The Great Revealed Scriptures : The Vedas

It is believed that the Vedas belong to sruti or divine revealed literature.
Radhakrishnan writes: “The Vedas were composed by the seers when they were in a state of inspiration. He who inspires them is God. Truth is impersonal, apauruseya and eternal, nitya. Inspiration is a joint activity, of which man’s contemplation and God’s revelation are two sides. The Svetasvatara Upanishad says that the sage Svetasvatara saw the truth owing to his power of contemplation, tapah-prabhava, and the grace of god, deva-prasada. The dual significance of revelation, its subjective and objective character, is suggested here.”
At another place Radhakrishnan writes that “The Naiyayikas maintain that the Vedas were composed by God, while the Mimamsakas hold that they were not composed at all either by man or by God, but have existed from all eternity in the form of sounds. It is perhaps a way of saying that the timeless truths of eternity exist from everlasting to everlasting."

You will be interested to know that Aristotle too regards the fundamental truths of religion as eternal and indestructible. We do not know enough about Aristotle and hence are not in position to comment whether he was an apostle of God or not, but the fact remains that the Straight Path to God – the Sirat-e-Mustaqeem – has always been one and the same.
With reference to the Prophets, Athenagoras says:
While entranced and deprived of their natural powers of reason by the influence of the Divine Spirit, they uttered that which was wrought in them, the spirit using them as its instrument as a flute-player might blow a flute. (Apol. IX.)
We have already proved the true identity of that Divine Spirit, which was not only responsible for the revelation of Vedas but several similar revealed scriptures in all parts of the world. Be it Aristotle or Athenagoras, or the sages of ancient Mesopotamia, China, India and Egypt, at all places it has been these devatas, who together comprise the spirit, who used the pious and pure bodies of sages as instruments, as a flute player uses a flute, at all times endeavouring to lead mankind and all other creatures to one path, that of worship of the Absolute God.
You may say that there is no proof that the devatas or the Divine Spirit had any role in revelation of the Vedas and Upanishads. Fact is that proof does exist and it can be derived from the words of Athenagoras and Svetasvatara Upanishad.
It is to be noted that the Svetasvatara Upanishad states that the sage Svetasvatara saw the truth owing to his power of contemplation, tapah-prabhava, and the grace of God, deva-prasada. The original word was deva-prasada, which has been wrongly translated as ‘grace of god’. We are sure that by now you already know a lot about the real identity of these devatas or the Divine Spirit of God. It were the devatas who had taken it as their duty to lead mankind to the worship of Absolute God, who Himself had nothing to gain from the worship. That is why it is even more logical that the Vedas should be attributed to the devatas.
It is evident that the devatas or the spirit of God had a role to play in the revelation of Vedas.
Here we are going to study the true content of the Vedas. As usual, we again forewarn you to be attentive and prepared for certain conclusions that may not be in your wildest imagination. However, we wish to tell in advance that our conclusions are not concocted theories, but are based on hard facts, and substantiated by the Upanishads and the Gita, not at a place or two, but in their entirety. In fact, if you remain patient, and continue to read further, you will find that all those mysteries related to the Vedas, the Upanishads and even the Gita, which have confounded the minds of commentators till date, are getting solved, by relying on our study.
Conflicting interpretations of Vedic text
Rishi Dayanand Saraswati (referred to as RDS by us), the founder of Arya Samaj, has categorically stated that the Vedas are original and the word of God, containing eternal and true knowledge. Devi Chand endorses the same view in his introduction of the commentary of The Yajur Veda. He writes: “Vedas are the word of God, revealed in the beginning of creation, for the moral, spiritual, and physical guidance and uplift of humanity. They are replete with the eternal truths and throw a flood of light on various aspects of life to make a man perfect and ideal. God out of His infinite source of knowledge reveals in the beginning of creation a part of it, adequate for the requirements of the soul, its spiritual satisfaction, fulfillment of its thirst for truth and making its journey of life successful.”
“A part of knowledge was revealed at the beginning of creation,” as per Devi Chand. If the remaining part was revealed later in the form of Taurait, Zuboor, Injeel and Quran, we should not doubt it. Surely, neither the God nor His devatas stopped working for our guidance from that time onwards. The very fact that true knowledge about the content of Vedas and other scriptures is being known now proves that the devatas continue to work to this day.
We do not doubt a word of what RDS or Devi Chand says above. In fact, our view is that not even a matra or vowel in Vedas can be without a meaning or significance, now that we know it to be the word of God. God is the source of all knowledge and it is not His Nature that He performs errors of speech, even though it is of the degree of a useless matra or for the purpose of rhetoric alone. Any where during our study of the Vedas, or for that matter, the Gita, if we are able to find a verse that does not gel with our understanding, we are nobody to doubt the text or point errors in it, that most commentators have done. In fact, in a situation like this, we should humbly accept our lack of knowledge and pursue with renewed vigour to get to the real meaning, as was intended by God.
Throughout the course here, we will cite innumerable instances where the commentators have raised a finger at The Word of God, which is sin in our view and need to be severely condemned. In fact, this became the reason that prompted us to go deeper into the real content of the Vedas and the Upanishads.
We are all aware that the Vedas are replete with mention of Indra, Vayu, Agni, etc. The Vedas, in actuality, are the real source of all information that we possess about these names and also formed the basis of all the myths and legends that came into existence subsequently, which were to find place in later period works like Puranas, Ramayana and Mahabharata. However, kindly remember that Puranas, Ramayana and Mahabharata are not revealed scriptures from God or devatas and were mere compilations by common men like you and me. Therefore, what they say is not final, but what the Vedas and Upanishads, and what Gita says, is final indeed.
RDS is considered one of the greatest commentators of Vedas, along with Sayanacharaya. It is RDS’s commentary that we took up for study and hence would like to talk about it first.
A true reformist that he considered himself to be, RDS concluded that the Vedas talked of airplanes, cars and steam engines. RDS was perhaps distressed at the allegations raised by various Western scholars that the Hindu scriptures were merely mythology and ritual, which no longer had any living truth or force for the thinking minds and were therefore fit to be put away among the relics of the past as an antique record of semi-barbarous worship. This distress is also visible in the writing of Aurobindo Ghosh, who shared RDS’s view, and which you will read in a short while. Therefore, RDS re-wrote the entire commentary, saying that the names of Indra, Vayu, Agni, etc. that were so often used in the Vedas, and which have been taken as divine persons, or devatas, by most commentators, actually meant material sun, air, fire, etc. and nothing else. In the course of his commentary, where Vayu and Agni were mentioned together, he concluded that steam engines were being discussed and so on. This was done with the purpose of making these scriptures fit for the thinking mind, without realizing that we were only leading to further deviation.
To tell you the truth, when we picked up the Vedas for study, we were of the opinion that if it is God’s revealed text, then it must be of the nature of a torchbearer, which would show that path to the human beings that would lead them to the worship of One God and save them from the scourge of sin and troubled existence. The moment we started reading it, it was apparent that this could not be digested, as it is beyond reason that God would use His energy and time, send Prophets and emissaries, to tell that in future there would be airplanes and steam-engines to carry us or tell us what oils to put in ritual fire, what kind of ladle to use during such oblations, and so on.
Our view was further substantiated when we read Manu, who is largely believed to be the first lawgiver after the Vedas, singing the glory of the Vedas in such un-ambiguous terms as:
The Veda is the source of all Dharma i.e. religion, morality, righteousness and good conduct. (Manusmriti 2-6)
It is unfortunate that the later day translators of the Vedas inferred the value of Vedas from the value given to them by revered sages of earlier times, but forgot the true meaning of the Vedas. Instead of what Manu described Vedas to be, they found rites and rituals, electricity, steam engines and airplanes in the Vedas.
How foolish of us that we claim Vedas to be having a universal appeal due to the reason that they talk about future when steam engines would run and electric gadgets would be part of our life. The fact that several Vedic hymns talk in the future tense and carry words like Vayu and Agni made RDS and few others come to this conclusion. But have we ever thought that the same Vedas, of whose universal nature we are boasting of, would become redundant for the man of the period when they were revealed, in case we were to translate them in such a manner. Neither would they be of any further interest to the growing generations, to whom steam engines, et al are already things of the past.
To counter this argument, those very people who talk of the scientific and logical nature of Vedas, claim that people of the time when Vedas were composed knew the art of making airplanes and steam vehicles, which was lost with time. Would any person with a scientific and logical bent of mind ever believe this? Did we ever unearth a plane while digging or ever found a picture of it on the walls of a cave or a mention of it in any of the historical or religious books? Hanuman’s visit from Lanka to Himalaya in a very short time is cited but we will prove later that his visit was not owing to a fast-moving vehicle but to something that is far loftier than the flight of our materialism-inflicted minds.
If there were cars and airplanes, where have they disappeared? Why is it that in the excavations, no trace of engine or airplanes is found and only things to be found are crude utensils, traditional instruments of warfare and life bereft of all the so-called modern luxuries and modes of quicker transportation?
Even for a moment, if we suppose that there were indeed such vehicles existing during the time, then what about the middle ages, when airplanes were surely not plying? Were the Vedas redundant during that time period? Or were they only for our times, and the people of the past were merely reciting the hymns so that they are remembered and reach us without any change? We are sure you won’t agree to this as Vedas truly are God’s own words and are for all times.
With such an explanation, Vedas would also become redundant in the 21st century, when steam engines, cars and airplanes have become common knowledge. Why should we look at the Vedas now when we have gone far ahead in terms of progress, from the days of steam engines and airplanes?
We are sure your curiosity is aroused! Some of you may be thinking that only a handful of commentators like RDS have translated the Vedas with steam-engines and airplanes in them, whereas the rest of the commentators have certainly not done so. Maharshi Patanjali writes in the Mahabhasya, that there are 101 shakhas (schools of thoughts) of the Yajur Veda. All these commentaries are not available at present except the Kanva, Madhyandini, Taittiriya, Maitrayani, Kathak and Kapishthala. Only six available to us out of the 101 versions!
It can therefore be inferred that RDS’s commentary is either 105th, 110th or any such version but certainly not lesser than the 102nd. Since commentaries or schools of thoughts are based on the understood meaning, this would amount to saying that Yajur Veda alone (containing merely 1984 verses in comparison to Rig Veda’s 10,522) has been understood with at least 102 meanings. If this is so, then what is the real meaning that God intended? God surely must have talked about one straight path, even if He had to send His Messages through various Apostles and emissaries, and not diverse ones as the various Schools of Thoughts suggest.
From this reasoning, you will have to agree that out of the 102 Schools of Thoughts, 101 are surely wrong and do not carry the meaning that God intended. Only one may be the right path that God truly intended to show us. But what if the right path was one amongst the 95 schools of thoughts that are lost? Are we groping in the dark then? And the light of illumination that we consider to be from God, is from other source, perhaps has its source in Satan (devil) itself.
Here we would like to say that since we believe the Vedas to be God’s words, we must be prepared to accept it as it is, without getting into a sort of inferiority or superiority complex on the basis of its content. The fact that RDS had to do another translation, to silence the criticism of British commentators, highlights his lack of faith in God. Why was he eager to give shape to the God’s words or mold them as per his choice? Why didn’t he accept whatever the Vedas were saying, instead of getting into an inferiority complex as regard to the existing translations, which were being labeled by British commentators as pre-historic or archaic? He should have accepted that since He is Creator and Knower of all that will transpire till the end of this world; His words cannot be termed as lacking foresight or wisdom.
If we believe that God has created us and it is He who has made arrangements for showing us the right path, if we believe that not a single leaf falls without His wish, and if we believe that we are like scrap in the smelting unit of an iron or steel factory that keeps moving on a chain towards inevitable destruction of its material form, then we must accept God’s Word as final, whatever it is. Yes, sincere endeavours to understand that Word in the true sense should be an endless pursuit.
Whether truth is in RDS’s inference or in that of commentators like Sayana and other Western scholars, all should be checked and rechecked on the basis of our reasoning, before we come to believe them. Nothing, not even the arguments carried in this book itself, should be accepted until we find them based on logic and reason, after a sincere study.
Let us now see how Sayana and others have interpreted the Vedas, and what was there that was unacceptable to RDS, Aurobindo Ghosh and others. Commentators like Sayana and others (there are several) have taken Indra, Vayu, Agni, etc., to mean divine persons or devas, and translated the word 'devas' as 'gods'. They are believed to be lesser gods or gods of specific functions. The Western scholars too have interpreted Indra, Agni, Vayu, etc. as Nature Gods residing somewhere in the heavens. The problem of accepting this argument in the way it is presented is that it seems to give a ritual, mythological and polytheistic interpretation, which surely won’t be acceptable to any one of us.
Unable to digest this, Aurobindo Ghosh had no choice but to fall back on RDS’s commentary, even though it is apparent from his writing that he is not accepting it because he perfectly agrees with it, but has no choice in the face of other existing translations which are far more non-acceptable. He says: “In any case we have to make one choice or another. Either the Veda is what Sayana says it is, and then we have to leave it behind for ever as the document of a mythology and ritual or which have no longer any living truth or force for thinking minds, or it is what the European scholars say it is, and then we have to put it away among the relics of the past as an antique record of semi-barbarous worship or else it is indeed Veda, a book of divine knowledge, and then it becomes of supreme importance to us to know and to hear its message.”
In this BOOK, we will give the true explanation of the Vedas and you will realize that all the problems that various different commentators were facing, to accept one version or the other, will get resolved.
Objections to RDS’s version
Devi Chand, who otherwise justifies RDS’s view, agrees that a large many people object upon RDS’s view. Says he: “People at all times have raised objections to the philological and etymological method by which RDS arrived at his results, especially in his dealing with the names of god-heads (devas). Those adhering to RDS’s school, have given several reasons to justify their stand but adherents of other school have always found them as baseless.”
RDS and Aurobindo Ghosh are of the view that Vedas hymn the One Deity of many names and powers, and talk of One God alone. However, when puzzled by that One God’s name being described as a mortal human being, or two or more such names described together, they take the literal meaning of fire or air or sun and carry on the discussion to include fire-sacrifice, oblations, airplanes, steam engines, cars and what not. They are confounded to such an extent that the same word that at one point is taken to mean One God, is interpreted as meant for wind, air, fire or sun at another place, and for yet another thing at another place.
For instance, at a place RDS takes Saraswati as god, out of her one hundred names enumerated in the first chapter of the Satyartha Prakash, but interprets the word as wife when discussing marriage, as instructive speech elsewhere and knowledge and learning at some other place. Why can’t he give one meaning to the word ‘Saraswati’ that is accepted throughout? This is so because one meaning would not have fitted everywhere. Perplexed indeed must he be but at no instance did he confess that his lack of understanding was the cause of this confusion.
In order to endorse RDS’s commentary, Aurobindo Ghosh writes: “According to etymological formation of the Nirukta, all so-called historical names denote ordinary things according to science of rhetoric.” We might have accepted this logic as true had the “so-called historical names” were of ordinary nature. Instead, we find Indra, Vayu, Agni, Saraswati, etc., mentioned in almost all scriptures of Hindus. Not just the Vedas, but Upanishads are full of their mention. Puranas go to the extent of associating myths and legends to their names, so much so they are talked about as siring children. Hanuman is Vayuputra. Rama is said to have given Sita in the custody of Agnideva. Krishna in Gita talks of ‘Indra’s Heaven’. Arjuna sees various devatas in the revealed image of God shown to him, as per Gita, and is also believed to have received weapons and training from devatas, as per Mahabharata. And even today, Saraswati is worshipped as goddess and Indra is prayed, when too less or too much of rain comes.
It is clear from our study of various Upanishads and Puranas that people worshipped Indra as a superior devata, Agni was chief deity of all sacrifices, and talked of Vayu reverentially. With such profound literature abounding on them, prior to Gita and during the time, how could the commentators ignore all this? In the backdrop of all this literature, it is seems illogical that even Vedas would have used the terms like Indra as meaning the material sun, without giving clear indications that it is meant for the material sun.
And it is not that there are only a few names. Vasishtha, Bharadwaja, Jamadagni, Viswamitra, Devas, Angiras, Gautama, Kashyap, Urvashi, Bhrigu, Bharata, Parashara, etc. are not just mere historical persons, but are sure to have some significance, in imparting of God’s Message. Lest you have forgotten, we remind you that we are talking of Vedas, which is believed to be a word of God. Parasara may be denoting some ordinary thing, as per RDS or Aurobindo Ghosh, but we must remember that it is Parasara who teaches the entire Vishnu Purana.
Moreover, if you have seen any of the translations of Vedas, you must have seen that each Veda comprises of several hymns. We were of opinion that each hymn must be pertaining to a particular subject and were expecting some sort of continuity in meaning. What we find from RDS’s translation though is that there is no continuity and the subject keeps changing so much so that it is better to treat every verse separately. It may move from a religious sacrifice to an airplane and from there to subject of God, to cars, to oblations by the fire, and vice versa. We were unable to digest this as we had expected God to stick to some logic or subject.
There is no denying the fact that most commentators including RDS have tried to interpret the translation as per their liking. They have given their own explanation instead of the word-by-word translation, though the ideal approach would have been to stick to the word-by-word translation and then write whatever they wanted in the commentary that followed. This too confirms that they knew that the word-by-word translation would not fit with the commentary that they wanted to do.
A very clear example of our claim that RDS has not relied on the real meaning but devised his own meanings can be seen from RDS’s translation of Mantra 14 and 19 in Chapter I of Yajur Veda. In the Sanskrit text, the first half of both the Mantras is exactly the same. The second half is different but it has several common words. This should have meant that the meanings of the two should have been similar. And since the Mantra consists of only 2 lines, then half or at least a portion of the translation should have same meaning. But since the meaning that RDS derived for the first line of Mantra14 was not fitting with his meaning of the second line of Mantra 19, he gave altogether different meanings, in spite of the fact that one line was common to both the mantras. See for yourself, while keeping in mind that first half of both the mantras is identical.
Mantra 14: May your house be comfortable. It should afford no shelter to the wicked and the uncharitable. May your house serve on as skin of the Earth. May all persons acquire such a house through the grace of God. Clouds receive moisture from forests, reside in the vast space, and receive water from air. May God impart you this knowledge of clouds and building houses. May the learned understand the building of houses, which serve as skin of the earth.
Mantra 19: The yajna is the giver of happiness, puts an end to the selfish and miserly habits and protects the mid-regions as skin protects the body. May the performer of the yajna realize its significance. The proper recitation of the Vedic hymns is the yajna itself. The yajna performed on special occasions also protects truth as skin protects the body. The yajna is the sustainer of the illustrious sun, the embodiment of Vedic lore. May we realize the yajna as the bringer of rain, and the giver of spiritual knowledge.
Also note that the subject keeps changing from a comfortable house to the wicked and the uncharitable, to clouds that receive moisture from forests, knowledge of the clouds and back to building houses.
The translation of Mantra 19 is actually a small paragraph, when there were merely a few words in the original mantra.
True content of the Vedas
The importance of the true content of the Vedas can be understood from the fact that even Mahatma Buddha, who is erroneously considered to be an atheist or opposed to the Vedas, has stated in Sutta Nipata, 292:
He who attains true knowledge of Dharma or righteousness through the Vedas, attains a steady position. He does not waver.
This shows that the content of the Vedas was as much regarded by Buddha as by Krishna. It is unfortunate indeed, that some commentators of Gita have even gone on to say that Krishna was against Vedic teachings. How can this be possible? How can the revealed text from God and the avatar of God be on different paths? We are extremely sorry to say but the fact is that Hindus, who were known to be the most wise and intelligent people during a period of time in history, have ceased to apply their mind in religious matters. They have ceased to question, to seek the logic, and to explore, and accept whatever the so-called learned people thrust at them, even if they find it hard to digest. Our sincere attempt, all through is to invite you to apply your reason and intellect, something that Krishna too wants you to do, all through in Gita.
Now we are close to revealing the true content of the Vedas. But before we do so, we would like you to keep this book aside for a while and ponder that if God was to directly give you some knowledge, what it would be. We are sure that all those in sincere pursuit of spirituality and the consequent salvation would agree that God cannot be expected to teach us mundane things, that have little significance in our spiritual life. It is this reason that we discounted RDS’s commentary the moment we saw it talking of steam engines, airplanes, ingredients for sacrifice and similar other subjects.
Rather than this, God’s books have to light the true path that leads us to God. There are already so many misleading paths in front of us, and in the confusing haze, it is surely difficult to trace the true path that would lead man to God. Therefore, knowledge imparted by God or His representatives must surely talk about the shortest path to reach Him, which has got blurred with time due to deviations and man’s nature to mold the shown path as per his own whims and likings.
However, we have seen that several books written by humans are so complex that they cannot be understood without a teacher or a guide. What if we are unable to understand God’s book, or confusion arise as regard to their understanding and interpretation. Who will be the teacher in such a case? Who will be the guide? Are we to consider ordinary human beings or apparently pious sages as our guides, when we all know that each of us is governed by material senses and modalities of nature and, therefore, each one of us is fallible? Surely, the guides to God’s teachings must be those who are chosen by God Himself. They should be ones who are not fallible, who show us the true path always and show how to lead that path in practicality.
Such divine beings should take birth as humans, live as humans and die as humans, so that none of us can say that God’s path cannot be treaded. In their lives as humans, if they show certain superhuman characteristics, it should be either as sign to indicate their position in relation to God or because of their perfect knowledge of all sciences and spirituality. It is to them that we should look at our hour of crisis and find solutions to our problems only through making an access to them. These are men who are identified by God as devatas in the Vedas so that we recognize them when they come to show us the way in future.
You might say, what was the need of identifying them in the beginning? Why didn’t’ they took birth on earth right at the beginning? Answer is that the man of earlier times was not prepared to accept them, because of his inferior mental capabilities. Mere mention of them in the Vedas astounded them so much so that they assigned divinity to them. What if the devatas were physically present in front of them? Moreover, if they had come at the time when Vedas were revealed, there was a greater chance that modern man would have discounted the incidents of their life as myths of pre-historic men. They came during an age when the language and particularly the art of writing had developed and man was somewhat prepared to receive them. Also Arabia was chosen for them as the place for various reasons. First, it was located at the centre of all major civilizations. Secondly, in spite of all the evils that they carried, Arabs had a language that was far more developed than all the languages of the time. More importantly, Arabs had an elaborate method of narrating incidents and even mentioned the chain of narrators. This ensured that it was always possible to know the authenticity of narrations.
When I sat down to study the Vedas, I was having handicap of not knowing the original language in which these scriptures were written. Reason and intellect was my chief resort. Using this, when I attempted to study the Vedas from the existing translations, I came to conclusion that something was wrong somewhere. I concluded that either the Vedas are not divinely revealed books as claimed or the text or the translation has got altered with time. This is so because I found total lack of sense and coherence in the existing translations. Why would God spend His energy on telling us what oil to be put in fire, what kind of ladles are to be used and how water and fire combine to make steam. This was the view formed because all through my study of Upanishads and Puranas, I had seen them mentioning that the greatest of secrets about our salvation lay in the Vedas. Can all this mundane information guarantee salvation?
For instance see this passage from Mundaka Upanishad, which says:
(I.2.1): This is that truth. The works which the sages saw in the hymns are variously spread forth in the three Vedas. Perform them constantly, ye lovers of truth. This is your path to the world of good deeds.
But even need to perform good deeds cannot be found in the existing translations of the Vedas. Then I found in the existing translations some hints of the inner truth that the Gita and Upanishads were trying to convey. I decided to buy a Sanskrit-English dictionary that very day. I noted down the translation of all the words mentioned in some of the hymns and then tried to form a sensible sentence out of the words. To my utter surprise, I saw that the mysteries were glaring at us, waiting to be unveiled. Though I admit that my translations may not be accurate but what gets undeniably revealed from this exercise is that the truths are plainly written in the Vedas and if our knowledgeable scholars were unable to decipher them till now, it was because the Manifest Self had not willed this to happen. If a person like me with no knowledge of Sanskrit could reach the truths, just imagine the extent of information that would be revealed when our learned scholars of Sanskrit will translate the various hymns in the light of the missing links that I have pieced together.
From now onwards, I am presenting the study of the Vedas very much in the manner in which I did it. First I will show you what discrepancies I found in the existing translation of the Vedas to come to conclusion that if this is what the Vedas contain, then it cannot be the word from God. Then I will show you how my views changed about the Vedas and its content and finally what I found upon translating some of the hymns myself.
Yes, devatas are those who are being identified by the Vedas. They are the saviours. They are described as rulers of our organs of action and senses. It is they who pervade inside our atma. They are going to be those who would be the real guides, when they come in human form to live in this world. It is they who would conclude the God’s teachings and show us the right path and also how to tread on it.
As we proceed, you will find our conclusion perfectly fitting not only with the entire Vedic literature, but also confirming to the Upanishads and Gita and also with other revealed books like the Old Testament and the Quran. But you must be prepared to make certain compromises with your existing beliefs, as we will conclude that not only the present day Hindus, but the Muslims, the Christians and the Jews – all have digressed from one and only true path. The source of all of them is one, all of them are following certain religion but none is following God’s religion. Muslims too are far deviated from the true path and not one of their sects today is strictly practicing the religion that was intended by God. God’s religion or the true path to God is far different from all that the Muslims, the Hindus, the Christians, the Jews, and the others are doing in the name of God.
This will become clearer when you proceed with this book. If you are receptive to reason, you will find that all of us were in dark. Not only the Vedas, but the ancient Egyptian, Mesopotamian, Chinese and Greek literature, all tried to identify the devatas but we didn’t understood. In fact, we understood and then got deviated.
As Quran says:
No misfortune strikes the earth nor your selves unless it has been written in a book before We bring it into existence; that it is easy for God (Quran: LVII, 22)
And Vedas are nothing but a living proof of this claim of God!
We picked up the Vedas to see if we find some more proofs of our claim in them. We picked up ‘The Holy Veda’ translated by Acharya Dharma Deva Vidya Martanda (ADDVM) with Rishi Dayananda Saraswati’s (RDS) commentary and The Yajur Veda, translated by Devi Chand M.A. based on the commentary of RDS (b. 1824 - d.1884 A.D.)
Initially, we have tried to show the absurdities and conflicts that exist in the existing commentaries so as to prove that the presently available commentaries are incorrect. A little later we will try to give the true translations of certain Vedic mantras, through the help of a Sanskrit-English dictionary. If you are eager to see the meanings derived by us or do not wish to read the criticism of the present day commentaries done by us, you can skip this portion. Though, it is our earnest wish that you read, so as to get an idea how, our failure to use reason and intellect, has led to people thrusting illogical, contradictory and meaningless theories on us.