Thread: Does "Bharat-Varsha" refer to India, or the entire planet?
Re: Does "Bharat-Varsha" refer to India, or the entire planet?
Bharata means, "light-giver". BharataVarsha means, "the land of light". On a mundane level, it means, "the East". But to be accurate, BharataVarsha means vrihata Bharata including all those Eastern nations which fall into Ramayana zone of influence.
Then there is AryaVrata. Arya means, "the dark divine Sun" (don't ask me how ). Mundanely, "the West". Accurately, the vrihata Arya desha including all those western nations that fell under Arya domain of influence.
So, in the modern times it is no surprise that there is some confusion regarding these words. Clearly, more orthodox Hindus (read mostly native born) will equate AryaVarta to BharataVarsha to present confines of India - this view is well justified by observing that Dharma's influence has totally vanished outside India.
Then there are some Sadhus still residing in India, who know much much more, things that are very powerful and perhaps shouldn't be told.
Personally I am of the belief that at one point in time, vedic civilization was present everywhere on the planet, but at present is confined to the subcontinent.
Is it possible that in every Manuvantara, Manu manifests in different parts of the planet, and in this particular Manuvantara, that place happens to be India? This is pure speculation on my part, I was just wondering if it has any basis in authorized scriptures or whatever.
Puranas praises Bharatavarsha as Mokshabhumi and says that even gods wish to take birth in bharatavarsha in vaidik families. Such birth is a sure way to moksha. It is knows as Mokshabhumi as most of the people here attains moksha. Birth in Bharata is the highest as one is born in Brahmana, Kshatriya and Vaishya varna.
Lets see what puranas say. Following words are extractions from Puranas.
"Puranas mention India as the landmass that stretches from the snowy peaks of Himalayas to the splashing Indian Ocean. Bharatavarsha has nine divisions named Indradweep, Kaseru, Tamraparn, Gamastiman, Nagdweep, Soumya, Gandharva, Varun and Yahadweep which is surrounded by the sea and has an expansion of 1000 Yojans. In the eastern part of Bharata, live Kirat whereas in the western part live Yavans. In the Bharata, live population of Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and Shudras who pass their lives engage in works ascribed to their respective class. So as people who've varna lives only in Bharatavarsha, Vishnu takes avatara in India."
"Four yugas namely Satya Yuga, Treta Yuga, Dwapar Yuga and Kali Yuga descend on Bharatavarsha. In Bharatavarsha, sages observe penance to attain better life in another world, people organise Yagyas and offer donations to the Brahmins respectfully. In Jambudweep, Lord Vishnu is worshipped in Yagyas. Bharatavarsha is the land par excellence in Jambudweep for it is a land of action. Soul passes through millions of births, only then it finds a chance to take birth in Bharatavarsha when its pious deeds accumulate to a certain extent. Even the gods envy those people who take birth in Bharatavarsha. People in Bharatavarsha act without a desire to get fruits from their action. They dedicate their whole action to Lord Vishnu and ultimately mingle with Him. "
From Markandeya Purana : " Bharatavarsha is the only country in the whole world where all the four yugas- Satya, Treta, Dwapar, and Kali occur in a cyclic way. Bharatavarsha is the root of all forms of divinity where deities reside and almighty God takes incarnation."
"Beyond the boundaries of Bharatavarsha live the disbelievers (Non-aryan,that is, those who disbelieve in the Vedas). To the east live the kiratas and to the west live the yavanas.
Bharatavarsha is populated by brahmanas, kshatriyas, vaishyas and shudras. There are seven major mountain ranges in Bharatavarsha. These are known as Mahendra, Malaya, Sahya, Shaktimana, Riksha, Vindhya and Paripatra. "
It's wort to note that we got something. According to Purana, non-aryan are those people whose homeland isn't India. Another refutation to AIT..
Such is the glory of India.
Hail to our Mother, Bharata.
Thanks, can you please show me exactly where I can reference those quotes that you cited? A link perhaps?
Sri Rishabhadeva and Jayanthi had many sons and the first one was named "Bharatha"[not to be confused with the son of Dushyantha and Shakuntala of Mahabharatha] and according to the Puranas, the area of land, Ajanabha, in Jambudweepa, below the great himalayas till the ocean was ruled by Bharatha and hence it also got the name "Bharatha-varsha"
Srimad Bhagavatam[5.7.3] ajanābhaṁ nāmaitad varṣaṁ bhāratam iti yata ārabhya vyapadiśanti.
Coming to your question "....why have none of the avatars appeared in any place outside India? Why do shastras only speak of holy places within the subcontinent and nowhere else?"
can you please let me know on what basis have to come to this conclusion?
can you please explain as to how on earth did you conclude that none of the Avatars appeared in any place outside India?
Have you heard of the term "Prithvi" which refers to earth? do you know how it got that name?
This may not go down well with people who are born outside of India, would it also include Indians who have not taken birth in India.
Most probably yes, because we see much differences between Indian and western born Hindus.
The Daoist tradition grew up independently from Hindu culture, would you also say that they are not not noble. Also what about the Ancient Egyptians. Both these were very advanced cultures.
They may be advanced but not more than Vaidik culture. Vaidik Hindu culture is ultimate and Lord Vishnu himself is the creator and protector of it. Other cultures are man made and developed in course of time.
As I think, only Iskcons alleges that Bharatvarsha refers to whole world. I don't know the exact reason, may be to attract westerners to make them feel that Hinduism is not actually foreign to them..
While I do not wish to undermine the great Culture of Bharat-Varsha I think that if many even minded people see those types of comments then they will be heading straight for the exit door. I also think many western Hindus maybe up in arms over this too.
I am not totally sure of what ISKCON thinks about this, some have done some archeological research, Micheal A Cremo for one in Forbidden Archeology , but it is considered controversial.
I read and study many aspects of culture and religion around the world, and I do find something common within all of them, although expressed in diverse ways. The underlying essence of Daoism is non different as far as I can see from advaita, although mention of Vedic Gods maybe absent in their writings, but perhaps not their visions, also the Buddha Dharma over hundreds of years have claimed many realized masters in China,Thailand, Burma Japan and Southern Korea etc...., and the heart of true Buddhism is non different from advaita. As of this time other than reading certain passages which you highlight,I can't find anyway in which I can say God is localized in only one place. I also feel that it maybe a mistake to think that we can limit the workings of God and how he reaches out in broader parameter.
But saying all this as of now I do not see many other cultures so rich and profound as those that have arisen or have been revealed from India. I think the ancient writings set the standard of realization, and may stand supreme in terms of revelation but within mystic writings over the years many have come to the same type of conclusion but expressed according to the cultural and environmental surroundings.
That being said I have no doubts that I need a good few lifetimes for success, and I wouldn't say no to being born in a highly advanced setting like in South India.
Here's the thing, as a Hindu polytheist, I do not hold the glorious gods and goddesses of my ancestors under the assumption that they are universally applicable. In terms of purely socio-cultural matters, where the gods "take birth" or incarnate is not really a matter worth contemplating rigorously over. Therefore, since I hold them under Bharatiya paradigms, or rather Dharmic epistemic and ontological realities, because of their socio-cultural relevancy, the question of why they were "born" only in various cities of Bharat and not in, say, Tokyo or Kiev, is invalid since it is irrelevant. Please keep in mind, however, what I have offered is only a Hindu polytheist perspective, a perspective that is quite content with not acknowledging a Supreme or Absolute; this question, in my opinion, would most likely apply to Hindus that hold the gods, or rather a Supreme, under the assumption or qualification of universality.
So for you, who doesn't accept smRiti (where the paratvam of certain devatA-s is established) where does the question of ayodhyA, mathurA, etc. even come up?
Last edited by Jaskaran Singh; 16 December 2014 at 08:47 PM.
I no longer hold such "Law of Shruti" thoughts. If you have been following my posts "in other dimensions" , you'll see that I have made a lot of retractions and changes in thought since early summer. Oh, and it's good to hear from you. Hope you are doing well.
Pranam..Nice article. Just my thoughts.
Vaidika culture was NEVER outside of Bharatavarsha or Aryavarta. It is not like that once all countries were following Vaidik culture but later they gave up following it.
Some similarities we find in other cultures only because the reign of entire earth was operated by one king, who was Indian/Hindu king. So there must be some cultural impact of the vaidik dharma all over the world.