On apauruṣeya of veda
170 views
Skip to first unread message
Lokesh Sharma
Jun 17, 2022, 9:42:56 AM6/17/22
to भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्
नमस्सर्वेभ्यः
2. Mantra like इति॑ शुश्रुम॒ धीरा॑णां॒ ये न॒स्तद्वि॑चचक्षि॒रे (यजुर्वेद ४०.१३) clearly mention that this knowledge is received from other brilliant people. This implies that the ऋषि writing this mantra, has received instruction from his ancestors. He is not directly experiencing things in samadhi and writing them AS IT IS. This mantra cannot be revealed in samadhi or composed by ईश्वर. If this mantra directly comes from ईश्वर, then it looks very absurd that ईश्वर is saying that He got the knowledge from other brilliant people.
In the last few years after studying both the arguments for and against apauruṣeya of veda, it looks to me that veda is not apauruṣeya. I am writing this post in order to also seek the opinions of other experts on this subject to make sure I didn't miss anything.
Dr. Elst makes good arguments against apauruṣeya of veda. You may find his article here - http://koenraadelst.blogspot.com/2021/12/divinizing-veda-problem-of.html
To know why this debate is important read - https://koenraadelst.blogspot.com/2012/09/hindus-and-outsiders.html
I'm combining his and my arguments against apauruṣeya of veda and listing them below -
1. The description of flora-fauna and other environmental features in veda is limited to a certain time period and place. For example, veda talk mainly talk about animals and plants found in North-West Bharat which were present during that period rather than describing giraffes, kangaroos, cars, rockets, etc found in other parts of the world and different time periods.
To know why this debate is important read - https://koenraadelst.blogspot.com/2012/09/hindus-and-outsiders.html
I'm combining his and my arguments against apauruṣeya of veda and listing them below -
1. The description of flora-fauna and other environmental features in veda is limited to a certain time period and place. For example, veda talk mainly talk about animals and plants found in North-West Bharat which were present during that period rather than describing giraffes, kangaroos, cars, rockets, etc found in other parts of the world and different time periods.
2. Mantra like इति॑ शुश्रुम॒ धीरा॑णां॒ ये न॒स्तद्वि॑चचक्षि॒रे (यजुर्वेद ४०.१३) clearly mention that this knowledge is received from other brilliant people. This implies that the ऋषि writing this mantra, has received instruction from his ancestors. He is not directly experiencing things in samadhi and writing them AS IT IS. This mantra cannot be revealed in samadhi or composed by ईश्वर. If this mantra directly comes from ईश्वर, then it looks very absurd that ईश्वर is saying that He got the knowledge from other brilliant people.
3. Some say that just like Newton didn't invent laws of motion, he just discovered them, in the same manner, Veda is apauruṣeya because ऋषि only discovers the truth and does not invent them. The problem with this argument is that if that's the case then we cannot assign authorship of any text, music, art, or composition to anybody because everyone is discovering existing patterns in nature. Even if I tomorrow discover a theorem, it would get termed as apauruṣeya. So, then what's the difference between Veda and human discoveries? If you agree they are the same type, then we are in agreement.
4. Traditionally, it is claimed that there's can be no history in Veda for it is eternal but clearly we see history in ब्राह्मणं texts. For example, there's the story of ऋषि याज्ञवल्क्य, his wives, his meeting with राजा जनक, and how He won the best ब्रह्मज्ञानी प्रतियोगिता in the international workshop organized by राजा जनक.
5. Traditionalists who believe in pauruṣeya of Veda also believe that Veda has to be interpreted in light of Puranas. So they also accept the authority of Puranas. If we look at Puranas we find the age of people of other yuga spanning thousands of years and yet we see that in Veda ऋषि is asking for only 100 years to live - पश्येम शरदः शतं जीवेम शरदः..., कु॒र्वन्ने॒वेह कर्मा॑णि जिजीवि॒षेच्छ॒तꣳ समाः॑, etc. So if Veda is eternal, why ऋषि asks for only 100 years which is limited to humans of कलि युग?
6. The Vedic hymns naturally contain passing many data about the age and region in which they were composed, as well as the genealogy and the circumstances of their composers. The gods figure in them in the second or the third person, the seers in the first. Bhargo devasya dhimahi, “let us meditate on the god’s effulgence”, or Tryambakan yajamahe, “Let us worship the three-eyed one”, or Agnim ile, “I praise the fire”, all have the human seers as their subject, the gods as their object.
5. Traditionalists who believe in pauruṣeya of Veda also believe that Veda has to be interpreted in light of Puranas. So they also accept the authority of Puranas. If we look at Puranas we find the age of people of other yuga spanning thousands of years and yet we see that in Veda ऋषि is asking for only 100 years to live - पश्येम शरदः शतं जीवेम शरदः..., कु॒र्वन्ने॒वेह कर्मा॑णि जिजीवि॒षेच्छ॒तꣳ समाः॑, etc. So if Veda is eternal, why ऋषि asks for only 100 years which is limited to humans of कलि युग?
6. The Vedic hymns naturally contain passing many data about the age and region in which they were composed, as well as the genealogy and the circumstances of their composers. The gods figure in them in the second or the third person, the seers in the first. Bhargo devasya dhimahi, “let us meditate on the god’s effulgence”, or Tryambakan yajamahe, “Let us worship the three-eyed one”, or Agnim ile, “I praise the fire”, all have the human seers as their subject, the gods as their object.
I invite others to put arguments for and against the apauruṣeya of Veda.
स्वस्ति अस्तु
Nagaraj Paturi
Jun 17, 2022, 10:00:45 AM6/17/22
to bvpar...@googlegroups.com
There are a few older threads on BVP on this topic.
Prof. Aklujkar wrote in one of the old threads;
I will share the links.
But summary of the discussions is this :
1. Both positions mantrakartaa mantradrashtaa are inside the Vedic texts and Vedic shaastric texts. Hence it is prudent to understand how these two seemingly conflicting positions can be reconciled with each other.
2. There are explanations within the Vedic shaastric tradition itself to explain how a text (here, oral) can have a human 'author' but can still be understood not to have an author.
One such explanation is provided in Vakyapadiyam.
May I draw attention to a different view of Vedaapauru.seyatva and different understandings of the specified Nirukta passage that are discussed in:Aklujkar, Ashok. 2009. "Veda revelation according to Bhart®-hari." In Bhart®hari: Language, Thought and Reality, pp. 1-97. (ed) Chaturvedi, Mithilesh. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
Sharing the article here.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/03dea1ba-82f7-4b00-9fb3-d06445d31385n%40googlegroups.com.
Nagaraj Paturi
Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.
Senior Director, IndicA
BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, Maharashtra
BoS Kavikulaguru Kalidasa Sanskrit University, Ramtek, Maharashtra
BoS Veda Vijnana Gurukula, Bengaluru.
Member, Advisory Council, Veda Vijnana Shodha Samsthanam, Bengaluru
BoS Rashtram School of Public Leadership
Editor-in-Chief, International Journal of Studies in Public Leadership
Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies,
FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of Liberal Education,
Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.
Nagaraj Paturi
Jun 17, 2022, 10:11:54 AM6/17/22
to bvpar...@googlegroups.com
The verse which is taken up for discussion by Prof. Aklujkar in the article is
avibhāgād vivṛttānām
abhikhyā svapnavac chrutau
bhāvatattvaṃ tu vijñāya liṅgebhyo vihitā smṛtiḥ // Vakya // 1-173 (GRETIL)
http://gretil.sub.uni-goettingen.de/gretil/1_sanskr/6_sastra/1_gram/vakyp1pu.htm
Nagaraj Paturi
Jun 17, 2022, 10:45:05 AM6/17/22
to bvpar...@googlegroups.com
the post
by Prof. Korada:
वेदानाम् अपौरुषेयत्वम् ----
व्याकरणम् - पूर्वमीमांसा - वेदान्तः - न्यायः - वैशेषिकम् - भारतम् - उपनिषत्
व्याकरणम् --
What is the meaning of अपौरुषेयः --
पुर अग्रगमने (तुदादिः) - ’ पुरः कुषन् ’ (उणादिः) - पुरुषः - ’ ञ्नित्यादिर्नित्यम् ’ आद्युदात्तः ।
’ सर्वपुरुषाभ्यां णढञौ ’ (पा 5-1-10)
पुरुषात् वधे (वार्तिकम्)
अत्यल्पमिदमुच्यते - पुरुषाद्वध इति । पुरुषात् वध - विकार - समूह - तेनकृते - ष्विति वक्तव्यम् । पौरुषेयो वधः । पौरुषेयो विकारः । पौरुषेयः समूहः । तेन कृतं पौरुषेयम् ।
( पुरुष + ढञ् = पौरुषेयम् , ’ ञ्नित्यादिर्नित्यम् ’ - आद्युदात्तस्वरः )
Here Panini did not mean the पुरुष of सांख्यम् etc --
Kaiyata -- पुरुषश्च लोकप्रसिद्धः पाण्यादियुक्तः इह गृह्यते । न तु सांख्यादिशास्त्रप्रसिद्धः , तत्र प्रत्ययस्यादर्शनात् ।
Therefore , अपौरुषेयम् means - not done / authored by a person / human being .
Under तेन प्रोक्तम् ( पा 4-3-101) - Patanjali says -वेदs are not authored , rather they are नित्य् ---
तेन प्रोक्तम्
प्रोक्तग्रहणम् अनर्थकम् (वा) ग्रन्थे च दर्शनात् (वा)
भाष्यम् --
छन्दो’र्थं तर्हीदं वक्तव्यम् । न हि छन्दांसि क्रियन्ते , नित्यानि छन्दांसि ।
कर्तुः अस्मरणात् तेषामित्यर्थः -- कैयटः
छ्न्दो’र्थमिति चेत्तुल्यम् (वा)
भाष्यम् --
छन्दो’र्थमिति चेत् तुल्यमेतद्भवति । ग्रामे ग्रामे कालकं कालापकं च प्रोच्यते त्त्र अदर्शनात् । न च तत्र प्रत्ययो दृश्यते ।
ग्रन्थे च दर्शनात् । यत दृश्यते ग्रन्थः सः, तत्र ’कृते ग्रान्थे’ इत्येव सिद्धम् ।
ननु चोक्तम् - न हि छन्दांसि क्रियन्ते नित्यानि छन्दांसि इति ।
यद्यपि अर्थो नित्यः , या त्वसौ वर्णानुपूर्वी सा अनित्या । तद्भेदाच्चैतद्भवति - काठकम् कालापकम् मौदकम् पैप्पलादकम् इति ।
Kaiyata explains --
महाप्रलयादिषु व्र्णानुपूर्वीविनाशे पुनरुत्पद्य ऋषयः संस्कारातिशयात् वेदार्थं स्मृत्वा शब्दरचनां
विदधतीत्यर्थः ।
नागेशः -- काठकेत्यादि । अर्थैक्ये’पि आनुपूर्वीभेदादेव काठककालापकादिव्यवहार इति भावः।
This is what is meant by - मन्त्रकृत् ( नमो वाचे या चोदिता .... नमो मन्त्रकृद्भ्यः ) ।
A caution - we have to be careful in interpretation --
दृष्टं साम ( पा सू 4-2-7) ) does not mean - the साम seen by वसिष्ठ etc.
Kaiyata - कलिना दृष्टमिति । यस्य साम्नो विशिष्टकार्यविषये विनियोगो ज्ञानातिशयसंपत्त्याकलिना अज्ञायि तत्तेन दृष्टमित्युच्यते ।
वाक्यपदीयम् --
ज्ञानमस्मद्विशिष्टानां सर्वं सर्वेन्द्रियं विदुः ( नेदानीम् .... उपनिषत्) ।
At the end of every महाप्रलय ( not acceptable to पूर्वमीमांसकs - यः कल्पः स कल्पपूर्वः / न कदापि अनीदृशं जगत्) - the Vedas disappear and the sages with their तपश्शक्ति and योगिप्रत्यक्षम् , would discern the वेदमन्त्रs and propagate the same - and the Mantras are named after them - मन्त्रकृतः / मन्त्रद्रष्टारः --
प्रतिमन्वन्तरं चैषा श्रुतिरन्या विधीयते ।
वेदान्तः ---
अत एव च नित्यत्वम् ( ब्र सू 1-3-29)
शाङ्करभाष्यम् --
स्वतन्त्रस्य कर्तुः अस्मरणादिभिः स्थिते वेदस्य नित्यत्वे देवादिव्यक्तिप्रभवाभ्युपगमेन तस्य विरोधम् आशङ्क्य अतः प्रभवात् इति परिहृत्य इदानीं तदेव वेदनित्यत्वं द्रढयति - अत एव च नित्यत्वम् इति । अत एव नियताकृतेः देवादेः जगतः वेदशब्दप्रभवत्वात् वेदशब्दनित्यत्वमपि प्रत्येतव्यम् ।
तथा च मन्त्रवर्णः --
यज्ञेन वाचः पदवीयमायन् तामन्वविन्दन् ऋषिषु प्रविष्टाम् ( ऋग्वेदः 10-71-3) इति स्थितामेव वाचम् अनुविन्नां दर्शयति . वेदव्यासश्चैवं स्मरति --
युगान्ते’र्हितान् वेदान् सेतिहासान् महर्षयः ।
लेभिरे तपसा पूर्वम् अनुज्ञातः स्वयंभुवा ॥इति -- महाभारतम् - शान्ति 210-19
Veda itself clearly says --
अस्य महतो भूतस्य निःश्वसितम् एतद्यद् ऋद्वेदो यजुर्वेदः सामवेदॊsथर्वाङ्गिरसः ( बृहदा. उप 2-4-10)
पूर्वमीमांसा --
1-1-7-27 -- वेदांश्चैके सन्निकर्षं पुरुषाख्याः पू प सू
Some scholars argued that Vedas are written as there are names such as कठ , कलाप etc
28 -- अनित्यदर्शनाच्च पू प सू
In Veda there is proof to show that it is non-eternal - there are names of some people like - बबर , son of प्रावाहणि , खुसुरविन्द son of उद्दालक , who are mortal.
29 उक्तं तु शब्दपूर्वत्वम् सि सू
It is already stated that वेद has got अध्ययनपूर्वकत्वम् । There has been uninterrupted chain of गुरुशिष्यपरम्परा - nobody who has independently recited Veda.
30 आख्या प्रवचनात् सि सू
काठक , कालापक etc संज्ञs due to specialization .
वैशेषिकम् --
1-1-3 -- तद्वचनात् आम्नायस्य प्रामाण्यम्
Since धर्म is defined clearly Veda is an authority .
9-2-13 - आर्षं सिद्धदर्शन च धर्मेभ्यः
Due to performance of धर्म ordained by Veda ऋषिs got the perfect knowledge of पदार्थs .
न्यायदर्शनम् --
मन्त्रायुर्वेदप्रामाण्यवच्च तत्प्रामाण्यम् - आप्तप्रामाण्यात् 1-1-68
शब्द - दीप - ज्ञानानां स्वतः प्रामाण्यम् - इति स्पष्टं लघुमञ्जूषायाम् । नैयायिकानां परतः प्रामाण्यम् तु अनवस्थादोषजुष्टत्वात् हेयमेव ।
Refer to my book - Pramanas in Indian Philosophy (online).
धन्यो’स्मि
Nagaraj Paturi
Jun 17, 2022, 10:57:12 AM6/17/22
to bvpar...@googlegroups.com
Sri Vidyasankar Sundaresan ji's post :
The mImAmsakas do indeed make it a point to stress the drashTrtva as opposed to kartrtva of the Rshis, but there are other dArSanika ideas of apaurusheyatva that are different.
Besides, there is a well known and often recited SAnti mantra where the Rshis are described three times as mantrakRt, so we should be aware of that.
namo vAce yA codita yA cAnudita ... ... nama Rshibhyo mantra-kRdbhyo mantra-patibhyo mA mAm Rshayo mantra-krto mantra-patayaH parAdur mAham RshIn mantra-kRto mantra-patIn parAdAm ...
Regards,
Vidyasankar
Raghavendra
Jun 17, 2022, 12:47:35 PM6/17/22
to bvpar...@googlegroups.com
Greetings Lokesh Ji.
नमस्सर्वेभ्यः
2. Mantra like इति॑ शुश्रुम॒ धीरा॑णां॒ ये न॒स्तद्वि॑चचक्षि॒रे (यजुर्वेद ४०.१३) clearly mention that this knowledge is received from other brilliant people. This implies that the ऋषि writing this mantra, has received instruction from his ancestors. He is not directly experiencing things in samadhi and writing them AS IT IS. This mantra cannot be revealed in samadhi or composed by ईश्वर. If this mantra directly comes from ईश्वर, then it looks very absurd that ईश्वर is saying that He got the knowledge from other brilliant people.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
A just-born tiger cub thrown into a river swims *without बुद्धि-पूर्व-प्रयत्न*. This is called स्फुरण (flash) This is अ-पौरुषेय.
A newborn human baby can't swim, it has to grow to a certain age, learn the art & science of swimming, then swim. Here there is बुद्धि-पूर्व-प्रयत्न. This is पौरुषेय.
So, speech is of two types: -
◆स्फुरत् = अ-पौरुषेय and
◆बुद्धिमत् = पौरुषेय.
●Where 'speech' follows 'meaning' there is 'agency' (पौरुषेय)
●Where 'meaning' follows 'speech' there is 'no-agency' (अ-पौरुषेय)
Coming to flora-fauna mentioned in the Vedas, historical aspects mentioned in the Vedas is not a strong argument against अपौरुषेयत्व of the Vedas at all.
… "धाता यथा पूर्वमकल्पयत्" ...
Whatever "it is", that "will be",
Whatever that "is", what "it was".
परमादरणीय-महर्षि-यास्क has read the term वेदः under धन-नामा synonym list.
The Veda is an inexhaustible and undecaying wealth.
This is how परमादरणीय-महर्षि-यास्क saw it.
Let us not lose that wealth to Dr. Elst.
If Dr. Elst says there no अपौरुषेयत्व, then it is as good as him saying "I have no flash or intuition".
My concluding words may sound 'emotional', but I am sure you will allow them.
Best regards / Raghavendra. B
=========================
From: Lokesh Sharma <lokeshh...@gmail.com>
Sent: Fri, 17 Jun 2022 19:12:59 GMT+0530
To: ¯¿ª¿· <bvpar...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} On apauruṣeya of veda
From: Lokesh Sharma <lokeshh...@gmail.com>
Sent: Fri, 17 Jun 2022 19:12:59 GMT+0530
To: ¯¿ª¿· <bvpar...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} On apauruṣeya of veda
नमस्सर्वेभ्यः
In the last few years after studying both the arguments for and against apauruṣeya of veda, it looks to me that veda is not apauruṣeya. I am writing this post in order to also seek the opinions of other experts on this subject to make sure I didn't miss anything.
Dr. Elst makes good arguments against apauruṣeya of veda. You may find his article here - http://koenraadelst.blogspot.com/2021/12/divinizing-veda-problem-of.html
To know why this debate is important read - https://koenraadelst.blogspot.com/2012/09/hindus-and-outsiders.html
I'm combining his and my arguments against apauruṣeya of veda and listing them below -
1. The description of flora-fauna and other environmental features in veda is limited to a certain time period and place. For example, veda talk mainly talk about animals and plants found in North-West Bharat which were present during that period rather than describing giraffes, kangaroos, cars, rockets, etc found in other parts of the world and different time periods.
To know why this debate is important read - https://koenraadelst.blogspot.com/2012/09/hindus-and-outsiders.html
I'm combining his and my arguments against apauruṣeya of veda and listing them below -
1. The description of flora-fauna and other environmental features in veda is limited to a certain time period and place. For example, veda talk mainly talk about animals and plants found in North-West Bharat which were present during that period rather than describing giraffes, kangaroos, cars, rockets, etc found in other parts of the world and different time periods.
2. Mantra like इति॑ शुश्रुम॒ धीरा॑णां॒ ये न॒स्तद्वि॑चचक्षि॒रे (यजुर्वेद ४०.१३) clearly mention that this knowledge is received from other brilliant people. This implies that the ऋषि writing this mantra, has received instruction from his ancestors. He is not directly experiencing things in samadhi and writing them AS IT IS. This mantra cannot be revealed in samadhi or composed by ईश्वर. If this mantra directly comes from ईश्वर, then it looks very absurd that ईश्वर is saying that He got the knowledge from other brilliant people.
3. Some say that just like Newton didn't invent laws of motion, he just discovered them, in the same manner, Veda is apauruṣeya because ऋषि only discovers the truth and does not invent them. The problem with this argument is that if that's the case then we cannot assign authorship of any text, music, art, or composition to anybody because everyone is discovering existing patterns in nature. Even if I tomorrow discover a theorem, it would get termed as apauruṣeya. So, then what's the difference between Veda and human discoveries? If you agree they are the same type, then we are in agreement.
4. Traditionally, it is claimed that there's can be no history in Veda for it is eternal but clearly we see history in ब्राह्मणं texts. For example, there's the story of ऋषि याज्ञवल्क्य, his wives, his meeting with राजा जनक, and how He won the best ब्रह्मज्ञानी प्रतियोगिता in the international workshop organized by राजा जनक.
5. Traditionalists who believe in pauruṣeya of Veda also believe that Veda has to be interpreted in light of Puranas. So they also accept the authority of Puranas. If we look at Puranas we find the age of people of other yuga spanning thousands of years and yet we see that in Veda ऋषि is asking for only 100 years to live - पश्येम शरदः शतं जीवेम शरदः..., कु॒र्वन्ने॒वेह कर्मा॑णि जिजीवि॒षेच्छ॒तꣳ समाः॑, etc. So if Veda is eternal, why ऋषि asks for only 100 years which is limited to humans of कलि युग?
5. Traditionalists who believe in pauruṣeya of Veda also believe that Veda has to be interpreted in light of Puranas. So they also accept the authority of Puranas. If we look at Puranas we find the age of people of other yuga spanning thousands of years and yet we see that in Veda ऋषि is asking for only 100 years to live - पश्येम शरदः शतं जीवेम शरदः..., कु॒र्वन्ने॒वेह कर्मा॑णि जिजीवि॒षेच्छ॒तꣳ समाः॑, etc. So if Veda is eternal, why ऋषि asks for only 100 years which is limited to humans of कलि युग?
6. The Vedic hymns naturally contain passing many data about the age and region in which they were composed, as well as the genealogy and the circumstances of their composers. The gods figure in them in the second or the third person, the seers in the first. Bhargo devasya dhimahi, “let us meditate on the god’s effulgence”, or Tryambakan yajamahe, “Let us worship the three-eyed one”, or Agnim file, “I praise the fire”, all have the human seers as their subject, the gods as their object.
I invite others to put arguments for and against the apauruṣeya of Veda.
स्वस्ति अस्तु
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https:roups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/03dea1ba-82f7-4b00...@googlegroups.com.
Yogananda CS
Jun 17, 2022, 1:02:49 PM6/17/22
to bvpar...@googlegroups.com
Namaste,
In the prasthanatraya bhashya of Sri Shankara, this word occurs once
विवक्षितगुणोपपत्तेश्च ॥ २ ॥
वक्तुमिष्टा विवक्षिताः । यद्यप्यपौरुषेये वेदे वक्तुरभावात्नेच्छार्थः सम्भवति, तथाप्युपादानेन फलेनोपचर्यते । लोकेऽपियच्छब्दाभिहितमुपादेयं भवति तद्विवक्षितमित्युच्यते, यदनुपादेयं तदविवक्षितमिति । तद्वद्वेदेऽप्युपादेयत्वेनाभिहितंविवक्षितं भवति, इतरदविवक्षितम् । उपादानानुपादाने तुवेदवाक्यतात्पर्यातात्पर्याभ्यामवगम्येते । तदिह ये विवक्षितागुणा उपासनायामुपादेयत्वेनोपदिष्टाः सत्यसङ्कल्पप्रभृतयः, तेपरस्मिन्ब्रह्मण्युपपद्यन्ते ।
translation by V Panoli:
--------------------
Those that are meant to expressed are vivakshitah (वक्तुम् इष्टा विवक्षिताः). Although the Vedas are not authored by anyone and since in the absence of an author, the question of intention does not arise, yet expressions such as intention may be figuratively used owing to the accepted result. In common parlance too what is accepted as the sense expressed by a word is said to be the meaning actually meant and that which is not acceptable is said to be not meant. Similarly, in the Veda also, the meaning actually meant is known from its introduction as acceptable and the other is that which is not acceptable. But the acceptability or unacceptability is known from what actually is the purport of the Vedic passage and what is not.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/1655478603.S.37063.autosave.drafts.1655483429.8795%40webmail.rediffmail.com.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages