Famous Samskŗt pundits like Satvalekar have debated extensively the reason why Krişhņa Yajur Veda is called "insipid or polluted' by a major authority like Vişhņu Purāņa or Srimad Bhāgavata. Two reasons are given, both of them are far-fetched, (i) the insertion of brāhmaņa passages into the mantra text, (ii) the mantrās in TS do not have reference to the name of seer who has the revelation of mantra. None of these are serious. Any one can distinguish the brāhmaņa passage from a mantra. The presence of a brāhmaņa passage is no more than a nuisance. The second reason is also far-fetched: why should the lack of rişhi's name make it polluted especially since the mīmāmsakās, the main theoreticians and practitioners of the outer yajňa, believe that Veda cannot contain the name of human beings, even if they are the seers of the mantra.

The real reason can be easily traced if one bothers to look into the actual texts of the Vājasneyi Samhitā of Shukla Yajur Veda and the Taittirīya Samhitā of the Krişhņa Yajur Veda. Shukla Yajur Veda is a book of 40 chapters or adhyāyās. There is no title for each chapter.

The TS, on the other hand, has 651 anuvākās. Each anuvāka is given a title connected to rituals. The first anuvāka, i.e., TS (1.1.1) (kāņda 1, prapāţhaka 1, anuvāka 1) is titled “vatsāpakaraņa'' (driving the calves). TS (1.1.2) as “barhir āharaņam,'' collecting the barhi grass.

Most offensive to any religious person trying to practice the virtue of non-violence (ahimsa) is the obsession of KYV TS with the animal sacrifice. The entire prapāţhaka 3 of TS, TS (1.3) is titled “agnişhţoma pashu'' the animals in the agnişhţoma yajňa. The titles given to the five anuvākās TS (1.3.7) through TS (1.3.11) are:

1.3.7:    pashurūpakaraņam, driving the animal to the sacrificial altar (yūpa).

1.3.8:   pashor vishasanam, killing of the animal.

1.3.9:   samgňapitasya pashor vapor khedanam, the removal of vapa or diaphragm of the (killed) animal and placing it in the fire.

1.3.10: vasāhoma, the fire-ritual with the organs of the animal and its "juice'.

1.3.11: gudakāņdahoma, offering of the intestines into the fire.

Every mantra of the Veda is imbibed with deep wisdom and was revealed to the rişhis when they were in a superconscient state. It is difficult to imagine that anyone with any sense could say that “drive the calves'' or “kill the animal'' is a direct revelation from the Supreme Being. Anyone who has seen the misery and pain suffered by an animal during its killing can only be shocked by these titles. 

What is most shocking is that if we read all the verses in TS (1.3.8) with the title, “the killing of the pashu'' there is no such act at all. What is being mentioned is that the human being should become conscious of the various organs of the subtle body. But the prevailing view in the time of the Vişhņu Purāņa was that each of the verses were taught as if the killing or dismembering the animal is the only meaning of these verses. These proponents of the animal killing in TS KYV insist that these mantrās have no other meaning.

As mentioned earlier about one half of the mantrās of SYV (VS) are also in TS. Some of the mantrās in TS (1.3) mentioned earlier also appear in SYV/VS in chapters 4-8. Commentators like Mahidhara who were addicted to rituals interpreted these verses as part of the animal sacrifice rite. But the text of SYV/VS is kept free from this abhorrent view. The text of KYV/TS has been ‘hijacked' as it were by the proponents of animal sacrifice by assigning titles to anuvākās specifically mentioning animal killing and making the titles to be a part of the sacred text. No wonder Vişhņu Purāņa and Srimad Bhāgavatam regard KYV/TS as ‘insipid and without substance' yātāyāmam.

S. who wrote his commentary on TS in which he forced every verse in it to yield a ritualistic meaning, especially those supposedly involving animal sacrifice.

Most of the priests in these yajňas were/are brāhmins by caste and were/are strict vegetarians; they are easily scared of a dead animal, let alone kill an animal in cold blood or watch this act. Still because of the prestige of S and because of their fear that criticising the Vedic commentary is a sacrilege, many pundits even whisper any criticism. Even some of the Heads of the  maţhās, started by the great Shankarāchārya for propagating Vedanta and the path of knowledge, are full of praise for the Sāyaņācharya's ritualistic commentary, completely avoiding the question of the morality of the animal sacrifice.

How can we make the KYV/TS become ayātayāmam, i.e., full of essence? The first step is to delete the ritual based titles given to each anuvāka. Secondly one has to accept that TS mantrās have an interpretation from the point of view of inner yajňa, i.e., contemplating mentally the collaboration with Gods without any external effort or substance.

Back to Top