Ved: 1 R’gved: Mandal 1| Sookt 7| Mantr 5

Ved: 1 R’gved:

Mandal 1|

Sookt 7| Mantr 5

DSM Satyarthi

———————————————————————————–——————-

Indram vayam mahādhan indramarbhé havāmahé,

yujam vr’tréshu vajriñam.

—————————————————————————

1We call the controller of organs for the great wealth2, the controller of organs for the small3, the united one4, Vajrin5 in the Vr’trs6.

—————————————————————————-

1. R’shi: Madhuchchhandā Mahimvat Vaishvāmitr.

Sookt 1 to 10 are revealed on Vedarshi Bhagvān Madhuchchhandā Mahimvat Vaishvāmitr.

He confirmed that these 10 Sookts were not written by Vedarshi Bhagvān Lord Agni:

‘AgnérR’gvedo Vāyoh Yajurvedah Sūryāt Sāmvedah’ iti Shatpath Brāhmañé.

Dévtā/Divine Subject: Indr, the controller of organs.

Most of the Ved is devoted to this Mantr Dévtā/Divine Subject.

The second subject Ved guides in most, is Agni, the person that  leads everyone to light, not to darkness ever: ‘Tamso ma jyotirgamay’.

Neither, a person should be immune to the society surrounding him/her.

One can’t be a Sukr’t if he/she is immune to it.

Only a fool can think that the society surrounding him/her does not affect him/her, his/her children, and his/her family.

How can it be  a smart policy,then,  to be immune to something that affects you, your children and your family, whether you like it or not?

Don’t you want to be a smart person?

Don’t you love yourself, your spouse(s), your children and your family at all?

And if you do, how can you be immune to something that affects the life of the person/persons you love?

You have to interfere, because that something is interfering the life of someone you love, whether you like it or not.

It’s a great mistake to think one should be immune to the society surrounding him/her.

The Westerners are already suffering from the irretrievable results of this mistake.

Actually, this erroneous and suicidal view is imposed on the society by the corrupt politicians.

They can’t afford ever an awake and conscious society.

Therefore, they and their paid persons always try to preach the people, under this or that pretext to keep to themselves carefully.

They try to confine them always to themselves.

They can never afford a properly awake, conscious, constantly progressive society.

It’s always dangerous to their own vested vile interests.

It’s obvious, therefore, to be awake, aware and conscious always against these corrupt politicians, to protect your own and your children’s interests.

Chhand/Meter: Gāyatrī

2. Heaven.

3. Physical/material wealth

4. with your woman.

Yujam’ in original text.

Actually ‘Yujam’ in Vedic Sanskr’t contains more meaning than even united with women.

It contains the meaning to be united oneself too.

Without Trishapt everyone is actually not united in him/her self.

This Vedmantr actually tells the same thing what ‘Pātanjal Yogdarshanam’ does when it says:

Yogashchittvr’ttinirodhah.’

‘Yog is the motionlessness of the waves of chitt.’

1 Samādhipād| 2

Tadā dr’shŧuh svarūpé avasthānam.’

“Then synchronization of the viewer in his/her personal identity.’

1 Samādhipād| 3

Vr’ttisārūpyam itaratr.’

‘Synchronization with the wave otherwise.’

1 Samādhipād| 4

A person’s personality and identity is always diverse if Trishapt is not practiced.

Only the practice of Trishapt collects all the diverse parts of one’s personality and identity and unites into a strong one.

It’s the reason why a practitioner of Trishapt always wins on the non practitioners.

The non practitioners have diverse personalities and identities.

They act according to one of them, when one of them is prevalent.

When the other part of one’s personality/identity becomes prevalent, one switches over to it and acts accordingly, different from the first.

A non practitioner’s efforts are, consequently, always diversified, wasting his/her precious time always, in useless diversified acts.

A Trishapt practitioner, however, becomes united in personality/identity.

His/her efforts are consequently united and almost always produce the wanted results.

5. The one who uses his manhood to sanctify the human society.

Hinduism is ever persistent that sex is, and must be ever, an utmost responsible action.

Pavmān Som is the one who has sex for consecration, not for animal desires or children.

Hinduism/Ved does not support the view that one should marry for sex or children.

Both the concepts are erroneous and not good for human society.

Hinduism does not believe that human beings are only social animals.

Of course, it believes in the principle that when born, the infants are not better than animals:

Vitishŧhantām māturasyā upasthānnānāroopā pashavo jāýmānāh.

Sumangalyup sīdémamagnim. sampatnī, pratibhhoshéh dévān.’

Let there come forth from the genital organ of this mother, animals of various forms, being born.

Well doing woman, sit by the man leading to light. Proper wife, ornamentize here the divine ones.’

Ved: 4 Atharv Ved: 14| 2| 25

Yet, it does classify the infants in two classes:

1. ‘Pratibhhoshéh dévān’ ‘the divine ones.’

2. The ordinary human infants who don’t show any inclination towards divinity whatsoever.

The first type of children is entrusted to their mothers, whether the mothers are the followers of Ved or not.

Even Kaikasī could not convert Vibhīshañ to Rāxasism.

This type of infants, therefore, can be safely entrusted to even such mothers.

Islamic policy in this subject differs with Hinduism altogether.

It says:

V’ lā tankiħū almusharikāti ħattā yu’minn.’

‘Don’t marry almusharikāti until they bring Īmān.’

— Al Qur’an Al Majīd: 2 Al Baqara| 221

Al Qur’an Al Majīd allowedNikāħ-e-Kitābiyah’:

Alyaum uħill lakumuttayyibātu v’ t’åāmullazīn ūtulkitāb ħillallakum v’ t’åāmukum ħillallahum valmuħsanātu minal Mu’mināti valmuħsanātu minallazīn ūtulkitāb min qablikum izā ātaitumūhunn ujūrahunn  muħsinīn ghair musāfiħīn v’ lā muttakħizī akħdānin.’

This day are all good things made lawful for you. The food of those who have received the Scripture is lawful for you, and your food is lawful for them. And so are the virtuous women of the believers and the virtuous women of those who received the Scripture before you, when ye give them their marriage portions and live with them in honor, not in fornication, nor taking them as secret concubines.’

Al Qur’an Al Majīd: 5 Al Māedah|5

But practically, some Saħābīs stopped it too, after watching the impracticality of ‘Nikāħ-e-Kitābiyah’ for Musalmeen.

Even Maulānah Saiyad Abul Åālā Maudūdī writes:

‘No doubt, it is a big fitnah, chaos.

In India, Egypt, Syria etc. countries it affected only to the extent, that the Ma’ams, entering the Islamic social system, shattered the Islamic culture vastly.

But in Turkey, its political results too, have been proved dangerous.

This is one of the important reasons that destroyed the vast Sultanate of Turks.

Due to it, if some sympathetic Musalmeen feel the need of its abolition, it’s absolutely proper.’

—‘Nikāħ-e-Kitābiyah’: Tafahīmāt 2: Markazī maktabah Islamī, Delhi edition, January 1981 pp. 314. Translation from original Urdu: DSM Satyarthi

These are the two approaches, two great religions, Hinduism and Islam adopt in this matter.

Of course, Hinduism itself has gone through these bitter experiences several times in its longest history right from the beginning.

Yet, it never surrenders to the evil to the extent, not to take the responsibilities of even the women not accepting Vedic system of life.

It always accepted the challenge.

It never ran away from its responsibilities.

It reasons, if a bad woman too, can’t find shelter in a system claiming to be structured by Eishān Param Brahm Paramātmā Himself, why Eishān Param Brahm Paramātmā made her ab initio.

Did Eishān Param Brahm Paramātmā not know she would be a bad woman?

Isn’t He All-knowing?

However, even in Hinduism, as soon as she is a mother, a woman is required to change her heretofore-irresponsible attitude, and act welldoer, ‘Sumangalī’ .

Remember, she is required to change her attitude, Sumangalī, not her religion, as it is required in Islamic system of life.

Her religion is never attacked in Hinduism, whatsoever it may be.

It maybe discussed with her peacefully, if she consents to it.

If she does not consent to discuss it, it can’t even be discussed with her against her will.

In Hinduism, religion is always a matter of rationality.

Even in Islam too, there is no compulsion in religion.

لَا إِكْرَاهَ فِي الدِّينِ ۖ قَد تَّبَيَّنَ الرُّشْدُ مِنَ الْغَيِّ ۚ فَمَن يَكْفُرْ بِالطَّاغُوتِ وَيُؤْمِن بِاللَّهِ فَقَدِ اسْتَمْسَكَ بِالْعُرْوَةِ الْوُثْقَىٰ لَا

انفِصَامَ لَهَا ۗ وَاللَّهُ سَمِيعٌ عَلِيمٌ

La ikraha fiddeeni qad tabayyana alrrushdu min’ alghayyi faman yakfur bialttaghooti wayumin biAllahi faqadi istamsaka bialAAurwati alwuthqa la infisama laha waAllahu sameeAAun AAaleemun.

There is no compulsion in religion. The right direction is henceforth distinct from error. And he who rejecteth false deities and believeth in Allah hath grasped a firm handhold which will never break. Allah is Hearer, Knower.’

–Al Qur’an Al Kareem: 2 Al Baqarah: 256

Yet, Islam insists on Virtuous women, valmuħsanātu, only:

Alyaum uħill lakumuttayyibātu v’ t’åāmullazīn ūtulkitāb ħillallakum v’ t’åāmukum ħillallahum valmuħsanātu minal Mu’mināti valmuħsanātu minallazīn ūtulkitāb min qablikum izā ātaitumūhunn ujūrahunn  muħsinīn ghair musāfiħīn v’ lā muttakħizī akħdānin.’

This day are all good things made lawful for you. The food of those who have received the Scripture is lawful for you, and your food is lawful for them. And so are the virtuous women of the believers and the virtuous women of those who received the Scripture before you, when ye give them their marriage portions and live with them in honor, not in fornication, nor taking them as secret concubines.’

Al Qur’an Al Majīd: 5 Al Māedah|5

Hinduism orders:

Imām nārīm Sukr’te dadhāt’

without any condition whatsoever.

It orders every woman must have a Sukr’t husband whether she is herself virtuous or not.

Her reformation is also entrusted in Hinduism with the Sukr’t husband.

It’s his duty to reform her peacefully and with all her willingness.

Only because she is a woman, she must have a Sukr’t husband whether she is herself virtuous or not.

This is the sex for consecration Hinduism insists on so aggressively that it orders:

‘Ap raxo hanāth’ even.

It does not compromise in the matter ever.

That’s why Lord Kr’shñ even fought with Rukmiñī’s relations and the persons who helped them.

The second type of infants is ordered to be watched, with close scrutiny, by the Sukr’t father himself.

However, both types of children are instructed to follow the Sukr’t father only, not the mother.

She must be cared for not to be disheartened, however:

Anuvratah pituh putro, mātrā bhavatu sammanāh.

Jāyā patyé madhumatīm vācham vadatu shantivām.’

Ved: 4 Atharv Ved: 3| 30| 2, Paippalād Samhitā: 5| 19| 2

Moreover, if the sex is for sex only, i.e. for Animal Pleasure, or for children, the human beings are not any different from animals.

The animals also do the same.

One can’t fight, rationally and effectively, against Niyog or incest if we accept such a concept.

Only the concept that the sex must be for the consecration of the human society can cure both these evil social diseases.

6. The evil doers who don’t believe in non-violence ever.

Remember, Ved  is not talking here, of the non-violence of Gandhi that was gross injustice with Hindus and the gross appeasement of the wicked Musalmeen.

Gandhi never preferred the nobles of the Musalmeen.

Whenever he was advised to prefer the nobles of the Musalmeen, he always remembered the incident in South Africa when he was beaten by the wicked Musalmeen to the extent that he was afraid of them to the bones, for the entire rest of his life.

Gandhi experimented his non-violence on the cost of innocent Hindus.

Yet he never sacrificed his wicked Musalmeen appeasement even for doing justice with Hindus.

Due to his grossly unjustified wrong policies the wickedness flourished and nobility suffered, more and more.

Hinduism/Ved is proposing a greater policy.

No injustice at all with anyone, punishment to the wicked ones and prosperity for the noble persons whether they are Hindus or Musalmeen.

Ved does not  discriminate the persons in creeds, as Gandhi erroneously did.

Ved discriminate the persons in deeds:

‘Imaam naareem Sukr’te dadhaat’.

Discrimination in creeds is communalism, not secularism.

No matter how much it is advertised for wicked political gains.

While, discrimination in deeds is an aggressive journey of the brave ones, marching bravely to the infinite divinity.

R’gved: Mandal 1| Sookt 7| Mantr 8

——————————————————————–———————–

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

5. R’gved: Mandal 1| Sookt 7| Mantr 5

6. R’gved: Mandal 1| Sookt 7| Mantr 8

4. R’gved: Mandal 1| Sookt 19| Mantr 1

5. R’gved: Mandal 1| Sookt 19| Mantr 2

6. R’gved: Mandal 1| Sookt 19| Mantr 3

7. R’gved: Mandal 1| Sookt 19| Mantr 4

8. R’gved: Mandal 1| Sookt 19| Mantr 5

9. R’gved: Mandal 1| Sookt 19| Mantr 6

10. R’gved: Mandal 1| Sookt 19| Mantr 7

11. R’gved: Mandal 1| Sookt 19| Mantr 8

12.R’gved: Mandal 1| Sookt 19| Mantr 9

13. R’gved: Mandal 1| Sookt 58| Mantr 6

14. R’gved: Mandal 1| Sookt 164| Mantr 20

15. R’gved: Mandal 1| Sookt 164| Mantr 46

16. R’gved: Mandal 2| Sookt 1| Mantr 1

17 R’gved: Mandal 3| Sookt 1| Mantr 1

18. R’gved: Mandal 3| Sookt 6| Mantr 2

19. R’gved: Mandal 4| Sookt 1| Mantr 1

20. R’gved: Mandal 5| Sookt 1| Mantr 1

21. R’gved: Mandal 6| Sookt 1| Mantr 1

22. R’gved: Mandal 7| Sookt 1| Mantr 1

23. R’gved: Mandal 8| Sookt 1| Mantr 1

24. R’gved: Mandal 9| Sookt 1| Mantr 1

25. R’gved: Mandal 9| Sookt 63| Mantr 4-5

26. R’gved: Mandal 10| Sookt 1| Mantr 1

27. R’gved: Mandal 10| Sookt 85| Mantr 42

28. Yajurved: Adhyaay’ 1| Mantr 1

29. Yajurved: Adhyaay’ 1| Mantr 2

30. Yajurved: Adhyaay’ 1| Mantr 3

31. Yajurved: Adhyaay’ 1| Mantr 4

32. Yajurved: Adhyaay’ 11| Mantr 1

33. Yajurved: Adhyaay’ 13| Mantr 4

34. Yajurved: Adhyaay’ 23| Mantr 3

35. Yajurved: Adhyaay’ 40| Mantr8

36. Saamved: Mantr 1

37. Sāmved: Mantr 115

38. Sāmved: Mantr 641: Mahānāmnyārchik| 1

39. Sāmved: Mantr 650: Mahānāmnyārchik| 10

40. Sāmved: Mantr 651: Uttarārchik

41. Atharv Ved: Kaand 1| Sookt 1| Mantr 1

42.  Atharv Ved: Kānd 3| Sookt 30| Mantr 3

43. Atharv Ved: Kānd 3| Sookt 30| Mantr 4

44. Atharv Ved: Kānd 3| Sookt 30| Mantr 6

45. Atharv Ved: Kānd 4| Sookt 4| Mantr 6

46. Atharv Ved: Kānd 4| Sookt 4| Mantr 7

47. Atharv Ved: Kānd 4| Sookt 4| Mantr 8

48. Atharv Ved: Kaand 8| Sookt 1| Mantr 6

49. Atharv Ved: Kaand 14| Sookt 1| Mantr 22

50.Atharv Ved: Kaand 14| Sookt 2| Mantr 25

———————————————————————————–———–

More on Ved from DSM Satyarthi:

1. ‘According to facts’: ‘Yaathaatathyatah’

2. According to Hinduism: We must be polite, not coward

3. Aheism can’t win Hinduism/Ved

4. Casteism is NOT an intgral part of Hinduism:’Samaanee prapaa sah vonnabhaagah’ ”Same drinking same share of food.’

5. Hinduism builds its society on SUKR’TS/Noble doers:’Imaam naareem Sukr’te dadhaat’

6. Hinduism is PRINCIPLES BASED , not PERSON BASED

7. One should not wish to die: Ved hates death

8. RELIGIOUS DEMOCRACY in Hinduism: Ekam sadvipra bahudhaa vadanti

9. Sanyas is not the goal of Hinduism

10. Sati tradition was an Aasur Tradition, not Vedic at all


2 comments on “Ved: 1 R’gved: Mandal 1| Sookt 7| Mantr 5

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s