Timeline for Why was the epithet varAha (वराह) used for Rudra in Rig Veda I.114.5?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 14, 2020 at 18:45 | comment | added | Prasanna R | Why for strength Varaha is chosen.. why not narasimha for any other creation of vishnu or for that mater hanuman is well know for strength or animal wise also Strength is elephant.. or lion. not anothre createure comes to mind for strength. @PradipGangopadhyay so logic of strength is wrong.. Varaha means rain bearing cloud that is the meaning in ancient sanskirt.. may sanaya wrote after 1500 AD i dont know because even 1000 AD abinahv kosha sanskrit mentions rain bearing cloud.factually wrong interpretation by sayanaacharya.. | |
| Sep 14, 2020 at 17:08 | comment | added | Ikshvaku | "There were criticisms on Sayana's work as Puranic based" - The Vedas are supposed to be interpreted based on the Puranas and Smritis, since the Vedic sentences are ambiguous. Moreover, it is better to rely on the commentaries of orthodox Vedic scholars rather than neoHindus (aurobindo) and atheists (Western indologists). Secondly aruSa also means "reddish" so it can mean "like a red boar". | |
| Aug 31, 2020 at 2:14 | comment | added | Srimannarayana K V | In the mantra व॑रा॒हम॑रु॒षं Can be split into varAham + aruSa . aruSa indicates shape of a varAha. Hence, Sayana definitely went wrong here. | |
| Aug 30, 2020 at 13:13 | comment | added | Srimannarayana K V | I have my own apprehension on this translation. Thanks for responding. | |
| Aug 30, 2020 at 12:43 | comment | added | Pradip Gangopadhyay | Yes, Sayana's commentary has been questioned. However, here it seems to me that Sayana could well be right since he is saying Varaha should be understood as conveying strength. So this interpretation sidesteps the objection that Varaha is Vishnu's incarnation since he is not saying that Rudra is a Varaha. | |
| Aug 30, 2020 at 12:40 | comment | added | Srimannarayana K V | There were criticisms on Sayana's work as Puranic based, lacking depth, etc, especially from Sri Aurobindo and others. So is the translation of Sayana dependable? Further, Sayana might not have translated varAha as boar, because it comes in the way of Vishnu's incarnation. | |
| Aug 30, 2020 at 12:18 | history | edited | Pradip Gangopadhyay | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 71 characters in body
|
| Aug 30, 2020 at 12:16 | comment | added | Pradip Gangopadhyay | The word Varaha is used to signify the strength of a boar and not boar itself. At least that is how Sayana understands it. I have edited my post to make this point clear. | |
| Aug 30, 2020 at 12:12 | comment | added | Srimannarayana K V | In their translations Stephanie W. Jamison and Joel P. Brereton and Ralph T.H. Griffith mentioned varAha as boar. | |
| Aug 30, 2020 at 11:54 | history | answered | Pradip Gangopadhyay | CC BY-SA 4.0 |