RGVedic AryAs

Vaidix Vaidix at AOL.COM
Thu Apr 9 04:03:06 UTC 1998

> Luis Gonzalez-Reimann wrote..

> May I remind some of our list members that INDOLOGY is meant to be a
> scholarly forum.  Although mystical insights and experiences are perfectly
> valid, they would surely be more appropriate on a list devoted to such a
> perspective.  Such a list could be called INNER INDOLOGY, HIGHER INDOLOGY,
> or REAL INDOLOGY, if that reflects the beliefs of those who would wish to
> participate in it, but a scholarly discussion needs to remain within certain
> boundaries.

I agree with Luis Reimann.  Mystical subjects must not be brought into this

However I point out that there is nothing mystical about vedic symbols such as
bRhaspati &c.  Identifying these symbols is as easy or as difficult as
identifying musical notes like sa, re, ga &c.  While the art of music is still
preseved, the art of identifying Vedic symbols was lost many centuries ago and
the subject has become confined to texts.

Even if one were told how to, it would take at least a few years of study and
observation to identify the symbols, and how they make up the thought process,
how they help in pronouncing syllables &c.  The start up time is quite
substantial, but once the basics are clear, the subject offers exciting
possibilities for research.  No doubt there is also some personal risk
involved because it is a mindsport and non-different from yoga.

By the way being able to identify vedic symbols does not make a person a
yajJavalkya just as knowing musical notes does not make one a subbulakSmi.  I
don't mean there will be enough scope for mediocrity ;-) but that is just a
beginning.  There is a lot of solid work to be done beyond learning basics.

If there is any mystery or mysticism, it is just this:  We humans are able to
write emails and lifeless objects can't.  Other than I dont see any mysticism
in Veda.  According to zatapatha brAhmaNa, the word 'RSi' is derived from the
root 'RS' meaning 'to rub' .  That means the vedic RSis had rubbed themselves
against hard facts of reality to and saw the formulae, not through mysticism.

In any case, all the arguments I gave till now about veda (as part of
abstracts) and those that I plan to issue, can be intensely criticized by
psychologists and neurologists (if there are any on this list).  I am ready to
face them.

I doubt if linguists could do much regarding this subject for the moment.
They might enter at a later stage after many decades when the gaps are

Also Vedic interpretation is a proactive subject high in speculation, where as
linguistics as I see in this forum is mostly a post mortem of facts based on
rules like 'kavi prayogam vyakaraNam', mostly looking for precedents or past
research.  So there is a big cultural difference that presents a contrast.

I can't blame anyone that Veda needs such a hard sell.  I leave it upto the
list administrator to decide the matter.

Bhadraiah Mallampalli

More information about the INDOLOGY mailing list