EMAILS from ARAVIND somasushma IYER

As for my world view I do hold that an educated Hindu needs to perform

vaidika or tAntrika karma (i.e. rituals) accurately to the best of
one's abilities irrespective of one's darshana. But as far as
interpretation of the dharma shAstra's injunctions the clause of
desha-kAla-vartamAnaH (that the conditions of place and time) need to
be taken into account while being guided by the shruti about dharma
itself. In the domain of darshana I hold the opinion that we need to
evolve beyond the discoveries already achieved by the older vidvAn-s.
This view was held in the past by great darshana vidvAn-s like
vAchaspati mishra, bhaTTa jayanta and appayya dIkShita -- hence it is
not a new one. In a logically consistent form of this view I see the
shruti as the base of knowledge from which various other types of
knowledge evolved. So I see modern science as well as later
discoveries of the tAntrika-s and yogin-s in the sphere of first
person experience as part of this
continuum of knowledge evolving from the shruti. This knowledge would
lead us closer to the truth. As in my opinion the darshana is evolving
we return to the shruti to examine it with the newly acquired
knowledge.
If you still feel determined to explore this path then see the below. I must be
laconic at this stage as "one size does not fit all" and each person might have
to chart his own course.
<<What do you think is the best way to study Hinduism -- or rather, to become a
learned Hindu? >>
One can study the dharma as an outsider -- one would be like an indologist and p
erhaps not acquire any insider experience despite acquire some level of textual
competence. I assume this is not the path you are taking. Now becoming an aware
Hindu is not easy because most of us are simply born into the system and plugged
into it from an early age. There are three great paths within the Hindu system
(which are not entirely exclusive): 1) The path of heightened emotional experien
ce through the practice of inspired devotion -- typically termed bhakti. This in
my tradition is the lowest and least satisfying approach although the easiest o
ne. 2)Orthoprax ritualism and acquisition of technical knowledge that eventually
leads one to the inspired state. This in my tradition is the best path. 3)The p
ath of yoga. This is highly respected and the most direct path, but also the mos
t difficult. After choosing the primary mode of the above one must practice it d
iligently. For the latter two paths one needs to find a guide suitable to ones t
emperament and practice with his/her help.

A major distinction between classical Hindu thought and Abrahamistic religions i

s that of faith. In the latter (at least the two younger universalist Abrahamism
s) faith is the bedrock.
A Hindu typically experiences a deva via yoga or yajana. He might experience the
puruSha or the brahman. The first person experience, even if typically guided v
ia a lineage of teachers, is the foundation of the Hindu systems. However, it sh
ould be realized that first person experience is "colored" by the sense organs a
nd the capacity of the brain. These lead to all kinds of constructs, which inclu
de but are not limited to life after death, the avatara-s, faith and many other
things. Yet for the educated Hindu the pursuit of the "unadulterated" foundation
of first person experience is one of the four great goals or perhaps even a ter
minal destination.
The majority of the sUkta-s (hymns) and yajus and sAman-s in the veda are addres
sed by human reciters to the gods. To give you some typical examples:
upa tvAgne dive-dive doShAvastardhiyA vayam | bharanta emasi || RV1.1.7
To you, agni the dispeller of darkness, day after day with meditation and bearin
g reverence we approach.
Here the deva (a great god) agni is addressed in second person singular (tvA - y
ou). The performers of the rite are in first person plural (vayam). This pattern
is true of the thousands of mantra-s in the veda. In some cases the author expl
icitly states that he has compose a new sUkta to perform the ritual
e.g. :pra vAM manmAny R^ichase navAni kR^itAni brahma jujuShan-nimAni ||
*R^ichase navAni kR^itAni* Here the R^iShi vasiShTha states he has created a new
recitation to perform the ritual.
A very small minority (about 5 or so) sUkta-s in the R^igveda of the over 1000 s
imulate the utterances of the gods to men.
<<Now I checked up a few famous Hindu texts -- they seem to contradict your stat
ement there. Manu Smriti is a good example, wherein in the first chapter, the pr
inciple narrator (Manu, whom the sages approach for advice) equates himself with
the primeval cause of the universe -- what can this mean anything other than th
at God (minus the Christian undertone of the word) laid down the law by Himself
in the form of this text?>>
As I said the authors of the veda hold themselves as its composers. However in l
ater times the texts consider the veda as an eternal utterance. The manu smR^iti
while a very authoritative dharma text (at least in my tradition) is not part o
f the veda. It is smR^iti and is by definition lower in authority than the veda
as a text. In the veda the human laws are seen as seeing as stemming from the na
tural laws that are upheld by mitra and varuNa -- the R^ita. So in a sense the h
uman laws (dharma) are seen as emerging from the primal cause (the R^ita of mitr
AvaruNA) itself as expounded by manu in his opening section. However, actual law
s are said to be desha kAla vartamAnaH i.e. influenced in praxis by place of res
idence, the times and the usages in which the individual lives.
As an aside in several authoritative schools the primal cause in not equivalent
with the Christian god even in a general sense. The primal cause may be puruSha
and prakR^iti or brahman or the primary "atoms". The equivalent of the Christian
god is what a hindu would call an Ishvara.
<<In extension, who are Parashara, Agastya, Bharadwaja and other Rishis from a h
istorical point of view? They are supposed to be very ancient and yet they also
appear in the Mahabharata (around the time of Kali Yuga, that is). Can Parashara
refer to multiple persons referred to by the same name?>>

It is common understanding that many people are referred to as a parAshara or a

bharadvAja etc. There are several clans founded by different R^iShi-s and the de
scendants are known by those patronymics. So sukesha bhAradvAja a much later des
cendant of the ancient bharadvAja may also be called simply bhAradvAja. This lea
ds to much confusion in Indian tradition when the genealogy is not explicitly gi
ven.
<<Could it possibly be that what we describe today as the scientific method and
all the struggle associated with it was in fact the method also of the Rishis, e
xcept that they had a very systematic psychology behind it and identified peculi
ar creative insights into it with certain gods(/mechanisms?) rather than the mod
ern presumption that it just comes up in the scientist's mind?>>
I hold some such view (in a very approximate sense). But that is my interpretati
on and not necessarily widely seen that way by the average modern Hindu.

There is a long history of haThayoga prior to the HYP. In medieval bhArata the
haThayoga broke out as a distinct system of yogasAdhana (i.e. practice) from its
tAntrika roots. Prior to that it was used within the matrix of shaiva and vaiSh
Nava tAntrika systems. For example in the shiva saMhitA you can still see the li
nks to the shaiva system of the worship of the the great goddess tripurA. The ol
dest elements of haThayoga i.e. a system of detailed Asana-s are described in th
e shaiva tantra-s of the dakShiNa and Urdhva srotas. They include some difficult
Asana-s which are no longer in vogue. svAtmArama was drawing in large part from
these tAntrika antecedents with some practical modifications of his own.
<<The origin of ayurveda is also not so clear to me. When they say the god Dhanv
antari propounded the knowledge to a disciple, what are they essentially saying?
>>
The roots of Ayurveda lie in an older Vedic tradition namely the text of the ath
arvaveda. Some later day Hindu traditions holds that the atharvaveda along with
the other veda-s are eternal words emanating from the primal cause. However, the
internal evidence shows that the AV authors where very conscious of being human
and the AV hymns are addressed by humans to deva-s or various medicinal entitie
s. The classical Ayurveda emerges in the charaka saMhitA which also has close li
nks to vedic tradition. It is presented as a discussion between learned brAhmaNa
and kShatriya teachers of medicine. However it recognizes that some of these te
achers first learned medicine from the deva-s indra and the ashvin-s.
dhanvantari was originally a daivodAsa king of kAshI who founded a medical schoo
l. He was later deified and syncretized with the deva viShNu as the founder of h
indu medicine.
<<Is this what the Hindus mean when they talk about revealed/ heard scriptures?>>
There are certainly considerable differences of opinions among Hindu traditions
regarding how to interpret shruti (somewhat imprecisely termed revelation). Some
restrict it to the veda-s, other say it was a more continuous process expressin
g itself later in the form of the tantra-s. Others feel it even goes on to the c
urrent age in the form of the words of siddha-s and yogin-s. There are differenc
es again in terms of what exactly is meant to be shruti. Many typically hold the
view that the veda-s words are eternal and was heard as is by the R^iShi-s due
to their state of consciousness. A less restrictive view is that the veda is an
expression of eternal truths seen by the R^iShi-s. Yet others hold the view that
the veda was an earlier expression of the eternal truth seen by old R^iShi-s bu
t it has been superseded by the direct teachings of the gods in the tantra-s. St
ill others say the tantra-s do not supersede but elaborate the teachings of the
veda.
The authors of the veda themselves do not see their works as productions of the
gods.