A letter

[Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian]

Vidya wrote:

>> Regarding the durgA sUktam.h...it is part of an upanishad (mahAnArAyaNa)
>> which has not been commented upon by Shankara and is considered to be more
>> recent than the Vedas. Moreover, the familiar sUktam which goes by the name
>of
>> durgA sUktam (jAtavedase...) is not a prayer to durgA at all. They are all
>> prayers to agni. People have named it durgA sUktam just because the word
>durgA
>> appears in the mantras. Such incongrencies are found abundantly in our use of
>
>This is interesting news. I used to wonder that the durgA sUktam actually
>says jAtavedase..., and that jAtavedas is agni (as used in the kena
>upanishad, for example). I used to wonder what the connection to durgA was.
>This clears my doubt. The use of the word durgA in this sUktam is probably
>in the literal sense - durgA means "difficult to approach." Similarly,
>the words Siva, vishNu etc. are meant in quite different senses in the
>vedas than is popular nowadays.

Actually there is also a verse which personifies the "difficulties" as the Devi
herself in the suukta,

durgaam.h devi (a symbol whose name I don't know, but can pronounce)
sharaNamaham.h prapadye sutara sitarase namaH |

That's the connection with durgaa devi. However many of the mantras are, as
claimed, about agni.

I believe that the various shiva, vishhNu cults have been dated around 700 BC or
perhaps even before. Also the word shiva seems to mean our usual shiva in the
shvetaasvatara and the kaivalya upanishads. Also quite a few names in the
rudram (niilagriiva, niilakaNTha, etc) refer to popular legends about shiva in
the puranas. Perhaps the earlier parts of the Rg Veda may be as you say.

Ramakishnan.
--
Utinam logica falsa tuam philosophiam totam suffodiant (May faulty logic
undermine your entire philosophy)           -- strong Vulcan curse
                  http://yake.ecn.purdue.edu/~rbalasub/