[Advaita-l] Fwd: [advaitin] Re: apauruSheyatva of the Veda

[Venkatraghavan S]

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Venkatraghavan S <agnimile at gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2024, 08:37
Subject: Re: [advaitin] Re: apauruSheyatva of the Veda
To: <advaitin at googlegroups.com>


Namaste,
Yes, it is Nirukta 7.3, not 7.6.

After I sent that email, someone pointed another good reference from Rig
Veda, maNDala 8.75.6.

तस्मै॑ नू॒नम॒भिद्य॑वे वा॒चा वि॑रूप॒ नित्य॑या । वृष्णे॑ चोदस्व सुष्टु॒तिम् ॥

The rishi addresses himself thus (or the yajamAna addreses the hotA) -
नित्यया वाचा चोदस्व - glorify (agni) with the eternal word. sAyaNAchArya
comments on the words नित्यया वाचा as नित्यया उत्पत्तिरहितया वाचा
मन्त्ररूपया - in the mantra form of the word, which is eternal, without
birth.

When presented these examples, the opponents of apauruSheyatva may present
a few references in the Veda where Rishis are said to have "created" the
mantras. A few examples:

Rg Veda 1.62.13 - स॒ना॒य॒ते गोत॑म इन्द्र॒ नव्य॒मत॑क्ष॒द्ब्रह्म॑ हरि॒योज॑नाय
। सु॒नी॒थाय॑ नः शवसान नो॒धाः प्रा॒तर्म॒क्षू धि॒याव॑सुर्जगम्यात् ॥
Wilson: “Mighty Indra, Nodhas, the son of Gotama, has composed for us this
new hymn, (addressed) to you, who have been forever, who harness your
coursers (to your car) and are the sure guide (of all). May he who has
acquired wealth by propitious acts, come hither quickly in the morning.”

The verb अतक्षत् in the above mantra is translated by sAyaNAchArya as
अकरोत्.

Rig Veda 7.22.9 - ये च॒ पूर्व॒ ऋष॑यो॒ ये च॒ नूत्ना॒ इन्द्र॒ ब्रह्मा॑णि
ज॒नय॑न्त॒ विप्रा॑: । अ॒स्मे ते॑ सन्तु स॒ख्या शि॒वानि॑ यू॒यं पा॑त
स्व॒स्तिभि॒: सदा॑ नः ॥
Wilson: “May your auspicious regards, Indra, be directed towards us, as
they have been to those pious sages,ancient or recent, who have originated
(your) praises, and do you ever cherish us with blessings.”

The word जनयन्त has been translated as "originated".

Mantra-s such as these can give the impression that the vedic RSi-s have
created the mantra-s - however, wherever mantra-s are said to have been
"created", "composed", "originanted" in the Veda, it must be interpreted to
mean they have been "seen". A question may be asked if it is permitted for
one meaning of a verb to take another meaning. The answer is provided in
Patanjali's Mahabhashya - in fact, Patanjali shows the meaning of the very
dhAtu कृ ("to make", "to create") can also mean अभूतप्रादुर्भावः - making
manifest what was not.

mahAbhAShya -
बह्वर्था अपि धातवो भवन्ति । ... करोतिरभूतप्रादुर्भावे दृष्टः - root verbs
can be used in multiple meanings. The word 'karoti' can be used to mean
'make manifest what was not available'.

In that sense, when speaking of rishis "creating" mantras it has to be
understood as manifesting. So even if there are 100 examples given from the
Vedas, it will mean the same thing - the RSis are mantra draShTa-s only.

In support, when commenting on the words नम ऋषिभ्यः मन्त्रकृद्भ्यः
occurring in TaittirIya AraNyaka 4.1.1, both bhaTTa bhAskara and
sAyaNAchArya say the following:

bhaTTa bhAskara
अथ नम ऋषिभ्यः द्रष्टुभ्यः मन्त्रकृद्भ्यो मन्त्राणां द्रष्टभ्यः दर्शनमेव
कर्तृत्वं

sAyaNa says -
मन्त्रं कुर्वन्तीति मन्त्रकृतः, यद्यप्यपौरुषेये वेदे कर्तारो न सन्ति, तथापि
कल्पादावीश्वरानुग्रहेण मन्त्राणां लब्धारो मन्त्रकृत इत्युच्यन्ते

We can extend this to every other instance in the Veda where mantra-s are
said to have been composed.

All this evidence may not convince those who refuse to be convinced, but
the basic principle remains - if the apauruSheyatva of the Veda is an
"invented tradition", then it is a tradition that stretches from the Veda
itself.

Those within the tradition need not discard apauruSheyatva, to fit the
Vedas within what is acceptable scientifically - the pedagogy and the
subject matter of Vedas are very much outside the scientific sphere - to
apply science's methodology in a completely different sphere is as absurd
as expecting a musician to perform neurosurgery.

Kind regards,
Venkatraghavan

On Sun, Mar 3, 2024 at 10:39 PM Kalyan <kalyanchakravarthy2021 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Namaste Sri Venkatji
>
> Thanks for this message. The comments of Yaska are very illuminating.
>
> Please allow me to point out a minor correction
>
> >Elsewhere in the niruktam itself, Yaska says एवमुच्चावचैरभिप्रायैर्ऋषीणां
> मन्त्रदृष्टयो भवन्ति । 7.6
>
> This is 7.3, not 7.6. Apologies for nitpicking.
>
> Best Regards
>
>
>