Posts Tagged hindu world view

A Hindu-centric World-view

Abstract:

    A linguistic framework for a Hindu world-view, geocentric about the Indian subcontinent, is presented. This world-view, in all likelihood widely prevalent among Astika Wanderers since time immemorial, is drawn upon here by available empirical detail, and ably captures the envisioned entanglements of Devata-s with the mundane realm.

Discussion:

Figure-A

Hindu-geo

    In Fig-A two red lines are shown drawn across the India map:

    A vertical line running at Longitude [77.5 ± 1.0°], a horizontal line at Latitude [10 ± 1.0°].  Their intersection point – just north of Kerala and Tamilnadu, and south of Karnataka – is earmarked here as the Origin point,  KumAra-Granthi. Quadrants falling in the left nADI of bhArati are shown in red overlay, while quadrants falling in the right nADI of bhArati are shown in blue overlay.

chart

    The red regions are primarily Devis’ Kshetra-s/domains, the blue ones are primarily Devas’ Kshetra-s. In Deva-Kshetra, societies evolve as conservative, industrial, male dominant, and tend to practise systematized religions (Deva oriented). Devi-Kshetra cultures evolve as socialistic, creative, female oriented, and practise diverse localized religions (Devi oriented).

    These influences also culminate in a specific Triangular representation of India:

1) KaumAra-vertex (South); Prototypical

2) Ashvina-vertex (West); Sarasvati cultures

3) Hanumat-vertex (East); GAnga cultures

Figure-B

Hindu-world

    Next, in Fig-B, the same red lines are extended beyond the subcontinent to throughout the globe.

    China, big chunks of Russia, South America, South of Africa – fall in the red quadrants, whereas Europe, Mid-East, Australia, etc come under the blue quadrants. Now, societies and cultures beyond the Indian subcontinent can hardly be classified as Astika (subscribing to Hindu world-view) – so the modes of religions are not Hindu – yet other indicators (e.g. socialist/communist proclivity of Red, and liberal/conservative of Blue, etc) fit in perfectly with the model.)

    The North American countries show equal areas between Red and Blue, though not in an as diversified manner as India (that possesses the Kumara-granthi).

    India’s diversity – with holistic specialization – can be a hidden gift to the nation, but if not properly handled by policy influencers can only result in genetic load (as is the case presently) manifesting into chaos and self-destruction.

On the Triangle Linguistic-Representation of India:

1) KaumAra-vertex (South); prototypical

2) Ashvina-vertex (West); Sarasvati cultures

3) Hanumat-vertex (East); GAnga cultures

    These are the three orthogonal centres of core-competencies that through interactions amongst themselves create the whole Astika homeland. Linguistically these are the centres of Dravidian, Sanskrit, and Munda families respectively, all other regions in-between being “Krigian geostatistical” mix of the three.

    So even as the KaumAra-vertex can be somewhat seen as the first among equals, the mutual interactions among the three are more on the lines of contemporaneous. For example, the mandAra parvata “used” in Samudra Manthana (a Southern event) is located in the Bihar-Jharkhand region (near Hanumat vertex).

    Another way to understand this is with the analogy of Antenna: the three vertices constitute an antenna array like system — creating a space inside (the triangular region) where internal communication (without interference) happens, and a space outside where signals are transmitted.

    The three vertices, however, are far from being alike: as discussed earlier, the Southern vertex constitutes of both deva & devi kshetra-s within a rather condensed territory. The other two centres — Ashvina & Hanumat are attuned to deva and devi influences respectively and have a lot of freedom for space and movement.

    Ashvina vertex — being deva oriented, outwards looking, and male dominant – was responsible for taking the lead in the codifying of Astika knowledge system in the form of Veda. Both the Veda and the “universal” language it was expressed in were built bottom-up in an industrial-like fashion, even as these truly belonged to the time immemorial inter-communication within the triangle of the insiders’ space.

P.S.
There is also the tradition of Veda mUrti-s (largely
“off-the-radar” and undocumented, though once acknowledged by the Maharashtrian scholar Sri Hemadri in his ~1300 AD work Chaturvarga Chintamaniwhere each Veda itself is known and worshiped as a deity with a unique face:

Rg-veda: रासभाननः (Donkey face)
Sama-veda: हयाननः (Horse face)
Yajur-veda: अजाननः (Goat faced)
Atharva-veda: मर्कटाननः (Monkey face)

    So, even as Ashvin koNa took lead in putting expression to the Veda, this tradition indicates that –
1) the Rk & the sAman come originally from the Ashvin-vertex (donkey and horse both belong to equus genus).
2) Atharvan comes originally from the Hanumat-vertex.
3) Yajus comes originally from the KaumAra-vertex (अज understood as “prototypical”; आदेः जायते. Moreover, the goat is also considered as the most original face of Kumara – “the six-faced” – of his all six faces.).

Advertisements

, , ,

3 Comments

%d bloggers like this: