Is music sacred?

[shankarank]

This kind of interpretation wasn't my intention, just to clarify.

In post modernism it seems , there no such thing as intent or original interpretation. Everybody can make up their own myths! . Like Devdutt Patnaik!

[shankarank]

Hope you noticed the fact that they carefully avoided mentioning a specific "God".

There is no specific God. There is only one God for all Abrahamic offshoots! So when U.S motto refers to One Nation Under God or In God we trust, that is the Judeo Christian conception of God.

[SrinathK]

This kind of interpretation wasn't my intention, just to clarify.

In post modernism it seems , there no such thing as intent or original interpretation. Everybody can make up their own myths! . Like Devdutt Patnaik!

??

Sir, please do not mind me pointing this out, I see that you've stuffed your mind with a lot of info over the decades, but I think its high time for some serious meditation and defragmentation (like those old hard drives). There is a lack of cohesion and focus in your posting, it is jumping from one thing to another whatever comes up in memory. It's causing discussions to meander a lot. It will be so much better if all this knowledge was kept in order, not disorder. My 2 cents.

[Pratyaksham Bala]

Gone astray !
What are we discussing ?
Proselytism ? Foreign vs Indian ? Disparity in Hindu society ? Or …

[SrinathK]

Or shankarank's next thought...

[humdinger]

Well, this is what late Zahiruddin Khan Dagar seems to have written (source here):
"Dhrupad is a gift of Samaveda. This music emerges from sacred mantras of that holy scripture....you can not sepearate hindustani classical music from the worship of god."

Well said

We should all feel the same way about carnatic music also. Then only we can protect its divinity and sanctity.

Hope you noticed the fact that they carefully avoided mentioning a specific "God".

Dear Suresh, I don't think I can support your observation. Here obvious reference is to the worship of that god who is espoused in "vEdas", of which sAmavEda is a part.

[uday_shankar]

I don't think I can support your observation. Here obvious reference is to the worship of that god who is espoused in "vEdas", of which sAmavEda is a part.

In the vedas, there is only mention of multiple demigods/deities such as Indra, Varuna, sUrya, Agni, Vishnu, Mitra, etc...

The notion of a dualist "God", eternally separated from man and situated in heaven, is hard to coax from the vedas. "Brahman", which is widely mentioned, cannot be interpreted as such. Nor too, "Isvara", which is kind of a saguna Brahman. So there is really no "God" in the vedas in this simple dualist sense, a God who is permanently separated from existence, residing in a place called Kailasa or VaikunTa, who is a object of worship. All that came later, the smritis, puranas, etc.. Of course, all along, most ordinary folks were worshiping their local deities, and had nothing to do with vEdas...

Even the demigods/deities were not worshiped in the contemporary sense of the word. They were just offered Ahuti's in the yagnya so they may bless us with better specific things, Surya for vision, Varuna for rains, etc... Very transactional, kind of applying for special favors from specialists in that kind of favor.

So it appears there really was no "worship" of any god, or God, in the Vedic practice.

So I really don't know what you're disagreeing with with Suresh .

[Sachi_R]

Humdinger,
I agree with you.

Dhrupad is a musical tradition from the Samaveda.

The Dagars go back to 7 generations and were Hindu Brahmins from Delhi. This is stated by Ustad Baha’uddin Dagar in the Amazon Prime Harmony video also.

Uday Bhawalkar in a Parivadini lecdem has stated how he found the Dagar family to be very "Hindu" in their belief and tradition.

The Dagars stand for Dhrupad music, centred in Hindu traditions. Nothing Abrahamic in their sentiment.

The sacredness discussion is not about my God vs their god. Please.

[Sachi_R]

In the vedas, there is only mention of multiple demigods/deities such as Indra, Varuna, sUrya, Agni, Vishnu, Mitra, etc...

Uday, I think you know this one:

इन्द्रं मित्रं वरुणमग्निमाहुरथो स दिव्यो सुपर्णो गरुत्मान् ।

एकं सद्विप्राः बहुधा वदन्ति अग्निं यमं मातरिश्वानमाहुः ॥

“indram mitram varuNamagnimAhuratho sa divyo suparNo garutmAn |

ekam sadviprAh bahudhA vadanti agnim yamam mAtarishvAnamAhuh ||” - RV1.164.46
This is from the Rigveda.

Throughout the Vedas, the attempt is to seek and worship that enternal principle we call God in English.

Samaveda contains Kena Upanishad. The word Kena means "by whom is..." The Upanishad gives a beautiful allusion to this God principle.

I think this type of discussion often uses the word God or god in several ways, but I am pretty sure what God Ustad Dagar was referring to... The Vedic principle of God.

There is this famous shloka i. BHAGAVATAM:
SB 12.13.1
sūta uvāca
yaṁ brahmā varuṇendra-rudra-marutaḥ stunvanti divyaiḥ stavair
 vedaiḥ sāṅga-pada-kramopaniṣadair gāyanti yaṁ sāma-gāḥ
dhyānāvasthita-tad-gatena manasā paśyanti yaṁ yogino
 yasyāntaṁ na viduḥ surāsura-gaṇā devāya tasmai namaḥ

This shloka is often quoted to show how in Hinduism the many approaches to God all tie into the core concept of a Supreme Being, call it Parabrahman or Ishvara.

Sorry I have used different transcript methods, all copy paste

[humdinger]

Humdinger,
I agree with you.

Dhrupad is a musical tradition from the Samaveda.

The Dagars go back to 7 generations and were Hindu Brahmins from Delhi. This is stated by Ustad Baha’uddin Dagar in the Amazon Prime Harmony video also.

Uday Bhawalkar in a Parivadini lecdem has stated how he found the Dagar family to be very "Hindu" in their belief and tradition.

The Dagars stand for Dhrupad music, centred in Hindu traditions. Nothing Abrahamic in their sentiment.

The sacredness discussion is not about my God vs their god. Please.

This could be of interest to you. Dagar family can be traced back to 19th generation, and the generation before that was hindu, a person named Gopal Das Pandey: http://dhrupad.org/about/dagar-tradition/

Not my intention to bring this god vs that god, was just responding to Suresh's observation.

But from the above statement of dagar ji, I deduce he definitely feels that his music is sacred.

[humdinger]

I don't think I can support your observation. Here obvious reference is to the worship of that god who is espoused in "vEdas", of which sAmavEda is a part.

In the vedas, there is only mention of multiple demigods/deities such as Indra, Varuna, sUrya, Agni, Vishnu, Mitra, etc...

The notion of a dualist "God", eternally separated from man and situated in heaven, is hard to coax from the vedas. "Brahman", which is widely mentioned, cannot be interpreted as such. Nor too, "Isvara", which is kind of a saguna Brahman. So there is really no "God" in the vedas in this simple dualist sense, a God who is permanently separated from existence, residing in a place called Kailasa or VaikunTa, who is a object of worship. All that came later, the smritis, puranas, etc.. Of course, all along, most ordinary folks were worshiping their local deities, and had nothing to do with vEdas...

Even the demigods/deities were not worshiped in the contemporary sense of the word. They were just offered Ahuti's in the yagnya so they may bless us with better specific things, Surya for vision, Varuna for rains, etc... Very transactional, kind of applying for special favors from specialists in that kind of favor.

So it appears there really was no "worship" of any god, or God, in the Vedic practice.

So I really don't know what you're disagreeing with with Suresh .

I was only disagreeing with Sureh's observation that the statement was not specific.
I don't have the required education to do the veda bhashya like you so can't comment on your observations. But told by elders that the gist of vedas is to realize the god/brahman in your true self. And I don't think this concept is espoused by any abrahamic faiths, so in that sense the idea of god is certainly different for them.

[Sachi_R]

Humdinger,
Thank you.
It's my turn to share:
https://youtu.be/N96gZGTBDqY
Please cue to 1hr 9 min.

[sureshvv]

Well said

We should all feel the same way about carnatic music also. Then only we can protect its divinity and sanctity.

Hope you noticed the fact that they carefully avoided mentioning a specific "God".

Dear Suresh, I don't think I can support your observation. Here obvious reference is to the worship of that god who is espoused in "vEdas", of which sAmavEda is a part.

OK. Let me try to say it another way and may be you will agree.

It is the same God that they (the other religion which Zahiruddin Khan Dagar belongs to) also worship.

[Ranganayaki]

. Let me try to say it another way and may be you will agree.

It is the same God that they (the other religion which Zahiruddin Khan Dagar belongs to) also worship.

Yes.

[Ranganayaki]

Even the demigods/deities were not worshiped in the contemporary sense of the word. They were just offered Ahuti's in the yagnya so they may bless us with better specific things, Surya for vision, Varuna for rains, etc... Very transactional, kind of applying for special favors from specialists in that kind of favor.

So it appears there really was no "worship" of any god, or God, in the Vedic practice.

Yes, we "propitiated" them.

(Just responding to the content of individual posts without a sense of the direction of the thread. )

[shankarank]

Throughout the Vedas, the attempt is to seek and worship that enternal principle we call God in English.

vEdas were not taught to anybody in general, except those committed to learn it. So all claims in that context are private, between the Guru and Sishya. To publicly discuss them and allow them to be characterized this way or that way is somewhat unfair! Just because some people from the West published translations of them that too!

I go only as far as the general cultural sense they convey and I challenged the brahmin community based on them - as to if chandas is sacred why did they walk out of Mridangam tani? Only a sweet or powerful voice is divine?

Or if they say it is all entertainment - then they have no basis to complain of anything now.

Or if they buy into the "fad" "intellectual" definition of "art" - then can I claim they are poor art connoisseurs as they have not seen the "art" in Mridangam?

The reason it is fair to critique the dominant religions of the world is because they make public claims about various other cultures not in their direct dominion as of yet and publicly and forcefully make such claims to the people of native cultures without their asking.

If somebody says publicly using free speech and freedom of religion about me, I have the duty to respond.

On top of that you say "God" in English. Is English language a religion or a culture with sense of sacred? When did it by itself define God?

[Sachi_R]

Shankarank,
I don't buy your comments.

When someone says Vedas have no mention of God, I clarify by quoting Vedas.

I also clarify that the word God comes from English and has specific connotations (derived from religions that are associated with English originally) and those concepts vary from our idea of Paramatma or Parabrahman or Ishvara.

Period.

[shankarank]

You are hand-waving and quoting a suburban rail traveler or a European football fan! You either check out the authoritative cosmologies described in specific in each of the scriptures about God or just stop using the word in any serious discussion, especially if you start quoting from vEdas which are NOT public documents or enforced documents.

[humdinger]

Humdinger,
Thank you.
It's my turn to share:
https://youtu.be/N96gZGTBDqY
Please cue to 1hr 9 min.

Thank you, I remember watching it when someone quoted this video earlier on this forum.

[humdinger]

OK. Let me try to say it another way and may be you will agree.

It is the same God that they (the other religion which Zahiruddin Khan Dagar belongs to) also worship.

I can't say because I don't know what they are worshiping. The extent to which I see it doesn't convince me to agree and I haven't studied that in more detail to be able to comment authoritatively. While it is absolute commonsense that there can be not but one god, I see a problem with the statement people especially current day educated Hindus so easily make - " all religions are same/lead to same god". Everyone whom I know who made that statement never tried to learn what is the essence of his/her religion, forget about comparing it with other religions. Just because it is fashionable and politically correct to say that, people get away talking authoritatively on stuff they didn't even spend a day studying about.

You can also refer to the post#61 of mine above to know more about what I think on this.

[shankarank]

Oh Common you finally end up with dictionary?? Dictionary is your source?? You are even worse than a coffee table conversationalist. Oh I forgot we are all just rasika forumites!!

[Ranganayaki]

Replying to 61: it's not completely true that realization is not a part of their faith, it is certainly true that Christianity has mostly suppressed it - the Church. I am reading Brother Lawrence - The Practice of The Presence Of God. Christian monk from the 17th century. He was suppressed, but his practice seems to coincide with Vedanta, but is rooted in the Christian faith.. Will come back to you on that.

If self realization is not something we thought of , but a totally natural thing, it goes without saying that there are realized souls everywhere.

[shankarank]

Oh Common you finally end up with dictionary?? Dictionary is your source??

And why does that refer to Christians ., Jews and Muslims if there is an English meaning of "God"? How many of those faiths originally have anything to do with the language of English? And why is that not a legitimate question, when all their narratives are rooted in physical history of their origins?

Are you saying V.S Srinivasa Sastry and Dr Radhakrishnan had in their minds a certain conception of "God", based on their knowledge of English and English alone?

Isn't English a sacred language of Indian people now? What it has to do with the English of England man or the queen? Including the broken ungrammatical English that I hear every Hindi medium, tamizh medium, telugu/kannada medium guy speak for livelihood in all conference calls?

[shankarank]

Isn't English a sacred language of Indian people now?

If only we understood that, would we not have composed a song in praise of Bharat in English and in praise of our culture in English and teach that to kindergartners, instead of the imported curriculum of ba ba black sheep??

We became Bakri! We fools!

[sureshvv]

While it is absolute commonsense that there can be not but one god, I see a problem with the statement people especially current day educated Hindus so easily make - " all religions are same/lead to same god".

What about if we amend it to say, "all true religions lead to the same god".

And its corollary, "any religion that claims that it is supreme/superior is fake".

Of course this will apply equally to us and them.

[shankarank]

Truth is, religion is a big business and such ideas will not have any traction , beyond a limited set of people - who will be quickly othered! There are many mystics that have tried that argument already, and their followers are othered as "cults"!

Give animism a chance first! If you don't accept it fine. Respect it's followers! Then rest will follow!

[Ranganayaki]

Replying to 61:( ...)his practice seems to coincide with Vedanta, but is rooted in the Christian faith.. Will come back to you on that.

If self realization is not something we thought of , but a totally natural thing, it goes without saying that there are realized souls everywhere.

Rather than write something of my own, I think I will soon offer you a link to a lecture that happened just today. It is a monk born into the Christian tradition, but left the faith and joined the RKMM. He hasn’t been a Christian for about 30 years and has spoken of his need for therapy over Christianity. But the impact of the first 20 years of your life is indelible and he is rediscovering Christianity and is in a healthy place with both religions . Today’s lecture was a bit about the Vedanta in Christianity and bridging the divide between the two religions. I will provide you with a link as soon as it becomes available.

[Ranganayaki]

I have the link.

It is a slightly emotional talk from a monk reflecting on all he has received in his order and is moving to a new phase in his seeking, breaking boundaries. But it is very relevant to the discussions we have been having, but offers a very different approach and tone, quite contrary to the religious acrimony we’ve been experiencing everywhere.

It’s a hour-long talk.

http://vedantacenter.s3.amazonaws.com/2 ... nda%29.mp3

[shankarank]

I have N number of such swamis and gurus to choose from. So he isn't anything new or special. The idea of a swami that unites a dogmatic faith based followers of something with me is ridiculous.

And you cannot claim religious acrimony. The subject of the thread is not religion or God.

And in the history of people who have come from the west there are many U-turners.

Simply in meditation and mind sciences - this discussion details how it proceeds : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyfHqCWp4Pc

What about if we amend it to say, "all true religions lead to the same god".

First of all I don't have a concept of God to offer to them. Define what God you are talking about? I might as well be convinced by evolutionary biology.

They will summarily reject any suggestion:

https://christiananswers.net/q-eden/rfsm-guru.html

The ask of Music being sacred or language being sacred is a civilizational/cultural value and not a religious statement from some Monk or anything to do with any goal of realization.

It is minimal in that it is rooted in the present , but does consider the past about what is inherited and taught sincerely to be treated as sacred and makes a promise to the future generations that we would pass it on along with our own newly cherished beautiful creativity.

This is only to fend off the claim that music is secular ( as in secular human art!) devoid of any divinity - where divinity does not assume a creator. The claim of divinity does not prevent any enjoyment of pleasure as a result of music. And the claim that music as a Worldly pleasure makes it secular is rejected.

The term secular has another connotation. That it is like any piece of art people buy in the market and museums , art galleries display and purges the civilizational value or experience. After all the concept of museum in this context of antique cultural treasures is an abominable display of a destroyed and plundered culture, with no respect to those who cherished it.

We also oppose this construct.

This may still happen, like ragas being taken outside the context in movies and used. We only want people to distinguish the two, so such attempts can be othered. Sometimes depending on how it is used we will choose to accept it.

This is the minimal requirement with which we discuss the sacredness of music, within the sphere of public debate. Elsewhere it can have deeper connotations, but at this time this is sufficient I think.