Ashŧak 1| Adhyāý 1| Anuvāk 1| Varg 1

DSM Satyarthi

—————————————————————————————————-—————–

1.Agnimeedé Purohitam Yagyasy dévamr’tvijam hotaram ratndhātamam.

———————————————————————————————————–

———————————————————————————————————–

¹(Vow,²) ‘I laud³ Agni⁴, the first existent⁵, the god of sacrifice⁶, the winner of seasons⁷, the hotā⁸, the lavishest of wealth^9′.

——————————————————————————————————————-

1. The Ved is the most heard of book even among the non-believers.

It does not make any difference whether one believes there is a God or not and whether the Ved is a divine book revealed on His sages.

The Ved is a world heritage now equally respected among the believers and non-believers.

Therefore, it is necessary, even for a non Hindu, that he should be acquainted with Ved as much as possible for him.

It is necessary even for an atheist if she/ he wants to know about world heritages.

It’s a question of his general awareness even.

He or she cannot avoid Ved any more as it is avoided so far.

The Ved is divided into four volumes: R’gved , Yajurved, ,Samved, and Atharvved.

R’gved is divided into ten books.

Each of the books is called ‘Mandal’.

The Mandals are subsequently divided into hymns, which are called ‘Sookts’.

We have 191 Sookts or hymns in the first Mandal or book 1 of R’gved.

The first Sookt or the first hymn of R’gved is called ‘Agni Sookt‘.

It contains nine Mantrs or verses.

R. T. H. Griffith has written a short introductory note:

‘The first two hymns of this book (Sookt 1 and Sookt 2 of Mandal 1) are ascribed to the R’shi or seer Madhuchchhandā Vaishvāmitr, a son or descendant of the famous Vishvāmitr.

The deity to whom this hymn is addressed is Agni, the God of fire, the most prominent, next to Indr, of the deities of the R’gved.’

According to Hindu History, which is the only written history of the period, Lord Vedarshi Bhagvān Madhuchchhandā Mahimvat Vaishvāmitr were the son of Lord Brahmarshi Vedarshi Bhagvān Vishvāmitr. Why there was any doubt to R. T. H. Griffith in it, is not written by him.

Chhand, meter: 1, 3-5, 7 Gāyatri, 2 Pipeelikāmadhyānichr’dGāyatri, 6 Nichr’dGāyatri, 8 YavmadhyāVirādGāyatri, 9 VirādGāyatri. Svar: Shadj.

R’gved is divided in two ways.

The first division is already told.

In the second division, R’gved is divided into 8 Ashtaks.

Each Ashtak has 8 chapters called ‘Adhyāý’.

Each ‘Adhyāý’ or chapter is divided into ‘Anuvāk’ and ‘Varg’.

This is first ‘Anuvāk’, first ‘Varg’ of first ‘Adhyāý’, first Ashtak.

The first Varg has five Mantrs.

However, Ved is Not in the Vedmantrs we recite.

2. Swear. Generally, this word is not added while translating and commenting on R’gved. In my personal view, however it is necessary to add it as Ved claims to be the constitution of entire infinite creations:

‘svayambhooryāthātathyatoarthānvyadadhāchchhāshvateebhyah samābhyah‘

‘The Self Existent has constituted the values for eternal subjects forever according to facts .’

–Ved:2Y: 40/8.

It is not necessary to agree with the claim, but it is however, necessary to understand what Ved has to say to us. We are quite free to evaluate what Ved claims to be in whatever manner we see fit. We will do it as the commentary follows step by step. We will analyze all of its claims and even the claims its followers adamantly, rigidly, and obstinately, do about it. However, it is not the proper place for it. We will examine them subsequently step by step. Even the queries about them will be equally honored.

3. In the text verb ‘Eed‘ has been used. Lord Bhagvān Maharshi Yāsk has written: ‘Agnimeedeagnim yāchāmi’‘eediradhyeshñākarmā poojākarmā vā’

– Nirukt Daivat Kand: Chapter 7: Pād 4: Khand 15.

Ved is written or revealed in Vedic Sanskr’t. Vedic Sanskr’t is an entirely different language from ‘Sanskr’t’. It is necessary to understand Ved in its proper form to follow Nighantu, Nirukt and other related work as Vedic Sanskr’t is not in use in later Sanskr’t literature.

Ralph T.H. Griffith has translated ‘Agnimeede’ ‘I laud Agni ‘.

It means I laud Agni, I praise Agni, I speak well of Agni, I acclaim Agni, I extol Agni, I commend Agni, I admire Agni, I eulogize Agni, I rave about Agni, I sing the praises of Agni. I worship Agni.

Lord Bhagvan Maharshi Yask has added two more explanations as we’ve seen above: ‘I demand Agni’ and ‘I research Agni’.

All these explanations tell us that Agni does not mean here only ‘the god of fire’ as some persons claim.

Even Ralph T.H. Griffith never did such foolishness.

Even he has translated ‘Agni’ here ‘God‘ too.

Here one thing more is to be understood.

Some immature students of Ved and Sanskr’t think, and even say unknowingly, and actually childishly, that Lord Bhagvan Maharshi Yask did not know how to interpret Ved correctly.

In their utter Ignorance they even claim as if what Lord Bhagvan Maharshi Yask did not know, they know.

‘Alpjnānjanyonmādmidam nānyattu kinchit’.

It is nothing else except the immature knowledge generated ego. What these self efficient immature Vedajn and Sanskr’t grammarians forget, or simply do not know, is the fact that Lord Bhagvan Maharshi Yask did not devise etymology.

It was already there.

Lord Bhagvan Maharshi Yask was only a practitioner of Vedic etymology.

He was not its inventor.

How a person can be made responsible for the work he has not invented, only followed?

Lord Bhagvan Maharshi Yask was only a practitioner of a Vedic school, which was preceded by Vyākarañāchārý Shākatāyan.

They even criticize in their utter Ignorance Lord Bhagvān Brahmarshi Dayānand Sarasvatī.

Lord Bhagvān Brahmarshi Dayānand Sarasvatī followed Lord Bhagvān Maharshi Yask.

And, Lord Bhagvan Maharshi Yask followed Vyākarañāchārý Shākatāyan who precedes their only reliable Vyākarañāchārý Lord Bhagvān Maharshi Pāñini.

There is a continuous chain of followers and their followers of this Vedic etymology which was followed by Vyākarañāchārý Shākatāyan, Lord Bhagvān Maharshi Yask, Brahmdandī Lord Bhagvān Brahmarshi Virajānand Sarasvatī, Lord Bhagvān Brahmarshi Dayānand Sarasvatī.

It goes ultimately to none other less than Lord Bhagvān Dévrāj Indr himself.

4. Ved itself explains subsequently:

‘Indram mitram varuñamagnimāhurathodivyah s’ suparño garutmān,

ekam sadviprā bahudhā vadantyagnim yamam matarishvānamahuh.‘

— Ved: 1R’gved|1|164|46.

Griffith has translated this Mantr as follows:

‘They call him Indra, /mitra, Varuna, Agni, and he is heavenly nobly winged Garutmān. To what is One, sages give many is title: they call it Agni, Yama, Mātarishvan.’

Even then, the Mantr is not represented entirely in its true spirit.

The correct representation of the Mantr in my view will be:

‘They call Him Indr, Mitr; Agni-Divine is He Suparñ, Garutmān. The noble persons with wisdom call One Existence in many ways. They call Agni, Yam, Mātarishvan.’

The persons who do not believe that Ved is a divine book revealed on Lord Bhagvan Maharshi Agni, Lord Bhagvan Maharshi Vayu, Lord Bhagvan Maharshi Aditý and Lord Bhagvan Maharshi Angira; say that it is a later verse.

Their views are not supported by the internal proof of Ved.

The Mantr comes in the very first book of R’gved in 164^th Sookt.

In this way the Ved, itself does not support the view that the verse, the Mantr in question, is of the later era.

‘Agni’ does mean the God in this way, but literally, it means why one must laud Agni.

The verb ‘anj’ in Sanskr’t means ‘to enlighten’, the verb ‘nee’ means ‘to lead’.

In this way the word, “Agni’ in Vedic Sanskr’t means ‘one who leads to enlightenment’.

It is something quite different from ‘the god of fire’ as the word ‘Agni’ has been generally translated in English while translating and commenting on Ved.

Even Griffith has written:

‘The deity to whom this hymn is addressed is Agni, the God of fire, the most prominent, next to Indra, of the deities of the R’gved. Agni is the messenger and mediator between earth and heaven announcing to the Gods the hymns, and conveying to them the oblations of their worshippers, inviting them with the sound of crackling flames and bringing them down to the place of sacrifice. As concentrating in himself the various sacrificial duties of different classes of human priests, Agni is called the ‘Purohit’ or chosen priest, the prospositus or prosses.

He is a R’tvij, a priest or minister who sacrifices at the proper seasons, and a Hotar, an invoking priest, who calls the Gods to enjoy the offering.

All riches are at his disposal, and he is the most bountiful rewarder, both directly and indirectly, of the pious whose oblations he carries to the Gods.’

The commentary produced above, thus, does not present Ved in its true form. As above, in explanatory note 2, we have seen that Ved itself claims to be the constitution of all the creations for ever:

‘svayambhooryāthātathyatoarthānvyadadhāchchhāshvateebhyah samābhyah’ ‘The Self Existent has constituted the values for eternal subjects forever according to facts.’

–Ved:2Y: 40/8.

The commentary produced above, does not tally with this claim.

It is quite natural that one of the two, is either wrong, or insufficient, to convey complete picture.

Ved cannot be treated to contradict itself, to be wrong, or to be insufficient to convey complete picture.

Naturally, therefore, we have to assume that the commentary produced above, is the one, which is insufficient to convey complete picture.

Now, please don’t get excited.

I’m not claiming that only Mr. Griffith is responsible for it.

It has become a trend, a tendency, an inclination, a fashion, a style, among Hindus , generally, to make responsible others, for their own shortcomings.

We don’t believe the trend is right and is a benefiting one for Hindus. It is quite the opposite.

The persons, who make responsible others, for their own shortcomings; never improve.

And, therefore, never succeed.

To improve, one must admit first his/her shortcomings.

Most of the Hindus, alas, do not realize it.

They forget what Ved claims to be, themselves.

‘svayambhooryāthātathyatoarthānvyadadhāchchhāshvateebhyah samābhyah’ ‘The Self Existent has constituted the values for eternal subjects forever according to facts.’

-Ved:2Y: 40/8.

‘Yāthātathyatah’

‘according to facts.’

Ved must be interpreted according to facts‘, if we want to interpret it as the constitution for entire creations, forever.

If we are religious, if we want to follow Ved literally, we cannot avoid the facts.

Ved will guarantee our salvation, only when we follow it literally. And, to follow it literally, we have to interpret it literally, according to facts.’

This is the rule, which was being followed when it was‘the wonder that was India’.

It was the golden rule, which was being followed when the Hindus were the emperors of the globe.

Mr. Ralph Thomas Hotchkin Griffith was not there when Āchārý Sāyañ were being requested to interpret Ved , according to sacrificial rituals, in which the Ved Mantrs were being applied.

The request itself proves that the Ved was not interpreted, then, according to sacrificial rituals, in which the Ved Mantrs were being applied.

If it had been, there was no need for the request itself.

How, then, the Ved, was interpreted, is the million dollar question. Mr. Ralph Thomas Hotchkin Griffith interpreted Ved, as Āchārý Sāyañ had done in his sacrificial rituals oriented commentary, as it was requested to him.

If Mr. Griffith was responsible to present Ved in its wrong form to the English oriented people, he was not alone.

Moreover, it was not a wrong interpretation at all.

It was an incomplete interpretation only.

Āchārý Sāyañ did it knowingly, for he was requested to do so. Nobody criticized Āchārý Sāyañ then, because every one of them knew the specific intention, with which Āchārý Sāyañ had to proceed, and proceeded eventually.

The other original interpretations of Ved were available then, in the Gurukuls, found everywhere in his golden time.

Moreover, the Samhitas, the Brahmans, the Arañyaks, the Upnishads, Nighantu, Nirukt, Vedic Grammars, all were present and being taught in the Gurukuls.

The commentary of Ved of Āchārý Sāyañ was a specific commentary. It was requested to be so, it was intentionally written to be so, and was accepted to be so.

It was the time when Hindus were their own masters.

They were in decline however, as it is self-explicit from history.

The reason behind their decline is also evident from the request made to Āchārý Sāyañ.

They were more devoted to rituals then, instead of the Principles.

The rituals are not important ever, the PRINIPLES are.

Ved is in Principles, not in rituals.

If Ved had been in rituals, Eīshān Param Brahm Parmātmā hadn’t revealed Principles in Ved.

He would’ve revealed the rituals themselves.

The rituals are not eternal ever.

They always change from person to person and from time to time.

Only the Principles are eternal.

Ved claims to be eternal:

‘Devasy’ pashy’ kaavyam n’ mamaar, n’ jeeryati.’

‘See the wisdom of the Divine One, neither died nor grew old.’

―Ved: 4 Atharv Ved: 10|8|32

It’s obvious, therefore, from what has been discussed, that Ved is in Principles, not in rituals.

‘Agni’ is however used here as opposite to ‘Andhantamah’-

‘Andhantamah pravishanti ye’sambhootimupasaté, Tato bhooy’iv te tamo y’u sambhootyagvang ratāh.’

-Ved 2Y|40|9.

‘Andhantamah pravishanti ye’vidyamupasaté, Tato bhooy’iv te tamo y’u viyayagvang ratāh.’

–Ved 2Y|40|12.

In both the Vedmantrs stated above we see that ‘Andhantamah’ is described more sinister than ‘Avidyā‘ and ‘Asambhooti‘ both.

So, it is actually ‘Andhantamah’ Ved suggests avoiding, not ‘Avidyā‘ neither ‘Asambhooti‘ equally.

This conclusion which I have drawn from above mentioned two Vedmantrs may surprise the readers, even traditional Hindus of them.

Nevertheless, every one can see profoundly that the conclusion drawn is correct.

Ved wants to safeguard its readers from this ‘Andhantamah’.

Here a question arises.

What is meant by ‘Andhantamah’ in Ved?

I think it is ‘Absolute Darkness’ as well as what is referred now as ‘Dark Ages’.

It was quite natural; therefore, that Ved must start with ‘Agni Sookt‘. ‘Agni’ is the one who leads to enlightenment, generally who leads to light.

Therefore ‘Agni’ is what directly opposite to ‘Andhantamah’, is quite clear.

It means Ved claims that if Ved is not followed it will lead eventually to the ‘Dark Ages’ as well as ‘Absolute Darkness’.

The entire history of humankind proves this claim CORRECT.

5. ‘The First Existent’ ‘Purohitam’.

R. T. H. Griffith has translated it simply ‘the chosen priest’.

I’m unable to understand which word of the Original Sanskr’t Text is translated ‘chosen’ here.

I’m not challenging the authority of the renowned scholar here.

Nevertheless, even Āchārý Sāyañ has written :

‘Purohitshabdo dviteeyédhyayé yaddévāpih Shantanvé Purohit ityétāmr’chamudāhritý pur’énam dadhateeti vyākhyātah. Taittireeyāshch’ paurohityén spardhmānasý pashvanushthānam vidhāý tatphalatvén pur’énam dadhat ityāmananti.’

Except these words, Āchārý Sāyañ has explained only the grammatical process of the word ‘Purohitam’.

It was necessary to understand the original meaning of the word ‘Purohitam‘ to go through its grammatical process.

In Vedic Sanskr’t every word is made of its root, ‘Dhaatu’, VERB.

So, to understand the original meaning of any word of Vedic Sanskr’t it’s necessary to go through the grammatical process of the word.

There is nothing which can be translated ‘chosen’.

Even ‘The Priest’ is only a ‘laukik sanskr’t’ based translation, not Vedic.

It is already said that Vedic Sanskr’t is a quite different language from ‘laukik Sanskr’t’.

The correct translation according to the Vedic Sanskr’t is therefore what we have adapted: ‘the First Existent’.

It is supported by Nighantu and Nirukt also as Āchārý Sāyañ has mentioned.

It is necessary here to understand that Ved does not present polytheism, henotheism or even atheism attributed to it by its later interpreters.

Ved preaches Monotheism instead, as we have already quoted above: ‘Indram mitram varuñamagnimāhurathodivyah s’ suparño garutmān,ekam sadviprā bahudhā vadantyagnim yamam matarishvānamahuh.’

– Ved1R/1/164/46.

‘Ekam sadviprā bahudhā vadanti’

‘The noble intelligents call One Existence in a range of ways’.

‘One Existence’ ‘Ekam Sat’.

Later on Ved names this ‘Ekam Sat’, this ‘One Existence’ ‘Jyeshth Brahm‘:

‘Yasý bhoomih pramā’ntarixamutodaram, Divam yashchakrémuurdhaanam tasmai jyéshthāý brahmañé namah.’

‘Of whom earth is model and space belly, Who made heaven head, Homage to that Eldest Brahm.’

– Ved: 4A|10|7 Skambh Sookt|32.

But here it is not named ‘Brahm’.

Here it is simply called ‘Agni’ only.

Why is it so?

Because it is the introductory Sookt.

It is introductory hymn.

It is telling us whom one should laud.

While Ved is starting here an endless movement against the dark ages, darkness and even against the ‘Absolute Darkness’, it’s quite natural it should not enter into any dispute.

Whether God exists or not, whether there is anyone which is responsible for creations or not, is not the subject to discuss here in this introductory Sookt.

It will be discussed step by step, as we’ll see, in proper place.

The only thing Ved wants here to tell is that no one has to laud one which does not lead to light.

One who does not lead to light is not laudable.

It is the first principle Ved wants to establish here profoundly.

It is introductory Sookt.

It is noticeable that Ved does not start to ask one here to worship the God.

It does not start to tell us about spiritualism even.

Ved is not revealed primarily for these purposes.

The primary purpose of Ved, it is revealed for, is to lead the persons to Light.

‘Dhiyo yo nah prachodayaat!’

‘Who let our wisdoms stimulate!’

– Ved: 2Y|3|35, 36|3.

The Gāyatrī Mantr is called ‘Mool Mantr’, ‘The Original Mantr’, ‘Mahā Mantr’ ‘Greatest Mantr’, and Mantrrāj’ ‘the Emperor of the Mantrs’. Ved is its answer from the God.

The persons ask Him to let their wisdoms stimulate and in answer to it, the God bestows them with Ved.

It is the concept with which Hinduism presents Ved to the Multiverse.

It can be readily seen that Ved enters to the subject right with its very first Sookt, and with its very first Mantr even.

Why vow to laud Agni?

Because–

1. It is “Agni’. It leads to enlightenment, it leads to Light.

2. It is the First Existent ever ‘Purohitam’. ‘Purah’ ‘Ago’ ‘Hitam’ ‘Established’ ‘Existent’. There was no one before Him:

‘Nāsadāseenno sadāseettadāneemnāseedrajo no vyomā paro yat, kimāvareevah kuh kasý sharmannambhah kimāseedgahanam gabheeram?

N’ Mr’tyurāseedamr’tam n’ tarhi n’ rātryā ahn āseetpraketah, āneedavātam svadhayā tadekam tasmāddhāny’nn’ parah kinchanās.’

– Ved: 1R|10| 129 Nāsadeeý Sookt| 1-2.

Dr. Isaac Asimov has translated these two mantrs:

‘Then was not nonexistent nor existent,

there was no realm of air, no sky beyond it.

What covered in, and where?

And what gave shelter?

Was water there, Unfathomed depth of water?

Death was not then, nor was there aught immortal:

no sign was there, the day’s and night’s divider.

That One Thing, breathless, breathed by its own nature:

apart from it was nothing whatsoever’.

— Creations: Isaac Asimov: Harrap London 1984: p.101.

Moreover, he has written an introductory note also:

‘Those people whose education and experience have been sharply limited to their own communities are apt to end with a totally self-contained view of the Universe.

Their language is the only language.

Why should anyone call a boy a knabe or a garcon, when a boy is manifestly a boy?

Again, people who believe that the Bible is the inspired word of God often believe that the King James Bible, specifically, that is so inspired, and turn away in horror from any attempt to correct or modernize what is after all merely a translation.

Or as one aged parishioner said, waving his Bible, ‘If the King James was good enough for the prophets and apostles, it is good enough for me.’

Yet there are sophisticated attempts at penetrating the mysteries of creation that are neither scientific nor Judo Christian and here is one of them:

a Hindu Attempt.

There are points in it that resemble Genesis1 (chaos and darkness first, and then light), and points that do not (the Universe first and gods next, rather than reverse).

— Creations: Isaac Asimov: Harrap London 1984: p.101.

The one thing is to be cleared however, is that Dr. Isaac Asimov has translated ‘Nāsadāseenno sadāseettadāneem’ ‘Then was not nonexistent nor existent’.

It is somewhat incorrect.

The actual translation must be:

‘Neither non existence nor existence was then‘.

The Ved is actually telling us that the God is beyond even non existence and existence.

Even the existence depends on the God.

He does not depend on the existence even.

It is something far deeper than what the translations in ‘Creations’ describe.

‘Asat’ means ‘non existence’, not ‘nonexistent’ as it is translated there erroneously.

Similarly, ‘Sat’ means ‘existence’, not ‘existent’.

The depth of the original Vedic Sanskr’t Text is far greater.

Thus, we have two reasons here to laud Agni:

1. It is “Agni’. It leads to enlightenment, it leads to Light.

2. It is the First Existent ever ‘Purohitam’. ‘Purah’ ‘Ago’ ‘Hitam’ ‘Established’ ‘Existent’.

Right from the very first Mantr, thus Ved tells us to do everything rationally.

It does not command to do something only because it tells to do. Thus, we see that Ved does not provoke any sort of superstition ab initio.

It asks everything to do, rationally, and ‘according to facts’-– ‘Yāthātathyatah’ (Ved 2Y|40|8).

‘The First Existent’, ‘Purohitam’ means there was nobody else who was present before the personality who revealed Ved.

Right from the beginning in this way, Ved preaches ‘Absolute Monotheism‘ on rational basis, neither polytheism nor henotheism.

6. ‘The god of sacrifice’ ‘Yajnasý dévam’ is the third reason why one must vow to laud Agni.

Both the original Sanskr’t words ‘Yajnasý’ and ‘dévam’ have deeper meanings than their English substitutes ‘sacrifice’ and ‘god’ used here. We have used them in translation due to the insistence of R. T. H. Griffith.

‘Yajn’ does not mean ‘sacrifice’ only, rather ‘the best work’ also– ‘Yajno vai shréshthtamam Karm’ (Shatpath Brāhmañ).

Ved, thus, starts to emphasize on ‘best work’ instead of beliefs and faiths, right from its first Mantr.

It tells us that ‘Agni’, the One who leads to Light, is ‘Yajnasý Dévam’ also, i.e. ‘the god of the best work’.

It is quite noticeable here that an Āyat of Al Qur’ān Al Majeed does also direct the humankind towards somewhat a similar goal:

‘Innallazīn ‘Āmanū Wa Allaazīn Hādū Wa An-Naşārá Wa Aş-Şābi’īn Man ‘Āman Billāhi Wa Al-Yawmi Al-‘Ākhiri Wa `Amil Şāliĥan Falahum ‘Ajruhum `Ind Rabbihim Wa Lā Khawfun `Alaihim Wa Lā Hum Yaĥzanūn’

‘Verily! Thosewho believe and those who are Jews and Christians, and Sabians, whoever believes in Allāh and the Last Day and do righteous good deeds shall have their reward with their Lord, on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve .’

—2Al-Baqarah: 62

Like all other religious revelations, this magnanimous Āyat of Al Qur’ān Al Majeed is also communally interpreted by several of its interpreters.

However, its translations, by different translators even, are somewhat all alike, and give the said meaning.

Alas, how unfortunate it is that, even Maulānā Saiyad Abul Ālā Maudūdī argues:

‘The context of the verse makes it clear that it is not attempting to enumerate in detail all of the articles of faith in which one should believe or all the principles of conduct which one should follow in order to merit reward from God.

These matters are mentioned elsewhere, in their appropriate places. The aim of the verse is merely to repudiate the illusion cherished by the Jews that, by virtue of their being Jews, they have a monopoly of salvation.

They had long entertained the notion that a special and exclusive relationship existed between them and God.

They thought, therefore, that all who belonged to their group were predestined to salvation regardless of their beliefs and actions, whereas all non Jews were predestined to serve as fodder for hell fire. To clarify this misgiving the Jews are told that what really matters in the sight of God is true faith and good deeds rather than formal affiliation with a certain religious community.

Whoever has true faith and good deeds to his credit is bound to receive his reward, since God will judge people on the basis of merit rather on the grounds that a man’s name happens to be listed in the world as a member of one religious community or other.’

I respect Maulānā Saiyad Abul Ālā Maudūdī very much. Nevertheless, we can’t agree with him here.

I think the magnanimous Āyat contains more profound principle of humanity, everyone must pay attention to.

In my views it is one of the most important āyāt of Al Qur’an Al Majīd.

Let’s once more concentrate on the exact words of the Āyat in question:

‘Inna Al-Lazīn ‘Āmanū Wa Al-Lazīn Hādū Wa An-Naşārá Wa Aş-Şābi’īn Man ‘Āman Billāhi Wa Al-Yawmi Al-‘Ākhiri Wa `Amil Şāliĥāan Falahum ‘Ajruhum `Ind Rabbihim Wa Lā Khawfun `alaihim Wa Lā Hum Yaĥzanūn’

‘Verily! Those who believe and those who are Jews and Christians, and Sabians, whoever believes in Allāh and the Last Day and do righteous good deeds shall have their reward with their Lord, on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve .’

—Al-Baqarah 2:62

Let’s investigate its various translations.

According to Zafar Ishaque Ansari, Maulānā Saiyad Abul Ālā Maudūdī himself interprets it thus:

‘Rest assured that whosoever from among the Muslims or the Jews or the Christians or the Sabaeans believes in Allāh and the Last Day, and performs good deeds, he will have his reward with his Lord and he will have no cause for fear and grief.’

Now, he writes in footnote that:

‘The aim of the verse is merely to repudiate the illusion cherished by the Jews that, by virtue of their being Jews, they have a monopoly of salvation.’

I am unable to understand why the learned Maulānā has enlimited the range of this magnanimous Āyat only to the Jews.

We all whether Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Jews, or of any other religious system of life, cherish this illusion to this or that extent.

It is one of the principle faults of us so called religious persons.

We don’t believe, and we don’t want to believe that another path of salvation is also possible there.

Why ‘merely to repudiate the illusion cherished by the Jews’ then?

Why not to repudiate the illusion cherished by all of us so called religious persons whether Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Jews, or of any other religious system of life, who cherish this illusion to this or that extent?

I think this magnanimous Āyat covers all of us.

It declares the salvation for all the persons whether Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Jews, or of any other religious system of life, if one ‘believes in Allāh and the Last Day, and performs good deeds, he will have his reward with his Lord and he will have no cause for fear and grief.’

Now one can have an objection.

‘If one believes in Allāh and the Last Day, and performs good deeds, one becomes Muslim.

So, what is there liberal here and to investigate specifically?

Yes, there is.

This Āyat, in my view, is telling the same thing what Ved is telling here by announcing Agni to be ‘Yajnasý Dévam’.

The main problem we have is the Communal Interpretations of our Religious Reveled Divine Books.

The second great problem we human being are suffering from everywhere is Communal Interpretations of our histories even.

Let’s vow to dishonor all these Communal Interpretations whether how much dear they were to us till now.

Ved, Bible, Qur’ān or any other Religious Reveled Divine Book whatsoever it is, is not reveled to divide us human beings.

‘Why there are differences among us?

Everybody is making too much fuss.

If I am born in a Hindu family am I responsible for it?

If you are born in a Muslim family, are you responsible for it?

If he is born in a Christian family is he responsible?

If she is born in a Jew family is she responsible?

Why can’t we intermarry if we please?

Why can’t we date each other if we please?

Are we all not descendants of Adam and Eve?

If it is not so why do you pretend to believe?

Tear up your divine books if you don’t have any faith in them.

Burn them all if you don’t need any more of them.

Stop the hypocrisy of going church every Sunday.

Stop the hypocrisy of reading Namāz five times a day.

Reciting of Mantrs in the Mandirs haven’t made you a human being if, Shame on you that you even now claim your belief.

Ved Bible and Qur’an all teach us humanity.

Are their teachings now for you mere futility?

‘We one our nest one’ I’ve found in our divine books.

Please don’t destroy our nest allowing differences and crooks.

Follow the path of love every divine book does preach.

Prosperity and true happiness will not be then out of reach.’

All these Magnanimous Religious Reveled Divine Books were reveled to unite us human beings.

It is unfortunate that we did not honor them as we should, we MUST have.

We don’t have differences among us because we are Hindus, Muslims, Jews or Christians.

We have differences among us, because we are not Hindus, not Muslims, not Jews and not Christians.

It may surprise you but it is right.

How many of us Hindus have read and studied Ved?

How many of us Muslims follow Qur’ān without our Communal Interpretations of the same?

How many of us Jews have interpreted Old Testament without any Communal Interpretations?

How many of us Christians have done so with New Testament?

We all are divided and profoundly divided.

And, in this way we all have marred the very purpose for which these Religious Reveled Divine Books were given to us.

‘Yajnasý Dévam’ ‘god of sacrifice’ has a meaning more in addition to the meaning explained above:

‘the god of best work’.

It is described by Lord Bhagvān Manu.

Shatpath Brāhmañ describes the ‘Yajn’ as ‘the best work’ ‘Yajno vai Shréshthtamam Karm’.

Manusmr’ti tells us:

‘Adhyāpanam Brahmyajnah pitr’yajnashch tarpañam homo daivo balirbhautā Nr’yajno’tithipoojanam’.

— Manusmr’ti: 3|70.

These are called ‘Panchmahāyajn‘.

7. ‘The winner of seasons’ ‘R’tvijam.

Shatpath Brāhmañ also tells us that:

‘Brahm hyagnih’ (1|4|2|11) and ‘Agnirvai dévānām vratpatih, étaddh vai dévā vratam charanti yatsatyam’ (1|1|1|2|5).

Moreover, Eīshān Param Brahm Parmātmā has himself told us what he does mean by ‘Agni’:

‘Mamāgné varcho vihavésvastu vayam tvéndhānāstanvam pushém,

Mahyam namantām pradishaschatasrastvayādhyaxeñ pr’tanā jayém.’

‘My splendor be, Agni, in special/ various calls. We bright you all. Let’s safeguard the body. Four directions bow to me. Let’s win the armies with you President.’

– Ved: 4A|5|3|1

Eīshān has discussed a ‘President‘ somewhere else also:

‘Iyam visr’shtiryat ābabhūv yadi vā dadhé yadi vā n’,

yo asyādhyaxah paramé vyomantso Ang! Véd yadi vā n’ véd’.

‘These different kinds of Creations, Wherefrom they came, whether holds or not, Who is its President in the absolute space, He, O Part! Knows it or does not know.’

-Ved: 1R|10|129 Nāsadīý Sookt|7

From these two Mantrs it is clear to us that–

1. Ved is originally addressed not to an ordinary person who leads to light, but to the President of the Creations.

2. It is his duty to lead to Light all the rest of the Creations.

3. He is in absolute space, not in ordinary space.

4. He is not the Creator.

It is clear from the fact that there is something, which even he does not know.

5. He is different from the Creator.

6. He is addressed as “Agni’ in Ved: 4A|5|3|1- ‘Mamāgné…tvayādhyaxéñ’

‘The winner of seasons’ ‘R’tvijam’ means there is no season in which he does not perform his duties.

The Seasons can’t win him.

He wins the seasons.

Let it be hot season, let it be cold or let it be rainy season, he does not run away from obeying Eīshān Param Brahm Parmātmā.

He performs Stavans and Mandrs irrespective of every inadequacy of the seasons.

What are its physical benefits?

‘Tato dvandvaanabhighaatah.’

‘Therefrom body becomes immune to intense conflicts in seasons.’

—Paatanjal Yogdarshanam

He gives Āýpanchamānsh whenever he receives any income before spending any part of it on him or his family.

No hot season, no cold and no rainy season even can stop him from performing his duty allotted to him.

He has to lead others to Light.

He cannot afford to indulge in luxuries of life when a duty is calling him to be attended.

He understands that the Life Hereafter is more important than the worldly life.

This is the meaning of ‘the winner of seasons’ ‘R’tvijam’ in respect of ‘Agni, the President’, in the light of the above two Vedmantrs.

The meaning of the same in the light of ‘ ‘Brahm hyagnih’ (Shatpath Brahman’: 1|4|2|11) and ‘Agnirvai dévānām vratpatih, étaddh vai dévā vratam charanti yatsatyam’ (ibid: 1|1|1|2|5)–is that Eīshān Param Brahm Parmātmā has complete control on the seasons also. He is quite capable even to change them as He does please and there is no one who can ask Him why He did what he did.

Among the ancient commentators of Ved, Āchārý Skand Svāmi has not explained ‘R’tvijam’ separately.

He had chosen to explain ‘R’tvijam hotāram’ collectively:

‘Agnim aham staumi. Kīdr’sham? Purohitam― Shāntikpaushtikaih karmbhiryo rājānamāpadbyastrāyté s’ Purohit ityuchyaté, tatsthānīyam. Kasý? Yajnasý yajnādhikr’tasý― ‘Yajno vai yajamānah’ (Aiteréý Brāhmañ: 1|28) iti shrutéh. Āpadāmaphantāramityarthah. “Dévam’ dīvyatirdānārthé dīptyarthé vā. Athavā Purohitshabdah kriyāshabdah. Pūrvasyām dishi nihitamāhavnīyātmanā sthāpitam. Yajnayétyétattu dévamityanén sambadhyaté. Yajnasý dātāram dīpyitāram vā. Yajnam hi dévébhyo manushyébhyasch’agnirdadāti, tadāyattatvāt. Dīpayati ch’.

N’ ch’ Yajnasý dévamév kévalam. Kim tarhi? R’tvijam. Katamam? Hotāram― ‘Agnirvai dévānām hotā’(Aiteréý Brāhmañ: 1|28) iti shrutéh. Agnirdaivyo hotā. Tadadhikr’tastu Mānusho hotā hautram karm karoti. Athavā R’tvigghotr’shabdāvapi kriyāshabdāvév.

R’tāvr’tau yashtāram R’tvijam. Yo yo yāgkālastatr’ tatr yashtāramityarthah―’

It is clear from what Āchārý Skand Svāmi has translated that ‘R’tvijam’ does mean ‘Deserving to laud in every season’.

And, also that he has explained:

‘He is laudable whenever time of ‘Yajn’ is there.

Ved has told us these ‘Times of ‘Yajn’:

‘Sraddhām prātarhavāmahé

sraddhām madhyandinam pari

Sraddhām sooryasý nimruchi

Shraddhé shraddhāpayéh nah.’

‘Sacred faith in the early morning We call,

Sacred faith in the noon from everywhere,

Sacred faith at the setting of the Sun,

Sacred faith! Endow us here with Sacred faith.

‘Médhām sāyam médhām prātarmédhām

Madhyandinam pari,

Médhām sooryasý rashmibhirvachsā véshayāmahé.’

‘Wisdom at evening, wisdom in the morning,

Wisdom about noon, wisdom by the sun’s rays, by the speech, do We make enter.’

― Ved: 4A|6|108|5

H. H. Wilson has commented in his commentary on R’gved on ‘R’tvijam’:

‘The Ministrant: ‘R’tvij’, a ministering priest, or, according to some, the ‘R’tvij’ who is also ‘Hotr’― the term that follows in the text…’

R.T. H. Griffith has written:

‘He is a R’tvij’, a priest or minister who sacrifices at the proper seasons.’

Oldenberg has translated the entire Mantr as:

‘I magnify Agni, the Purohit, the divine ministrant of the sacrifice, the Hotr’ priest, the greatest bestower of treasures.’

8.‘Hotā’: It is the next reason why a person

must laud Agni.

1^st He leads to Light.

2^nd He is Purohit, the First Existent.

3^rd He is the god of ‘Best Work’ ‘Yajnasý dévam’.

4^th He is the ‘Winner of seasons’ ‘R’tvijam’ and―

5^th He is ‘Hotā’. He calls the people towards Light.

We give and receive.

Receiving is not a matter of shame always.

It’s an attribute too.

We have not created the people to keep them in darkness. Human beings have experienced already what happens when an atheistic political system governs them.

A system of life was deliberately developed pretending that there is no God.

Every new invention of science was presented and advertised deliberately as if it was a new proof that We do not exist.

However, it was absolutely clear that if there is a system, there has to be an Intelligence to imagine and to conceive it.

You can’t expect a system to be developed by at random activities.

Actually, every invention of science was proving that the Creations, Visr’shtih, åālmīn , multiverse, are systematic.

They cannot emerge at random and be systematic simultaneously.

But, it was not accepted.

The obvious was rejected.

What happened?

The Creations, Visr’shtih, åālmīn , multiverse, rejected not only the theory but also the persons who advertised the theory pretending to believe it.

You can pretend to believe anything whether it does exist or not.

You can do it.

But, you can’t make it truth.

Communism embraced atheism and died even before atheism.

If one has eyes, brain and if he/she is IMPARTIAL also, one can understand that with the fall of Communism it has been proved that atheism cannot provide a viable system of life.

‘Hum to dūbéngé Sanam! Tumko bhī lé dūbéngé!’

It was not Collapse of Communism actually.

It was the Collapse of Atheism asa system of life.

‘Vr’shch’ pr’ Vr’shch’ sam Vr’shch’

dah pr’ dah sam dah

Brahmajyam dévyaghný

Ā mūlādanusamdah.

Yathāyād yamsādnāt pāplokān parāvatah,

Évā tvam dévyaghnýé brahmajyaý

kr’tāgso dévpīyorarādhasah,

Vajréñ shatparvñā tīxñén xurbhr’shtinā,

pr’ skandhān pr’ shiro jahi!

Lomānyasý sam chhindhi tvachamasý vi véshtaý

Mānsānyasý shātaý snāvānyasý sam vr’h,

Asthīnyasý pīdaý majjānamasý nirjahi,

Sarvāsyāngā parvāñi vi shrathaý.’

‘Cut, cut off, cut up; burn, burn off, burn up.

Brahm killer, divine inviolable!

Burn up all the way from the root.

The way he went from the house of Yam

To the evil worlds to the distances,

In the same way, divine inviolable!

Sin doer, god reviler, non-worshipper,

With a thunderbolt hundred jointed,

Sharp, razor pronged―

Smite forth the shoulder bones, forth the head.

His hairs cut up, his skin strip off,

His flesh cut in pieces, his sinews wrench off,

His bones distress, his marrow smite out―

All his limbs joints unloosen.’

― Ved: 4A| Kaand 12| Sookt 5| Paryāý 7| 1-10.

Word by word the eternal laws worked.

The blind ones could not see even then.

It does not make any difference!

The laws always work whether one sees it or not.

Communism embraced Atheism for itssurvival.

Atheism survived and Communism died out.

Communism supplied the necessary energy for life Atheism required, by sacrificing its own life.

Though, Communism wanted to survive itself with the help of Atheism.

9. ‘The lavishest of wealth’ ‘Ratndhātamam’.

Eīshān Param Brahm Parmātmā has Himself

classified the wealth in two kinds, in Ved itself:

‘Indram vayam mahādhan

Indramarbhé havāmahé.’

‘We call Indr for great wealth,

’Indr for the little.’

― Ved: 1R|1|7|5

According to this very classification, even Bhagvān Maharshi Kañād has defined ‘Dharm’ as:

‘Yato’bhyudaýnihshréyassiddhih s’ Dharmah’.

‘Whence wanted progress and achievement in life hereafter, that is Dharm.’

Therefore, according to Bhagvān Maharshi Kañād what Ekshān has called ‘mahādhan’ here, is the heaven itself; and what He has called ‘the little’ ‘Arbhé’ is worldly progress.

H. H. Wilson has written:

‘The Possessor of Great Wealth: The word is ‘Ratndhātamam’ lit. Holder of jewels; but ‘Ratn’ is explained generally wealth, and figuratively signifies the reward of religious rites.’

It means― Eīshān Param Brahm Parmātmā does admonish us here that ‘Damnfools! We are never short of money. We ourselves make it. Therefore, if you are in need of money even, even then you don’t need to surrender to anyone else for it. We do not lead to Light only. We provide you money also.

We have not made you to suffer.

We have made you to enjoy life and everything We have made for you.’

‘Eīshāvāsyamidagvong sarvam

Yatkinch’ jagatyām jagat

Tén tyaktén bhunjeethā

Mā gr’dhah kasý sviddhanam

Kurvannévéh karmāñi

jijkvishéchchhatagvog samah

Evam tvayi nānyathéto’sti n’ karm lipyaté naré.’

‘Panentheable by the Lord must be This All―

Each thing, which moves in the Multiverse.

With that renounced, enjoy thyself,

Covet no wealth of anyone.

Only Doing works here

one should wish to live hundreds of years.

No way for thee but this

so action cleaveth not the man.’

―Ved: 2Y: 40/1-2.

With this Great Admonition from our Creator, Eīshān Param Brahm Parmātmā, God, Allah, whatever we like to call Him this first Mantr, this everfirst verse of Ved ends.

A person who has gone to the extent to pray Eīshān that

‘Dhiyo yo nah prachodayaat!’

‘Who let our wisdoms stimulate!’

― Ved: 2Y|3|35, 36|3.

― may find the relief and guidance he/she was so earnest in need.

He/she can confidently proceed to the next Mantr or verse to know what Eīshān Param Brahm Parmātmā wants to reveal there for him/her.

R’gved: Mandal 1| Sookt 1| Mantr 2

———————————————————————

More Commentary on Ved from DSM Satyarthi:

1. R’gved: Mandal 1| Sookt 1| Mantr 1

2. R’gved: Mandal 1| Sookt 1| Mantr 2

3. R’gved: Mandal 1| Sookt 5| Mantr 3