I have come across an article which claims to have analyzed the Vedas in-depth, with quotes and translations from eminent persons like Swami Dayananda Sarasvati,concluding that the Vedas are Obscene.
I have published an article on whether Rama’s Mother Kausalya indulged in Horse sex and orgy.
“Although all three of King Dasaratha’s wives were united with the carcass of the horse, Rama’s mom Kausalya was the one who had the honor of spending a whole night with the dead animal’s genitals plugged in her vagina: “
Another on the observation that the Vedas contain and promote Incest.
‘Swami Dayanand Saraswati, in his book Rigvedadi Bhashya Bhumika on the authority of Rigved 1/164/33, uses immoral language to convey the working of the natural phenomenon. You can yourself assess the cheap nature of this allegory, which promotes and glorifies incest”
Links are provided towards the close of the Post and you may read my rebuttals.
Now to the conclusion that the Vedas are obscene.
1.One should study the Vedas in its entirety.
The Vedas are not Books that are compiled to promote a particular group nor are they founded by some one who visits Heaven in a Horse, reads the Laws of God written in a Stone(as if God can not remember His own Laws) and reveals(?) after some time (possibly for recollection).
The Vedas are grasped from the Ether by various people of various dispositions and were transmitted through word of mouth.
Unlike some Religions, Hinduism, does not believe in numbers nor does it proclaim that those who do not subscribe to it are Infidels,Heathen, nor does it consign them to Hell.
Information as experienced, as distinct from being learned, were compiled later by Vyasa for People to refer and follow, if they so desire.
2.The Vedas need 36 years of study or at least seven years to understand.
3.The core teaching has to be grasped, that of,
Reality being a Principle,
That It has No name and Form,
That the Deavatas and the Timurthis, Brahma, Vishnu ans Rudra are prone to emotions and they pay for their actions.
Especially the Deavatas like Indra , Varuna, Agni, Vayu and others are only a slightly more evolved Beings than Man:they undergo the trails and tribulations as we Humans go through because of our desires.
3.Some of the passages quoted in the article are allegorical and they do not promote obscenity.
4.To understand the Vedas , one must know that Vedas, at the Highest level do not subscribe to the concept of Sin at all.
It says that the so-called Sins are the result of Human Nature nd warns people to stay away if they want to develop spiritually.
Sanctions are imposed by the Smritis and not by the Sruthi(Vedas)
Later The Ithihasas, Ramayana, Mahabharata and the Puranas express this idea from real life and expose the perils of such desires.
But this concept needs maturity to understand.
In the hands of the immature this would promote personal degradation and social instability.
5.And one must understand that The Puranas,and the Vedas are facts and they reveal what is the Truth, even if it be unpalatable and by our human standards sinful.
Facts, in the view of Hinduism, are facts, even if the perpetrators are Gods themselves.
It may be Indra when he forcefully enjoyed Ahalya,Lord Rama when He killed Vaali by hiding behind a tree or Lord Krishna’s son who ridiculed Sages.
Rig Veda 10.110.5 Spacious doors remain wide open like beautiful wives for their husbands. O divine doors, great and all-impellers, be easy of access to the gods.
Yaska Acharya explains this verse as
Nirukta 8.10 ”Having spaciousness, make yourself wide open as exceedingly beautiful wives do their thighs for their husbands in sexual intercourse. The thighs are the most beautiful parts (of the body)…”
The next verse is even more obscene,
‘‘Just as a wife, the recipient of semen, at the time of cohabitation keeps her head opposite to the head of the husband, and her face opposite to that of his, so should both husband and wife perform together their domestic duties. A husband is a protector like a physician. He lives happily like a child, and with tranquillity produces progeny with penis keen with ardour.”- Yajur Veda 19.88, Tr. Devi Chand (Arya Samaj), p.215.
What is obscene in describing the actual sex position?
Hinduism does nor abhor sex for it knows it is Natural
As to the first portion of this quote, it is a simile .
“We read in newspaper about some Hindu scholars condemning homosexuality. But do they have any evidence that prohibits homosexuality in Hinduism? Hindu scholars fail to furnish any reference which condemns homosexuality but still some try to term homosexuality as irreligious act. Fortunately there are some Hindu scholars like Shri Shri Ravishankar who honestly accept such facts, below are two snapshots of his tweets
Hinduism accepts LGBT.
What is wrong in it?
Please read my post on this.
Some protestant Hindus proudly promote Vedas as philosophical, free from all vulgarities. But in reality there is no limit for Vulgarity in Vedas. It even promotes sex with animals let alone adultery and pornography. Sex with animals in Hinduism is not a vulgar thing, Ancient Hindu temples like Khajuraho, Ajanta, Ellora clearly depicts men and girls having sex with animals.
”As a buffalo (Indra) desired the lusty female born from himself; the mena of the horse he made into the mother of the cow”- Rig Veda 1.121.2, Tr. Geldner.
Maharshi Yaska mentions a strange story about the birth of Asvins (the twin horsemen). The story says Saranyu was unwilling to have sex with Vivasvat and ran away but Vivasvat chased her and raped her. Yaska writes,
”Saranyu daughter of Tvastr bore twins, Yama and Yami, to Vivasvat the sun. She having substituted another lady of similar appearance, and having assumed the shape of a mare, ran away. He, Vivasvat, the sun, having also assumed the shape of a horse, pursued her, and joined her. Thence the Asvins were born. Manu was born from the lady of similar appearance.” Nirukta 12.10
In all these cases the perversions of Human Nature are exposed.
They are not promoted.
In these cases the individual has sex with the animals after assuming the form of the animal, there is no Human animal sex here.
The articles other points merit)?) the same rebuttal.
I forgot to add that some of the meanings are by western scholars(?) to malign Hinduism and promote Christianity.