1. Manthra – chanting the verses
2. Thanthra – symbolic representation of manthra
3. Yanthra – imaginary representation of thrantha and manthra.

Every veda manthra is consists of ARTHA, RASA and JNANA. Through artha we perform rituality. Through rasa, one can create the object. Jnana is liberation.

During the Vedic period, the ancient rishis have performed all above. Performed retualities, created objects and attained liberation. If you follow the yanthra model , every verse in the Vedas created the state of objects.

In purusha suktha, it is said, “Bhramhano Mukha masi, Bhahu rajanyah kruthaha……….. “ it doesn’t mean that Bramhin came out of the gods face. It means that bramhanathva came out of the face, Bramhanism is not a cast. It is a state. The current cast Bramhins are suppose to be called as “VIPRAS”. Whereas Rajas is again a state not a cast. And the other follows.

For more clarifications please feel free to right to me on shivu.handsome@gmail.com

Thanks!

Again I agree with everything you say. One of the uniqueness of the Vedic Age and the people who lived then is that words are all we have to go by. John Keay has characterises this state as the direct opposite of the case with the Indus Valley people. For the latter we have immense archaeological evidence but no words because we have not deciphered the script (despite earnest efforts to convince people we have: http://www.criticaltwenties.in/philosophyreligionculture/abuse-of-history-left-and-right). It is almost as if we have chanced upon a intircately designed and shot artistic silent film.

With the Vedic people we have next to no evidence of how they lived except from the tantalisingly eliptical language of the Vedas. The lord of the word , vac, to which they paid homage is the only god who brings their message down to us. And as you will have noticed these lines are not great indicators of how people actually lived. In fact empirical reality seems to be the last thing on anyone’s mind. So who knows if the reference to brahmanas or vaisyas is to the caste at all or somehting completely different!

The next point you make can cut both ways. It seems to be the scholarly consensus that the 10th Mandala which contains the most philosophical content is the latest insertion. So, if you argue that the casteist reference in the Purusha Sukta is a later corruption, you will also have to let go of the wonderfully advaitic Creation hymn and the song of Hiranyagarbha or Ka (Ka means literally who? All the lines of the song end with the words “Who shall we adore with our oblation?” Roberto Calasso has written a delightful book, Ka, where he uses this as the basis for a very post modern interpretation of Hindu mythology). These hymns are also the basis for the argument that Advaita Vedanta (the view that individual self and the universal self, the Brahman are one) has its roots in the Rg Veda. So if you lose the 10th Mandala, you probably lose that as well! The rest of the Rg Veda is mostly given over to very ornate and descriptive adoration of the various gods.

Some scholars have tried to explain away the controversial parts by arguing that they referred to states of consciousness rather than providing a basis for dividing up human beings socially. I do not know enough Sanskrit to assess the soundness of this argument. There is however one argument strongly going for this theory. Any hierarchical division of human beings seems to be totally incongruous with the Advaitic message of oneness at the heart of the Vedas. I think that a caste system is inconceivable in an Advaitic world view. Of course my view is based on a ‘contextual’ conjecture rather than one based a close study of the Purusa Sukta.

However there is some authority that may (indirectly) support my conjecture. Several noted scholars like Colebrook and Witzel ( and Ambedker following Colebrook)have argued that the Purusa Sukta is a later day interpolation which was inserted into the Rig Veda way after the caste system began to be practiced. They say this on an observation of linguistic and organizational dissimilarity of the 10th mandala containing the Purusa Sukta with the rest of the text of the Vedas. The Sanskrit used in the 10th mandala( which contains the Purusa Sukta) is decidedly more modern than one used in the other parts of the Rig Veda. If this theory is right then the Purusa Sukta does actually justify the caste system, but it was never a part of the original Rig Veda. The Rig Veda then does not provide any basis for the caste system.