian.

There was time enough for northern Europeans to shed melanin in order to avoid vitamin D deficiency, and develop tolerance to lactose in order to supplement their diet with milk. Evolution can't achieve that in a few centuries.

True,the adverse and harsh climatic conditions in europe may have played a part in the evolution of the european people there from the historical african, as is now stated by modern biology.

The albinos were perhaps better adaptive to the climate, evolved better than the others, and survived the harshness of the region in larger numbers.

I have met albinos in both north and south India. The south Indians with blond hair and blue eyes descended straight from dark-skinned Indians, had a low tolerance of sunlight for some reason.

 

[ajay0]

Anyway, whether one likes the idea that all the Aryans came from outside of India in the distant and less distant past or not, it was them who brought the Vedic deities and Vedic types of worship with them.

Then how come vedic deities are not worshipped with vedic chants elsewhere else in the world, especially in eurasia.

I understand that you are a follower of Prabhat Ranjan Sarkar (21 May 1921 – 21 October 1990),and I am a fan of his teachings as well with respect to meditation. But he is primarily a theologian and not a historian. He lived in the twentieth century where the AIT theories were in vogue and based his historical doctrine on them to complement his ideology. The AMT theory, which is at vogue at present in the west, came later on which itself shows revision being done with updated knowledge.

If Sarkar had lived longer and in today's times , he would have no doubt revised his stance on the AIT. The sattelite imagery of the Saraswati river and route along the IVC centers, along with corresponding geological findings, coupled with the discovery of horse remains and the Swastika in the excavated Harrapan cities in recent times, have all rendered the AIT and AMT theories untenable and lacking credibility at present.

No doubt it is now a part of Hinduism but they were not invented in India.

The 33 crore gods and goddesses were all part of the Hindu pantheon. All of them are seen interacting in Indian conditions and surroundings as seen in the scriptures. They were not however all worshipped in temples due to the huge logistics involved and only a few of the important ones were worshipped then and now besides the Shivalingam.

 

[Marcion]

Then how come vedic deities are not worshipped with vedic chants elsewhere else in the world, especially in eurasia.

I understand that you are a follower of Prabhat Ranjan Sarkar (21 May 1921 – 21 October 1990),and I am a fan of his teachings as well with respect to meditation. But he is primarily a theologian and not a historian. He lived in the twentieth century where the AIT theories were in vogue and based his historical doctrine on them to complement his ideology. The AMT theory, which is at vogue at present in the west, came later on which itself shows revision being done with updated knowledge.

If Sarkar had lived longer and in today's times , he would have no doubt revised his stance on the AIT. The sattelite imagery of the Saraswati river and route along the IVC centers, along with corresponding geological findings, coupled with the discovery of horse remains and the Swastika in the excavated Harrapan cities in recent times, have all rendered the AIT and AMT theories untenable and lacking credibility at present.

P.R. Sarkar was not a theologian but a philosopher and spiritual preceptor (and of course the founder of AMPS).
His writings, though profoundly spiritual, are always rational, never irrational.
E.g. Sarkar speaks of the origins of modern humans from the Australopithecines and does not approve of irrational religious (mythical) ideas about 'yuga's'. He also has a rational historical approach to Tantric Gurus and a rational explanation of the origins of Hindu mythology and the Hindu pantheon of gods.

It is therefore perfectly natural for Sarkar to not follow any irrational ideas denying the influx of different human races into India in pre-historic times as proven through genetics.
Such denials are coming from fundamentalist religious people. Sarkar however never takes a religious irrational religious perspective but always sees humanity as one and indivisable. He will never take sides for or against human expressions of culture or races but he will also not back down from pointing out injustices perpetrated from certain sides.
As a follower of him, I do not believe Sarkar is speaking from book knowledge, he is not an academic (he did not get the chance to receive higher education).

The 33 crore gods and goddesses were all part of the Hindu pantheon. All of them are seen interacting in Indian conditions and surroundings as seen in the scriptures. They were not however all worshipped in temples due to the huge logistics involved and only a few of the important ones were worshipped then and now besides the Shivalingam.

The gods that are mentioned in the oldest Veda's were first worshipped outside of India and were in fact "imported" into India as was indeed the whole Rg Veda (initially only through memorization as it was forbidden to write it down).
Sarkar has also spoken about the Saraswati river, I would need to look that up for details.
So according to Sarkar the original Vedic religion (and language) came from outside of India but the Tantric approach to spiritiuality was largely indigenous.
Sanskrit however was already spoken in India before the entry of the Aryans and because of the spiritual (and cultural) superiority of the indigenous Indians, Sanskrit became the preferred spiritual language (as it had been adjusted to match with the effects of the root sounds).

I don't know how the Vedic religion disappeared from the areas where the Aryans originated. Perhaps they were converted to other religions? Sarkar speaks of the last group of Aryans to have been accepted in India as recognized brahmins to have entered India as recent as around a thousands years ago (sun worshipping Aryans).

There are some things in Ananda Marga that date from the pre-Indian Vedic days, such as the singing of the Sam Gaccadvam (Let Us Move Together etc.) mantra before group meditations.

I would not pay too much attention to hysterical sites that want to combat the idea of an out of India origin of the Rg Veda and the Vedic religion. They are a similar type of folk as Christians who deny evolution and the scientifically proven age of our planet (also with the same type of hate of other cultures and religions).

 

[Srivijaya]

I meant that they are not considered an ancient civilization like the Egyptian, Chinese, Jewish and Indian.

True. There are some odd parallels between Norse mythology and Tantra, which may link back to shamanism. A human body, is a human body after all and has internal energy etc.

I have met albinos in both north and south India. The south Indians with blond hair and blue eyes descended straight from dark-skinned Indians, had a low tolerance of sunlight for some reason.

Lack of melanin is a problem. Albinism isn't quite the same thing. I once read that characteristics evolved in two stages as a result of two ice ages. The first was blond-ism with blue eyes, the second was red hair with even paler skin and freckles. There is still a massive mystery around all this though, as DNA evidence from early Europeans shows dark skin & blue eyes. Europeans may not have evolved in Europe but it must have been someplace cold with comparatively low levels of sunlight.

 

[ajay0]

E.g. Sarkar speaks of the origins of modern humans from the Australopithecines and does not approve of irrational religious (mythical) ideas about 'yuga's'.

The Yugas or Ages ( Golden-Silver-Bronze-Iron ) is mentioned both in Hindu and Greek-Roman religious philosophies.

As per the Sankhya philosophy, the Gunas Sattva, Rajas and Tamas are present in all of Prakriti (nature), and in all things and beings.

Sattva is the quality of goodness, positivity, truth, serenity, balance, peacefulness, and virtuousness that is drawn towards Dharma and Jnana (knowledge). Rajas is the quality of passion, activity, neither good nor bad and sometimes either, self-centeredness, egoistic, individualizing, driven, moving, dynamic. Tamas is the quality of imbalance, disorder, chaos, anxiety, impure, destructive, delusion, negative, dull or inactive, apathy, inertia or lethargy, violent, vicious, ignorant.

The Satya Yuga or Golden Age is satto-pradhan or charecterised by intense sattva ; the Treta Yuga is denoted by a combination of sattva and rajas, while the Dvapar Yuga is characterised by a combination of rajas and tamas. The Kali Yuga, the present yuga where we dwell, is charecterised by intense tamas.


There is an interesting similarity in the qualities of the Satya Yuga, Treta Yuga, Dvapar Yuga and Kali Yuga with their Greek-Roman counterparts of the Golden Age, Silver Age, Bronze Age and Iron Age.

Ages of Man - Wikipedia


Iron Age – Hesiod finds himself in the Iron Age. During this age humans live an existence of toil and misery. Children dishonor their parents, brother fights with brother and the social contract between guest and host (xenia) is forgotten. During this age might makes right, and bad men use lies to be thought good. At the height of this age, humans no longer feel shame or indignation at wrongdoing; babies will be born with gray hair and the gods will have completely forsaken humanity: "there will be no help against evil."


Yuga - Wikipedia


Kali Yuga: The final age. It is the age of darkness and ignorance. People become sinners and lack virtue. They become slaves to their passions and are barely as powerful as their earliest ancestors in the Satya Yuga. Society falls into disuse and people become liars and hypocrites. Knowledge is lost and scriptures are diminished. Humans eat forbidden and dirty food. The environment is polluted, water and food become scarce. Wealth is heavily diminished. Families become non-existent. By the end of Kali Yuga the average lifespan of humans will be as low as 20 years.

It is the predominance of Tamas that leads to intense body-consciousness/unconsciousness with cravings and aversions manifest in lust, anger, hatred, greed, egoism, attachments, jealousy, competitiveness and the consequent crimes thereof.

Truth, virtue and virtuous conduct, morality will be replaced by falsehood, vice and vicious conduct, and immorality respectively in the Kali Yuga. Philosophies like nihilism, which considers all virtues or values to be merely abstractly contrived without any independent existence, were responsible for the outbreak of the second world war.

The heavy pollution in nature, coupled with unprecedented extinction of various plant, animal and aquatic species, and global warming along with aberrant weather patterns, drought can also be attributed to the increase in tamas day by day.

Nature while being positive towards sattva and indifferent to rajas, is hostile to tamas, and the increase in tamas will reflect in nature becoming more destructive rather than helpful to human efforts.

 

[Mlecch]

There's a lot of focus of forms of Viṣṇu and Śiva, but the Vedas emphasize Indra, Agni, Soma and others.

The academic view is that Śiva was native to the Indus Valley, Viṣṇu's various forms were native to the Ganges plains, and that the Aryans brought the Vedic religion. Over time these were syncretized into a greater pantheon.

I wonder, tho, with the great importance the Vedas have had, why these early Aryan deities didn't become more commonly venerated by devotees.

Please answer from any perspective: academic, astika, nastika, devotee, yogi, etc.

This is not true because in the Vedas there is पञ्चसूक्त. These most important of all Vedic suktas clearly proclaim the supremacy of Narayana, Sadashiva and Devi: Rig Veda, VII, 41; Rig Veda, X, 125; Krishna Yajur Veda, Taittiriya Aranyaka, IV.10.2; Krishna Yajur Veda, Taittiriya Aranyaka, 10.41-44; Krishna Yajur Veda, Taittiriya Aranyaka, 10.13; Rig Veda, X, 90; Krishna Yajur Veda, IV, 5/7; Rig Veda, I.89; and etc. Vedic hymns.