Ariyanise the entire world. Rg-Veda
  • “Aryanise the entire world “ Says Rg-veda( ix63.5) .
    So it is more relavent to call it Aryan Relegion.
    Aryan in Samskrutha means 'Noble'. It may therefore be more appropriate than “Hinduism “ as labelled by forieghers ( Milechas !)
    Let us ponder, what is ethically wrng in Islam,
    Christianityare Buddhist and even Jews in adopting conversion
  • Dear sathishhish,
    agreed. That is What Hitler wanted to do, which was admired by late Sang Chalak Golwakar

  • Thanks VKR for your mail. Atleast I came to know who Golwalkar is :)

    Refer the below link..

    The author is definitely not an Indian or an right wing person :)

    To be frank, I didnt read the entire page.. (lazy as usual) but atleast read
    till section 3.2, which throws light on your remark about Golwalkar and

    Thanks once again...atleast I learnt something new.
  • Dear All,

    I know this Author personally and he lives in a city 35 miles /56 kms from us !
    if any question you have for him & are you in need anything from him, I could
    try calling him and asking him directly ! I can be of helpanyone ifuseful ?
  • Yes, the translation given by Shash, of Griffith, is similar to what is given in
    my copy of Rgveda. It does not say anything about Arya or Aryanize thing.
    I understand Sanskrit however not an expert in this, hence we may take help from
    some Sanskrit scholar. One things I would like to say, that we have two
    references here, Griffith and Rgveda of mine where the similar meaning is
    extracted hence currently it seems to be the correct meaning.
  • Friend,

    विश्वमार्यम् = vishvamaryam = vishvam + Aryam

    any one who knows DEVANAGARI SCRIPT CAN READ THIS..

    vishvam means universe als universal. the so called quote from Griffith as given by Shah is totally wrong.

    A twelth std student having Samskrutha as a prt of her syllabus could have helped you

  • wonderful Sash...thanks a lot for the details.

    The problem is people pick few words here and there and interpret as they
    like, without going through details. If you say you are not qualified, then
    what should I say...:) the same, that I dont know sanskirt and I am no
    scholar to comment.

    I didnt want to reply earlier on the comment on 'Purusha suktham'.. given
    the context, I like to throw what I read.

    Everyone uses Purusha suktham to criticize veda, sayign that it disparages
    the lower cast. It is said that, purushasuktham says the brahmins were born
    from the head of vishnu, etc etc and the sudhras came from the feet and
    hence it illtreats the sudhras.

    This is a classic example of quoting out of context.

    I read one explanation that it should be read with the phrases preceding
    these starts as

    "yat puruSHam vyadadhu katidhA vyakalpayan mukham kimasya kau bAhoo
    kavooroo pAdA ucyete" (these are questions)

    then comes the answers..

    "brAhmaNo asya mukhamAseet bAhoo rAjanya: krta: ooru tadasya yad vaishya
    padbhyAm shoodro ajAyata"

    Literal translation might mean that the shudras were born from HIS feet.

    But if we see the question and then the answer..the question is, how does
    the brahman look like, what it is made of, how does its face look, how are
    its arms and leg (tried my best to translate...I dont know sanskrit)

    for this the answer goes like, the face looks like the brahmins, the arms
    are like the kshatriyas, the thighs are like the vysyas and the legs (feet)
    are like Shudras....

    Literal translation might be 'born' instead of 'like' in my above
    statement.I am not sure. Its a symbolization of how the society is and how
    the brahman is reflected as the society. The meaning should be, the face
    look brilliant with intelligence, the arms are as strong as the warriors (to
    protect the rajya), the thighs are like the business class who support the
    society (thighs make an important part to hold the body upright and so is
    money power-business needed to keep the society upright), and the feet are
    like those working class who tirelessy work for the society.

    I dont see any discrimination in this. Any working class comes under
    'Sudhra' and today I can say, there are no brhamins in the world and it is
    full of vysyas and sudhra's only. After all, the ultimate goal of any human
    being is to reach the foot of the god and how come born out the feet become
    a discrimination? So everytime a brahmin prostrates before the god, he
    actually prostrates the 'shudras' even if we take the arguement that its
    'born' and not 'like'.

    Do we differencite between parts of our own body? If someone asks me whether
    you love your head or your feet, my answer will be both, as I need both. If
    feet is so low, then why these people are walking with feet, they can cut
    and throw them off, right... :)

    So, as rightly pointed out by you all, without knowing the entire context,
    we are not fit to debate on the vedas. But people who pick selected words
    and go for the entire meaning of vedas...what can we say...its like four
    blind men describing the elephant.
  • It is common practice to addres people as " Putra" like Pandu Putra, Arya Putra. etc.

    Even woman were addressed as "Aryaa".( Nedil) ( There is an Aryastuthi on Kamakshi).

    In Lighter vein - In Rural areas aged people call children as " Makkuppapaya Magane"
  • Dear VKR,

    Great sir...then can you please give the full meaning of this sloka as per
    your interpretation? it might throw more light on the context and the
    meaning, than just harping with one word.

    Hope atleast this time you will answer with evidence.
  • Sash,

    Once again a good mail. Adding to what you say, we should also consider the
    words usage and meaning in line with the local culture, language, tradition
    and many other factors.

    One thing good in one society might be offensive in other. If someone visits
    us uninvited in India, we dont take it wrong and offer them food,
    coffee/tea/juice or atleast a glass of water. Where in, in the US, visiting
    someone without being invited or without giving prior notice might not be
    taken in the right sense. Also, unless invited for dinner/lunch I dont think
    anyone will offer even a glass of water.

    the word 'rubber' in India means different and the same word in the US means
    totally a different thing. 'Give me a ring' in India has one meaning in
    India and a different one in the US.

    Similarly, even if the root word is same or being used in two different
    cultures, we cant take the same meaning. While trying the get the meaning of
    Veda's, it should be taken in Indian context and not just vomit what
    westerners translated. After all, its a known fact that the westerners
    called every civilization/practice/religion in the world as inferior to
    thiers and wiped out the local populace world wide.So their translation will
    also be biased.

    my 2 paise.
  • another funny expression is to 'knock up' someone. Fine in Brit,
    sensational in US!
  • The term Arya is purely cultural . It naturally cannot be interpreted in racial
    terms. This is inspite of the fact that there may have been a

    small influx of ie speakers. Therefore IE influx does not equate to Brahmin and
    this doesnt equate to Aryan. All three are different -Sujay

    I have explained this in my paper
  • Guys,

    In all these discussions one thing is to be remembered. Aryan denoted in ancient sanskrit scriptures was not meant to denote a particular race. It was meant to be used as a noble man. It is the view of the western scholars to make the entire aryan thing as a seperate race so as to divide indians. in this context विश्वमार्यम् would mean to Nobilize the entire world not colonize the world.
  • Dear friends,

    have quoted from a bookas detailed below.

    "A calll of vedas"
    Wriien by Dr.Abhinash Chandra Bose.
    Published by Barathiya Vdyabhavan. Mumbai( 1988 Rs 35 )

    Dr.Bose has chosen 300 manthhrasut of all the vedas. they are in Devanagari with Englissh translation and explainations where necessary'

    I am very sad tnote members have blindly criticised me by providing transltion Mr.Griffith 'Online. Kathie Madam please note )

    Of courseI am a non-conformist or agnostic so to say.

    " all relegions say the other relidion is a lie. There fore all relegions are lies "

    I also belive in the ThirukkuraL, " Be it from any source ( who ever) search for the truth in it "
  • Dear Sathish,

    I was introduse i RSS when I was Sixn my 14thyear I gave up RSS, because they told me that I shoulnot pay condolences for late Kasturiba Gandhi, when she died in Prison. I found they were keeping aloof from fredom movement. I jone the Socialist youth wing known as Rashtiya Sevadal.

    My was an ordent RSS worker, who was respnsible ffffffor putting me in RSS. H e died recently as an RSS. He was honoured witha saffron flag. WE were more frirnds than relatives.
    Once I found a book by Golwakar titled "Golden Bough". there iI he said he admired Hitle

    I have heard Golwakar in My High school days.

    I had excellent topranker RSS men in Chennai in 1877 to'84 as Lion member

    You have got on hand only secondhand info. Read Golwaker's golden Boughto know him firsthand.

  • Copy of a message posted yeastier day to PSP.

    My sources for understanding Vedas, Upanishads, and Geetha are writtins of Indians published by Indian relegious institutions like Chinmayananda's, Ramakrisna mutt,and Barthiya vidyabhavan.

    Sathish shoul apologise for his note about my source of knowledge based on his prejudice.

  • MR.Shashwath.
    Buy this book by Bose, you can learn to read smskrutha in two months.
    I f you a gggeetha with word to word translation from R.K.Mutt, in English, that coul be a lif time companion. You may also buy their works on Upanishads as individual books or as volumes of collections. All their publications are generally original text in devanagari and word to word translation. I would prefer to buy the English translashions.

    इन्द्रं वर्धन्तो अप्तुरः कर्ण्वन्तो विश्वमार्यम |
    अपघ्नन्तो अराव्णः
    Performing every noble work, active, augmenting Indra's strength,
    Driving away the godless ones Ralph.T.H.Griffith

    Griffith has not provided anymtranslated material for two phrases highlighted in yellow. His translation for the idiom in green is ihot very appropriate.
    कर्ण्वन्तो विश्वमार्यम =kruNvantho vishvamaartam = Ariyanaise the world
    अराव्णः = araavNa: = lawless not godless
    Ref. Dr. A.C.Bose
  • First things first....for some reason I didnt get the mails you have sent
    about your source of knowledge in my inbox.

    Leaving that aside, are you really serious VKR????

    Dear VKR,

    If you quote a book, obviously its a second hand information. Unless you
    read and understand and translate, its not first hand. whether its
    bharathiya vidya bhavan, or RK mutt or Max muller or web...its not first

    If I quote a website to refute your point, then I talk with second hand
    information,but if you quote a book, then you are correct.

    If Sash, painstakingly tries to explain things, you are not ready to see
    others point of view and blindly say, he is wrong, but you say I am
    prejudiced... :) good joke sir..

    Please do understand that, I have the same level of right as you have...if
    you have right to believe in one thing, I too have the same right to believe
    in other. We are here to share knowledge and learn, but you are taking one
    sided view and taking it personal and calling others prejudiced. You quote
    kural and say we have to be it any source, look for the truth in it...but
    you are not ready to do what you preach...not seeing the truth by taking the
    other side of view. Till now neither Sash nor Saurab nor me nor anyone who
    replied ever said 'you are wrong' but you did use that word (Griffith is

    We didnt pass any judgement so far, but you did... and calling me
    prejudiced....great....thanks for your compliments...

    Moderators - The thread is getting personal...Request your intervention.
  • Dear friends.

    I m sorry I have disturbed you all by Aryanisation.

    I know some samskrutha grammar and some vocabulary go understand books .I need to.

    Since I don't believe in
    athma or rebirth I do not need some of the dialectics and lessons in logic\

    You may present my messages to any Vedic scholar, hecould help you. Why shoul you waste time with me.

    But I may be writing more about Aryan colonialism in India.


Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Top Posters