Click here for the previous question
Question - 2
There are various versions doing rounds in the name of Vyasa Bharata. Which among them is authentic?
Answer:
Various recensions were created by Vyasa himself. There was no scope for meddling up with the different recensions because until a century ago, copies were in the possession of the Maṭha-s, teachers and religious scholars who studied them and propagated the ideals of Dharma enshrined in them. Since none of them were interested in dating the text – because they either knew the date or it was immaterial for the goal of the Mahabharata - there is no scope to assume that they altered the verses on time-related information.
Listing down the recensions authored by Vyasa himself:
1. First version: 8,800 verses. Lord Ganesha was the scribe of this version. Therefore this version contains Vyasa's request to Ganesha and Ganesha agreeing to write under certain conditions.
2. Second version: Contained 24,000 verses, also authored by Vyasa.
3. Third version: 150 verses were added to the previous version by Vyasa as Introduction and chapter of contents.
4. Fourth version: Another longer version which was split into different recensions and recited to different people:
(a): 30 lakh verses to Devas (perhaps in temples and in Yajnas)
(b): 15 lakh verses to Pitrus (perhaps during Pitru ceremonies)
(c): 14 lakh verses to Gandharvas, Yakshas and Rakshasas (different people from different parts of the world. Eg: Gandharvas were in Europe, Yakshas were in Lanka (Srilanka) and Rakshasas were in Africa)
(d): 1 lakh verses to mankind (Manava-s / Bharatheeyas)
Thus different versions of different lengths were created by Vyasa himself. These different versions were recited by different people even during the period of Vyasa. Some recited from the very beginning and some from different parts. Each such recital must have gone for ages and retained in different places which were collected to create a Critical version.
The Critical version prepared by BORI unfortunately had left out many parts of different versions under a mistaken impression that they were interpolations. None dared to alter or interpolate until the copies were in the possession of mutts and religious scholars, till a century ago. Only in the last 100 years interpolations and mindless chopping have happened.
The southern recension had 1 lakh and 25,000 verses, which was 25,000 verses more than what were imparted to Manava-s. The excess must have been from the other editions of Vyasa - in this case, perhaps from the version delivered to the Yaksha-s and the Rakshasa-s having presence in Lanka and beyond.
Click here for the next question
Hi Madam,
ReplyDeleteI was really intrigued by your mention that "Gandharvas were in Europe, Yakshas were in Lanka (Sri Lanka), and Rakshasas were in Africa." Is this just an example, a metaphorical interpretation, or is there some historical basis for it? I've been searching around but haven't found many references that discuss this. Could you possibly provide more context or sources on this? I'd love to learn more about it. Thanks for sharing.
Welcome Blackfyre.
ReplyDeleteThe names such as Yakshas, Rakshasas and Gandharvas are not metaphorical. Those were the names of specific people about whom you can gather a lot of information from the Valmiki Ramayana and Vyasa Bharata.
On Yakshas, you can check my video on Yakshas of Srilanka. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tWIw3At8BW4&list=PLDThIv-a11RSX9Ti3iE98vtmcFVDCdans&index=2
The talk is in Tamil.
If you don't understand Tamil, here is a gist of what I talked.
Lanka, now known as Srilanka was home to Yakshas as per many sources, particularly MahaVamsam. Kubera was a Yaksha. You have seen Kubera image - a short and stout man with an indistinct neck. Such images can be seen in temple architecture as Gana-s and load-bearers. The same figures are found in many olden sites of SE Asia. That is the image of Yaksha.
They continue to exist but in small numbers. We tend to use them in circuses and movies.
The Balangoda Man fulfils the features of Yaksha. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balangoda_Man
Till 7000 years ago their presence is noticed - that was the period of Ramayana. The Veddas of Srilanka are found to be their descendants genetically - but they no longer resemble the olden Yaksha due to cross marriages with human beings. Mahavamsa's Vijaya's wife was a Yaksha. Most rakshasas of Ramayana were Yakshas. The Rakshasa women described in Ramayana were of Yaksha group only.
Ravana brought them under his control and used them to fight on his behalf. Due to their fierce nature, they were classified as asuras (a trait) and rakshasas. They occupied the dandaka forest and gave trouble to human beings (Manava).
(continued)
Now on Rakshasas.
ReplyDeleteYou can check the Mahabharata for Rakshasa origins. http://ancientvoice.wikidot.com/src-mbh-01:section-67
The rakshasas were the sons of Pulastya rishi who was a resident Srilanka.
His son was Visravas who married a rakshasa woman by name Ketumati, the daughter of Sumali.
Sumali, Malyavan and Maali were brothers whose names resemble the locations on east Africa such as Somali, Malava and Maali. They were not residents of India. They belonged to the southern regions as per Ramayana. They searched for a groom for Ketumati and landed in Lanka and identified rishi Visravas. In those days, there was no restraint on cross marriages. Visravas already married to a Yaksha girl Ilavila to whom Kubera was born. He was identified as a Yaksha only. Ravana and his siblings were born to Ketumati and they were known as Rakshasas. Only Vibheeshana showed traits like his father.
I have given the description of Ravana's ancestry here in this Tamil talk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kp5uoQ1DVk&list=PLDThIv-a11RQ3qR1cuOP-ABWKJm3tOE61&index=1&t=33s
In Ramayana, Ravana is described as huge bodied and dark in colour, This also matches with the origin from African blood.
Elsewhere in Ramayana Viradha also identified himself as a rakshasa and asked Rama to bury him alive as Rakshasas were treated so. In my Mahabharata book, I have written about this and shown Yamnaya connection by way of pit burial and genetically. Huge bodied people were therefore known as Rakshasas and Yamnayas belonged to that category. I also hinted in the book that Bhima could have been of Yamnaya gene.
So Rakshasas were spotted in the south and in the west (Europe) but the southern tribe were black in colour. In the particular context where you raised your query, I suggest that a lakh and 25,000 verses of the Mahabharata - which were more than what Vaisampayana gave could have come from the Rakshasas of the South due to proximity to Tamil people.
(continued)
Now on Gandharvas.
ReplyDeleteOnce again the Mahabharata is the source. Gandharvas and Apsaras were living in Uttara Kuru ruled by Indra. When Arjuna went there, their presence is described. About Apsaras, I have written in the Mahabharata book, in epilogue. There is a verse in Rik Veda that Apsaras are those who have 5 locks of hair. In those days, people dutifully followed their traditions and as such the Apsaras always had their hair tied into 5 locks. They along with Gandharvas were good at singing and playing musical instruments and were fond of playing near waterways. They led an easy life without any worries. That is why the Apsara woman would not even bother to care for her child. She would go easy with any man (provided she liked him) but once a baby is born, she would leave the baby with the man and leave him looking for new partners. Gandharvas too led such easy life.
In Mehrharh, a group of them must have lived as seen from a figurine seen with a woman of 5 locks travelling in a boat. But these women in course of time developed maternal instincts and started taking care of their babies. Mehrgarh (Matrikavana) is found with many figurines of women carrying babies.
The Gandharvas were kshatriyas, had the best horses, rode horse-driven chariots and were experts in the science of illusions called Chakshushi. A Gandharva defeated by Arjuna agreed to teach him that science by which one can seen others, without being seen by others. He also gifted the best horses from his country.
Gandharvas took part in the Mahabharata war. Narada was a Gandharva. Some of them lived in Kailasha to serve Kubera but their country was where Indra lived (Amaravati). From their names such as Pingala and Swetabhadra (refer Mahabharata) we deduce that they were whitish in complexion. The horse breeding white people were the Europeans. So I wrote that Gandharvas were of European origin. All the three categories I discussed here, mingled with Manavas - and genetically all them have left traces in the Indians.
I would like to point out the findings from the skulls in Adhichanallur containing four races - Caucasoids, Mongoloids, Negroids and Australoids - date 2500-2300 BCE.
https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/tamil-nadu/the-ghosts-of-adichanallur/article22431890.ece
Of these 4 categories, caicasoids = danavas, Gandharvas. Europeans
Mongoloids = Daityas (Prahladha was a Daitya), Chinese
Negroids = Rakshasas, Africans
Australoids = Manavas, Indians
India, particularly South Indian coastal regions were habitable even during the ice age. Lot of movement happened via India Ocean to the southern coast before people moved inland of Asia and Europe.