Removing The Sheen From Buddhism

[Husky]

Post 6/?



And finally, all occurrences (=4) of RiShabha in the Rig Veda Samhita

(substring *R^iShabha*)



(Will get to verse 10.166.1 at the end, which was claimed to be the reference to the Jain teerthankara Rishabha)

आ ते अग्न ऋचा हविर्हृदा तष्टं भरामसि ।

ते ते भवन्तूक्षण रषभासो वशा उत ॥ (6.16.47) [Agni]

47 Agni, we bring thee, with our hymn, oblation fashioned in the heart.

Let these be oxen unto thee, let these be bulls and kine to thee.



उपेदमुपपर्चनमासु गोषूप पृच्यताम् ।

उप ऋषभस्य रेतस्युपेन्द्र तव वीर्ये ॥ (6.28.8) [On the Gau. Also a bit on Indra]

8 Now let this close admixture be close intermigled with these Cows,

Mixt with the Steer's prolific flow, and, Indra, with thy hero might. [Steer is a certain state/type of bull.]



यस्मिन्नश्वास ऋषभास उक्षणो वशा मेषा अवसृष्टास आहुताः ।

कीलालपे सोमपृष्ठाय वेधसे हृदा मतिं जनये चारुमग्नये ॥ (10.91.14) [Agni]

14 He in whom horses, bulls, oxen, and barren cows, and rams, when duly set apart, are offered up,—

To Agni, Soma-sprinkled, drinker of sweet juice, Disposer, with my heart I bring a fair hymn forth.

However, it was the RV Mandala 10.166 that was specifically alleged as being a reference to the Jain RiShabha.

In Wacky's (teerthankara) Rishabha page history, and many other sites on the web, the assertion is that the verse 10.166.1 (containing the Vedic Skt word R^iShabha) referred to the Jain teerthankara of that name and meant the following:

Of Rishabha (1st Tirthankara Rishabha) is written:

? ::"''But Risabha went on, unperturbed by anything till he became sin-free like a conch that takes no black dot, without obstruction ... which is the epithet of the First World-teacher, may become the destroyer of enemies''" (Rig Veda X.166)

But the actual verse 10.166 in the Rig Veda is as follows - it mentions the word R^iShabha alright, but isn't referring to any Jain teerthankara:

[ऋषभं मा समानानां सपत्नानां विषासहिम् ।

हन्तारं शत्रूणां कर्धि विराजं गोपतिं गवाम ॥ (10.166.1) [sapatnanAshanam]



1. MAKE me a bull among my peers, make me my rivals, conqueror:

Make me the slayer of my foes, a sovran ruler, lord of kine

+ The suktam that this verse is from is for "sapatnanAshanam". I.e. not for praising anyone, but for the destruction of one's enemies.

+ The only God addressed in this Suktam appears to be vAchaspati: he's called on to help subdue the enemies.

+ But the word "R^iShabha" here as well as the shloka containing the word do not refer to Vachaspati (who is called upon in a later shloka), but is literally a reference to the one reciting the mantra (i.e. the first-person singular).

Yet *this* is the verse Jains have chosen to read the Jaina teerthankara into....?



Am pasting the Griffith translation for the the full 10.166, for a better glimpse at the original context. Note it's the first 2 lines that translate the verse containing the word "R^iShabha".

1. MAKE me a bull among my peers, make me my rivals, conqueror:

Make me the slayer of my foes, a sovran ruler, lord of kine

2 I am my rivals’ slayer, like Indra unwounded and unhurt,

And all these enemies of mine are vanquished and beneath my feet.

3 Here, verily, I bind you fast, as the two bow-ends with the string.

Press down these men, O Lord of Speech, that they may humbly speak to me.

4 Hither I came as conqueror with mighty all-effecting power,

And I have mastered all your thought, your synod, and your holy work.

5 May I be highest, having gained your strength in war, your skill in peace

my feet have trodden on your heads.

Speak to me from beneath my feet, as frogs from out the water croak, as frogs from out the water croak.

I think it's also worth pasting the following, as it appears to me to give an instance of where just verse 1 of 10.166 is apparently to be used by Hindus in some specific context (?), along with other mantras from other parts of the Rig:



archive.org/stream/grihyastrasrul01oldeuoft/grihyastrasrul01oldeuoft_djvu.txt

[...]

10. Or something else that belongs to the house-

hold.



11. (He then) should drive (In that chariot) to an

assembly.



12. Having murmured, while looking at the sun,

(the verse), 'Make our renown highest' (Rig-veda

IV, 31, 15), he should descend.



13. ' To the bull among my equals ' (Rig-veda X,

166, i) — (this verse he should murmur) while

approaching (that assembly ?).



14. ' May we be called to-day Indra's best friends *

(Rig-veda I, 167, 10) — when the sun is setting,



15. ' Thus I address you, O daughters of heaven,

while you arise' (Rig-veda IV, 51, 11) — when day

appears.

[...]

Only the opening of the shloka is translated above. But it looks like the file gives an overview of the set of shlokas (from different parts of the Veda) that are to be used in some particular situation.

And now, why would the Grihya Sutras' explanation be "this verse he [not sure who, the reciter?] should murmer while approaching (that assembly)" if it was actually something to do with a Jain Teerthankara? What does it have do with Jainism or say about Jainism at all - even in this 2nd context where the relevant single verse appears to be used independent of the rest of 10.166? Still nothing (remotely) Jain about it.





To repeat, the claim made was as follows (as seen in wacky's teerthankara "Rishabh" page edit history):

Of Rishabha (1st Tirthankara Rishabha) is written:

? ::"''But Risabha went on, unperturbed by anything till he became sin-free like a conch that takes no black dot, without obstruction ... which is the epithet of the First World-teacher, may become the destroyer of enemies''" (Rig Veda X.166)

Where did they even get that from? It seems like they pulled this most convenient "meaning" that they wish to assign the verse out of thin air, just to prop up Jainism's theology of a line of teerthankaras using Hindu religious texts.



No wonder the claims are now becoming more vague - but no less determined to somehow involve the Vedam as proof for Jain teerthankaras - such as:

[Jain Teerthankara RiShabha] finds some references in Veda. However, its meaning is not clear and has different interpretations."



[Jain Teerthankara Neminatha as ariShTaNemi] is mentioned in some of the hymns of the Vedas but their meaning is doubtful.

In the Yajurveda, he seems to be clearly mentioned as one of the important Rishis [citation needed].

How convenient to no longer have to bother giving references for impossible claims. If he's so "clearly" mentioned in the Yajus, then where is the "citation" that even wacky - so loose with references, or with checking up on them - demands?



But it's a copout - and a deliberate change of tack at that - for them to say that the meaning of the Vedic verses is not "clear" for Rishabha and is "doubtful" (despite simultaneously/magically also being supposedly "clear" for references to Neminatha etc) and that these verses "have different interpretations".

Nonsense, the actual Vedic lines are at least sufficiently clear to allow no readings of "Jainism" in them. And even were multiple interpretations actually possible, forcibly-reading Jaina teerthankaras into them is an invalid interpretation. Or just downright falsehood.





Anyway, Mahabharatam plus its appendix (the Harivamsha) for another day. So too the Chandogya Upanishad/ghorA~Ngirasa of the lineage of A~Ngirasas. And anything else.