002_The Heritage of Scriptures-Edited.docx

[The Heritage of Scriptures] In scriptures, the following points shall be discussed: - - - In addition, a small introductory level textual study of one of the scriptures shall also be discussed towards the end. [The notion of scripture] This is the first thing to be discussed, for which...

[The Heritage of Scriptures] In scriptures, the following points shall be discussed: - - - In addition, a small introductory level textual study of one of the scriptures shall also be discussed towards the end. [The notion of scripture] This is the first thing to be discussed, for which it is essential to understand the very notion of scriptures. Where does it come from? What are all its etymological properties etc. When we talk about Scriptures in the Indian context, there is some uniqueness that is particular to India because this idea of scripture is not native to India, which can be understood when we look into the meaning of scripture. To discuss the idea of scripture in the Indian context, the first thing we have to do is to adapt it in a manner suitable for the Indian framework. Let us look at the dictionary meaning of scripture, the dictionary meaning itself brings in the idea of "religion". The inter-relationship between scripture and religion, and the very idea of religion itself is a debatable theme in India. How can we fit this idea of scripture, and the study of it into the Indian frame? There are certain requirements for a disciple to undertake the study of scriptures. Without further ado, let us move on to the first topic to be discussed, that is the **etymology or the notion of scripture.** From the Latin verb scribere, comes the term script which means written, which gave rise to the word scripture which means writing. The Oxford dictionary defines the term scripture, as the Bible. The initial meaning of scripture according to the Oxford dictionary is the Bible. There was no other meaning at the very beginning, but then by the 15th, 16th and the 17th centuries, the European communities started moving out of Europe and travelled to other parts of the World to experience their different ways of lives. There was a pre-conceived notion in the European minds that as they had the concept of religion, so too would the people be living in other parts of the world. Under this thought process, it would also be mandatory for a religion to have a scripture. As a result, additions were made to the meaning of scripture. The Oxford dictionary now states scripture to be the holy books of a particular religion. This secondary meaning is what is prevalent in India today. If scripture means the sacred writings of Christianity contained in the bible, then in simple terms scripture would be some content pertaining to religion in the written form and if we keenly observe this, do we have this kind of scripture? Is it possible to have this kind of scripture in India? The very idea of writing itself may not be suitable for some of the scriptures that we call as Indian scriptures. Let's discuss **scripture and religion**. If we examine the etymology, the dictionary meaning and the definition of scripture, there are certain similarities. The first thing is that a scripture means some content that should be written, and very importantly belong to some religion and not only should it pertain to religion, but since it belongs to religion it must be sacred, and also give the commandments to the follower of a particular religion. Regarding the Indian context, do we have scriptures or a religion? We can confirm the existence of scripture, in its original meaning in India, only if we prove the concept of religion in India, which is highly debatable. According to some scholars of 5th century there is no religion in India. You cannot apply religiosity to the traditions of India. There is no religion that exists in India as of the 20th century according to European scholars and some of the contemporary scholars like Professor S.N. Balagangadhar. According to J Laine in the well reputed paper "The Notion of Scripture in Modern Indian Thought", the concept of 'Hinduism' and 'Religion' were part of the intellectual baggage packed off to India in the 18th century. With the introduction of the British into Indian thought, Indians themselves used these terms in their efforts of self-definition and understanding vis-\`a-vis the alien Englishmen. He says it is not a concept native to India. On looking into the features of religion it is evident that perhaps we cannot apply these features to any of the existing customs or traditions of India. Then if we do not have religion what else do we have? Because we have festivals, great men and women who existed in the tradition or in the past, we have the faith system, we have *Iswara.* What is there in India if we cannot call it as religion and what else can we call it? What we have here in India is nothing but traditions. These are the words of Professor S.N.Balagangadhar from his recent book "What does it mean to be Indian". According to the original concept we did not have religion here in India, as a result it is very difficult for us to decide the meaning of scripture because we can\'t understand how religion and scriptures are intertwined, and therefore can\'t adapt it to the Indian context. [Scriptures in Indian context] As the concept of religion is alien to India, the idea of scripture, which is associated with religion must be alien too. The question of what to call the output of our ancient knowledge and tradition arises. There are umpteen number of books, doctrines but what do we call them? The Vedas, the Smritis, Puranas and Itihasas are often referred to as \'Indian Scriptures\'. but on closely examining what \'scripture\' stands for, then these are the questions we have to find the answers to. Vedas are called Shrutis or Apaurusheya. This concept of Apaurusheya partially exists in Europe as well. Another term for Vedas is Shruti. Shruti is a Sanskrit term. Shruti means \"heard\". This implies that Vedas are never written. Of course, the content was printed in modern India around the 16th or 17th century when the printing press was introduced, for the first time ever Vedas were written down. Prior to this it was an oral tradition (Shruti). Shruti, in short, means it is heard from the mouth of a Guru by the disciple and he repeats it. This was the way one learned Vedas. That is why it is called Shruti. It is never written. But for a scripture to be called so, it was explained earlier how one of the features it has was that it should be \'written\'. Shrutis do not come under this. Today everything is written, everything is tangible but previously this was not the case. Smritis are those which are "recalled" by the sages of different times in history. How can these be a 'scripture'? Shruti is also called Sabhdha. Sabhdha means sound, the voice. It is not varuna roopa, it is sabhdha roopa. In oral tradition shruti is taught and learnt. Smriti is the recollection after hearing shruti, what the sages could remember, what they could recall or recollect that is what is termed as Smritis. There are many Smritis like Manusmiriti, which is one of the famous smritis. Yajnavalkya smriti, Parashara smriti, Vashista Smriti etc. are other examples. These texts are compiled out of the memory of the sages. These concepts cannot fit into the idea of a scripture. To consider Shruti and Smriti in accordance with the original idea of scripture it is not feasible, therefore modifications are required, the idea of scripture must be diluted. Since scripture is not native to India, its native meaning was explored. After which it was understood that certain modifications to the definiton of scripture were needed, if it was to be used in the Indian context. After understanding the concept of scripture in its native sense, now it is time to move on to accept the diluted or customized meaning of the term scripture. Sanatana in its entirety is not a religion though there are certain sects and sub-sects fitting into the frame of religion to some extent. If we look into some small regional practices in India like Lingayatha, it fits such a frame to some extent. There is one prophet or an Adhipurusha and then there are some texts which they hold on to, certain practices and some mutts associated with lingayatha practices. But in the broader sense, **Sanatana is a composition of multiple schools of philosophies dedicated to world's knowledge. So broadly we can say India is a knowledge-oriented society. It is not any practice oriented or belief or faith-oriented society. It is a knowledge-oriented society. The ultimate goal of any philosophical school here in India is knowledge.** *Gnanadevathu kaivalyam-* that is the claim of Advaita as well. There are some scriptures that can be mentioned: Nigama and agamas. Every single Veda be it Rig Veda, Yajur Veda, Sama Veda and Atharva Veda again has four components: Samhita, Brahmana, Aranyaka and Upanishad. Samhita is the core of the Veda. The larger portion of Vedas is nothing but Samhita. And then Brahmana. Every Veda has Brahmana- how to execute the rituals which are mentioned in the Veda, how to decide the meaning of the particular Veda -- all of this can be found in Brahmana. Aranyaka: it is something which is to be often revisited on one's own after learning. And then Upanishads- that is the quintessential form of Veda. Hence only Advaita Vedanta is called the Upanishadic Philosophy. Puranas - Ashtadasha mahapuranas- there are 18 mahapuranas and 18 upapuranas. The major puranas and the subsidiary 18 puranas deal with the story of the past, instead of scripture, we call them Itihasas. Ramayana and Mahabharata are Itihasas. Ramayana being the Aadhi Kaavya - the first ever classical Sanskrit poetic expression. Ramayana is the story of Rama, and then Mahabharata - the story of the Kuru dynasty. As part of these scriptures there are many Gitas, the philosophical segment of Itihasa and purana: such as Bhagavad Gita, Uddhava Gita, Guru Gita, Ashtavakra Gita and many other Gitas as well. We can consider these texts as Indian scriptures. The structure of Indian Vedas is quite unique. Vedic literature is one of a kind and on looking into the literary traditions of the human civilization for the past 3000 years, Vedas stand out not only because of its meaning but also because of its structure. What makes Veda unique is its structure. It is not simply written content. If it was then it would only express the Varanas, the syllables, the words, and the sentences. Apart from this Veda has intonation. Vedas employ a well-defined tonal language which is precise and beyond textual representation. Studying Vedangas is essential to decipher the meaning. The meaning changes based on the intonation or tonal expression of Vedas, so when writing Veda on paper it is difficult to get the right tonal expression, and it cannot be just a tonal language when it is uttered and heard. If uttered by the guru and heard by the disciple then only will the intended expression be grasped by the disciple. Today the Vedic content on paper is printed with some marks but unless a disciple listens to it from some Guru, they cannot really understand what those marks stand for. It is similar to how music has written notes, but unless a guru teaches how to make music from such notes, there is no way a disciple can learn the music. Vedas are a similar case, it is a text, it is literary content but unique, which is accompanied by precise tonal language. So just to study Veda it is of utmost importance to have command over **vedhangas**. " reciting *sloka".* There are six angas, six parts or limbs for Veda. **Shiksha** the very first anga of the Veda. Shiksha deals with pronunciation, the correctness of pronunciation, starting from syllable to the non-syllable expressions. **Vyakarana** is grammar. Since the Vedic language is not that similar to most of the Indian languages, there is a different set of grammatical rules for Veda and these grammatical rules differ from Veda to Veda. Hence each Veda has its own prathashakhya which deals with the etymological and phonetic uniqueness of that particular Veda Vyakarana. The **Chandhas** means the meter. All the Vedic expressions, especially the Samhita part of Veda is always composed or compiled in one or the other meter. The word Chandhas serves as another synonym for Vedas. The knowledge of Chandhas is also essential in what we call today the Gayathri mantra. Actually, Gayathri is a meter. There are many such meters using which Vedic expressions are made. **Niruktha** is etymology. Niruktha is also the first ever lexicon wherein we find the derivation of various Vedic terms and then comes **Jyothisha**, which is about the planetary motions, it pertains calculating the time, finding the auspicious time etc. And then **kalpa**- that is the sixth anga or sixth limb of Veda, that guides someone how to perform the Vedic rituals. Kalpa is considered to be the hands of Vedha purusha. Vyakarana is considered to be the mugha, the face or the mouth and the eyes of Vedha purusha is Jyothisha. This is the concept of Veda purusha, and in order to understand the Veda, the understanding of the six angas is essential. In the 13th and 14th centuries, Greek south Indian scholars Ayan Acharya, commented upon all the Vedas, which are known as sayanam hashya, the commentary on all the four Vedas that is available today. Through which one can decipher the meaning of Vedas. But again, a preliminary understanding of the Angas is required. The rest of the scriptures are composed in poetry. We already discussed how Vedic Expression is unique and there is no parallel to Veda. Not only in the Indian context but in literary expressions of other civilizations as well. We do not find anything similar to Veda. The rest of the scriptures are composed in poetry they are called Padyatmaka expression. Look at the Puranas, they are composed in meters, their slokas and a few of these are in Sutra form as well. It is a unique way of composing texts in Sutra literature. What is the approach of Indian scripture? How does it try to reach the intended person? **Approach of Indian scripture** can be classified into three: - - - Prabhu is the administrator: He is the king and his approach is very authoritative. When he assigns a task, it will be in the form of an order and that is Prabhu Samhita. Vedic expression is primarily Prabhu Samhita. It says "satyamvada, Dharmam Sada, swadhyayavan na pramaha." You follow truthfulness, you follow Dharma, the right path of life. This is the approach of Veda there is no option to do it or not. It has to be done in the Vedic order, the Vedic approach that is called Prabhu Samhita. Mitra Samhita: In Sanskrit, Mitra has two meanings: one is Mitram that is friend and Mitraha that is Surya. Here the Mitram is friendly and the friendly approach. This is also one of the approaches of Indian scripture. Smritis have a friendly approach. Kanta Samhita: this is largely seen in the Kavya and Mitra Samhita. Under Mitra Samhita, we can consider puranas as well. **How are these Indian scriptures interconnected?** We saw how the understanding of Shruti is possible only for the person who has command over its six limbs. **"Parokshapriya ivahi devaha"** : this is the approach of Veda. Vedic expressions are always indirect. Vedic expression is always Alankarika: it employs all the indirect methods to convey a meaning. So, it is not that easy, even after mastering the six Limbs of Veda. These ideas of Vedas are retold in the Puranas in the form of stories. Indian puranic stories, the so-called mythology, are really captivating and can catch hold of the minds of not only the younger generation but also the older generation. The puranic expression is attractive as it tries to convey the essence of the stories and the ritualistic aspect of Vedas are expressed and coded into the Smritis. How to behave, how not to behave, how a king should be, how the subject should be, how a father should be, how a teacher should be such ideas can be found in the Smritis. Veda says it indirectly, while Smritis express it directly. The concept of Purushartha, in particular Dharma Purushartha, is elaborated and thematically presented in the Itihasas. Itihasas - Ramayana and Mahabharata. Vedas, Shrutis, Smritis, Puranas, and Itihasas are the major scriptures of India and are interconnected. All these are composed in Sanskrit language. Vedic language is somewhat different, it is not exactly classical Sanskrit hence it is called Vedic Sanskrit. Traditionally the study of most of the Indian scriptures is done under the principle of Guru Parampara, where the Guru plays a significant role. This learning of scriptures under **Guru Parampara** is still alive today and fortunately most of the scriptures are learnt even in present times under the able tutorage of a Guru. The Guru's knowledge and command over the scripture is the guiding light for the student's learning process. There are fundamental tools to decipher the meaning of the scriptures which the disciple is supposed to master at the very beginning of the study of a scripture. When the Guru deems someone capable of learning a certain scripture then the disciple would take up that task and the Guru's help would always be there with the disciple. It is with Guru Karunya, the compassion, the guidance and the grace of a Guru that one will be able to get the real essence of scripture. This is what the traditional understanding is. For a student, before he embarks on the journey to know a scripture, the knowledge of grammar, logic, and prosody are very essential. The person who wants to know the meaning of a sloka, a phadya, or a versification must be aware of the particular Chandas in which the sloka is composed. Only then can the next step of splitting the words be taken. Because usually in a sloka the words will be in a combined form, whatever euphonic combination is possible all of them are done or Sandhi is done. In order to acquire the meaning, the words should be kept separately, and for that splitting should take place, but one must be really good at grammar for this. So, a knowledge of grammar is essential. To get the logical conclusion of a sloka, Anvaidh jnana is necessary. Anvaidh jnana means arranging the words according to their meaning and then coming to a conclusion. For an understandable conclusion, the knowledge of logic also is very important. That is why, always in this tradition it is remembered that *Kanadham paniniyancha Sarvashashthropakarakam*, gyaya vyshesika and then grammar. Knowledge of grammar or vyakarana is very important throughout the Shastra Parampara or the scriptures. But the Indian scripture is still not a well-defined domain as we have already seen. We face difficulties when we adopt this term scripture and when we translate Indian terms into a non- Indian language, at least in the academic domain, such problems still exist like translation of the term Dharma or Karma, Atma, Moksha etc. In that light even the concept of scripture is not well defined so it is hard to name them one by one. It is difficult to name the scriptures of India one by one which are all composed in various languages of India. Most of them are written in Sanskrit, and in the scriptures that are written in other Indian languages the essence will be same and hence the knowledge of Sanskrit language is a must to go through Indian scriptures. How do we extract the meaning out of a Sloka? Because in a sloka, the words are jumbled up. In Sanskrit there is no rule as such in a sentence- the Karta should be in the beginning Karma should come next and the verb should come last. Sanskrit is such a language that the meaning is intact even if you change up the word order, that is the beauty of this language which has enabled people to take up various experiments in the language itself, in the in various compositions of meters and so on and so forth. In order to get the meaning out of those compositions one has to be trained in it and since most of the scriptures are composed in sloka form it is absolutely essential to know how to rearrange the words according to their meaning. Let\'s take the example of one sloka, this is taken from the Bhagavad Gita, a small portion of Mahabharatha, which serves as the source of Vedantha- the 3rd sloka from the 17th chapter of Shrimad Bhagavad Gita is a Anushtup Chandas. This sloka is composed in the meter called Anushtup. Anushtup is the name of that particular Chandhas wherein you have 32 letters in total, the sloka contains 4 Padha or 4 quarter parts, each quarter would contain eight letters, so eight times four, making 32 letters in total and there are certain other norms for an Anushtup sloka. In the process of getting the meaning of a sloka the first step is to split the Sandhi which is called Padha vibhaga. So here in this sloka, first comes Padha Vibhaga or the splitting up of words. Following that, Anuvaya comes. Anuvaya means as mentioned earlier is the rearranging of words according to the meaning. Here the Anuvaya is as follows, Shri Krishna is addressing Arjuna as Bharatha, Hey Bharatha\...". This is the Anuvaya. Usually in the case of scriptures it is recommended to move on to the Bhashya, the authentic commentary on that particular scripture. In the case of Bhagavad Gita, we have the very well reputed, often quoted commentary of Shrimad Shankaracharya on Bhagavad Gita. In the commentary of Shankara, on the particular versification that goes like this, Sathvanurupa, He gives the explanation for this word satvanurupa. We have four antahkarana, Mano, Vidya, Alankar, Chitta, and then antahkarana when it is purified that is called satvanurupa.This is just a loose translation. The meaning of Sarvasya according to Shankaracharya is Pranijathasya ,any living creature. Samsari Jeevaha he says, Jeevaha means a human without any specification so any human being male or female is what samsari jeevaha means. Shraddha prayaha - he or she is nothing but Shradha, Shradha can be loosely translated as faith. This is Shankara's commentary on Bhagavad Gita slokas and in today's context perhaps reliable translations can be used. This one is A. Mahadeva Sastri's translation published in 1901. The faith of each is in accordance with his nature, that is Satvanu Rupa, "O Bharatha. The man is made up of his faith; as a man's faith is, so is he." He gives an explanation for the words he has said in his commentary. This is the method to decipher the meaning of a scripture which is composed in Padhya format. As the format changes so will the approaches too. It is under Guru Parampara where it is learnt. For self-study reliable commentaries and translations can be used. Today a lot of online sessions are conducted by various knowledgeable teachers and those courses can be taken up. Each scripture has its own way of presenting a meaning and to understand the essence of that particular scripture the Shraddha, dedication of the disciple is critical. **LEARNING OUTCOME** 1. Vedas are not mere scriptures. They are called Shrutis or Apaurusheya. They were orally preserved and passed on from a guru to their disciples. 2. Vedas, Shrutis, Smritis, Puranas, and Itihasas are the major scriptures of India and are interconnected. 3. Sanatana is a composition of multiple schools of philosophies dedicated to knowledge. 4. To get the logical conclusion of a sloka, Anvaidh jnana is necessary, which means arranging the words according to their meaning and then coming to a conclusion.