Visistadvaitha 13

[Guest guest]

Jai Srimannarayana!

 

Let me explain to you each of the above points in detail.

 

Suppose we consider any work like Ramayanam, Mahabharatam or even certain

ancient works of western or any part of the world, it is always remembered with

its author's name say Valmiki or Vyasa or anyone etc respectively. But as far as

the Veda is concerned, no such author's name is possible to be remembered and

this is as such right there from ancient time. One may now object that “It is

possible that the name of author(s) might have been forgotten and that is why

the case is there for Veda. There are certain works whose author(s) names are

not known but still regarded as man-made. If the author name is forgotten then

is it possible to consider the work as not authored by anyone?” This objection

does not hold good and can be refuted from the very words of the objection

itself. In the objection, those author names ofworks are forgotten but from

ancient time, they are regarded only a man-made. Even though the objection

raised here stress that the author name is forgotten, it has regard regarding

the work as man-made only.

 

Further just because of absence of author name, one can not recognize a work as

not authored by any one. As per the objection, the author name may be absent

because it is forgotten long ago. But in the case of Veda, “forgetting of

author(s) name” is not acceptable because right from ancient time, there is no

author name associated with Veda. From the historical records, right from

ancient time, we do not find author name for Veda. It is not forgotten but the

author name is not there for Veda because it is not authored by any one or by a

group.

 

Few questions in this context are – “Why are the Seer’s names (Rishis)

mentioned in the Veda as if they have authored it? Who are the

Gotra-Pravartakaas? Has not the Chaturmuka Brahmaa authored the Veda?Why is

Vyaasa called Veda Vyaasa? Is he an author? If not these individuals, had the

supreme self authored it?” Another question in this context is “If no one is the

author then how the Veda came into existence?”

 

These questions are answered now one by one. The seer’s names are surely

mentioned in the Veda as if they are the composers of the Vedic hymns and

sections of Veda. But they are not called as “Authors” of the Veda/portions of

Veda but are called “Drashtr” meaning “He who revealed it” as against the

meaning “He who authored it”. The Seers by their divine knowledge grasped the

eternal Veda and revealed to the world. The Gotra-Pravartakaas are again Rishis

(seers) and Prajaapatis who preached portions of Veda and made their

generations to spread in world. Therefore they are also not authors of Veda.

Even Chaturmuka Brahmaa is not the author of Veda. He is again a preacher who

got the eternal Veda from his father who is Vishnu (Shreeman Naaraayanan).

 

The Supreme Sprit according to the Veda is Vishnu who is denoted also by the

word “Brahman”. Even this Supreme Spirit is not the author of Veda. During the

grand destruction of universe, the Veda condenses in subtle form as the syllable

OM with the supreme sprit. When the supreme sprit creates the universe again, he

remembers the Veda and expands it and preaches it to the first created sentient

being named Chaturmuka Brahmaa. Therefore the Veda is not composed even by the

supreme sprit and is eternal as eternal as the supreme spirit (Iswara), the

sentient souls (Jeevaatmans) and the insentient(matter). Vyaasa, is incarnation

of supreme sprit who was born in the world as son of Sage Paraasara. His name is

Krishnaadvaipaayana (a) Baadaraayana.

He is called Veda Vyaasa because he divided the Veda in four namely 'Rik, Yajur,

Saama and Atharvana'. Therefore he is also not the author of Veda.Up to this,

the nature of Veda being not authored by any one and its eternal nature was

explained. Therefore the Veda neither has an author nor a date of origin. It is

eternal.

 

Veda is the only flawless ultimate authority and authority by itself. As no one

authors the Veda, there is no chance for the presence of any

individual’s idea. Therefore it is free from pride and prejudice. It is

therefore the flawless ultimate authority and authority by itself. There is no

error in it. It is absolute and all portions of it are authority. Veda has power

to impart knowledge by itself that is its virtue and does not require any

sub-agent in this regard " .

 

When I said this, both the atheist and believer in God asked me to chant a verse

from Veda. I chanted a verse from Veda and they said that they are not able to

understand it and get knowledge from it. They questioned me

“How do you say that Veda has power to impart knowledge by itself that is its

virtue and does not require any sub-agent in this regard?”

 

I answered them as follows. I asked them to consider the eyes.

" It has power to see by itself that is its virtue and does not require any

sub-agent in this regard. But it cannot see an object and impart knowledge about

it if the object is not illuminated by light. Note that darkness here does not

rule out this natural nature of eyes that is to see but does not enable its

power. This is the fact. Similarly, though the Veda has power to impart

knowledge by itself that is its virtue, it is not enabled to a person who does

not know the relation between the words of Veda denoting entities/actions and

the entities/actions denoted by it.

 

Now an objection arises. Is this said relation between “the words of Veda

denoting entities/actions and the entities/actions denoted by it” created by

some one or by a group or is it natural and eternal? The objection here is “We

see a person understanding certain known gestures made by another person known

to him and gets knowledge about entities and actions denoted by those gestures.

Why cannot this above said relation (in case of Veda) also be considered like

this?”

 

 

The refutation of this objection is as follows: In the objection, the

knowledge about persons involved in making gestures and regarding

understanding those gestures is available amongst the persons involved in the

example quoted in the objection. Otherwise, the meaning of gestures may not make

sense to outsiders. In this objection, the group of persons involved has set

meanings to the gestures. On the other hand, right from ancient time, there is

no knowledge available regarding the individual or group of person who set the

relation between the words of Veda and the entities/actions denoted by them. The

fact is no one set such relation between Veda and the objects/actions denoted by

it. The creation is done in the same was as it was in existence before

destruction as ascertained by

Veda. Therefore relation between the words of Veda and the entities/actions

denoted by them are the same right from time immemorial without any change.

 

Therefore the example cited in objection is not at all comparable with Veda

words imparting meaning. The objection thus gets refuted. Therefore the Veda has

power to impart knowledge by itself that is its virtue and does not require any

sub-agent in this regard. This power is natural and eternal for Veda. But for

newly coined terms, a group sets such relation. Such terms come under the

example cited in the objection.

 

 

Andal Tiruvadigale Saranam

Madhava Ramanuja dasan.