Sri Sadhguro Pahimam Parama Dayalu Rakshamam

[Guest guest]

Dear Members

" Hindu Dharma " is a book published by Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan which contains

English translation of two volumes of the Tamil Book " Deivatthin Kural " ; which

is a collection of invaluable and engrossing speeches of Sri Sri Sri

Chandrasekharendra Saraswathi MahaSwamiji.

 

http://kamakoti.org/hindudharma/part5/chap6.htm

 

Eternal

 

 

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.

 

 

JAYA JAYA SANKARA HARA HARA SANKARA

 

Thwameva Maathaa Cha Pithaa Thwameva

Thwameva Bhandhuscha Sakhaa Thwameva

 

Thwameva Vidhyaa Dhravinam Thwameva

Thwameva Sarvam Mama Dheva Dheva.