Riddle No. 4: Why suddenly the Brahmans declare the Vedas to be infallible
and not to be questioned?
Ambedkar states that the Brahmins describe the Vedas as apaurusheya (not
man-made) and infallible texts, whose authority cannot be questioned. He
then quotes various Dharma Sutras to illustrate that the Vedas were not
always considered the sole infallible authorities. In the surviving text,
Ambedkar intends to present a quote from the Shatapatha Brahmana, but the
quote and the subsequent discussion is missing.
Extract: From AMBEDKAR BOOK
RIDDLE NO. 4 WHY SUDDENLY THE BRAHMINS DECLARE THE VEDAS TO BE INFALLIBLE
AND NOT TO BE QUESTIONED? To say that the Vedas occupy a very high position
in the Religious literature of the Hindus is to make an understatement. To
say that the Vedas form the sacred literature of the Hindus will also be an
inadequate statement. For the Vedas besides being a sacred literature of
the Hindus is a book whose authority cannot be questioned. The Vedas are
infallible. Any argument based on the Vedas is final and conclusive. There
is no appeal against it. This is the theory of the Vedic Brahmins and is
accepted by the generality of the Hindus. I On what does this theory rest?
The theory rests on the view that the Vedas are Apaurusheya. When the Vedic
Brahmins say that the Vedas are Apaurusheya what they mean is that they
were not made by man. Not being made by man, they are free from the
failings, faults and frailties to which every man is subject and are
therefore infallible. II It is difficult to understand how such a theory
came to be propounded by the Vedic Brahmins. For there was a time when the
Vedic Brahmins themselves thought quite differently on the question of the
authority of the Vedas as being final and conclusive. These Vaidik Brahmins
are no other than the authors of the various Dharma Sutras. The following
are the views expressed by the Dharma Sutras on question of the authority
of the Vedas:
1 To begin with the Gautama Dharma Sutra. It lays down the following
rule on the question of the infallibility of the Vedas.
“The Veda is the source of the sacred law” I-
“And the tradition and practice of those who know the Veda” I-2.
“If authorities of equal force are conflicting, (either may be followed
at) pleasure”
2 I-4. The Vasishtha Dharma Sutra propounds the following view: “The
sacred law has been settled by the revealed texts i.e., Vedas and by the
tradition of the sages” I-4. “On the failure of (rules given in) these (two
sources) the practice of Shishtas (has) authority”.
3 I-5. The views of Baudhayana are given below: Prasna I, Adhyaya I,
Kandika I.
(1) The sacred law is taught in each Veda. (2) We will explain (it) in
accordance with that. (3) (The sacred law), taught in the tradition
(Smriti) stands second. (4) The practice of the Sishtas (stands) third. (5)
On failure of them an Assembly consisting at least of ten members (shall
decide disputed points of law).
3 The view taken by the Apastamba Dharma Sutra is clear from the
following extract from that Sutra: “Now, therefore, we will declare the
acts productive of merit which form part of the customs of daily life”
4 I-1. “The authority (for these duties) is the agreement (samaya) of
those who know the law”. I-2. “And (the authorities for the latter are) the
Vedas alone” I-3. With regard to the Shishtas both the Vasishtha Dharma
Sutra and also the Baudhayana Dharma Sutra have taken particular care to
define who can be regarded as Shishtas. The Vashishta Dharma Sutra says:
“He whose heart is free from desire (is called) a Shishta”. I-6. Baudhayana
goes into much greater details about the qualification of the Shishtas.
This is what he says: “5. Shishtas, forsooth, (are those) who are free from
envy, free from pride, contented with a store of grain sufficient for ten
days, free from covetousness, and free from hypocrisy, arrogance, greed,
perplexity and anger.” “6. Those are called Shishtas who, in accordance
with the sacred law, have studied the Veda together with its appendages,
know how to draw inferences from that (and) are able to adduce proofs
perceptible by the senses from the revealed texts.” Baudhayana has also
something very interesting to say about the assembly whom he authorizes to
decide.
The following are his views on the matter
“8. Now they quote also (the following verses): ‘Four men, who each
know one of the four Vedas, a Mimansaka, one who knows the Angas, one who
recites (the works on) the sacred law, and three Brahmanas belonging to
(three different) orders, constitute an assembly consisting at least of ten
members.”
“9. There may be five, or there may be three, or there may be one
blameless man, who decides (questions regarding) the sacred law. But a
thousand fools (can) not do it).” “As an elephant made of wood, as an
antelope made of leather, such an unlearned Brahmana; those three having
nothing but the name (of their kind)”. This review of Dharma Sutras shows
that the (1) Veda, (2) Tradition (Smriti), (3) Practice of Shishta and (4)
Agreement in an assembly were the four different authorities which were
required to be referred to in the decision of an issue which was in
controversy. It also shows that there was a time when the Vedas were not
the sole infallible authorities. That was the time represented by the
Dharma Sutras of Vashishta and Baudhayana. Apastambha does not invest the
Vedas with any authority at all. Knowledge of Vedas is made by him as an
electoral qualification for membership of the Assembly whose agreed
decision is the law and the only law. The Veda was not at all regarded as a
book of authority and when the only recognized source of authority was an
agreement arrived at in an Assembly of the learned. It is only in the time
of Gautama that the Vedas came to be regarded as the only authority. There
was a time when an agreed decision of the Assembly was admitted as one
source of authority. That is the period represented by Baudhayana. This
conclusion is reinforced by the following quotation from the Satapatha
Brahmana. It says: [Left incomplete. Quotation and further discussion not
given.]
KR: Ambedkar did not quote the Shatapatha Brahamana and also he is
trying to pick a needle from the hay stack. Vedas determine the way of life
theoretically; they do not say the applications of the mind and the body.
Rig vedam speaks about the Yagna; but Yajur vedam alone defined the yagna
Kundams of various shapes wrt the various yagnas. So too the Vedas recite
the mantras. However, how those mantras were to be performed is the Grhya
sutrams. Hence, procedures might vary from place to place while executing
the Vedas. Hence, stated that where there are differences of opinions, who
is the authority to solve the issues are said in all the above sutras. LAWS
DO DIFFER FROM THE ORDERS OF THE INTERPRETATIONS OF THE LAW. DOES NOT
AMBEDKAR THE LAW MAKER KNEW THESE DISTINCTIONS?
K RAJARAM IRS 4725
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Thatha_Patty" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CAL5XZor2f012H8f7TG3Gs20navd%2BPCtLradLqiHJy5MqvbO7qA%40mail.gmail.com.
