Fw: Images of Religion

[Guest guest]

bhakti-list, "D Bala sundaram" <dbsundaram@h...> wrote:

> This is the response I got from Ms Nandita Krishna. I would like to

> know the views of the members.

>

 

srimate ramanujaya namah

 

Dear Sri Bala Sundaram,

 

I agree that a detailed linguistic analysis of the Rg Veda

is really beyond the scope of this list. Moreover, I would

wager that none of us are really knowledgable enough in

Vedic Sanskrit to give you a helpful answer on this

matter. I can, however, offer a few words about the views of

traditional scholars on the language of the Rg Veda.

 

In the Vedic tradition, and by this I include the acharyas

of Vedanta such as Sri Sankara, Sri Ramanuja, and Sri Madhva,

the very words of the Veda are eternal, constituting the

very breath of the Paramapurusha. In every kalpa, the

Paramapurusha himself "remembers" the prior word order of

the Veda and propagates it through rishis, who "perceive"

the mantras in their meditation. The rishis are therefore

known as "mantra-drashTas". A corollary of this idea

is that the Vedic language is also something divine and

eternal. Hence, the idea that some Veda mantras are later

than others on a linguistic basis does not hold much water

with traditional scholars because belief in the eternality

of the very words is axiomatic.

 

It is not that scholars in those days did not see some of the

difficulties involved in such a view. If I recall

correctly, many outside the orthodox Vedic fold, themselves

good Sanskritists as Sanskrit was the lingua franca of

the day, criticized the idea of the Veda's eternality

as being outside the realm of common sense and logic.

Though some, such as scholars of the Dvaita school, tried

to establish the Veda's eternity and unauthoredness on

logical grounds, the arguments are not very convincing and

one must fall back on the axiomatic nature of such a

belief to stay on unassailable ground.

 

In this day, some traditional scholars of all schools

reinterpret this idea in a manner that does not give pause

to those of a more historical or linguistic mindset. Their

belief is that it is not the very _word_ of the Veda

that is eternal but the truth behind it. The truth itself

is revealed by the Paramatman through rishis and saints

over different periods of time -- a continuing revelation

as it were. Hence, there is no trouble if the 10th mandala

of the Rg Veda is slightly different linguistically from

other sections, since it is all divinely revealed. There is

no hierarchy based purely on the age of the words.

 

The latter argument is also supported by the traditional

Sri Vaishnava belief that the Divya Prabandham is also a

divinely revealed scripture, sung through the Alvars in

a relatively modern tongue by the Paramapurusha for the

benefit of modern humanity. This explicit equation is made

by Sri Azhagiya Manavala Perumal Nayanar in the "Acharya

Hridayam". The idea here is that just as the Vedas are

eternally revealed truths of a sort, the Tamil Vedas are

also revealed, eternal truths, the Alvars being the rishis.

The recent acharya and scholar Sri Srirama Desikacharya of

Oppiliappan Kovil has pointed out that acharya Sri Vedanta Desika

shared this opinion, as he invariably called the Divya

Prabandham "maRai" and wrote that the sacred hymns were "seen", not

composed, implying that they too were of standing similar to the

Veda.

 

|| namah paramarshibhyah ||

 

adiyen ramanuja dasan,

Mani

[Guest guest]

>

> Mani Varadarajan [mani]

> Friday, November 08, 2002 5:29 AM

> It is not that scholars in those days did not see some of the

> difficulties involved in such a view. If I recall correctly, many

> outside the orthodox Vedic fold, themselves good Sanskritists as

> Sanskrit was the lingua franca of the day, criticized the idea of the

> Veda's eternality as being outside the realm of common sense and

> logic. Though some, such as scholars of the Dvaita school, tried

> to establish the Veda's eternity and unauthoredness on

> logical grounds, the arguments are not very convincing and

> one must fall back on the axiomatic nature of such a

> belief to stay on unassailable ground.

 

Dear Sri Mani,

 

May I know the source of the information that "scholars of the Dvaita school,

tried to establish the Veda's eternity and unauthoredness on logical grounds"?

Here's a line from Sri Madhva's Vishnu-tattva-vinirnaya (VTVN):

apaurushheyatvam.h cha svataH eva siddham.h | that contradicts your view.

 

I have compared the arguments mentioned in the VTVN to those mentioned in

Jaimini's sutras (yes, the attempt to 'prove' apaurusheyatva is older than

Shankara), those in Sayana's bhAShya-bhUmikAs and in Dayanand Saraswati's works.

Notwithstanding my affiliation to mâdhva philosophy, the arguments presented in

VTVN are more sophisticated and cover more ground and opposition than any other

works. It's only after those arguments can one understand that apaurusheyatva is

an uncontradictable truth and not an axiomatic 'belief'.

 

Thanks,

Krishna

[Guest guest]

This is the response I got from Ms Nandita Krishna. I would like to know the

views of the members.

 

Adiyen

D Bala sundaram

-

"nankrish" <nankrishna

<dbsundaram

Friday, November 01, 2002 11:30 AM

Images of Religion

 

> Dear Mr. Bala Sundaram,

>

> The Rig Veda is the oldest known and available book of the Hindu

> religion. The Purusha Sukta is the 10th book of the Rig Veda. It is

> called an interpolation because the language of the Purusha Sukta is

> much later than that of the Rig Veda. Please read any history of

> Sanskrit literature for more information on this subject.

>

> There are several references to varnashrama dharma in the later Vedas

> and Upanishads. All these come after the Rig Veda, but caste was still

> interchangeable in the later Vedic and Epic periods. The rigidity came

> in much later.

>

> With regards,

>

> Yours sincerely,

>

> Nanditha Krishna

>