The following is a verse from Nasadiya Sukta - the 129th sukta of the 10th mandala in Rig Veda.
i`yaṁ visṛ̍ṣṭi`ryata̍'āba`bhūva̍ yadi̍ vā da`dhe yadi̍ vā` na |
yo'a`syādhya̍kṣaḥ para`me vyo̍ma`ntso'a`ṁga ve̍da` yadi̍ vā` na veda̍ || 7 ||
The meaning is as follows :
Whence all creation had its origin,
he, whether he fashioned it or whether he did not,
he, who surveys it all from highest heaven,
he knows - or may be even he does not know.
I could appreciate something really interesting here. The verse shows the height of being impersonal and having a scientific frame of mind and not yielding to the cherished opinion that "It is God who made everything". Who ever came up with this verse, seems to be a theist. But, he never claims his God created the universe and things. He says God just surveys everything and he also may or may not 'know' who created the universe. Such an unbiased attitude. Great indeed are the seers.
i`yaṁ visṛ̍ṣṭi`ryata̍'āba`bhūva̍ yadi̍ vā da`dhe yadi̍ vā` na |
yo'a`syādhya̍kṣaḥ para`me vyo̍ma`ntso'a`ṁga ve̍da` yadi̍ vā` na veda̍ || 7 ||
The meaning is as follows :
Whence all creation had its origin,
he, whether he fashioned it or whether he did not,
he, who surveys it all from highest heaven,
he knows - or may be even he does not know.
I could appreciate something really interesting here. The verse shows the height of being impersonal and having a scientific frame of mind and not yielding to the cherished opinion that "It is God who made everything". Who ever came up with this verse, seems to be a theist. But, he never claims his God created the universe and things. He says God just surveys everything and he also may or may not 'know' who created the universe. Such an unbiased attitude. Great indeed are the seers.
21 comments:
Yeah..I can only hope 4 the christian missionaries 2 get 2 realize this and curb cajoling people to become christians..:) ..
Answers.com said that this is the "hymn of creation"
Oops - the words seems to have been corrupt..I cant view it :(
Ok - I guess they are the space limiters..
Its a nice one Kasthuri..There could be some inner significance..let me try to find it :)..
Krishna - you are right :)..but our people would do anything for a packet of biscuit ;)
I could not get the actual fonts of the verse. Let me know the fonts.
I am learning a lot from this blog spot. Thanks.
thats the beautiful quote being even discussed by many scientist themselves.
but some of the european bias kick in that says how could someone from ancient time can think to this level?
Knowledge we had, indeed a lot
Corrupted by the western mind we got
I admire the essence the vedas brought
Hope against hope that all these wouldnt be forgot.
Random Access
The search has just begun !!!
Interesting note. According to vedas, how did the universe evolve?.
Another thing: The vedas were not written by one individual. So, is it possible that the contributors could have had conflicting resources/opinions?.
Man,
I wonder what ur sources of info are?
I can see a sea around
@ krishna : Yes Krishna, this sukta talks about creation and it is akin to the theory of Big Bang. Reg. conversion - it is really a pity to see how people get blinded to false propaganda.
@ arjuna_speaks : :-) Thanks.
@ ram : I guess the problem is with internet explorer. Firefox is good to view the verse. I didn't use any special font. I just used 'cut and paste' from pdf. Thank you Ram for visiting and leaving comments.
@ ganesh : True Ganesh. Scientists believe this sukta explains Big Bang. But, its a pity to see things are diluted when it comes to oriental things. I hate this euro-centrism.
@ random_accress : Very nice. Really enjoyed it. Thanks.
@ tt_giant : The evolution of the universe is explained in this sukta and it resembles Big Bang. Purusha Suktam also describes the creation of the universe. The vedas were not authored by any induvidual or a group of induviduals. They are called 'Apourusheyam' meaning unauthored. They are the spiritual truths which arose in seers when they were in deep meditation. Veda Vyasa compiled them. Since they are not contributed by induviduals they don't have contradicting opinions. That is the beauty of it. The nice thing about Hinduism is that we believe in Vedas than believing in one personal God. An atheist/theist in hindusim means one who doesn't believe/believe in Vedas and it was never about God. I'll try to write a post on this.
@ ioiio : Necessity is the mother of all sources :-). When did u go to the coast ? ;-)
Dear Kasthuri,
interesting post..I have seen this Nasadiya sukta before. I would like to know your views on the Universe and its inhabitants. I strongly favour both cosmology and darwinian evolution respectively. I would therefore like to refer to the universe as a manifestation of a mode of Brahman than a creation of God. anyway these issues also need greater discussion as most Vedantic acharyas stick to a slightly modified creationistic view and hold on to the first cause argument which was apparently refuted by Bertrand Russel. only Sri Sankara differs with them ( but his argument for origination of universe through apparent modification or vivartavada is not tenable scientifically if you look at it closely---topic for another post) and uses his Mayavada again. However the notion that all life and insentient matter were created either simultaneously or immediately after each other is indeed prevalent in Indian writings .
besides I came across a site on the net claiming to be associated with SRICHAITANYA sampradayam which refutes evolution ---I was shocked .. not just as an outsider but also as someone who has learnt and applied principles of Darwinian evolution for more than 4 years this was unacceptable.
again the western argument of INTELLIGENT DESIGN lacks logical substance and is easily refutablee. I think a complete reinterpretation of he vedic passages and Upanishads alongwith the Gita is required.
the upanishadic staements which refer to an impersonal view of the Universe are strongly supportable and those which speak of the Brahman as an intelligence existing in two modes are also entirely compatible with modern science. all creationisitc views have to go. no set of arguments can establish creation and that's why the sanskrit word SRISHTI is used which has been explained as pouring out \projection. this is acceptable compared to the notion of a being who creates this universe. I am atleast glad that thinkers of the sanathana dharma were not tempted to adopt the irrational stance of creationism.
KUDOS TO THEM AND TO YOU FOR BRINGING THIS TO THE FORE.
SARVAM VISHNUMAYAM JAGAT!
SARVAM SRIKRISHNAARPANAMASTHU!
DEAR KASTHURI,
26TH ANDRAIKKU ADIYENUDAIYA BLOGUKKU VARAVUM..KRISHNA JAYANTHI SPECIAL POST THAAN ADUTTHA POST.
SARVAM SRIKRISHNAARPANAMASTHU!
Kasthuri, you have mentioned that these are spiritual truths that arose in "seers" when they were in meditation. Cud it be possible that the seers experienced different things .. to be honest I feel too small even to ask this question about such ancient wisdom.
Can't help succumb to the current education system of questioning of everything.
dear Kasthuri,
can I answer a question addressed to you?
well
Paavai...
meditation as enjoined by scriptures and the yogic treatise of Patanjali is a systematic procedure with certain rules of its own. like all systematic procedures we can expect meditation to yield the same result irrespective of who tries it.If there are discrepancies they reflect upon the meditator and his\her application of the system. therefore all vedic seers may have experienced the same thing but put it down in different terms ( just as in science where the same concept gets refined or rephrased according to the time of rediscovery)
all vedantins and the supreme vedantin as well(SRIKRISHNA WHO ELSE?), have stated that all different descriptions in the shruti texts are of the same thing (I speak with particular reference to the Jnaanakanda or upanishads)
therefore when a text refers to Brahman as full of auspicious attributes and another says NETI NETI (BOY THIS ONE'S FAMOUS), they are not contradicting each other..how? I guess that will be a topic for a complete post.
SARVAM SRIKRISHNAARPANAMASTHU!
also Kasthuri,
can you post on why and How those vedic seers became Mantra Drishtaas or people who saw the vedic mantras ,, intriguing feature of vedic literature is its mathematical structure and supposed self-referential arrangement.
SARVAM SRIKRISHNAARPANAMASTHU!
This leads to intersting question of the origin of "God".
TJ or Kasthuri one of you can write about this 'God'
God/all prevading force doesnt have a mind of its own. Romba complexana oru vishyam.
If you are into vedanta you will know what I am trying to say, I am struggling to explain this.
@ anand : I kinda believe in the oscillating universe theory. It coincides with the notion of pralaya and prakriti going over indefinite period of time. Another beauty of this theory is that it doesn't assume the need for a creator. I am also of the view that universe is the manifestation of Brahman and not creation per se. Where did u read about Sri Chaitanya and evolution. Can u give me the link ? Sure, awaiting your blog on 26th. No problem, u can answer questions.
@ paavai : I think questioning is a healthy way of knowing things if it is done in proper spirit. I guess even though the mode of experience may be different for each person, the experience as such sould be the same. That's why we see the lots of similarity between the 'Sermon on the mount' by Jesus Christ and upanishadic truths. The higher meditative truths are consistent and this has been explored by many. If you are interested you can go through some of the books brought out by Vedanta society.
@ tj : The question about origin of God requires creationistic view which is not held by Hinduism (nothing is created nor destroyed). So I guess we cannot raise that question at all.
@ ganesh : I'll see whether I can take it up. It will be good if somebody who knows better takes this up - tj wanna give a shot ?
dear Kasthuri,
the theory you are referring to is currently being described as the EKPYOTIC theory ( if I am not wrong). besides it seems to invoke certain consditions such as mass of the universe. however the dispute over whether the big bang was unique or a mere phase in the evolution of an oscillatory universe remains hotly debated. please check up on brane cosmology as well.
the page I referred to was called the vaishnava news network or something ( I didn't mark the URL ).
there can be no mind for a God ? what vedantic standpoint can this be... as the upanishads declare BRAHMAN TO be existence, consciousness and bliss,
maybe the supreme Brahman does not have a mind like human beings do as the Brahman is of the nature of an intelligence independent of partite time... I'll try to post on this but only after Gokulashtami,
SARVAM SRIKRISHNAARPANAMASTHU!
Kasthuri,
Good catch this. If you've read this book called 'Conversations with God' by Donald Walsh Neale, the author would keep repeating, God as we ascribe to him, does not micro manage things - but to say, anything is but him, is foolishness :-)
regarding conversions etc - let us face it - for all of us to live through, we will need basic necessities, if we dont have that - would we still be chanting spirituality ??
@ anand : Thanks for the reference. I am learning a lot through your comments. Do keep up the good work.
@ arvind : mmm...I haven't read the book and it is interesting to know Walsh Neale's opinion. Regarding conversion - it is a highly debatable topic. I agree that basic necessities are required for a normal man to get involved in spirituality, but highly evolved souls don't care even for basic things in life. So, spirituality doesn't seem to stem from basic necessities.
I agree, but how many can be in such state is the question that needs careful consideration :-)
Post a Comment