Why Veda is misunderstood by centuries?

The modern timeline also produces Commentators like The Sayana, the Yaska or the European Pundits who found language of veda such complicated and jumbled and attributed them something different that mankind ever imagined. They not only deteriorating to find the significance of the Veda, but misinterpreted and try to manipulate it. More specifically the modern Islamists are in a mission to wipe out every scriptures of humanity present on earth including the vedas. They twisted, toggled and co-relate the divine language of the vedas with different philosophy, mythology and personality. Like the European Pundits (of past), they reclaim that The Hindus (Aryans) used to worship the Sun, Moon, Stars, Planets, the Dawn, the Night, the Wind and the Storm, Rivers, Streams, Sea, Mountains, Trees and such visible objects, as they are the play of multiple Gods, and in addition it also foretold other religion like Islam.

Completely incapable of understanding the divine language of Veda, by willing or not willing they came out of such extraordinary stories full of unnatural strange and book of prophecy. An example will illustrate this in more details. Maulana Abdul Haq (1888–1977) a so called scholar tagged his name with that Hindu name "Vidyarthi" and wrote a book “Muhammad being prophecized in Hindu scriptures” some time back in 1940s He originally wrote Muhammad in World Scriptures in Urdu as Mithaq-un-nabiyyin, published in 1936. Then he had it translated into English and it appeared under the present title in 1940. A little later he published a second part in Urdu. He then went on to expand the English version considerably, which was published in 3 volumes between 1966 and 1975. At the end this man joined in Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement and died as Ahmadiyya Muslim following another fellow from Punjab " Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad". Maulana Abdul Haq Vidyarthi wrote the following

(a) Brahma, the Creator in the Hindu Trinity, is declared to be actually Abraham. The initial letter A in Abraham has apparently been moved to the end making it Brahma. We are told "This analysis is accurate when one writes the two words in Arabic script, a language close to that spoken by Prophet Abraham". This immediately raises the problem of what language Abraham actually spoke and also that "a language close to that spoken" is not the same thing as the actual language. Also since the analysis is based on only phonetic similarity and on changing the position of the alphabets, the Hindus can with equal justice claim that Ramadan/Ramazan is actually a corruption of 'Ramanavami'.

Let us take a look at the linguistic root of Brahma.
The term Brah comes from the root Bri which means "to worship, to select, to surround". When an h is added to Bri it becomes Briha meaning to "increase, to grow". By addition of 'an', we have the word Brahman who in veda (Hinduism) is the Supreme God. Brahman thus is the original word. Brahman is without form, without gender and cannot be plural. The cosmos came into being by its will alone. When Brahman is imagined as a masculine being engaged in the act of creation, then it is called Brahma. When Brahman is imagined as a feminine being, who is the source of energy without which the act of creation cannot take place, then it is called Brahmani. Brahma thus has nothing to do with Abraham (incidentally we can also claim that Abraham comes from Brahma), but comes from Brahman and is clearly the God of creation/the creative aspect of God and not a human.

(b) "Similarly, Abraham’s first wife Sarah is mentioned in the Vedas as Saraswati". This again depends on mere phonetic similarity. Unfortunately, when we study the Rigvedic verses we see that Saraswati was actually a river. There is great dispute as to where this river was, but there is no doubt that it is a river. Rigveda again and again declares it to be a river with descriptions of flowing down from the mountains into the sea and it is worshipped as a river-goddess.

Later on in the modern era another scholar for dollar Dr. Zakir Naik borrowed all the work of Maulana Abdul Haq and continues this imaginary voyage. He profoundly quotes some common incomplete verse from veda like "na tasya pratima asti”, "shudhama poapvidham" etc. and generates confusion to his as well as his followers mind. Veda never told about the Image of God neither the Image is not God. The concept of veda is complete different to this twisted meaning. The complete verse of this Yajurveda means-

न तस्य प्रतिमा अस्ति यस्य नाम महाद्यशः | हिरण्यगर्भऽ इत्येष मा मा हिंन्सिदितेषा यस्मान्न जातऽ इत्येषः ||

"Na Tasya Pratima Asti, Yasya Nam Mahadyash |Hiranyagarbh Ityesha Ma Ma Hinsidityesha Yasmanna Jat Ityesha" - Yajur Ved 32:3

The supreme god who is described in verses like Hiranyagarbh (YV 25:10), Yasmanna Jat (YV 8:36), Ma Ma Hinsit (YV 12:102), whose name and glory is extremely broad but he/she does not have any pattern. (Which means, the Brahman does not have any specific pattern but by your meditational intellectual you can imagine his pattern)

Thus time after time, period after period, with lack of knowledge, dedication and will the profound simple & divine language of veda becomes mysterious, uncertain and irrational. But there are paths indicated by several sages from the past to the present to understand the divine words of veda. We will discuss it in near future.
--- G N Krishnaswami