N’ yé divah pr’thivyā antamāpurn
Yujam vajram vr’shabhashchakr indro
nirjyotishā tamso gā aduxat.
n’| yé |divah| pr’thivyāh| antam| āpuh| n’| māyābhih| dhan’dām| pari’abhūvan| yujam| vajram| vr’shbhah| chakré| indrah| nih| jyotishā| tamsah| gāh| adhuxat.
They who neither did get the end of divine
heaven and earth, nor altogether disgraced the
female wealth giver, with wisdoms, vr’shabh did
The controller of organs, continuously,
with light, milked the cows from out of darkness.
- R’shi: Hirañyastūp Mahimvat Āngiras.
He hasn’t written them himself from his own intellect.
It is said in Aétréý Brāhmañ 3|24, that Lord Bhagvān Hirañyastūp Mahimvat Āngiras achieved the throne of Indr, controller of organs.
‘Hirañyastūpatām prāpý sakhyam chéndréñ shāshvatam…’
‘Hirañyastūp, receiving the eternal friendship of the controller of organs, Param Purush…’
‘Āngiraso Hirañyastūp R’shih…’
─ R’gved 1| Sūkt 31 Sāyañ Bhāshý
Dévtā/Divine subject: Indr, controller of organs.
2. ‘N’ yé divah antam āpuh’ ‘Who didn’t get the end of divine heaven.’
The Heaven is divine and endless.
Your brain has its Conscious, Sub conscious and Para Conscious parts.
You may activate them one by one if you want to.
This Heaven is already there for you, yet you can transform it according to your wishes, desires and needs.
It’s divine, endless and flexible to your wishes, desires and needs, if you are Shaktimān enough.
There’s no compulsion for you to believe in what you don’t want to believe in.
There’s no compulsion for you to have a faith in what you don’t want to have a faith in.
The fools create their own hell for them by opting for it.
We haven’t created you for hell.
Nevertheless, we haven’t created you for creating hell for others too.
If you do it, Our Automatic Scientific System working everywhere is bound to punish you, and you can’t break Our Automatic Scientific System ever, however Shaktimān, however Powerful you are/might be ever.
The earth is similarly endless for the persons of action.
Everything depends actually on your point of view that how you see it ab initio.
If you are basically a negative thinker, you see everything with a negative point of view.
It leads you gradually eventually ultimately to helplessness and depression, consequently.
If you are basically a positive thinker you would never find yourself helpless, never reaching to depression ultimately.
Whereas a negative thinking always leads to depression.
No positive thinker has gone mad anywhere ever, neither has s/he committed suicide ever anywhere.
It doesn’t mean there isn’t any negativity anywhere.
There is poison in existence too.
But it doesn’t imply ever that you are bound to eat/drink the poison.
It has another purpose altogether.
The poison is used in medicines positively.
There are some medicines that can’t be made if poison isn’t used in making them.
Similarly only the existence of negativity doesn’t mean you have to surrender to it too, necessarily.
There are some persons who argue with their immense stupidity that everything is made by Us for its use.
So, there are bound to be some persons to resort to stupidity, negativity and death.
We haven’t created negativity ever.
It’s your own creation due to your immense stupidity.
We never created death for you.
It’s your own creation due to your ever adamant ever insistent ever persistent inertia and negativity.
You have to fight with your inertia and the resultant negativity if you really want to survive and progress ever.
Your death isn’t in action ever.
It’s always in inaction:
‘Kurvannév karmāñi jijīvishéchchhatagvong samāh,
Évam tvayi nānýthéto’sti n’ karm lipyaté naré.’
‘Doing Karm only, here, one should wish to live hundreds of years.
Only this is the way for thee, none else;
4. ‘Pari’ in original text.
5. ‘Abhūvan’ in original text.
Never disgrace any female whosoever she is, and/or whatsoever her attributes are.
Her usefulness for humanity is never in her human attributes only.
She is useful for humanity even if she is a female animal.
A Sukr’t, a sāliħ, a good man can still use her for the existence and/or survival/progress for humanity.
That’s why there isn’t any human culture at all, even if it is even infinitesimally human, that has allowed death sentence for womankind and children.
A woman is always ‘Dhandā’ ‘Wealth Giver’, even if she is used by the wicked persons ever.
It’s self-explicit therefore why one should never disgrace her/womankind.
6. ‘Dhandā’ ‘Wealth Giver’.
The offspring a woman gives is itself a wealth if
You ever understand.
7. If you disgrace a woman you actually disgrace the wealth itself.
8. It isn’t wisdom at all.
‘Māyā’ iti pragyā nāmasu paŧhitam.’: Nighanŧu: 3|9|9
11. ‘Yujam vajram vr’shabhashchakr’‘chakré’.
Most of the commentators from Brāhm denomination of Hinduism, not only insist but they even persistently keep arguing that ‘Vajr’ does not mean sexual male organ of a male that controls his organs and never uses any of his thus controlled organs against Our movement ‘Kr’ñvanto Vishvamāryam.
There are always some persons who charge Our obedients that they are liars/potential liars.
They say they have doubt in their credibility and therefore they are valid in not respecting them.
You may definitely leave them on their own anti Hindutv thoroughly erroneous thinking if they don’t want to improve them ever.
You may leave them with their ever erroneous ever harmful philosophy, but never bear, never tolerate if they disgrace your higher authorities in Hindutv.
Disgrace those morons yourselves to protect your own Hindutv.
Your parents are of course not the parents of any guest that comes to your house, but it does not mean the guest can disgrace or smirk your parents and you have to tolerate it.
If you have to respect your guest, the guest must also respect you, your parents and your values.
The guest can discuss your values with your permission, but s/he does not have any cordial right even to disgrace or smirk them.
Disgrace or smirk that scoundrel yourself/yourselves.
You never have to tolerate if any person even discuss your values with you disgracing or smirking you.
It’s never a discussion.
It’s a holy war between two cultures orally under the disguise of discussion.
Never run away from any sort of Dharmyuddh, Vāj, whatsoever.
It may make you Yātudhān even.
‘The Self existent has constituted the Values, according to facts, for eternal subjects/years.’
How can you allow anyone disgrace or smirk these Values and can still value them yourselves?
If the Vr’trs/ Brātr’výs can respect their erroneous, even harmful to them religious values, why can’t you yourselves?
Make the scoundrels to respect your values and your higher authorities in Hindutv even when they want to discuss them with you.
Let them not accept Our Antim Ācharañ Nāyak Our Antim Ācharañ Nāyak, if they don’t want to.
It’s not one of Trishapt.
One can still be Our obedient if s/he respects and believes in Trishapt.
But s/he has to discuss it until s/he does not establish the fact beyond all reasonable doubt that s/he is justified in doing so.
As far as this argument is concerned that he is valid in not accepting Our Antim Ācharañ Nāyak Our Antim Ācharañ Nāyak until he does not complete Our Dharmsansthāpan, it’s absolutely unjustified prima facie.
What is there to accept after it’s complete?
Hinduism has in its basic Mantr:
‘Dhiyo yo nah prachodayāt’
‘That impel our wisdoms’.
Where the wisdom is needed to understand anything if that is in front of your eyes.
Even an insect and an animal can see what is there in front of their eyes.
Then what for a human being needs wisdom?
Nobody is compelling any person(s) to accept Our Antim Ācharañ Nāyak Our Antim Ācharañ Nāyak.
We have never compelled even an atheist to accept Our Existence.
A person(s) is absolutely free not even to reject Our Antim Ācharañ Nāyak as Our Antim Ācharañ Nāyak, but even to act against him.
We are absolutely capable to protect him from all the scoundrels whoever come in his pathway to infinite humanity leading ever to divinity infinite.
We have protected him from the earlier holy wars some communal traditional Hindus fought against him.
We have protected him from terrorists and criminal Musalmīn.
We have protected him when he was fighting in writing for Us through an Islamic Magazine.
We have protected him when a Yātudhān challenged him that he is the worst sad person of the Multiverse that he doesn’t have a son.
We prophesied in Our Yogdr’shŧ Commentary of Ved then that not only Our Antim Ācharañ Nāyak but everyone that was following him then, would too have a son thereafter till further Yogdarshan otherwise.
The history stands to evidence it happened literally.
If you are really true in your conviction can you explain this phenomenon ever?
How Our Antim Ācharañ Nāyak could manage to do it if he were not Our Antim Ācharañ Nāyak?
We are always proving him that he is Our Antim Ācharañ Nāyak.
You haven’t proved even a single time that he is NOT Our Antim Ācharañ Nāyak.
Neither anyone can ever.
You can only create and spread suspicions, nothing else.
But even none of those suspicions is ever justified.
Our Antim Ācharañ Nāyak is building one after another new heights for the entire humanity to reach, and what are you yourself doing?
Stand before a mirror and find it out yourself.
Our Antim Ācharañ Nāyak is fighting for humanity, NOT for any of his own selfish interest, whatsoever it may be.
Can you prove against it, beyond all reasonable doubt?
If ‘yes’, go ahead and prove it.
If ‘not’, shame on you that you are fighting against a selfless person even,
instead of fighting with the wretched lobby of the wicked ones.
Never spill it out of any female organ.
The semen of a Vr’shabh is not as unimportant and worthless as to spill it ever out of any female sexual organ.
It’s an ever productive element.
Anything that’s made for any sort of production must never be wasted without production.
It says even masturbating is not as wrong as the entire religions say.
Actually it has fought with these problems to its best but since it could not win these problems, gradually eventually ultimately it surrendered to them.
Hinduism/Ved is basically against everything and every action that’s ever unproductive if it can be made productive ever, by changing the social system/some arrangement that isn’t as productive as the new proposed system/ arrangement is.
Lesbianism is not actually a natural activity.
Gayness is similarly not a natural activity itself.
We suggest such persons not to lose their manhood, their family, the sanctity in their society and the infinite existence and endless progress of human beings.
The fact is that these prejudices have brought you to your end if you can really see it.
They hated Hindus for their sex oriented religious practical scientific teachings.
It was not easy to understand what the grave mistakes they were doing then.
But now it’s a history and we can study it perfectly unemotionally.
The irrefutable fact today is that the persons who were claiming they were the stones that were converting the iron Hindus then into gold, now have lost even their homeland for ever and are living in the homeland of Hindus they called irons once.
Their over piety, not to understand the necessity of sexual discipline in their own household and society, ultimately started to destroy their family bindings.
It made their womankind vulnerable.
They surrendered to Hindus.
They had to.
In both the cases the women from outside were brought to India, not otherwise.
Should not the scholars and even other persons who claim Ved was neither ever interpreted principally nor practiced ever, it was only a book of worthless rituals, think afresh on what they believe erroneously still now?
It’s not detrimental to practicing Hindus now, it’s detrimental to yourselves.
Yes, you have some of the Apsarās from some traditional Hindus too.
Didn’t Hinduism overcome it?
Didn’t Satī Dāxāyañī Brahmāpautrī revolt against such a rotten political system, successfully?
Didn’t entire Brahmarshis, Devarshis, Maharshis, and R’shis supported her even against Param Purush?
That’s the inherent attribute of Hinduism, ingredient into it.
It never surrenders to the wicked absolutely.
But it was never unopposed neither it lasted long ever.
What do you think Dīn-e-Ilāhī was?
More from DSM Satyarthi:
3. On Islam
4. On History