• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Where is the word Bhakti in the Vedas?

ShivaFan

Satyameva Jayate
Premium Member
The literal word bhakti appears in the Shvetashvatara Upanishad of the Black Yajur Veda, which is translated devotion to God and to Guru - but actually now I see it meaning in proper "belonging" (to) or (membership) or (in the association)... e.g. "association with devotees", "I was once alone, but now I BELONG".

And in the Muktika Upanishad of the White Yajur Veda, as a form of Yoga, mentioned by Hanuman. Then Rama mentions the City of Light - Kashi (Varanasi) - and mentions the Brahmanala of Kashi... Brahmanala came to mean a large slab of stone, in a river or patially in water, where a person still alive was laid to die, then later once dead cremated on wood nearby but not on the stone itself. It was like a death bed. The Brahma Nala was in ancient times the name of a small stream that ran from Manikarnika Ghat in Kashi (where cremations take place) into the City.


The word Brahma Nala means something. The story of Nala appears in the Mahabharata history, but is clearly from a period much older than those events of the Mahabharata times. It is not part of the main plot or theme at all of where it appears, it is much, much older by hundreds or perhaps thousands of years. It appears as a story told to Yudhishthira of a great Maharaja called Nala who, like Yudhishthira, lost his Kingdom in a dice game. In central India was a daughter of another Raja, she was called Damayanti. A swan who had powers revealed to Nala this Princess, and promised to migrate all the way to this beauty and tell her of Nala. Then many suitors including Nala travelled to central India to seek her hand in marriage, but she was already biased in favor of Nala thanks to this magical swan. When some angelic types of deities realize this, they try to fool the Princess by taking the form described as Nala.

But these deities or powers do not cast a shadow when the sun is above them. This was their nature. The Princess was taught as a child to beware of the beings who cast no shadow, and she noticed this. But when the actual Nala came, he had a shadow and she recognized him and they are married.

But there was a Power called Darkling. This Power had designs on the Princess to give birth to a Child of Darkness. The Darkling took possession of Nala's body.

Nala became hypnotically possessed to play the rolling dice, eventually losing everything and the Kingdom to his brother.

Nala and the Princess then leave as homeless into the Forest. There in a possessed state he abandones Princess Damayanti after wandering away from her one morning still possessed by the Darkling. She tries to find him, but she eventually takes refuge of a King of some other race (Tamil or Dravidian) whose residents loved Lord Shiva.

But one day, Nala saves a Naga or snake from a burning bush. The Darkling would not let go of him to seek the Princess, no doubt the designs of the Darkling was to kill him. This was no ordinary bush. Nor an ordinary snake. Voices came from the burning bush. And the snake was from the underworld. Only a man whose mind was so disturbed could ever commune with such a snake that came up from the underworld but into this burning bush. This was a Divine Snake in a fire of strange words. Yet Nala pulled the snake somehow from the fire, for the possession while ill omened also gave him powers.

The Naga turned him into a dwarf with a magic robe. This drove out the possesion as the Darkling didn't recognize Nala, and feared the dwarf, and the cloak protects him from being snatched again. He eventually finds his wife and assumes his form. He takes her to his once Kingdom, and this time gambles and wins his Kingdom back in dice. Later, he tells of the great devotees of Shiva who took care of his wife. He believes the Naga was one of Shiva's.

He became a great devotee of Shiva.

"I belong (bhakta) with the devotees of Shiva" he said in old age. His beloved had died. He felt he had to belong to her by Shiva (bhakti).

Now he was going to die.

So he went to the City Never Forsaken by Shiva, Kashi, The City of Light, and laid down to die.

He laid down it is said, on a slab of stone on a stream that leads from the Manikarnika Ghat where cremations take place into the inner part of the city.

There he died, but just before he died Lord Shiva came and whispered the Taraka Mantra into his ear.

Some say this mantra is "Rama". Some say it is unknown. But for a long time this same stone was used, where many laid down to die. Waiting for the Taraka mantra. Then to be taken upon death to be cremated at Manikarnika. Either at the ghat where there are doms who burn you. Or at the pond "Where the earring fell" (Manikarnika). This is a pond where Lord Vishnu's earring fell after seeing Shiva. Vishnu shook with love, and the earring fell. The pond was Vishnu's tears of happiness that also touched the stream where there was this same stone. Shiva said "Vishnu belongs (bhakt) here where All The Gods Have Come To Be One".

This stone was here for a long time. But one day the stream went away.

The stream had become the Sister of a Devi known as Kashi Devi Kumari. She was a young girl dressed in tattered clothes but was a Goddess who would "haunt" the Pond that had Vishnu's earring and tears. But the stream said one day, "Nala wants his beloved to also be with Shiva where she belongs (bhakti). But she died in a far place. I will go find her by going to the Ganges and bring her to Nala where she belongs (bhakt)."

So the stream disappeared long ago.

One day the stone also disappeared.

But some say it was turned into a Lingam called Omkara. It will never leave Kashi, where it belongs (bhakti).

Brahma Nala was the stream - The Creator of Nala. Nala was created when he died in Kashi.
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
Bhakta, bhakti means 'devoted to'. I think it is in each verse of RigVeda. That is why they are termed as 'richas'.
"The etymological origin of Richa is the Sanskrit word, ric, which means to praise." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richa
See the first verse of RigVeda:
aghnimīḷe purohitaṃ yajñasya devaṃ ṛtvījam l hotāraṃ ratnadhātamam ll
(I Laud Agni, the chosen Priest, God, minister of sacrifice. The hotar, lavisher of wealth.)
Bhakti to Agni, no? ;)
 
Last edited:

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
Bhakta, bhakti means 'devoted to'. I think it is in each verse of RigVeda. That is why they are termed as 'richas'.
"The etymological origin of Richa is the Sanskrit word, ric, which means to praise." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richa
See the first verse of RigVeda:
aghnimīḷe purohitaṃ yajñasya devaṃ ṛtvījam l hotāraṃ ratnadhātamam ll
(I Laud Agni, the chosen Priest, God, minister of sacrifice. The hotar, lavishest of wealth.)
Bhakti to Agni, no? ;)

Which translation of the RigVeda, in English and online is most accurate from the Hinduism perspective, please.
Regards
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
People have different views about it and use various translation. My favorite is one by Ralph Griffith at Sacred-texts.com.

Thanks. But the translator is not from Hinduism. Right?
Is there a popular and accurate translation from mainstream Hinduism? Please
Anybody, please
Regards
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
I do not think that makes a difference. He was a scholar and was unbiased. A Hindu may have his biases. There are Hindus who have hugely distorted the meaning of RigVeda verses.
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
I do not think that makes a difference. He was a scholar and was unbiased. A Hindu may have his biases. There are Hindus who have hugely distorted the meaning of RigVeda verses.
Somebody objected wizanda that he has read from Western scholars, so he does not understand the Hinduism scriptures, that is why I am asking. I want to read RigVeda but from a translation that is acceptable to all Hinduism people. Thanks
Anybody else to suggest.

Regards
 

shivsomashekhar

Well-Known Member
I want to read RigVeda but from a translation that is acceptable to all Hinduism people. Thanks
Anybody else to suggest.

Regards

There is no such thing.

Aup is 100% correct.

Hinduism is a hodge podge of several different beliefs and everyone has his own take on what the Rig-Veda says. Madhva (tattva-vada) for instance, claimed that the Rig Veda has proof of his own avatarhood. No non-Madhva would accept this claim.

A Hindu scholar will invariably "interpret" the text to align it with his own beliefs and to give it an appearance of consistence. The Western scholar on the other hand has no such constraint and is likely to provide a more literal (or neutral) translation.
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
paarsurrey said: ↑
I want to read RigVeda but from a translation that is acceptable to all Hinduism people. Thanks
Anybody else to suggest.

There is no such thing.
Aup is 100% correct.
Hinduism is a hodge podge of several different beliefs and everyone has his own take on what the Rig-Veda says. Madhva (tattva-vada) for instance, claimed that the Rig Veda has proof of his own avatarhood. No non-Madhva would accept this claim.
A Hindu scholar will invariably "interpret" the text to align it with his own beliefs and to give it an appearance of consistence. The Western scholar on the other hand has no such constraint and is likely to provide a more literal (or neutral) translation.


Is it good on their part? Please
Regards
 
Last edited:

Satyamavejayanti

Well-Known Member
I do not think that makes a difference. He was a scholar and was unbiased. A Hindu may have his biases. There are Hindus who have hugely distorted the meaning of RigVeda verses.

Namaste,

To say or even assume Ralph T.H Griffith (The son of the Reverend R. C. Griffith Chaplain to the Marquess of Bath 1830 - See wiki) to be unbiased in his works is a assertion without evidence.

What is your evidence that RTHG was Unbiased and was a secularist?

Dhanyavad
 

Satyamavejayanti

Well-Known Member
"shivsomashekhar, post: 4804955, member: 56157"

Namaste,

The Western scholar on the other hand has no such constraint and is likely to provide a more literal (or neutral) translation.

I agree Hindus will interpret in a Traditional way, but being that the Hindus are the oldest group of people to have been in contact with the Vedic texts, is it not fair to accept their interpretation rather then those who's interpretations might have external influences.

Any evidence that western scholars are not influenced by the cultures and religions of their community?
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
To my knowledge, there is no single English Translation which can be considered accurate for the Vedas.
Dhanyavad

Then what should the seekers of Truth like m should do if there is not done by Sanatana Dharma. How much more time the Hinduism would take to do it, if RigVeda has some Truth in it and that is supposed to be for the whole humanity.
Hinduism people should do it on priority, I request it earnestly and humbly, please.

Regards
 

shivsomashekhar

Well-Known Member
Any evidence that western scholars are not influenced by the cultures and religions of their community?

What kind of evidence does one provide to prove a negative?

It should be the other way around - where one shows that a translator/commentator had a specific bias. If not, there is no reason to assume one, based solely on prejudice and nothing else.

Besides, there is a bigger problem here. The Rig-Veda is not a text to be read as a book. Such a reading has little value from a religious/spiritual perspective.
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
What is your evidence that RTHG was Unbiased and was a secularist?
I have been using his translation for the last 10 years and that is how I sum up my experience. Whether secularist or not is not my concern. I will have nothing against him if he was an Orthodox Russian Catholic. I am concerned only with his work.
 

निताइ dasa

Nitai's servant's servant
Rg Veda and all the Vedas for that matter are texts that are extremely vague in its language and ideas. Even if you do find a good or at least literal translation, it will be impossible to understand in a meaningful way without an authorized commentary by a particular school of Hinduism. That is why Vedanta focuses on the Upanishads and Puranas which are more clear in their ideas (and the ideas themselves. are easier to interpret and understand). What to speak of Vedanta, there are 6 schools of Hinduism who claim that their interpretation is the actual interpretation of the Vedas. These interpretations range from atheistic to theistic. Even Western Scholars, like Max Muller, interpreted the Vedas in accordance with the predominating ideologies of their time (in Muller's case it was Romanticism). If the Vedas did have a predominating translation, Hinduism would not be an umbrella of traditions.
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
Continued from my earlier post: Mistakes in good faith do not matter. Even Yaska and Sayana made mistakes in understand RigVeda. I know of only three people who have understood RigVeda correctly, BG Tilak, my late grandfather, Mahamahopadhyaya Pandit so-and-so, and yours faithfully. ;)
 
Last edited:

Satyamavejayanti

Well-Known Member
="paarsurrey, post: 4805411, member: 37462"]How much more time the Hinduism would take to do it, if RigVeda has some Truth in it and that is supposed to be for the whole humanity.
Hinduism people should do it on priority, I request it earnestly and humbly, please.
Regards

I am wondering the same thing, how long do we have to wait till Hindus (those capable in Sanskrit and have Shruddha for Dharmah) decide to produce the so called foundations of our Dharmah into a respectable translation, I guess the fear is that any person who produces a translation if he is Indian or Hindu the charge of biases would be placed on them.

So it seems like a Loose - Loose situation for Hindus.
 
Top