Hindu Dharma:Vedas [continued]

[Guest guest]

It is not possible to tell the age of the Vedas. If we

say that an object is " anadi " it means that nothing

existed before it. Any book, it is reasonable to

presume, must be the work of one or more people. The

Old Testament contains the sayings of several

Prophets. The New Testament contains the story of

Jesus Christ as well as his sermons. The Qu'ran

incorporates the teachings of the Prophet Mohammed.

The founders of such religions are historical

personalities and their teachings did not exist before

then. Are the Vedas similarly the work of one or more

teachers? And may we take it that these preceptors

lived in different periods of history? Ten thousand

years ago or a hundred thousand or a million years

ago? If the Vedas were created during any of these

periods they can not be claimed to be " anadi " . Even if

they were created a million years ago, it obviously

means that there was a time when they did not exist.

 

Questions like the above are justified if the Vedas

are regarded as the work of mortals. And, if they are,

it is wrong to claim that they are " anadi " . We think

that the Vedas are the creation of the rsis, seers who

were mortals. So it is said, at any rate, in the text

book of history we are taught.

 

Also consider the fact that the Vedas consists of many

" Suktas " . Jnanasambandhar's Tevaram consists of number

of patigams. And just as each patigam has ten stanzas,

each sukta consists of a number of mantras.

" Su+ukta " = " sukta " . The prefix " su " denotes " good " as

in " suguna " or " sulocana " . " Ukta " means " spoken " or

" what is spoken " . " Sukta " means " well spoken " , a " good

word " or a " good utterence " (or well uttered).

 

When we chant the Vedas in the manner prescribed by

the Sastras, we mention the name of the seer connected

with each sukta, its metre and the deity invoked.

Since there are many mantras associated with various

seers we think that they were composed by them. We

also refer to the ancestry of the seer concerned, his

gotra, etc. For instance, " Agastyo Maithravarunih " ,

that is Agastya, son of Maithravaruna. Here is another

: " Madhucchanda Vaisvamitrah " , the sage Madhucchanda

descended from the Visvamitra gotra. Like this there

are mantras in the names of many sages. If the mantras

connected with the name of Agastya were composed by

him it could not have existed during the time of

Mitravaruna; similarly that in the name of

Madhucchandana could not have existed during the time

of Visvamitra. If this is true, how can you claim that

the Vedas are " anadi " ?

 

Since the Mantras are associated with the names of

sages, we make the wrong inference that they may have

been composed by them. But it is not so as a matter of

fact. " Apaurseya " means not the work of any man. Were

the Vedas composed by one or more human beings, even

if they were rsis, they would be called " pauruseya " .

But since they are called " Apauruseya " it follows that

even the seers could not have created them. If they

were composed by the seers they (the latter) would be

called " Mantra-kartas " which means " those who

'created' the Mantras " . But as a matter of fact, the

rsis are called " Mantra-drastas " , those who " saw "

them.

 

When we say that Columbus discovered America, we do

not mean that he created the continent : we mean that

he merely made the continent known to the world. In

the same way the laws attributed to Newton, Einstein

and so on were not created by them. If an object

thrown up falls to earth it is not because Newton said

so. Scientists like Newton perceived the laws of

Nature and revealed them to the world. Similarly, the

seers discovered the Mantras and made a gift of them

to the world. These Mantras had existed before the

time of their fathers, grand fathers, great grand

fathers,. . . . . . . . . But they had remained

unknown to the world. The seers now made them known to

the mankind. So it became customory to mention their

names at the time of intoning them.

 

The publisher of a book is not necessarily its author.

The man who releases a film need not be its producer.

The seers disclosed the mantras to the world but they

did not create them. Though the mantras had existed

before them they performed the noble service of

revealing them to us. So it is appropriate on our part

to pay them obeisance by mentioning their names while

chanting the same.

 

Do we know anything about the existance of the mantras

before they were " seen " by the rsis? If they are

eternal does it mean that they manifested themselves

at the time of creation? Were they present before

man's appearance on earth? How did they come into

being?

 

If we take it that the Vedas appeared with creation,

it would mean that the Paramatman created them along

with the world. Did he write them down and leave them

somewhere to be discovered by the seers later? If so,

they cannot be claimed to be anadi. We have an idea of

when Brahma created the present world.

 

There are fixed periods for the four yugas or eons,

Krta, Treta, Dvapara and Kali. The four yugas together

are called a caturuga. A thousand caturugas make one

day time of Brahma and another equally long period is

his night. According to this reckoning Bramha is now

more than fifty years old. Any religious ceremony is

to be commenced with a samkalpa( " resolve " ) in which an

account is given of the time and place of performance

in such and such a year of Brahma, in such and such a

month, in such and such a fortnight (waxing or waning

moon), etc. From this account we know when the present

Brahma came into being. Even if we concede that he

made his appearence millions and millions of years

ago, he can not be claimed to be anadi. How can then

creation be said to have no begining in time? When

creation it self has an origin, how do we justify to

the claim that the Vedas are anadi?

 

The Paramatman, being eternal, was present even before

creation when there was no Brahma. The Paramatman, the

Brahman are the Supreme Godhead, is eternal. The

cosmos, all sentient beings and insentient objects,

emerge from him. The Paramatman did not create them

himself : he did so through the agency of Brahma.

Through Visnu he sustains them and through Rudra he

destroys them. Later Brahma, Visnu, Rudra are

themselves destroyed by him. The present Brahma, when

he became hundred years old, will unite with the

Paramatman. Another Brahma will appear and he will

start the work of creation all over again. The

question arises : Does the Paramatman create the Vedas

before he brings into being another Brahma?

 

We learn from the Sastras that the Vedas has existed

even before creation. Infact, they say, Brahma

performed his function of creation with the aid of

Vedic mantras. I shall be speaking to you about this

later, how he accomplished the creation with the

mantras manifested as sound. In the passage dealing

with creation the Bagavatha also says that Brahma

created the world with the Vedas.

 

Is this the reason (that Brahma created the world with

the Vedic mantras) why it is said that the Vedas are

anadi? Is it right to take such a view on the basis

that both the Vedas and Isvara are anadi? If we

suggest that isvara had made this scriptures even

before he created the world, it would mean that there

was a time when the Vedas did not exist and that would

contradict the claim that they are anadi.

 

If we believe that both Isvara and the Vedas are anadi

it would mean that Isvara could not have created them.

But if you believe that Isvara created them, they

cannot be said to be without the origin. Everything

has its origin in Isvara. It would be wrong to

maintain[according to this logic]that both Isvara and

the Vedas have no beginning in time. Well, it is all

so confusing.

 

What is the basis of the belief that the Vedas are

anadi and were not created by Isvara? An answer is

contained in the Vedas themselves. In the

Brhadaranyaka Upanishad(2. 4. 10) ---the Upanishads

are all part of the Vedas---it is said that the Rg,

Yajus and Sama Vedas are the very breath of Isarva.

The word " nihsvasitam " is used here.

 

It goes without saying that we cannot live even a

moment without breathing. The Vedas are the

life-breath of the Paramatman who is an eternal living

Reality. It follows that the Vedas exist together with

him as his breath.

 

We must note here that it is not customory to say that

the Vedas are the creation of Iswara. Do we create our

own breath? Our breath exists from the very moment we

are born. It is the same case with Iswara and the

Vedas. We can not say that he created them.

 

When Vidyaranyaswamin wrote his commentary on the

Vedas he prayed to his guru regarding him as Iswara.

He used these words in his prayer : " Yasya nihsvasitam

Vedah " (whose --that is Isvara's -- breath constitutes

the Vedas). The word " nihsvasitam " occurs in the

Upanishads also. Here too it is not stated that Iswara

created the Vedas.

 

The Lord says in the Gita : " It is I who am known by

all the Vedas " (Vedaisca sarvair aham eva vedyah). "

Instead of describing himself as " Vedakrd " (creator of

the Vedas), he calls himself " Vedantakrd " (creator of

philosophical system that is the crown of the Vedas).

He also refers to himself as " Vedavid " (he who knows

the Vedas). Before Vedanta that enshrines great

philosophical truths had been made know to mankind,

the Vedas had existed in the form of sound, as the

very breath of Isvara -- they were ( and are) indeed

Isvara dwelling in Isvara.

 

The Bhagavata too, like the Gita, does not state that

the Lord created the Vedas. It declares that they

occured in a flash in his heart, that they came to him

in a blaze of light. The word used on this context is

" Sphuranam " , occuring in the mind in a flash. Now we

can not apply this word to any thing that is created a

new, any thing that did not exist before. Bramha is

the premordial sage who saw all the mantras. But it

was the Parmatman who revealed them to him. Did he

transmit them orally? No, says the Bhagavatha. The

paramatman imparted the Vedas to Bramha through his

heart : " Tene Bramha hrdaya Adikavaye " says the very

first verse of that Purana. The Vedas were not created

by the Parmatman. The truth is that they are always

present in his heart. When he mearly resolved to pass

on the Vedas to Bramha the latter instantly received

them. And with their sound he began the work of

creation.

 

The Tamil Tevaram describes Isvara as " Vediya

Vedagita " . It says that the Lord keeps singing the

hymns of various sakas or recensions of the Vedas. How

are we to understand the statement that the " Lord sees

the Vedas " ? Breathing itself is music. Our out-breath

is called " hamsa-gita " . Thus, the Vedas are the music

of the Lord's breath. The Thevaran goes on : " Wearing

the sacred thread and the holy ashes, and bathing all

the time, Isvara keeps singing the Vedas " . The

impression one has from this description is that the

Lord is a great " ghanapathin " . Apparsvamigal refers to

the ashes resembling milk applied to the body of

Isvara which is like coral. He says that the Lord

" chants " the Vedas, " sings " them, not that he

creates ( or created ) them. In the Vaisnava Divya

Prabandham too there are many references to Vedic

sacrifices. But some how I donot remember any

reference in it to the Lord chanting the Vedas.

 

In the story of Gajendramoksa told by the Puhazhendi

Pulavar ( a Tamil Vaishnava saint - poet), the

elephant whose leg is caught in the jaws of the

crocodile cries in anguish. " Adimulame " [vocative in

Tamil of Adimula, the Primordial Lord]. The Lord

thereupon appears, asking " What? " The poet says that

Mahavisnu " stood before the Vedas " ( " Vedattin mum

ninran " ). According to the poet the lord stood infront

of the Vedas, not that he appeared at a time earlier

than the scriptures. The Tamil for " A man stood at the

door " is " Vittin mun ninran " . So " Vedattin mun ninran "

should be understood as " he stood at the comencement

of all the Vedas " . Another idea occurs to me. How is

Perumal (Visnu or any other Vaisnava deity ) taken in

procession? Preceeding the utsava-murthy (

processional deity) are the devotees reciting the

Tiruvaymozhi. And behind the processional deity is the

group reciting the Vedas. Here too we may say that the

Lord stood before the Vedas ( " Vedattin mun ninran " ).

 

In the visnava Agamas and puranas, Mahavisnu is

refered to specially as " Yajnaswaroopin " ( one

personifying the sacrifice) and as " Vedaswaroopin " (

one who personifies the Vedas). Garuda is also called

" Vedaswarupa " . But non of these texts is known to

refer to Visnu as the creator of the Vedas.

 

It is only in the " Purusasukta " , occuring in the Vedas

themselves, that the Vedas are said to have been

" born " " (ajayatha) " . However, this hymn is of

symbolical and allegorical signifcance and not to be

understood in a literal sense. It states that the

Parama-purusa (the Supreme Being) for sacrifice as an

animal and that it was in this sacrifice that creation

itself was accomplished. It was at this time that the

Vedas also made their appearence. How are we to

understand the statement that the Parama-purusa was

offered as a sacrificial animal? Not in a literal

sense. In this sacrifice the season of spring was

offered as an oblation (ahuthi) instead of ghee :

summer served the purpose of samidhs (fire sticks);

autum havis (oblation). Only those who meditate on the

mantras and become absorbed in them will know there

meaning inwardly as a matter of experience. So we can

not construe the statement literally that the Vedas

were " born " .

 

To the modern mind the claim that the breath of Isvara

is manifested in the form of sound seems nonsensical,

also that it was with this sound that Bramha performed

his function of creation. But on careful reflection

you will realise that the belief is based on a great

scientific truth.

 

I do not mean to say that we must accept the Vedas

only if they conform to present-day science. Nor do I

think that our scripture, which proclaims the truth of

the Paramatman and is beyond the reach of science and

scientist, ought to be brought within the ken of

science. Many matters pertaining to the Vedas may not

seems to be in conformity with science and for that

reason they are not to be treated as wrong. But our

present subject -- how the breath of the Parmatman can

become sound and how the function of creation can be

carried out withit -- is in keeping with science.

 

 

 

 

Discover

Have fun online with music videos, cool games, IM and more. Check it out!

http://discover./online.html