UNIT 1 GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF INDIAN PHILOSOPHY

Contents

1.0 Objectives
1.1 Introduction
1.2 Philosopher‟s Look at Reality
1.3 Knowledge in Indian Context
1.4 Philosophy and Life
1.5 Let Us Sum Up
1.6 Key Words
1.7 Suggested Readings and References
1.8 Answers to Check Your Progress

1.0 OBJECTIVES

The main objectives of this unit are:

 to dispel certain misconceptions about Indian philosophy held mainly by western scholars
and certain other misconceptions held by some Indian scholars. In order to grasp Indian
philosophy in proper perspective it is necessary that these misconceptions are erased;
 to distinguish philosophy from religion in the Indian context. This unit shows that, taken
in the strict sense of the term, philosophy is not the same as religion. Some key
philosophical issues developed in Indian context on very different lines when compared
with western thought;
 to project the essence of Indian thought.

1.1 INTRODUCTION

In Indian context, philosophy is taken to mean darshana or tattva. We shall consider how the
etymological meaning of „philosophy‟ correlates itself with darshana or tattva. „Drisyate anena
iti darshanam‟ - the one through which it is seen. The word seen can be understood either
literally or philosophically. Though the difference is irrelevant, let us consider only the latter.
To „see‟ in philosophic sense means to „realise‟. Darsana, therefore, means to realise. Again,
the verb „realise‟ is a transitive verb. We always realise „something‟ whenever we realise. To
say that we realise „nothing‟ is to admit that there is no realisation at all. If we recollect
whatever that was said about „know‟, then it becomes clear that to a great extent „to realise‟
corresponds to „to know‟, and hence realisation corresponds to knowledge. This correspondence
is nearly one-to-one; i.e., it is nearly isomorphic. This aspect unfolds itself in due course.
Before proceeding in this direction, we should know what „tattva’ stands for.

The word tattva is derived from two words „tat‟ and „tva‟. Tat means it or that and tva means
„you‟. Therefore tattva, etymologically, means „you are that‟. What is important is to know
what tat stands for in Indian thought. It means reality or „ultimate‟ reality. This is also what one

1
division of philosophy, i.e., metaphysics talks about. The word „it‟, which appears in the
meaning of darshana stands for tat, i.e., ultimate reality. Since darshana , is knowing reality, it
involves not only an important metaphysical component but also an important epistemological
component. Hence, the summation of these two components more or less satisfactorily
completes the description of philosophy as darshana in Indian context.

There is yet, another component that remains to be understood. Obviously, „you‟ (tva) stands for
knower, i.e., the epistemological subject and by identifying the epistemological subject with
reality, we arrive at an important corollary. Indian thought did not distinguish between reality
and the person or epistemological subject and hence etymologically, knowledge in Indian
thought became inward (however, it must be emphasized that it outgrew the etymological
meaning in its nascent stage itself). But what is of critical importance is the philosophical
significance of the above mentioned corollary. Wherever man is involved, directly or indirectly,
value is involved. So axiology surfaces. When man is identified with reality, it and the whole
lot of issues related to reality gain value-overtones. Hence, in Indian context, value is not merely
a subject matter of philosophy, but philosophy itself comes to be regarded as „value‟.
Consequently, the very approach of Indian thinkers to philosophy gains some distinct features.

1.2 PHILOSOPHER’S LOOK AT REALITY

Indian thought is essentially pluralistic as regards arguments which give an exposition of reality.
First, we can begin with types of reality and this can be done from two different angels

Table 1:
Theories
of Reality

Secular Spiritual

Non- Non-
Physical Theistic
Physical theistic

Table 2:
Theories
of Reality

Non-
Monistic Dualistic Pluralistic
Dualistic

2
Let us try to understand what Table 1 says. But before doing so, it is better to answer the
question; what is reality? Indeed, this is the most difficult question to answer. To start with,
„reality‟ can be defined as the one which is the ultimate source of everything and itself does not
have any source. It also can be taken to mean that which is independent. This definition itself is
hotly debated in philosophical circles. If we take this as a working definition of reality, then we
find to our surprise that ancient Indians offered various answers resulting in „proliferation of an
ocean of theories‟, to use the phrase used by Feyerabend. Contrary to widespread belief
prevailed in the past, all Indian thinkers did not recognize reality as spiritual. Nor did they
unanimously regard it as secular. A complex discipline like philosophy does not allow such
simple division. Surely, some thinkers accepted only spiritual reality and on the contrary, some
other thinkers accepted only „secular‟ reality. However, in many cases, these two divisions
crossed and the result is that in those cases we discover that reality has two faces, secular and
spiritual. An upshot of this conclusion is that thinkers in India neglected neither this world nor
the „other‟ (if it exists). This is a significant aspect to be borne in mind.

Curiously, at Level 2, the divisions of secular and spiritual theories are mutually exclusive and
totally exhaustive, i.e., physical and non-physical, on the one hand and theistic and non-theistic,
on the other. Though within secular range (and similarly within spiritual range) the divisions
exclude each other any division of secular theory can go with any division of spiritual theory
without succumbing to self-contradiction. Accordingly, we arrive at four combinations which
are as follows:
1. Physical – Theistic
2. Physical – Non-Theistic
3. Non-Physical – Theistic
4. Non-Physical – Non-Theistic

Now let us get to know the meaning of these terms. A theory which regards the independence of
physical world is physical. Likewise, a theory which regards the independence of any other
substance than physical world is non-physical. The former need not be non-theistic. A theory of
reality can accord equal status to this world and god. Surely, it does not involve any self-
contradiction. The Dvaita and the Vaisesika illustrate the former, whereas charvaka illustrates
the latter. A diagram illustrates the point.

Physical Theistic
(A) (C)

Non- Physical Non-theistic

(B) (D)

What is to be noted here is that A and B lack connectivity; and so also C and D. In western
tradition, the term „mind‟ replaces the term non-physical. However, in Indian context such usage
is inaccurate because, at least, some schools regard mind as sixth organ. The Sankhya is one
school which regards mind as an evolute of prakriti. Hence, it is as much physical as any other

3
sense organ. The Vaisheshika is another school which has to be bracketed with the Samkhya in
this regard. At this stage, we should get ourselves introduced to two key metaphysical terms,
realism and idealism; the former with all its variants regards the external world as ultimately real,
whereas the latter with all its variants regards external world as a derivative of mind. Of course,
here mind is not to be construed as sixth organ. The Yogachara, a later Buddhistic school is one
system which subscribes to idealism.

Now it is clear that (A) and (B) are mutually exclusive and totally exhaustive. Under (D) there
are two sub-divisions; atheistic and agnostic. (C) on the one hand, and atheistic and agnostic on
the other hand are mutually exclusive and totally exhaustive. Since, atheistic and agnostic
doctrines are philosophically different, 2nd and 4th types are further split into two each. So,
instead of 4, we will have six theories. Each theory differs from every other theory. The
differences are, sometimes gross and some times subtle.

It is, now, more than obvious that Indian philosophy does not lend itself to simple and easy
categorization. Complexity and variety must be regarded as salient features of Indian thought.
This aspect is further compounded when table 1 and table 2 intersect. Before considering such
intersection we should first elucidate table 2.

Table 2 explicates theories of reality and distinguishes theories on the basis of number, i.e., the
number of substances, which are regarded as real, becomes the criterion to make any distinction.
Monism asserts that reality is one. The assertions of dualistic and pluralistic theories can be
ascertained without difficulty, since they stand for „two‟ and „more than two‟ respectively. Non-
dualistic theory, i.e., The Advaita is unique. It does not make any assertion about number, but
only negates dualism (if dualism is inadmissible, then pluralism is also inadmissible). The
Upanisads are monistic and The Vaisesika is pluralistic.

Now we shall integrate table 1 and table 2. An integration of this sort yields in all twenty four
systems. This is not to imply that twenty-four systems dominated the scene. But majority of
them did flourish at one time or the other.

Consideration of questions in respect of reality should make it clear that no qualitative difference
can be discerned between the Indian and the western traditions. Questions are alike; because
problems are alike. But the same set of questions may elicit different answers from different
minds at different times and places. Always, spatio-temporal factor plays a major role in
determining solutions. The last aspect becomes clear after we consider issues in respect of
knowledge.

Check Your Progress I

Note: a) Use the space provided for your answer

b) Check your answers with those provided at the end of the unit

1. Show how the key terms Darshana and Tattva can be integrated into the etymological
meaning of philosophy.

4
 2. How do you explain that ultimate reality is knowing reality?

1.3 KNOWLEDGE IN INDIAN CONTEXT

Desire to know is not an extraordinary quality of man. This is an instinct which can be discerned
in any animal. However, differences lie elsewhere. The extent of knowledge acquired or
capable of being acquired varies from species to species. This is one difference. Second, man‟s
motive to acquire knowledge and his concept of knowledge differ from culture to culture.
Previous statement, surely, does not imply ranking of culture. It only shows that the concept of
knowledge is relative to culture. The essence of philosophy consists in these two principal
factors; motive and idea.

Indian and western concepts, whether ancient or modern, are best understood when they are
compared and contrasted. Ancient Greeks believed in the principle „knowledge for the sake of
knowledge‟, which gave impetus to birth and growth of pure science. In contrast, post-
renaissance age heralded the contrary principle „knowledge is power‟. This dictum propagated
by Bacon changed for ever the very direction of the evolution of science. However, ancient
Indians exhibited a very different mindset. While medicine and surgery developed to meet
practical needs, astronomy and mathematics developed for unique reason, neither purely spiritual
nor purely mundane, in order to perform yagas to meet practical ends and yajnas to achieve
spiritual gain. At any rate, ancient Indians never believed in Greek dictum. Nor did they,
perhaps, think of it. If we regard knowledge as value, then we have to conclude that it was never
regarded as intrinsic. On the other hand, it was mainly instrumental. The only exception to this
characterization is the Charvaka system which can be regarded as the Indian counterpart of
epicureanism.

In a restricted sense, the Indian philosophy of knowledge comes very close to the Baconan
philosophy of knowledge. Truly, Indians regarded knowledge as power because for them
knowledge (and thereby, philosophy) was a way of life and this is the reason why for them
knowledge was never intrinsic. But, then, it is absolutely necessary to reverse the connotation of
the word „power‟. While the Baconan „power‟ was meant to experience control over nature, the
Indian „power‟ was supposed to be the instrument to subjugate ones own self to nature. This is
the prime principle which forms the cornerstone of early vedic thought. This radical change in
the meaning of the word „power‟ also explains the difference in world view which can be easily
discerned when the belief-systems and attitudes of Indians and Europeans (for our purpose
„west‟ means Europe only) are compared and contrasted. Post-Baconian Europe believed that
this universe and everything in it is meant to serve the purpose of man because man is the centre
of the universe. (The spark of this thought did characterize a certain phase in the development of
vedic thought, only to be denounced at later stage). On the other hand, ancient Indian believed in
identifying himself with nature.

We should carry further our analysis of Baconian „power‟ vis-à-vis the Indian „power‟. The
repetition of what was said earlier is only to reinforce the critical importance of consequences.
Knowledge was not only „power‟ but became a powerful weapon for the westerners to address
their economic and political agenda. At no point of time did westerners look upon knowledge as
a means to achieve anything even remotely connected to spiritual goal. Just as the charvaka is

5
an exception in Indian context, Socrates and Spinoza can be regarded as exceptions in western
context. Indians, however, did not regard worldly pleasure as ultimate. For them there was
something more important and enduring and therefore the conquest of nature never mattered.
Precisely, this attitude has generated lot of needless controversy. This characterization, which,
no doubt, is true, was grossly misunderstood and, consequently, it was argued that the Indian
thought rejects altogether this world and present life as totally irrelevant and insignificant. This
argument, which stems from total misunderstanding, is altogether unwarranted. To say that x is
more important than y is not to say that y is insignificant. If something is more important, then it
means that something else is „less‟ important. In other words, Indian tradition, surely, includes
the „present‟ life, but it is not restricted to it; goes beyond it. This point becomes clear in the
third chapter.

Evidently, Indian tradition maintains a certain hierarchy of values unlike western tradition.
Knowledge, as a way of life, encompasses not only all sorts of values but also it changes one‟s
own perspective. Accordingly, the so-called spiritual goal in life can be attained only by one
who has acquired knowledge. It points to the fact that ignorance or avidya is a hindrance to attain
spiritual goal in particular and any other goal in general. One who has acquired true knowledge
or knows truly, acts and thinks, very differently, different from ignorant, a characteristic Socratic
thought in Indian attire. However, this characteristic is conspicuous by its absence in western
tradition. It was not necessary that personal life of a philosopher should match his philosophy, in
the sense that a philosopher‟s life need not be a role model for lesser mortals to emulate. While
Socrates and Spinoza are at one end of the thread, Bacon and Heidegger are at the opposite end.
The point is that in Indian tradition, philosophy and value are inseparable, whereas in the west it
is not so. A philosopher, in the west, can be (not that there are) worse than a hardened criminal.
But in Indian context it is inconceivable.

This sort of emphasis upon values led to a hermeneutic blunder. Without batting his eye lid the
critic, just like protagonist, argued that in Indian philosophy was never distinct from religion.
Hence in India there was no philosophy at all worth the name according to critics. That there
was no religion in India (with the exclusion of tribal religion) is a different story. The so-called
Hindu dharma cannot be mistaken and ought not to be mistaken for religion. This confusion
arose because many scholars mistakenly identified religion with spirituality. An analogy may
clear the mist surrounding Indian philosophy. Western philosophy is not divided into Christian
philosophy and Jewish philosophy, though all western philosophers (excluding Greek
philosophers) in loose sense are either Christians or Jews. Likewise, it is highly inappropriate to
talk about „Hindu philosophy’, though majority of Indian philosophers were „committed‟ Hindus.
It is true that a few philosophers in India became the heads of religious groups or sects (eg.
Ramanuj or Madhva). But then we have St. Augustine, St. Aquinas, etc. in the west also. But
nobody characterizes their philosophy as Christian philosophy. But surely, we have Buddhist or
Jaina philosophy because neither Buddhism nor Jainism is a religion in the strict sense of the
term. At this point, a pertinent question arises, if there is Buddhist philosophy, then why not
Hindu philosophy? To believe that there is such philosophy amounts to putting the cart in front
of the horse. Philosophy in India did not originate from Sanatana dharma – or Hindu dharma as
it is popularly known as – but it is the other way round.

6
Therefore, in sharp contrast to western tradition, Indian philosophy is essentially spiritual. When
it was said earlier that in India also knowledge is regarded as power, what was meant was that
knowledge was regarded as spiritual power; spiritual which is totally non-religious in its nature.

It is an error to assume that spiritual overtones can be discerned only in knowledge. The concept
of reality and aesthetic values also are endowed with spirituality. The Upanisadic or Advaitic
notion of Brahman is a classic example. It is spiritual because it is neither worldly (physical)
nor religious. If knowledge is spiritual, then its prama (object) also must be spiritual. „Raso vi
saha’ (that is, indeed, rasa) is an example for spiritual status of aesthetic value. In this case
„that‟ according to, at least one interpretation means „Para Brahma’ or highest reality and Rasa
may be taken to mean beauty. The metaphysical or spiritual element involved in philosophy
must have been hijacked by religions to formulate their notions of gods (and perhaps to counter
their rivals).

Let us return to knowledge again. Indian philosophy recognizes knowledge at two levels; Para
Vidya (higher knowledge) and Apara vidya (lower knowledge). Since knowledge is spiritual,
only the former is true knowledge, whereas the latter is not knowledge at all in the strict sense of
the term. Though the Upanisads subscribe to this view, subsequent systems, (with the exception
of Purva Mimamsa) which are supposed to be commentaries on the Upanishads, regarded
perception, for example, as a way of knowledge. Upamana is another pramana. Not only lower
knowledge, but also erroneous knowledge was seriously considered as species of knowledge
(e.g., akhyati) by systems of philosophy. Therefore even Apara Vidya retained its place.Does
Indian philosophy integrate spiritual life with worldly affairs? If the claim, that upholding of the
former is not tantamount to the rejection of the latter, then it does not. The truth is that the former
does not entail the latter. Therefore these two had to be fused and it was achieved in a
remarkable manner; purusartha scheme clarifies that only through Dharma, i.e., righteous
means, man should acquire artha (wealth) and satisfy kama (any sensuous desire), the very same
means to attain moksha (liberation). The law of parsimony is very well adhered to as regards the
questions of social philosophy and moral philosophy.

Check Your Progress II

Note: a) Use the space provided for your answer

b) Check your answers with those provided at the end of the unit

1. Explain briefly that theories of reality can be understood from two different angles, that is,
from spiritual and secular angles.

2. Do you agree with some Indian schools that regard mind as sixth organ?

1.4 PHILOSOPHY AND LIFE

Earlier, it was said that in India philosophy itself was regarded as a value and also that value and
human life are inextricably blended. What is the aim of life? Against this backdrop, it is easy to

7
discover solution to this quest in Indian philosophy. It is not so easy to reach the same in
western tradition (it is true that existentialism attempted the same, but it remained a sort of island
and was obliterated by analytic tradition). The aim of life according to Indian tradition is to make
a pilgrimage from „misery to happiness‟. This is a single thread which runs through the whole
gamut of Indian philosophy. At one point of time, vertical split occurred in philosophical
tradition leading to the birth of orthodox and heterodox schools of thought. However, they
concur on one issue, i.e., the aim of life. (It is a commonplace practice to regard them as vedic
and non-vedic schools though it is not very satisfactory to regard so). The dispute between these
two poles did not prevent them from embracing a common goal. In what sense is this goal a
philosophical issue? This is one question which arises in this context; how can two opposing
schools of thought have a common denominator? This is another. Answer to the first question
can be construed as follows. Knowledge as value is unique by itself. If the instrument which
gives thrust to the quality of lifestyle has any economic value, then from a different perspective,
if any, knowledge which reforms lifestyle also must possess value. Therefore knowledge
became „the‟ value in Indian thought. A Jnani in Socratic sense perceives not only routine life,
but also the world in which he lives, differently because knowledge changes his world view.
This type of change carries with it moral value. It means that the aim of life becomes an ethical
issue. In this sense it becomes a philosophical issue. Answer to second question is still simpler.
All schools of philosophy unanimously admit that the pursuit of happiness is the sole aim and
unanimity stops there. But these two poles differ when they specify what happiness is. An
example may make the point clear. All political parties, in their election manifesto, proclaim that
their sole aim is uplifting the downtrodden. But the mechanism of doing so differs from one
party to the other. Now the position is clear. Orthodox and heterodox schools differ on what
happiness is and on what constitutes happiness. Even within heterodox system the idea of
happiness differs. The Charvaka school maintains that happiness consists in pleasure whereas
the Buddhism asserts that happiness consists in nirvana if happiness is to be construed as
elimination of misery.

Earlier, it was mentioned that spirituality is the essence of Indian philosophy. Against this
background, let us analyse what happiness is. Neither this physical world nor earthly pleasure is
permanent. Nor are they ultimate. Hopefully, no one entertains the illusion that this world is
eternal. However, not many care to think whether or not everlasting peace or happiness is
possible within the bounds of finite world. Indian philosophy is characterized by this thought.
The desire to attain eternity is common to the Greek and the Indian traditions. However, in the
latter case this desire takes a different form. Hence eternity is tantamount to permanent
liberation from misery. A permanent liberation from misery is tantamount to attainment of
permanent happiness and this it eternity. It is variously designated as moksha, nirvana, etc. In
its ordinary sense vairagya means renouncing happiness. But in real sense what has to be
renounced is not happiness, but pleasure. Vairagya in conjuction with knowledge leads to
eternal happiness. Hence in Indian context vairagya is „renounce worldly pleasure and attain
eternal happiness‟. It is possible that the very idea of renunciation invites strong objections. But
in one definite sense such a renunciation is desirable. Vairagya should be construed as
elimination of greed and inclusion of contentment in life. This is the hidden meaning of
vairagya. What happened, in course of time, was that both dimensions were wrongly interpreted
leading to the conclusion that vairagya is not only negative but also is the sign of pessimism. It
did not stop at this stage, but extended to the whole of Indian philosophy.

8
At this point, it is necessary to digress; In the twentieth century, westerners believed that in India
there was noting like philosophy, but only myth and casuistry in the garb of philosophy. While
the western scholars argued that in India, philosophy was totally corrupted by religion, some
Indian scholars under the influence of Marxism failed to separate philosophy from custom and
tradition afflicting Indian society. The merits and demerits of their arguments and
counterarguments are not relevant presently. But the sense, in which the world religion has to be
construed, if it has to be regarded as philosophically constructive, is important. If the word
religion is taken to mean tribal religion, then its association with philosophy spells doom to the
latter. In India, philosophy was not influenced by religion in this sense. On the other hand,
various religious sects, which grew later, were influenced by philosophy.

But the criticisms of those scholars, who admit that in ancient India there was philosophic
movement, merit our considerations. According to one criticism, Indian thought prompted
negative outlook and therefore, is self-destructive only because it negates the reality of physical
world. This criticism can be rebutted in two stages. In the first place, Indian philosophy does
not deny the physical world in absolute terms. A particular system of philosophy does not
become a negative doctrine just because it regards the world as impermanent and that what is
impermanent is regarded as not ultimately real. No scientist has ever dared to say that the
universe is eternal. If the critic‟s argument is admitted, then Plato‟s philosophy also becomes
negative in character. Indian philosophers, like Plato, admitted something permanent.
Impermanence and permanence are relative terms; relevance of any one of them demands the
relevance of another. Secondly, what is relative is always relative to something different. There
is noting like absolute relativity. The last two statements which, actually, explicate the essence
of the theory of relativity holds good here also.

Now let us consider the second stage of refutation. Is it legitimate to categorize any doctrine as
negative? Refutation is an important step in arguments. But it is not final. If science can be
„characterized as satisfying a negative requirement such as falsifiability‟ (Karl Popper, 1959,
p.41), then philosophy, whether Indian or western, also is entitled to the same benefit or status.
To a great extent Indian philosophy followed the principle of „Assertion through refutation‟.
Precisely this principle was upheld by Popper.

Second criticism is as follows; it is pessimistic. Any theory, which negates this world and life in
absolute sense, ought to be pessimistic. The very fact that this criticism draws support from two
sources of error shows the degree of misunderstanding. First, the desire to escape from misery
was misconstrued as the desire to escape from external world. Second, it discourages earthly
pleasure. Let us consider the second source first. Negation of earthly pleasure is not tantamount
to the negation of happiness because pleasure and happiness are, evidently, different. Moksha is
simply Sanskrit version of happiness. Pleasure is not only momentary but also is not pure in the
sense that pleasure always comes with pain. If we consider Bentham‟s criteria, then these
criteria satisfy not pleasure but happiness. Duration, intensity and purity do not, in reality,
characterize pleasure but happiness. Perhaps proximity alone satisfies pleasure. If so, even from
practical standpoint any philosophy which regards moksha as ideal ceases to be pessimistic.

9
Now let us turn to the first source. Desire to escape from this world describes the mindset of an
escapist. There are references to rebirth. Rebirth may only be a myth and something beyond
verification. But when attainment of moksha is regarded as a possibility during the lifespan of an
individual (this is what is called jivanmukti), there is no reason to regard the external world as an
evil. It is, however, true that not only critics, but also the votaries of Indian philosophy
misunderstood the concept of moksha and it led to the cardinal mistake of treating external world
as evil.

One more objection can be raised to moksha. Is moksha a meaningful ideal? In the first place
moksha must be possible, and secondly, its realisation must be humanly possible. In the absence
of either of them does it not cease to be meaningful? Let us assume that it is humanly possible to
attain moksha. Then it remains an ideal. But then nothing is lost. If we pursue an unattainable
ideal, then we progress towards that ideal. What matters is progress. Plato‟s Utopia is an
example which comes very close to the ideal of moksha in this respect. Progress in right
direction is true progress. Therefore, knowing fully well that it is humanly impossible to achieve
a goal like moksha, man pursues moksha. Thereby man progresses from lower level to higher
level. This is a singular advantage of accepting something like moksha as an ideal.

In the western tradition only Greeks believed in the immortality of soul. It became totally alien
to modern western philosophy, though it found favour with Christianity. The paradox is that
immortality of soul is a common theme to Christianity and Indian philosophy, whereas it ought
to have been a common to western philosophy and Christianity because west happens to be the
mainland of Christianity. It illustrates one crucial factor. Religion does not determine
philosophy. On the other hand, philosophy has the required potential at least to influence
religion, if not determine the same.

Check Your Progress III

Note: a) Use the space provided for your answer

b) Check your answers with those provided at the end of the unit

1.What do you understand by the belief that „knowledge is power‟ in the Western and Indian
context?

2.Do you agree with the view that Indian philosophy is essentially spiritual?

1.5. LET US SUM UP

Philosophy is derived from two Greek words which mean love of knowledge or wisdom. In
Indian tradition philosophy means Darshana or tattva. Indian outlook is essentially different
from western outlook. In terms of problems there is no difference between Indian and western
philosophical traditions. Indians perceived knowledge as power in a different perspective. Bacon
regarded knowledge as the means to establish authority over external world. On the other hand,
Indians regarded knowledge as essential to establish control over ones own self. Indians

10
recognized philosophy itself as a value. Therefore philosophy, in India, was accepted as a way of
life. With the sole exception of the Charvaka, all other systems of philosophy in India accepted
liberation in one or the other sense. Moksha, is one such ideal. Philosophy is independent of
religion. However, religion may or may not be independent of philosophy.

1.6 KEY WORDS

Yagas and Yajnas: Yagas amd Yajnas are sacared rituals done to appease God, performed
during the Vedic period.

Pessimism: Pessimism, from the Latin „pessimus‟ (worst), is a painful state of mind which
negatively colours the perception of life, especially with regard to future events. Value
judgments may vary dramatically between individuals, even when judgments of fact are
undisputed.

1.7 FURTHER READINGS AND REFERENCES

Agarwal, M.M. “Nothingness and Freedom: Sartre and Krishnamurti”. Journal of Indian Council
of Philosophical Research. Vol. IX, No. 1 (September-December, 1991).
Aleaz, K.P. The Relevance of Relation in Sankara’s Advaita Vedanta. Delhi: Kant Publications,
1996.
Balasubramanian, R. The Metaphysics of the Spirit. New Delhi: Indian Council of Philosophical
Research, 1994.
Bagchi, Kalyan Kumar. “Ontological Argument and Ontology of Freedom”. Journal of Indian
Council of Philosophical Research. Vol. X, No. 1 (September-December, 1992).
Bharthakur, J.K. “A Journey Towards Essence of Mandukya Upanishad for a Theory of Time”.
Indian Philosophical Quarterly. Vol. XXV, No.1 (January, 1998).
-------------------. “A Theory of Time”. Indian Philosophical Quarterly. Vol. XXII, No.4
(October, 1995). Indian Philosophical Quarterly. Vol. XXIV, No.2 (April, 1997)
Brown, Jason W. “Microgenesis and Budhism: The Concept of Momentariness”. Philosophy
East and West. Vol. 49, No.3 (July, 1999).
Chadha, Monima. “Perceptual Cognition: A Nyaya-Kantian Approach”. Philosophy East and
West. Vol.51, No.2 (April, 2001).

Hiriyanna, M. Outlines of Indian Philosophy. London: Unwin Publishers, 1973.

Radhakrishnan, S. Indian Philosophy. Vol. 1. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1977.
Thachil, J. An Initiation to Indian Philosophy. Alwaye: Pontifical Institute of Philosophy and
Theology, 2000.

1.8 ANSWERS TO CHECK YOUR PROGRESS

Check Your Progress I

11
1) In Indian context philosophy is understood as „darsana‟ -to see or to realize. This
realization corresponds to that of knowledge. When we say that we are realizing a thing, it
amounts to say that we have some sort of knowledge. This correspondence relationship is one to
one and it is nearly isomorphic. Tattva stands for two words „tat’ and „tva’. The etymological
meaning of this word is „you are that‟. This mainly refers to the Ultimate reality in Indian
philosophy. The word darsana stands for the ultimate reality and it is a knowing reality thus
involving both metaphysical and epistemological component and satisfactorily explaining the
description of darsana in Indian context.

2) The word „darsana‟ comes from the word tattva – the ultimate reality. This ultimate
reality is the knowing reality. It not only describes about metaphysical component but also
epistemological component. However, the summation of both the components is necessary in
describing darsana. Epistemological component is very important, since it involves in knowing
the ultimate reality. In the initial stage there was no distinction between reality and epistemic
subject. Epistemologically knowledge became inward. In the course of time human related
oneself to value and identified with the reality. So in Indian context, value is not regarded only to
the subject matter of philosophy but philosophy itself is regarded as value.

Check Your Progress II

1) Theories of realities can be understood in two different angles, that is, from spiritual and
secular angles. First of all, reality is defined as the ultimate source of everything but that
itself does not have any source. Feyerabend comments that this sort of definition failed to
recognize reality as neither spiritual nor secular. However complex discipline like
philosophy does not allow such divisions. Obviously, we discover that reality has both
spiritual and secular face which are mutually exhaustive and totally exclusive, that is,
physical and non-physical. We arrive at four combinations. They are 1) physical theistic,
2) physical non-theistic, 3) non-physical theistic, 4) non-physical non-theistic. The theory
which regards the independence of the physical world is physical while the theory which
regards the independence of any other substance other than the physical world is non-
physical.

2) In Indian context, some schools regard mind as sixth organ. Samkhya is one school which
regards mind as evolutes of prakrti. Hence, it is as much physical as any other sense or
another organ. Vaisesika is another school which has to be bracketed with Samkhya in
this regard. At this stage, we should get ourselves introduced to two key metaphysical
terms, realism and idealism; the former with all its variants regards the external world as
ultimately real, whereas the latter with all its variants regards external world as a
derivative of mind. Of course, here mind is not to be costumed as sixth organ.
Yogacara, a later Buddhistic school, is one system which subscribes to idealism.

Check your progress III

12
1) In post-renaissance age Bacon propagated the famous dictum „knowledge is power‟. This
principle changed for ever the very direction of the evolution of science. But the ancient
Indians never believed in this dictum. On the contray, they performed yagas to meet
practical ends and yajnas to achieve spiritual gain.

But in a strict sense, Indians regarded knowledge as power because for them knowledge
was a way of life and this is the reason why for them knowledge was never intrinsic.
However, it is necessary to look into the connotation of the word power. The Baconan
„power‟ was necessary to experience control over nature, but the Indian „power‟ was
supposed to be the instrument to subjugate ones own self to nature. This is the prime
principle which forms the cornerstone of early vedic thought. This radical change in the
meaning of the word „power‟ also explains the difference in worldview which can be
easily discerned when the belief-systems and attitudes of Indians and Europeans are
compared and contrasted.

2) Unlike western tradition, Indian tradition maintains a hierarchy of values. In Indian

context, spiritual goal in life can be achieved by the one who has acquired knowledge.
However this type of characteristics is absent in western tradition. Many times Hindu
Dharma was mistaken to be religion. This confusion made many to identify religion with
spirituality. Philosophy in India did not originate from sanatana dharma – or Hindu
dharma. Therefore, in sharp contrast to western tradition, Indian philosophy is essentially
spiritual. When it was said earlier that in India also knowledge is regarded as power,
what was meant was that knowledge is spiritual power, spiritual which is totally non-
religious in its nature. Indian philosophy recognizes knowledge at two levels; Para
Vidya (higher knowledge) and apara vidya (lower knowledge). Since knowledge is
spiritual, only the former is true knowledge; whereas the latter is not knowledge at all in
the strict sense of the term.

13
UNIT 2 INDIAN SCRIPTURES

Contents
2.0 Objectives
2.1 Introduction
2.2 The subject matter of Smriti
2.3 Mythology
2.4 Vedangas
2.5 Epics
2.6 Let Us Sum Up
2.7 Key Words
2.8 Further Readings and References
2.9 Answers to Check Your Progress

2.0 OBJECTIVES

In this unit, you are exposed to the sources of Indian culture. However, the study material
excludes prominent texts like the Vedas (also called Sruti) sources of the Buddhism and the
Jainism since there are other units reserved for these sources. This unit, therefore, includes only
the following:

 smriti,
 mythology
 vedangas and
 epics

Since they only belong to the periphery of philosophy, mere cursory reference will suffice.

2.1 INTRODUCTION

The word „smriti’ means „that which is in memory.‟ The texts, which are called „smriti’,
appeared in written form at the initial stage itself because it was not regarded as blasphemy to
put it in written form unlike sruti. The age of smriti, followed the age of Vedas. Since the Vedic
period stretches to several centuries, it is also likely that smriti might have appeared during the
closing period of the Vedas. Consequently, all smritikaras (the founders of smriti) claimed that
their works drew support from the Vedas and also that their works are nothing more than
clarifications of the Vedas. However, we can easily discern in smritis lot of variations from
Vedas. Evidently, such deviations do not get any support from the Vedas.

2.2 THE SUBJECT MATTER OF SMRITI

1
Smriti is also known as Dharma Shasthra, which means code of conduct. The code of conduct
has three divisions; rituals, discharge of social responsibility and atonement for sins which
include crimes. It is important to note that there is no mention of rights – fundamental or any
other type. The emphasis is upon „prescription and proscription‟ only. The code of conduct is
identical with the „constitution‟ and so it is the same as penal code formulated by the present-day
governments. Hence, smriti emphasizes two aspects of life; „Dharmic’ and social. The former
does not simply exist without the latter. The role of ritual is restricted to individual life;
household work to be precise. All these dimensions together constitute „Dharma Shastra’.
Though it is claimed that there were several Smritis, history has recorded only a few. Among
them only three are well known; sometimes for wrong reasons. Vidhi and Nishedha were
codified by three persons, Manu, Yajnyavalkya and Parashara, and consequently, the smritis
were named after them. A cursory reference to these Smritis is enough.

An important aspect of smriti is its rigidity. Fixation of duties and emphasis upon duties
resemble, to a great extent, the directive principles enshrined in the constitution. While four-fold
division of society is one type, four fold division of individual life is another. Smriti is very clear
about not only four classes, but also four stages (brahmacharya, garhastya, vaanaprastha and
samnyasa) in the life of an individual. There is no scope for switching from one position to
another in a random manner. The last division, viz., atonement for sins deals precisely with this
sort of prohibited switching. The upshot of this discrimination is that liberty took back seat, but
stability in society was prioritized. This will help us to infer the kind of political system which
smriti supported. Surely, smriti did not support democratic system, though during Vedic age
democratic system flourished.

2.3 MYTHOLOGY

Mythology and History in India, it is claimed, are indistinguishable. Mythology in Sanskrit

means „purana’. This word has two slightly differing etymological meanings; pura (past),
ateetam (Lost), anaagatam (about to happen) – is one meaning. pura (past), bhavam (happened)
is another. In terms of structure purana consists of five components. They are listed as follows:
1. Description of nation or nations and their history
2. History of creation
3. History of re-creation
4. Description of dynasties
5. Story of each Manu (Manvantara)
First and fourth components do incorporate elements of history. However, there is a vital
difference, history follows a certain method and therefore, at some point to time or the other, it is
possible to dispute what a historian claims, because history tries to gather as many evidences (not
facts) as possible. Puranas, however, are altogether different. The relevance of evidences is
totally alien to puranas. It is, therefore, impossible to refute what puranas claim. Nor can we
defend the same.

Puranas are eighteen in number. Since they are not relevant philosophically, it is not even
necessary to list them. In addition to five components mentioned earlier, many puranas deal
with cosmology. Perhaps this is the only topic common to philosophy and puranas.
Interestingly, one purana, viz., vayu-purana attempts at geography, music, etc. Apart from the

2
neglect of evidence, puranas suffer from one more defect. All puranas combine legends related
to gods and demons, life after death, etc. which disqualify mythology from becoming worthy of
serious philosophical study.

In defence of puranas, it can be said that though puranas are related to mainly theological issues,
they include almost all activities of life and hence they ought to occupy an important position in
the list of disciplines. But this all inclusiveness itself is a serious defect.

Check Your Progress I

Note: a) Use the space provided for your answer
b) Check your answers with those provided at the end of the unit

1) Discuss briefly the rigidity of Smriti

…………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………..
………………………………………………………………………………….
2) Explain briefly the meaning of Puranas
…………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………

2.4 VEDANGAS

Vedangas are also known as shadangas, which means six organs. The function of these six
organs is to explicate the intricate thoughts of the Vedas. Those organs are shiksha (phonetics),
vyakarana (grammar; to be more specific, Vedic grammar), chandas (prosody), nirukta
(etymology and dictionary), jyautisha (astronomy) and kalpa (rituals).

It was believed that proper understanding of the Vedic texts is possible only when all these
organs are strictly followed. Two extraordinary characteristics of the Vedas form the
background of these organs. In the first place, the Vedas were held to be apaurusheya
(independent of man). Therefore, no change in any form for any reason was admissible.
Secondly, it was also believed that the Vedas should be taught and learnt only orally.
Consequently, it took several centuries for Indians to put the Vedas in writing. Without going
into the merits and demerits of this particular prescription, we should examine the role played by
Vedanga in protecting the Vedic tradition.

SHIKSHA

3
Sayana, in his Rig-Veda Bhashya, has defined shiksha as follows; „that which teaches
pronunciation in accordance with swara (vowel) and Varna (letter) is called shiksha. Clarity in
speech and ability to listen correctly are the pre-requisite to learn the Vedas. This is the reason
why the Vedas are also called „anushrava (that which follows listening). The emphasis upon
clear pronunciation is perfectly understandable because due to unique structure of the Vedic
language, which is the most primitive form of Sanskrit language set by very different grammar,
even the slightest variation in pronunciation could lead to total change of meaning.

VYAKARANA, CHANDAS & NIRUKTA

The next three organs are not unique in the sense that the role, which they play with regard to the
Vedic language, is very much similar to the role of grammar or dictionary in any other language.
Since no language is possible without grammar, Vedic grammar must be as old as the Vedas. If
the Vedas are apaurusheya, then the Vedic grammar also ought to have been apaurusheya.
However, it is not the case. Among the extant works of grammar, Panini’s work
„ashtaadhyaayi’ is the oldest one. It is said that this is a fourth Century A.D. work. However,
earlier Vedic dictionaries mention other vaiyakaranas. Since the dictionary is more ancient than
Panini‟s work, it is obvious that other vaiyakaranas’ works are more ancient. The mention of
these aspects shows that grammar is paurusheya. Hence language should be paurusheya.
However, one grammarian by name Shakatayana maintains that even grammar is apaurusheya.
According to him, the oldest work on grammar is aindra vyakarana. It is named so since,
according to the legend, men received it from Indra.

The source of prosody is „chandassutra’ by one Pingalacharya. Nothing is known about this
author. This work includes both Vedic and non-Vedic prosody. Generally, the Samhitas are
bound by definite prosody. Only Krishna-Yajurveda and Atharva-Veda samhitas are
occasionally prosaic. Hence, prosody occupies a prominent role in the study of the Vedas.
Panini says, ‘chandah padau tu vedasya’. Which means prosody is the very foundation of
Vedas. In course of time, the Vedic language itself became prosody. The Vedic prosody has one
unique feature, which is mentioned by Katyayana. He says, „yat akshara parimanam tat
chandah‟. It means, „the one which determines the number (or quantity) of letters, that is
prosody. It should be noted that this is not the case with secular Sanskrit. It is said that the latter
evolved from the former.

The Vedic prosody consists of what is called paada or quartet. Generally, a quartet is supposed
to possess four letters. This, perhaps, became a characteristic at the later stage because there are
eleven principal prosody, which differ not only in the number of quartets, but also in the number
of letters in each quartets, whereas trishtup chandas consists of four quartets with eleven letters
in each of them. A prosody may differ from another as regards the pattern of quartets. For
example, kakup chandas has eight letters in the first and third quartets and twelve letters in the
second. This difference shows that there is a little freedom here which is conspicuous by its
absence elsewhere.

Nirukta provides the meaning of the Vedic terms. In the first step, terms were collected which
constituted dictionary. Mere synonym or lexical meaning would defeat the very purpose of

4
compiling terms. Nirukta does not provide just this sort of meaning. What it indulges in is
hermeneutic exercise. Hence it is more than any ordinary dictionary.

Let us start with the structure of dictionary. A lexicographer, by name Yaska collected these
terms and provided the most authentic interpretation. The dictionary consists of in all 1770
terms spread over three kaandas. First kaanda consists of three chapters, which is called
„naighantuka’, second and third consisting of one chapter each are called „naigama and daivata.
Nirukta is an interpretation of these terms mainly and to some extent he has quoted some
mantras and interpreted the same. Nirukta itself consists of fourteen chapters of which first six
chapters deal with naighantuka kaanda and Naigama Kanda and the next six chapters deal with
Daivata Kanda. Last two are somewhat like appendices.

JYAUTISHA

Astronomy evolved in ancient India out of necessity. Yajnas and yagas could not be performed
at the discretion of any one. In the strict sense of the term, it was seasonal. Every varna (except
shudra) had a fixed season to perform yajnas. Taittiriya Brahmana spoke so, „vasante
brahmanaha, (Brahman during spring), agnimaadadheeta (ignite holy fire), greeshme rajanyaha
(Kshatriya during summer), aadadheeta, sharadi vaishyaha (Vaishya during post-monsoon)
aadadheeta’. Igniting holy fire is very important because only it ought to set any programme in
motion. Not only was season important, but also exact time of starting yajnas was important for
which it was necessary to track the movement of not only the sun but also all celestial bodies.
Most important among them are twenty-seven stars. This could be done only with adequate
knowledge of astronomy.

KALPA SUTRAS

Kalpa sutras are so called because whatever material is provided by them is all in the form of
formulas. The explanation Kalpa sutras is the same as that of Brahma Sutra; alpaksharam
(brief), asandigdham (unambiguous or incontravertible), saaravat (complete in essence),
vishwato mukham (all inclusive). Kalpa sutra literally means action – indicating formula. Action
is of four types, shrauta, grihya, dharma and shulba. The last one differs, more or less, in type
from the rest. Hence, let us consider it at the end. The first three are common to Rig, Yajur and
Sama. But all three Kalpa Sutras differ from one Veda to another as regards prescriptions and
scope. For example, Ashwalayana and Shankhayana sutras of Rig Veda cover all three Kalpa
sutras. Since every class of sutra has distinct commands, they constitute rituals. Let us consider
each Kalpa separately and represent membership using tables.

Table – A

SHRAUTA

Ashwalayana
Rig Veda
Shamkhayana

5
Katyayana Shukla Yajurveda

Bodhayana

Apastamba

Satyashadha
Krishna Yajurveda
Vaikhanasa

Bharadwaja

Manava

Arsheya Samaveda

Vaitana Atharva Veda

Table - B

GRIHYA

Ashwalayana
Rig Veda
Shankhayana

Paraskara Shukla Yajurveda

Bharadwaja

Apastamba Krishna Yajurveda

Bodhayana

Gobhila

Khadira Samaveda

Jaimini

Kaushika Atharvaveda

6
Table - C

DHARMA

Vasishta Rigveda

Bodhayana
Krishna Yajurveda
Apastamba

Gautama Samaveda

Dharma sutras pertaining to Shukla Yajurveda and Atharvaveda are not extant.

Let us examine what these sutras are about. Ashwalayana sutra was founded by Ashwalayana, a
student of Shaunaka. Likewise, many sutras are known after the names of the founders just as
many laws and theories in science are named after scientists like Newton‟s Laws of Motion, etc.
All shrauta sutras specify the manner in which yajnas and yagas have to be performed. They
are essentially prescriptive which do not allow any room for deviation. The very fact that there
are several shrauta sutras, which subscribe to different Vedas, indicates that there were several
ways in which yajnas were performed.

Two aspects deserve mention. Yagas were performed solely with the motive of reaping worldly
benefits. Second, man was ineligible to perform Yaga in the absence of wife, which means she
enjoyed equal status if not more.

Grihya sutras prescribe household duties. The point to be noted is that all Grihya sutras agree
on one particular count, i.e., what ought to be done. But they differ on another count, i.e., how it
ought to be done. No Grihya sutra disagrees, for example, with the relevance of, say, marriage.
But they disagree with the manner in which it is to be performed. Secondly, all four sutras are
complementary to each other. So there is neither choice nor contradiction. To fulfill his
obligation one has to perform all rituals in the manner prescribed.

The rituals pertaining to Grihya sutras are of two types. One type of rituals has to be performed
only once in life (in some cases, there are exceptions). Second type of rituals has to be
performed everyday or once in a year. There are sixteen such obligations which are called
„shodasha samskaras’. There are four classes of such samskaras; samskaras to be performed
before birth, after birth, to begin the learning of the Vedas and to prepare man for marriage, etc.
It should be noted that there are separate samskaras for men and women.

It is not necessary to consider all these samskaras. What is important is to know the manner in
which they were followed and qualifications which were held as necessary. The characteristic of

7
these samskaras is that they were (or are) not regarded as common to all Varnas. Two types of
discrimination are well known. One discrimination is Varna based; i.e., Brahmana, Kshatriya,
etc. Second discrimination is gender based. The first category of discrimination must have
eventually led to the caste system. It, also, might have resulted in hierarchy. Secondly, gender
based discrimination did not affect men. In a way, it was inconsequential as far as man was
considered. But it was not so in the case of women. One argument is that women, like shudras,
were denied of education because they were not entitled to some crucial samskaras. It is
insignificant that men were not entitled to some samskaras to which women were entitled
because this limitation did not really affect men. But it was not so in the case of women. One
particular samskara deserve special mention. Brahmopadesha, for example, is not permissible
for shudras and women, even to this day. It is this particular samskara which makes Brahmin
caste, in particular, a distinct caste. It also explains why brahmin is called „DWIJA’ (twice born)
after the completion of this samskara. It is said that before this samskara is performed, brahmin
is not a brahmin at all and so this samskara is supposed to give second birth to him.

Surely, even within the framework of chaturvarnya (Four-fold Varnas) system this particular
argument is not endorsed by all. The fact that the argument, being referred to, is at variance with
some established or accepted norms set by smritis was totally ignored while speaking about
brahmins. Our purpose, surely, is not go into the merits and demerits or chaturvarnya or caste
system, but to demonstrate structural changes which took place in belief-systems, perspective in
which age old customs came to be understood, and consequently rapid changes which affected
the society because this is what precisely happened over centuries in Indian society.

If we consider the literal meaning of the word „samskara’, then it becomes evident that it is
meant to uplift man (or woman) spiritually. It is argued that they also produce other class of
positive results; physical well being is one. If so, why was a certain class (or classes) denied of
this benefit? It is not possible to discover any answer to this question within the framework of
philosophy. A psychologist or sociologist may throw some light on such questions.

In spite of the fact that samskaras were spiritual in nature, the ulterior motive behind adherence
to them is mundane. It is very easy to discover in the samskaras some spiritual support, if not
any foundation, for all aspects of earthly life. For different reasons the samskaras did not receive
support from the Upanishads and heterodox systems. The Upanishads disapproved the
samskaras because the goal was this-worldly. The heterodox systems strongly reacted to the
samskaras because they claimed affinity to the Vedas. Despite difference in their philosophy,
both the Upanishads and the heterodox systems adhered to life in monastery. Their apathy to
anything connected with earthly life is behind their antagonism to the samskaras. This discussion
also brings to the surface an important fact that philosophy and religion do not coincide always if
religion is understood as Dharma. While samskaras stand for Dharma, the Upanishads stand for
philosophy.

Kaushika Sutra of Atharvaveda is unique because this sutra does not deal with any type of
spiritual matter unlike previously mentioned sutras. It throws some light on herbal plant and
thereby it helps in understanding ancient system of Indian medicine.

8
There is a sharp distinction between Grihya sutras and Dharma sutras. While Grihya sutras
regulate man‟s actions which are restricted to family, Dharma sutras have societal leaning.
Gautama’s Dharma sutras appears to be the earliest one. These sutras specify not only the
obligations within the frame-work of chaturvarnya, but also „Raja Dharma’ – the duties of ruler.
In Indian context morality is essentially based upon what the Dharma sutra specifies. Hence the
limits and defects of Dharma sutras have distinct bearing on the acceptability of moral
principles.

Last one to be considered in this section is Shulba sutra. Though this Sutra also is relevant in the
context of performing yagnas, it is restricted to geometrical aspects only because in the absence
of adequate knowledge of geometry it was impossible to construct the Vedic atlas. Shulba sutra
is an example of primitive technology developed by ancient Indians to meet the demands of
ecclesiastical dimension of life.

Check Your Progress II

Note: a) Use the space provided for your answer
b) Check your answers with those provided at the end of the unit

1) What do you understand by Shiksha?

…………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………..
………………………………………………………………………………….
2) Write a short note on Grihiya Sutras
…………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………

2.5 EPICS

Though the Ramayana and the Mahabharata are two epics which have influenced literature for
several centuries in all parts of India, the Ramayana is not significant philosophically, unlike the
Mahabharata and we are not concerned with the literary value of these two epics. So it is
sufficient if we notice that the Ramayana accepts the principles of Sanatana Dharma and duties
of ruler in particular. Since there is nothing philosophically new in this work, we need not
consider it. It will serve our purpose if we concentrate on philosophical component of the
Mahabharata.

Logic and epistemology which constitute any philosophical tradition have noting to do with us
when we study culture literature, etc. The Mahabharata is not an exception. We can trace

9
however, two philosophical issues in this work; one is expounded in the Bhagavad-Gita, rather
in a very unsatisfactory manner, because it is mainly a work in theistic tradition. Second one is
morality and polity expounded by two prominent characters; Vidura and Bheeshma. But these
philosophical issues in this work suffer from a serious drawback – draw back from philosophical
point of view. Nowhere in this work do we find discussion, or criticism which is the hallmark of
philosophy. More than anything else, what we find is only a sermon. Therefore brief reference
to these elements is enough.

THE MORAL PHILOSOPHY OF VIDURA

From the point of view of ethics, it is desirable to regard some characters as personification of
virtue. Vidura and Bheeshma belong to this category. In contrast to these characters in the
Mahabharata, we have other characters which are regarded as personification of evil. Why
should any epic portray evil characters? This is one question. Are they in a broader perspective,
really evil forces? This is another question. The second question is much deeper philosophically
and cannot be answered easily. First one is slightly easier to handle. An epic must be vast.
Hence it ought to include all facts of world and all aspects of life. So evil characters ought to find
place in any epic worth the name.

Vidura’s exposition of moral principles begins with a clear distinction between shreyas
(desirable) and preyas (pleasing). He compares shreyas with medicine which is not palatable. It
is immediately followed by a second analogy to demonstrate the status of pleasure which is
invariably accompanied by evil. To make this concomitant relation explicit, Vidura compares
pleasure with honey, pleasure seeker with one who collects honey and evil with abyss and says
that the pleasure hunter is busy only in seeking honey unmindful of impending danger of falling
into the abyss.

In the Mahabharata, Vidura plays his role on three occasions. On second occasion, Vidura plays
the role of a counselor. His counseling has moral base. He makes an explicit distinction
between two states of mind; those of wise man and ignorant. While Plato speaks of four cardinal
virtues, Vidura speaks of six cardinal vices. Greed is one among them. He makes out a case for
wise man by listing the remaining vices - lust, anger, irrational attachment, arrogance and
jealousy – which he does not possess. There is no need to describe the personality of one who is
free from these vices. It is very interesting to note that Vidura concurs with Plato, when he
describes ignorant person. He is the one who neglects his duty, but tries to perform what is not
his job. Secondly, he cannot distinguish between a true friend and enemy. All qualities
attributed to an ignorant person can be found in Thrasymachus who indulges in violent attack on
the ideas of Socrates. In the end of this particular session Vidura makes a list of Ten
Commandments in which one Commandment is identical with Plato‟s classification of men into
three classes; guardians (philosopher kings), soldiers and artisans. Both of them argue that these
three classes ought to perform duties assigned to them only. It means that justice, according to
Plato and Dharma according to Vidura consists in everyman doing his own duty and this is the
cardinal principle of welfare state. This is the essence of Vidura‟s moral philosophy

In the last session, Vidura talks of death and the need to accept the same. Death and fear are
nearly inseparable if man does not accept that death is inevitable. In this context Vidura accepts

10
reality, i.e., human nature and maintains that man hardly follows wisdom. There is striking
correspondence with what the Buddha says: trishna (desire) is the cause of misery, and remedy
consists in the realisation of truth and that is knowledge of philosophy. In this respect, Vidura,
the Buddha and Plato held an identical view. It is precisely in this sense that in Indian tradition
philosophy always was regarded as a way of life.

BHEESHMA’S POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY

There is a sharp difference between western model of political philosophy as understood and
practised today and ancient Indian concept of polity. The difference essentially consists in shift
from one end to the other, i.e., from rights to duty, with duty as the focuss of serman. Even
democracy, the most liberal form of government prioritizes duties of citizen in spite of the fact
that every citizen is entitled to fundamental rights. There is absolutely no gainsaying in holding
the view that directive principles form the backbone of any democratic set-up. Bhisma‟s advice
to Dharmaraya , on the other hand,provides a very different picture. He specifies only the duties
and responsibilities of ruler with no mention of the duties of citizen. Against this backdrop, it
becomes obvious that in real sense, citizen is the king and ruler is his guardian. Several centuries
before Plato visualized the role of guardians, the Mahabharata portrayed king in a similar
fashion. Bheeshma’s lecture not only explicitly mentions king‟s qualities and duties but also it is
first ever treatise on public administration. Let us consider these aspects briefly.

King should be proactive, truthful and straightforward. According to Bheeshma, theses are the
most important qualities of king. He should be compassionate but not too soft. It is interesting
to note that Plato starts from the other end, but arrives at the same result. According to him,
guardians should be given moderate physical training coupled with music lest they will
transform to beasts. The essence of „rajadharma’ is safe-guarding the interests of citizen. In
fact, Bheeshma lists thirty-six qualities in an ideal king which are necessary to follow
Rajadharma without which the citizens do not receive protection from the king.

Foreign policy is another aspect of public administration. Foreign policy involves two forces,
enemies and friends. The role of friends is not much highlighted. But he emphasizes that king
should know how to deal with enemy. Prudence is always the guiding force. Bheeshma makes it
very clear that war is not the solution. Nor did he mean that enemy can be spared. Constant
vigil, concealing one‟s own weakness and proper judgment only can ensure safety and security.
All these descriptions apply under normal circumstances, whereas in distress even enemy should
enjoy compassion because a humanitarian treatment may destroy enmity. Ultimately, humane
outlook scores over other considerations.

THE BHAGAVADGITA

The Bhagavad Gita is a sacred Indian scripture. It comprises roughly 700 verses, and is a part of
the Mahabharata. The teacher of the Bhagavad Gita is Krishna, and is referred to within the text
as Bhagavan, the Divine One. The content is the conversation between Krishna and Arjuna
taking place on the battlefield before the start of the Kurukshetra war. Responding to Arjuna‟s
confusion and moral dilemma about fighting his own cousins, Krishna explains to Arjuna his

11
duties as a warrior and prince and elaborates on different Yogic and Vedantic philosophies.
Thus, it is often being described as a concise guide to Hindu theology and also as a practical,
self-contained guide to life. It is also called Gitopanishad, implying its having the status of an
Upanishad, i.e. a Vedantic scripture. Since the Gita is drawn from the Mahabharata, it is
classified as a Smṛiti text. However, those branches of Hinduism that give it the status of an
Upanishad also consider it a śruti or revealed text. As it is taken to represent a summary of the
Upanishadic teachings, it is also called “the Upanishad of the Upanishads.”

Three features are prominent in the Gita; knowledge, social obligation and devotion. The
confluence of these principal features constitute what is popularly known as YOGA. There is no
need to consider its role in life which the Gita has explained.What is important is its position in
philosophy. But there is no reference to its philosophical foundation anywhere in the Gita. For
example, consider „devotion‟ (bhakti). Devotion is sensible only when „Bhakta’ is distinct from
Paramatma; not otherwise. In other words the refutation of the Advaita is a prerequisite to
accept the relevance of bhakti. But nowhere do we find any reference to Dvaita or Advaita in the
work. On the contrary, the Gita concludes by merging obligation or karma and knowledge in
Bhakti.

One point becomes clear from the Gita; no one can attain moksha if he or she renounces this
world. Renouncing the world is tantamount to renouncing obligations. Hence in defence of the
Gita one assertion can be unhesitatingly made, that the Gita does not prioritize spirituality at the
expense of worldly life. However, neither the charge that it does so nor the countercharge that it
does not, is philosophically insignificant. But this point is mentioned because attainment of
moksha in relation to karma has primary importance in the Gita.

Let us drop „bhakti’ and concentrate only on Karma Yoga and Jnana Yoga. While Jnana stands
for realization at highest level, Karma assumes a very different meaning. During the Vedic age,
Karma meant only performing Yajna. But in the Gita it has come to mean social obligation.
Yoga came to be understood as dedication. Hence, Karma Yoga may be understood as
discharging duty with a sense of commitment.

The most important element in the Gita is the doctrine of nishkama karma which consists in
discharging obligations in an impersonal manner. This attitude literally debars yagas because
one performs it with selfish motive. The Gita however, never advocated that karma should be
renounced. What it clearly asserts is that „Karma Phala’ should be renounced. It only sidelines
personal interest and upholds societal interest. Thus individual becomes the means and society
the end. An impersonal approach to duty does not affect the performer in any manner, i.e.,
neither success nor failure affects him or her. This attitude is „SAMATVA MANOBHAVA’ –
equanimity of mind.

It is necessary to clarify the relation between the meaning of karma and varna. At this stage,
chaturvarnya (four-fold classification) becomes relevant. Translated into ordinary language, it
means commitment to profession. „chaturvarnyam mayasrishtva gunakarma vibhagshcha‟. It
means guna (quality) and karma (profession) determine Varna. To this statement we can add
another, quality determines profession. Commitment to profession is what Dharma is.

12
The Gita makes a clear distinction between commitment and interest. Commitment is
impersonal, whereas interest is personal. Vested interest is well-known. But there is noting like
vested commitment. When vested interest affects an individual, one may resort to prohibited
means. But impersonal commitment does not result in this sort of selection. The maxim „ends
do not justify the means‟ is implicit in the Gita.

One more aspect remains to be mentioned. There is a mistaken notion that there is hierarchy in
profession. It is not the case as far as the Gita is concerned. But there is a distinction between
„good‟ and „bad‟ or „constructive‟ and „destructive‟. It is good to discharge duty which is in
conformity with one‟s own nature. Otherwise, it is bad. Clearly, there is division of labour, and
it is in the interest of society that such division is made mandatory. Therefore qualitative
distinction in profession is strongly disapproved.

Check Your Progress III

Note: a) Use the space provided for your answer
b) Check your answers with those provided at the end of the unit

1) How do you understand Bheeshma‟s foreign policy?

…………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………..
………………………………………………………………………………….
2) What is meant by Nishkamakarma?
…………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………

2.6 LET US SUM UP

Indian Scriptures mainly have determined the life-style of Hindus, who belong to the first three
varnas. There are four sources which prescribe the way of life. Among these sources, the
smritis, whether consciously or inadvertently, institutionalized caste system and women were
downgraded Smritis correspond to modern day constitution. What demarcates history from
mythology is blurred. The vedangas explicate the intricate thoughts of the Vedas. They specify
intonation, grammar, structure, etc. According to the vedangas chanting mantras after knowing
the meaning is very important. Kalpa sutras are four in number. They mainly deal with what
rituals are to be observed, how they are to be observed, etc. The Mahabharata possesses not only
literary value, but also it is the first ever treatise on polity. The Gita has minor importance as a
philosophical work. It gives priority to society at the expense of individual.

13
2.7 KEY WORDS

Sutra: Sūtra literally means a rope or thread that holds things together, and more metaphorically
refers to an aphorism (or line, rule, formula), or a collection of such aphorisms in the form of a
manual.
Gangrene: Gangrene is a complication of necrosis (i.e., cell death) characterized by the decay of
body tissues, which become black (and/or green).

2.8 FURTHER READINGS AND REFERENCES

Kane, P.V. History of Dharma Shastra. Vols I & II. Poona: Bhandarkar Oriental Research
Institute, 1999.
Pandey, Rajabali. Hindu Samskaras. Delhi: Motilal Banarasidas, 2002.
M. Hiriyanna. Outlines of Indian Philosophy. London: George Allen and Unwin, 1958.
S. Radhakrishnan. Indian Philosophy. Vol. I. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1967.
Thachil, J. An Initiation to Indian Philosophy. Alwaye: Pontifical Institute of Philosophy and
Theology, 2000.

2.9 ANSWERS TO CHECK YOUR PROGRESS

Answers to Check Your Progress I

1. An important aspect of smriti is its rigidity. Fixation of duties and emphasis upon duties
resemble, to a great extent, the directive principles enshrined in the constitution. While four-fold
division of society is one type, four fold division of individual life is another. Smriti is very clear
about not only four classes, but also four stages (brahmacharya, garhastya, vaanaprastha and
samnyasa) in the life of an individual. There is no scope for switching from one position to
another in a random manner. The last division, viz., atonement for sins deals precisely with this
sort of prohibited switching. The upshot of this discrimination is that liberty took back seat, but
stability in society was prioritized. This will help us to infer the kind of political system which
smriti supported. Surely, smriti did not support democratic system, though during Vedic age
democratic system flourished.

2. Puranas are eighteen in number. Since they are not relevant philosophically, it is not even
necessary to list them. In addition to five components mentioned earlier, many puranas deal
with cosmology. Perhaps this is the only topic common to philosophy and puranas.
Interestingly, one purana, viz., vayu-purana attempts at geography, music, etc. Apart from the
neglect of evidence, puranas suffer from one more defect. All puranas combine legends related
to gods and demons, life after death, etc. which disqualify mythology from becoming worthy of
serious philosophical study.

Answers to Check Your Progress II

14
1. Sayana, in his Rig-Veda Bhashya, has defined shiksha as follows; „that which teaches
pronunciation in accordance with swara (vowel) and Varna (letter) is called shiksha. Clarity in
speech and ability to listen correctly are the pre-requisite to learn the Vedas. This is the reason
why the Vedas are also called „anushrava (that which follows listening).
2. Grihya sutras prescribe household duties. The point to be noted is that all Grihya sutras agree
on one particular count, i.e., what ought to be done. But they differ on another count, i.e., how it
ought to be done. No Grihya sutra disagrees, for example, with the relevance of, say, marriage.
But they disagree with the manner in which it is to be performed. Secondly, all four sutras are
complementary to each other. So there is neither choice nor contradiction. To fulfill his
obligation one has to perform all rituals in the manner prescribed.

Answers to Check Your Progress III

1. Foreign policy is another aspect of public administration. Foreign policy involves two forces,
enemies and friends. The role of friends is not much highlighted. But he emphasizes that king
should know how to deal with enemy. Prudence is always the guiding force. Bheeshma makes it
very clear that war is not the solution. Nor did he mean that enemy can be spared. Constant
vigil, concealing one‟s own weakness and proper judgment only can ensure safety and security.
All these descriptions apply under normal circumstances, whereas in distress even enemy should
enjoy compassion because a humanitarian treatment may destroy enmity. Ultimately, humane
outlook scores over other considerations.

2. The most important element in the Gita is the doctrine of nishkama karma which consists in
discharging obligations in an impersonal manner. This attitude literally debars yagas because
one performs it with selfish motive. The Gita however, never advocated that karma should be
renounced. What it clearly asserts is that „Karma Phala’ should be renounced.

15
UNIT 3 VEDSAS - 1

Contents
3.0 Objectives
3.1 Introduction
3.2 Meaning and the classification of the Vedas
3.3 Age of the Mantras
3.4 Age of the Brahmanas
3.5 Age of the Aranyakas
3.6 The concept of Rita
3.7 Theories of Theology
3.8 Let us Sum Up
3.9 Key Words
3.10 Further Readings and References
3.11 Answers to Check Your Progress

3.0 OBJECTIVES

The main objective of this unit is to introduce:

 the essence of pre-philosophical sources of Indian philosophy. Just as history is preceded

by pre-history and pre-history provides the background knowledge so also knowledge of
pre-philosophy provides an insight into the spirit of philosophy and the direction in which
it developed and why it developed in a particular direction;
 various misconceptions that cause misunderstandings and misinterpretations. With the
help of this unit, you will be able to dispel all such negative elements so that a beginner
like you can approach the discipline without any preconceived notion;
 in order to distinguish Indian philosophy from the western philosophy where it has to be
distinguished and highlight similarities where there are;
 in order to distinguish philosophy from religion. This task is of paramount importance
given the misplaced belief that philosophy is religion and religion is philosophy. If this is
not erased in the beginning itself, a study of philosophy proves to be counterproductive;
 to be in a position to grasp the essence of Indian philosophy.

3.1 INTRODUCTION

Historians agree that the Indian civilization (and culture) is the oldest one. It is, therefore,
natural that the earliest product of an ancient civilization should be the oldest thought, though
found expression in written form much later (in the present case due to strange reasons) A

1
refined civilization, if it is truly refined, does not spring from vacuum. It should emerge from
primitive form of civilization and the latter from more primitive form. In other words, history
has its roots in pre-historic age. But, then, we have to initiate our study from somewhere. When
this ‘somewhere’ itself dates back to the earliest age, we begin from the threshold of human
civilization. It is sufficient if we are conscious of the roots of what marks the beginning of our
study.

The Indian civilization, in its infancy, is characterized by ‘nature-worship’. This feature

constitutes the base of our future study. The development of the Vedic thought carries with it
this particular germ. We are more pre-occupied with what germinated from this seed than with
history-oriented controversies.

DATE OF THE VEDIC AGE

At the outset, it should be borne in mind that the Vedic age is not restricted to one particular year
as in the case of the birth of any individual or a few decades as in the case of a few philosophical
schools. Most surprisingly, the Vedic age spans over a very long interval of several centuries.
What is shrouded in mystery is the exact century, let alone year, in which the Vedic thought took
its birth. With great difficulty, scholars have pieced together all known evidences only to arrive
at varying results. It is impossible to accept any result with certainty. The beginning of the
Vedic age stretches incredibly from 1200 B.C……. Second aspect is that the Vedic age is
characterized by continuous flow of thought. It is, rather, more like a stream of thought than like
flashes of insight. Why is it so difficult to fix the beginning? One reason is that ancient Indians
never thought of maintaining records what they did or, what they achieved. Secondly, the Vedic
tradition is characterized by oral tradition for reasons, which will become clear later (3.2). Nor is
there any reference to any thinker. Neither date nor authorship can be fixed with certainty in
such a tradition.

GENESIS

The most important feature of the Vedic tradition is mentioned at the end of the previous section.
Indeed, the word authorship is itself a misnomer because this vast literature does not have its
beginning in written form. Traditionally, the Veda is regarded as ‘apaurusheya’. This word can
be construed in two different senses. In the first place, it may be taken to mean that the Veda is a
message from the god in the sense in which the ‘Ten Commandments’ of Moses are. In the
second place, it may be taken to mean as what is ‘revealed’. If we accept the first one, we are
likely to be caught in an argument jam. Surely, it will be quite awkward to face this situation at
the early stage. Hence, let us consider the second alternative. Veda is literally ‘seen’; not
constructed brick-by-brick. The opinion is that ‘rishayah mantra drishtarah na tu kartarah’ (the
Rishis, i.e., philosophers, never constructed, but ‘saw’). Seeing is not through eyes, but it is
through intuition. Perhaps ancient Indians thought that what is intuitively grasped or revealed
must be independent of human. What is independent of human may not necessarily mean ‘God-
given’. In this sense the Vedas are Apaurusheya, just as the laws of physics are. Philosophy,
generally, regards knowledge as objective. Thereby it regards knowledge as independent of
human. Hence there does not seem to be any reason to contest the apaurusheya character of the
Vedic literature. Apaurusheya can be taken to mean that the said text is objective.

2
Earlier we mentioned that the Vedic literature spreads over a long interval of time, at least a
millennium, if S. Radhakrishnan is to be believed. Evidently, the literature is not the handiwork
of any one person but it is the outcome of several generations. Hence there is lot of divergence
in thought. Further, change of environment also contributes to variation. Not only thought, even
language varies from generation to generation. The language of Vedas is said to the very
ancient, so ancient that even the language of classical Sanskrit literature differs from the Vedic
language. Consequently, the Vedic grammar differs from the grammar of classical Sanskrit.
This has resulted in lot of hermeneutic controversies.

While we are not in a position to establish the founders of the Vedic tradition, at least we know
philosophers who compiled what was preserved till then orally. At this stage, the literature
acquired a definite form fit for a systematic study.

3.2 MEANING AND CLASSIFICATION OF THE VEDAS

THE MEANING

The word Veda is derived from the word ‘Vid’ which means ‘knowledge.’ Veda is supposed to
be boundless because knowledge is boundless. Earlier (3.1.3), we mentioned that since
knowledge is objective and impersonal, Veda also is objective and impersonal. Being impersonal
is the same as saying apaurusheya. It clearly shows that whatever epithet describes knowledge
also describes the Veda.

At the outset, let us introduce two terms, sruti and smriti. Sruti means to hear and smriti means
to remember. Of course, sruti does include smriti, a point, which will become obvious very
shortly, though the converse does not hold good. The Vedic literature came down from
generation to generation in the most unusual manner for extraordinary reasons. The ancient
Indians believed that the Vedas should be transmitted only orally because they are convinced that
to put the literature in the form of writing amount to sacrilege. It is likely that the technique of
preserving any document was invented much later. Whether the ancient Indians knew the art of
writing or not is a different question. But it is something different to ask this question; did they
know the technique of preserving any written document for prosperity? In the absence of any
such technique the only way was to communicate orally. What is listened has to be remembered.
In this sense, sruti includes smriti.

CLASSIFICATION OF THE VEDAS

In two different ways, the Vedic age can be divided; collection of material and development of
thought. It is commonly known that the Vedas are four in number; Rig, Yajur, Sama and
Atharva. This particular division is based on the first system of division. The Atharvaveda alone
belongs to a different age. It differs from the rest in all respects and only this Veda is
independent in all respects. In the second system of division, we have Mantras, Brahmanas,
Aranyakas and Upanishads. These two systems of division are not distinct. At every stage, the
first three Vedas, according to first division and all four components, according to, second
division intersect. The whole scheme can be represented as follows.

3
 1 2 3 4

Yajurveda→ Samaveda Atharvaveda

↓ ↓ ↓
Rigveda→
↓
1
Mantras (M1) Mantras (M2) Mantras (M3) Mantras (M4)
↓ ↓ ↓ ↓
2
Brahmanas (B1) Brahmanas (B2) Brahmanas Brahmanas
↓ ↓ (B3) (B4)
↓
3
Aranyakas (A1) Aranyakas (A2) Aranyakas
↓ ↓ (A3)
↓
Upanishads(U4)
4
Upanishads (U1) Upanishads (U2) Upanishads
(U3)

The case of Atharva Veda is slightly different. It has only one extant Brahmana called Gopatha
Brahman. The table indicates that the Aranyakas are associated with the first three Vedas only
and in the case of the Atharva veda, there is a sort of quantum jump from the age of Brahmanas
to the age of Upanishads. It may be noted that both horizontal and vertical developments are
essentially of temporal order. While the Mantras of the Rigveda (M1 – R1) belong to the earliest
age, the Upanishad of the Atharvaveda(U4- A4) belongs to the latest age. All other
combinations vary within this range. While a discussion of individual Vedas become our focuss
in the next unit, the other mode of development shall engage us presently.

Check Your Progress I

Note: a) Use the space provided for your answer
b) Check your answers with those provided at the end of the unit

1) What do you understand by Veda?

…………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………..

4
 …………………………………………………………………………………..
………………………………………………………………………………….
2) Write a short note on the classification of Vedas
…………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………

3.3 AGE OF THE MANTRAS

Why did the Aryans compose Mantras? When these Mantras number several thousands, it was
not for nothing that they did so. No matter what they said or did not say about the other world,
unknown and unseen, the external world in which they lived occupied the center stage of their
activity. The Aryans never thought that they could live independent of nature. Nor did they
even believe that the external world had submitted itself to their will. This is an essential
characteristic of the age of Mantras and the age of Mantras alone. They were convinced that
they were an integral part of nature. The power of nature came to be regarded as far superior to
their ability. One consequence of this attitude is that they came to believe that they are parasites
of nature.

This being the case, the Aryans ought to have developed only sense of fear. They developed
mixed emotions when they had to face gods. Gratitude and fear played a major role in this case.
At some point of time gratitude turned into a deep sense of love. This is because their very
survival, not just existence, depended upon nature and in turn, nature itself was deified. The
Vedic literature in its entirety is, therefore, nature-centric and life-centric. Awareness of this
simple fact propelled the Aryans to take several strides far ahead of others, which shaped the
Indian Society (for good or bad) for a very long duration.

The Aryans took seriously two major issues: agriculture and protection from enemies. There is
no sense in talking of agriculture when life is restricted to the bounds of forest. Depleting animal
strength due to continuous hunting must have forced tribal people to graduate from predation to
cultivation. Evidently, cultivation, then, was totally at the mercy of nature. By this time, the
Aryans had changed, or were driven to change, their life style. So they became nature-dependent
humans (or animals). Psychology is such that what is supportive of one need is taken as
supportive of any other need. If deified nature bestows all its mercy in the form of food, then the
very same nature may as well destroy enemies. The Mantras were composed in order to pray to
the nature-gods. Prayer was the mark of gratitude. This is the birth place of the Vedas. Now we
stand on the threshold of learning the nuance of the Vedic literature.

The Vedas are the collection of Mantras. Collection in Sanskrit means ‘Samhitaa’ (sam =
together, hita = put). Therefore, the Rigveda is actually the RigVeda Samhitaa and so other
Vedas. The collection of Mantras is not a random one. There is a definite design, which
determines every collection. To be precise, Samhitaa stands for order (in biological sense),
which has been clearly divided, and each division is further divided and this process is very

5
much akin to the kind of classification and division, which take place in biology. Before
understanding this process we have to return to the Vedic literature.

The Vedic pantheon included many gods, because there were too many natural forces, which
they worshipped. But all these gods were characterized by one particular quality. In Sanskrit,
god means ‘deva’. According to the Nirukta, which is Vedic dictionary, ‘deva’ means, two
things: one which gifts and one which shines; i.e., the source of light. Life depends upon light.
So, naturally, life depends upon the gods. These Vedic gods are classified differently. Hiriyanna
M. classified them as: (i) gods of the sky, (ii) gods of the mid-air and (iii) gods of the earth.
Bloomfield classified them as (i) gods of prominent aspects of nature, (ii) gods of action and
(iii) gods of concept. While according to first classification, Agni belongs to the third group,
according to the second classification it belongs to the first group. The difference between two
types of classification is that in the first type only natural forces find the place where as in the
second type, in addition to natural forces, abstract notions also find place. For example, Savitru
(one who stimulates) and Brahmanaspati (the source of prayer), which are gods of action, form a
sort of link between men and nature-gods.

The number of gods, it is said in the Vedic tradition is indefinite. However, it is desirable to
make a list of very important gods, numbering thirty-three, who hold key portfolios. The list
includes both types of classification.
Table A
(i) gods of Sky (gods of Dyuhu): Mitra (the sun), Varuna, Dyuhu, Savitru, Pushan, Ashwin,
Ushas, Aadityaha, Vishnu
(ii) gods of mid-air (gods of Antariksha): Indra, Vayu, Apaamnapaat, Rudra, Marut,
Parjanya, Aapaha.
(iii) gods of the earth (gods of Prithivi): Agni, Prithivi, Soma, Brihaspati (Brahmanaspati)

Table B
(i) gods of nature: Agni
(ii) gods of action: Tvashtru (the architect), Savitru (one who stimulates), etc.
(iii) gods of notions: Shraddha (faith), Manyu (anger), etc.

All Mantras are composed only with the intention propitiating these gods. Now we can
understand the principle or motive behind the collection of Mantras. All Mantras propitiating
one particular deity are classified together and this collection is called ‘Sukta’. The collection of
all such suktas is ‘Samhita’.

3.3.1 NATURE OF THE VEDIC GODS

It is very important to note this difference. In the Vedic tradition, we can only find either
impersonal gods (like all nature gods) or quasi-personal gods. In many respects, the Vedic gods
resemble human beings, like gender difference, procreation, etc. However, it is wrong to think
that gender difference, procreation, etc. are restricted to human beings. Surely, they characterize
life as such. Gods ought to have life. Admittedly, it is impossible to imagine lifeless gods.

6
When every natural force or agency (including day and night) is animated, the whole universe
(nature = universe) becomes animated.

What is the philosophical significance of this conclusion? The manner in which the Aryans
conceived nature gods was such that it demanded that the gods must be live-gods. The striking
aspect here is that even impersonal gods are animated.

The Mantras had two-fold function to perform at different stages. During the age of Mantras,
the method and the motive were quite simple. The motive was either to express gratitude or to
make a request. At this point of time, there was no place for sacrifice. The element of sacrifice
dominated the next stage, i.e., Brahmanas. When mere prayer, accompanied by freely available
commodities like milk, ghee, etc., was enough to propitiate any number of gods, there was no
need of any expert, i.e., priest. However, there was change in environment and the change was
not necessarily for better. This change takes us to the next stage of Vedic thought.

Before we pass on to the age of Brahmanas, there are two more philosophical aspects which
remain to be considered. When the Aryans conceived every natural force as something divine,
they inadvertently accepted that the external world is not final and that there is some unseen and
unknown force, which controls the visible world. This will lead us to the conclusion that if we
choose the path set by the Aryans, then we have to search for ultimate reality. This is possible if
we go beyond the bounds of senses. Hence speculation plays a major role. Just as, all
experimental sciences have their origin in philosophy and mythology, so also pure philosophy
has its origin in pure speculation. Speculation is an intellectual activity. If our understanding is
limited to what can be termed as elementary sense experience, then neither philosophy nor
science is possible. To refine there should be something, which is in need of refinement.
Initially, that which is crude is refined. The process of refinement is endless. Therefore what
was refined at one stage is further refined. This process is common to both science and
philosophy.

Second aspect explains the origin of nature worship. Philosophy of religion considers three
types of religion; tribal, national and universal. There is no need to study the characteristics of
these types. It is sufficient to know that the feeling of identity with nature is a characteristic
mark of tribal religion alone. The idea of sacrifice also characterizes only tribal religion. Since
these are hallmarks of Vedic thought, we ought to conclude that the Vedic thought is more tribal
in its nature than what it is made out to be. Surely, what is tribal is primitive. If so, is it inferior
to other kinds of religion? The question of superiority or inferiority may arise anywhere else, but
not in the case of religion. This is so because all religions differ only in kind, but not in degree.
Secondly, earlier form of religion does not give rise to later form of religion; one religion may
influence another. That is very different. We are only concerned with the origin of religion. We
do not indulge in the qualitative comparison of religions.

3.4 AGE OF THE BRAHMANAS

The tribal character of Vedic thought is explicit in the Brahmanas. What distinguishes this
particular phase from the earlier one is the prominence that the sacrificial cult received. It is
interesting to know how this transition took place. It is also necessary to peep into human

7
psychology. M. Hiriyanna comments in his work ‘Outlines of Indian Philosophy’, that the idea
of sacrifice was not altogether alien to the initial phase. Evidently, it had not yet become a cult
at that point of time. If so, why did it become a cult at later stage? During the course of
evolution, the ‘animal instinct’ or to ‘expect’ – to borrow the phrase from David Hume –might
have come down to man. Apparent order in nature is understood as inscrutable law of nature
thanks to this particular instinct. Again, the very same instinct prompts man to ‘demand’.
Obviously, the demands are endless. To ensure that the expectation or demand does not hit dead
end, he ingeniously manipulates. His ability to manipulate events creates an impression or firm
conviction that he can dictate terms. This mindset worked behind the attitude of Aryans at this
stage. It also explains why and how the Aryan mind switched from one end to the other. An act
of gratitude or request, which marked the age of Mantras was explicitly replaced by ‘command’.
This change reflects the spirit behind Brahmanas.

The age of Brahmanas is marked by the institutionalisation of rituals, which came to be known
as yaga and yagna. Since the spirit of Brahmanas died a premature death thanks to the onslaught
of the Upanishads and the Buddhism, its influence on the development of philosophy came to be
restricted to the birth of Purva Mimamsa only. This phase has to be considered only because it
stands for deviation from the mainstream of philosophy in the very beginning itself.

The institutionalisation of rituals brought into effect two major changes; first the very existence
of gods, in addition to their powers, became questionable. Secondly, it gave rise to a new class,
i.e., the priestly class. Though the Brahmanas did not question the existence of gods per se, their
attitude, in a way, downgraded gods and second, new forces or entities were added. They came
to believe that the rituals performed as per specifications have innate ability to yield the desired
results. Hence, gods became mere puppets. If they yield, then what man puts forth is not
request, but demand. Further, due to accurate performance of rituals if gods are forced to yield,
then it shows that the power really is vested in rituals. This was enough to sideline gods.
Consequently, the Purva Mimamsa, much later, denied altogether the very existence of god.

Earlier, a reference was made to new forces or entities. The equipments required to perform
rituals gained priority at this stage. They were treated nearly on par with gods. Thus it was not
just mechanism that played pivotal role. Thereby a new dimension was added to rituals.
Gradually, rituals came to be treated as a sort of magic. The course of transition is now
complete; from expression of gratitude to demand or command and from technique to magic.
Consequently, an expert who conducts rituals turns out to be a magician in the last phase.
Symbolic presentation is another addition, which destroyed the spirit of veneration that was
prevalent in the preceding phase.

However, the disastrous addition, which damaged the very structure of ancient Indian society,
was that of priest-class. Most probably, this addition gave rise to the caste system later. In other
words, if chaturvarnya system degenerated into caste system, it may be due to a sort of
superiority, which the priest class acquired rightly or wrongly.

3.5 THE AGE OF ARANYAKAS

8
This phase marks another transition from the spirit of Brahmanas to the spirit of the Upanishads.
While the Brahmanas are called Karma Kanda (Karma is another word for yajna) because of
total emphasis upon rituals, the Upanishads came to be known as Jñāna kanda because here
knowledge becomes primary. Since the shift involved total change in attitude, it needed a link.
This phase is called Aranyanka because it became relevant when men retired to forests due to old
age. Why should old people retire to forests? Surely, this is a provoking question. Forest was
the dwelling place for tribes. If old people retired to forest, then it must be due to strong affinity
to the place of origin, which prompted them to choose so.

That apart, we should consider other changes which forest life brought into. Even in those days
life in society (it is not clear whether the urban- rural divide, which is now a commonplace
phenomenon characterized life then) was more comfortable because all requirements could be
met. This was not so in forest where one has to lead secluded life. Non-availability of required
material came in the way performing rituals. Hence the need arose to replace rituals. At this
point of time, mechanism gave way to creativity. Routine performance of rituals did not require
any insight. What was required was merely practice. However, creativity is required when
replacement has to be decided. This thought itself was enough to notice the undesirability of
rituals. Reflection followed by realisation paved the way for the pursuit of knowledge in the
form of the Upanishads.

This change is, admittedly, a revolution. The Aryans, hitherto, concentrated only on procuring
facilities to lead a trouble-free life. To be sure, there was literally no philosophy in their
endeavour. Their lifestyle only laid the foundation for future philosophy. Hence, proper study
of philosophy begins only from the Upanishads.

In this connection, one question remains to be answered. The Aranyakas constitute a phase in
the life of an individual. There is no doubt about it. In what sense can it be regarded as a phase
in the Vedic thought? This question is relevant because only older generation belonged to this
phase, whereas younger generation belonged to the Brahmanas. It means that the Aranyakas
mark a stage in the life of individuals, but not in the development of Vedic thought. There is
only one way of answering the question. The thoughts of old people might have influenced the
younger generation during interaction. If this possibility is not accepted, there is no other reason
to accept the Arayakas as a phase in the development of Vedic thought.

Check Your Progress II

Note: a) Use the space provided for your answer
b) Check your answers with those provided at the end of the unit

1) Why did the Aryans compose Mantras?

…………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………..
………………………………………………………………………………….
2) What are two major changes brought into effect by the institutionalisation of rituals?

9
 …………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………

3.6 THE CONCEPT OF RITA

Earlier (3.3.1), reference was made to several gods who were propitiated by the Aryans but no
mention was made about their role in the life of the Aryans. Since in the next unit there will be a
detailed discussion, only passing reference to this aspect here is enough. Indra was regarded as
god of Valour. He was venerated during war. Surya was the source of life. Obviously, he
occupied center stage. The twin gods Dyava-Prithivi shower rains and through rains food. The
role played by Varuna, another Vedic god, is crucial. Varuna is held to be the guardian of Rita.
This word has two meanings; natural order and moral order. Varuna enforces order not only on
nature, but also on human beings. He is the guardian of order and also one who practises moral
principles (Ritavari) Not only Varuna, Surya also is regarded as the practitioner of morality.
Concern for morality, both personal and social, is another aspect of the Vedic thought.

3.7 THEORIES OF THEOLOGY

Since the Vedic pantheon included many gods (around thirty three), a question naturally arises;
who is most important among them? It is difficult to say that all are equally important. If only
some gods are very important, there must be some reasonable grounds to say so. In this light, we
can discern three streams of thought. In the strict sense of the term, the word theory cannot be
used. First two streams have only religious significance, whereas the last one is philosophically
significant. A brief consideration of these streams of thought follows.

POLYTHEISM

Ostensibly, the Vedic thought admits polytheism simply because several gods are propitiated.
This belief is further strengthened when we consider the fact that the same sukta includes more
than one name. However, in reality, the case is different. Polytheism was never a dominant
trend in the Vedic literature despite the presence of so many gods. It became a stepping-stone to
another trend. It ought to be so because if God (not god) is taken as omnipresent and
omnipotent, then the presence of even two gods (not too many) defies common sense, forget
logic. Only tenacity and dogma should resist any thought contrary to belief. The very fact that
at the initial stage itself the Aryans renounced polytheism speaks of their reflective temperament.
Willingness to accept defect is the first step in the direction of correcting the mistake. This is
what is called progressive thought. Hence, the obvious conclusion is that though the Vedic
literature has very little philosophy, the Vedic Aryan had developed philosophical acumen, which
paved the way for the birth of vast philosophical literature.

This is one aspect. The very prevalence of polytheism at any point of time anywhere in Vedic
literature was seriously questioned by Max Müller. If we follow his argument, then polytheism
is a misnomer. At any given point of time, ‘one’ god was worshiped. Gods differed in
accordance with needs. The Aryan exercised choice in worshiping one god which is surely
10
peculiar or unique form of democracy within the domain of religion. No pressure was exerted on
them to worship ‘this’ or ‘that’ god. They enjoyed religious ‘voluntarism’. This is what is called
freedom of thought. Max Müller used the word ‘henotheism’ to explain this trend.

MONOTHEISM

M. Hiriyanna makes a subtle distinction between ‘henotheism’ and monotheism. While,

according to him, the former is characterized by belief in one god, the latter is characterized by
belief in ‘one only’ god. Evidently, some sort of process of reduction is involved in bringing
down the number of gods from thirty-three to one. This is choice exercised with reason which is
similar to some kind of thought experiment. In the Rigveda, the suktas, which declare oneness,
are in plenty. Let us consider one such sukta:
indram mitram varunam agnimaahu
ekam sadvipraa bahudha vadanti
Before they arrived at this conclusion, the Aryans were troubled by a genuine problem, who
should be invited to receive the gift (havis)? kasmai devaaya havishaa vidhema, The Aryans
went on experimenting speculatively (so it is called thought experiment) to exercise their choice.
Several names cropped up’ vishwedevaaha, vishwakarma, prajaapati, hiranyagarbha, etc.
Yaska, in his Nirukta, has resolved this issue in a very simple manner. ‘one God acquires
different names corresponding to different actions.’ In other words, the problem of ‘many’ gods
was not solved but simply dissolved by Yaska.

MONISM

Monotheism is as much theistic as polytheism. The real leap – a kind of quantum leap – is to
monism. This stream of thought is of critical importance for two reasons; one, the Vedic thought
caught up, finally, with philosophical speculation and two, it freed itself from the clutches of
primitive religion. The idea of god as the architect of the universe and guardian of morality was
set aside and instead search of primeval substance began. Philosophy begins with doubt.
Promptly, monism begins with fundamental question; when and how did the universe come into
existence. The search for primeval substance is the search for unitary principle. Cosmology is
the subject of Vedic monism. Before quoting from the Rigveda, we should know what monism
means. Monism does not distinguish between creator and created. Otherwise, it amounts to
dualism. If ‘creator’ is the cause and what is created is the effect, then it leads to dichotomy of
cause and effect. Monism denies this dichotomy of cause and effect. This is the bottom line of
the development of monism.

There is one sukta in the Rigveda called Nasadiya sukta. This sukta begins with the assertion
that there was neither being nor non-being. Only tadekam (that one) was and is. Further, it
continues to say that ‘no gods had then been born’. It means that the gods are ‘younger’ than this
universe. Then, in any sense, philosophical or mythological, these gods are not gods at all. Only
the last line may pose a problem. It begins with these words; ‘its Lord in heaven’. How can any
sukta talk of heaven when it said earlier, ‘novyomaa paroyat (no sky beyond). In this context,
‘sky’ means celestial, thing in deep space, etc. It may be reasonable to assume that heaven
means deep space and Lord means the ‘primeval substance’. Irrespective of the correctness or

11
incorrectness of interpretation what can be concluded with certainty is that the Vedic monism is
germane to philosophical tradition.

Check Your Progress III

Note: a) Use the space provided for your answer
b) Check your answers with those provided at the end of the unit

1) What do you understand by Rta?

…………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………..
………………………………………………………………………………….
2) What is the difference between ‘henotheism’ and ‘monotheism’?
…………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………

3.8 LET US SUM UP

The earliest civilization in India began with the Vedic civilization. The Vedas are four in number;
Rig, Yajur, Sama, Atharva. Every Veda, with the exception of the Atharva, is divided into four
phases in its development of thought. The age of Mantras is supposed to be the earliest phase.
All Mantras are composed with the intention of offering prayer to gods. The Vedic gods are
known as nature gods because natural forces were worshiped by the ancient Indians. Gods are 33
in number. The most important among them are Agni, Indra and Surya. The Vedic thought, later,
developed on philosophical lines giving birth to monotheism and monism. Monism is the
beginning of Indian philosophy.

3.9 KEY WORDS

Intuition: Intuition is the ability to sense or know immediately without reasoning.

Hermeneutics: Hermeneutics is the science of interpretation. Traditional hermeneutics – which
includes Biblical hermeneutics – refers to the study of the interpretation of written texts,
especially texts in the areas of literature, religion and law.

3.10 FURTHER READINGS AND REFERENCES

Das Gupta,S.N. History of Indian Philosophy.Vol.I. New Delhi: Motilal Banarsidas,1988.

M. Hiriyanna. Outlines of Indian Philosophy. London: George Allen and Unwin, 1958.

12
----------------- Essentials of Indian Philosophy. London: Diane Publications, 1985.
S. Radhakrishnan. Indian Philosophy. Vol. I. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1967
Sharma, Chandradhara. A Critical Survey of Indian Philosophy. Harper Collins, 2000.
Warder, A.K. Outlines of Indian Philosophy. New Delhi: Motilal Banarsidas, 1971.

3.11 ANSWERS TO CHECK YOUR PROGRESS

Answers to Check Your Progress I

1. The word Veda is derived from the word ‘Vid’ which means ‘knowledge.’ Veda is supposed
to be boundless because knowledge is boundless. Earlier (3.1.3), we mentioned that since
knowledge is objective and impersonal, Veda also is objective and impersonal. Being impersonal
is the same as saying apaurusheya. It clearly shows that whatever epithet describes knowledge
also describes the Veda.

2. In two different ways, the Vedic age can be divided; collection of material and development of
thought. It is commonly known that the Vedas are four in number; Rig, Yajur, Sama and
Atharva. This particular division is based on the first system of division. The Atharvaveda alone
belongs to a different age. It differs from the rest in all respects and only this Veda is
independent in all respects. In the second system of division, we have Mantras, Brahmanas,
Aranyakas and Upanishads. These two systems of division are not distinct. At every stage, the
first three Vedas, according to first division and all four components, according to, second
division intersect.

Answers to Check Your Progress II

1. The Aryans never thought that they could live independent of nature. This is an important
reason for the composition of Mantras. The Mantras were composed in order to pray to the
nature-gods. Prayer was the mark of gratitude. This is the birth place of the Vedas. The Vedas are
the collection of Mantras. Collection in Sanskrit means ‘Samhitaa’ (sam = together, hita = put).
Therefore, the Rigveda is actually the RigVeda Samhitaa and so other Vedas.

2. The institutionalisation of rituals brought into effect two major changes; first the very
existence of gods, in addition to their powers, became questionable. Secondly, it gave rise to a
new class, i.e., the priestly class.

Answers to Check Your Progress III

1. This word ‘rta’ has two meanings: natural order and moral order. Varuna enforces order not
only on nature, but also on human beings. He is the guardian of order and also one who practises
moral principles (Ritavari). Not only Varuna, Surya also is regarded as the practitioner of
morality. Concern for morality, both personal and social, is another aspect of the Vedic thought.

2. There is a subtle distinction between ‘henotheism’ and monotheism. While the former is
characterized by belief in one god the latter is characterized by belief in ‘one only’ god.

13
UNIT 4 VEDAS – II

Contents

4.0 Objectives
4.1 Introduction
4.2 Structure of the Rigveda
4.3 Structure of the Yajurveda
4.4 Structure of the Samaveda
4.5 Structure of the Atharvaveda
4.6 Let Us Sum Up
4.7 Key Words
4.8 Further Readings and References
4.9 Answers to Check Your Progress

__________________________________________________________________
4.0 OBJECTIVES

With the help of this unit, you will be in a position:

 to discover the intricacies of the Vedic literature
 to understand the path in which the Vedas evolved over several centuries
 to understand several changes, which took place not only in the text but also in the
attitude of the ancient Indians
 to be exposed to the complexity in the content of the Vedic thought
 to compare and evaluate various stages of development against sociological and
psychological backgrounds

4.1 INTRODUCTION

It is claimed that the Rigveda is the foundation of all other Vedas. Directly or indirectly the
remaining Vedas, with the exception of the Atharvaveda, borrowed material from this particular
Veda. Therefore it is desirable to become familiar with the structure of this Veda. Earlier (in
unit 3), we came to know that the dates of composition and collection are different. It is unlikely
that before the Mantras were collected there was anything like structure. In other words, within
the limits of „oral tradition‟ there might not have been any possibility of systematizing the
literature. This particular study takes us farther from the age of composition towards the later
period. While doing so, care should be taken to separate legend or myth from history. Since no
records are available except quotations here and there, we should only restrict ourselves to

1
reasonable conjectures. If it is true that one of the authors of the Mahabharata (the
Mahabharata was not composed by any one individual within limited period of time)
systematized the Vedas, then except the Atharvaveda, other Vedas were put in order by him.
This is so because the Atharvaveda belongs to the post-Mahabharata age. There were twenty-
one schools of the Rigveda according to Patanjali. However, only a few schools remain out of
which Ashwalayana and Shankhayana are very significant because they are also sources of
Shrauta and Grihya sutras respectively.

4.2 STRUCTURE OF THE RIGVEDA

The Rigveda consists of approximately 10,600 Mantras („Mantras’ roughly mean the same as
stanzas). This Veda is systematized in two ways. One method is to divide the entire Veda into
eight parts, called ashtakas and each ashtaka, in turn, is divided into eight chapters. Therefore it
can be said that this method of division is on „mode – 8‟. Each chapter has several sections and
the number of these sections varies from 221 to 331. Finally, each section has Mantras ranging
from 1147 to 1730. In the second method, the Veda is divided into 10 divisions (Mandalas).
Each division consists of subdivisions (Anuvaaka) ranging from 4 to 24. Each subdivision
consists of a number of suktas ranging from 43 to 191. Finally, each sukta is nothing but a
collection of Mantras. There is an advantage in the latter method of organization. Each
Mandala is associated with definite Rishis (who can be regarded as programmers). For example,
the first Mandala consists of works of fifteen different authors. Their works do not appear in any
other Mandala. Hence, the Mandalas are author-oriented. It only means that this sort of
organization is very close, in purpose, to modern day technique of arranging and classifying
books. Further, the arrangement of suktas also follows a different order. The first sukta
addresses Agni, followed by Indra and so on. On the whole, the method of organization is either
author- oriented or god- oriented. This type of organization has distinct advantage even from the
point of view of tradition.

Since Mandala is Rishi-oriented (or author-oriented) and sukta is god-oriented, any particular
sukta is conditioned by these two features. Every sukta is attributed to the one who addresses
and the god who is addressed and this god is the presiding deity of that sukta. Third dimension is
meter to which the sukta is set. With meter is associated intonation. Intonation is something,
which can be picked up surely not by reading, but by listening and practice. In this respect,
chanting of the Vedic hymns resembles music. (Later we will learn that the Samaveda is the
source of music and is itself highly musical). Apart from intonation, priority was given to
method. There are six methods of chanting. The same Mantra is chanted in six different ways.
These methods with some sort of formula are mentioned below. Here a, b & c represent words
which are required to be chanted.
Formula
1 Samhita Paatha (Method) A Bc D E
2 Krama Paatha A B Bc c
3 Jataa Paatha A B Ba b
Bc Cb bc
4 Shikhaa Paatha A B Ba ab
C Bc cb Bc
5 Pada Paatha A B c

2
6 Ghana Paatha A B ba A b
C C ba A bc
In the formula, gap indicates pause in chanting. It is sufficient to note that different methods are
meant for different purposes. In the Rigveda, these aspects are significant because this Veda is
composed only in verse. Same judgment applies to the Samaveda also.

The Rigveda consists of suktas, which were specially meant to be chanted only when yagas were
performed. There are ten such suktas, which are called „Apree sukta’. While performing yaga,
there was one more specification. It was not the job of any one person to chant all the Mantras.
It was always a team consisting of four members who had a definite role to play. Members are
called ritwijas. Their designation and responsibilities are mentioned below.

Order Name Responsibility

1 Initiating the programme and invoking respective gods to
Hotru accept HAVIS (which is dedicated to a particular god)
2 One who utters Swaaha and simultaneously adds sacred
Adhvar material to the sacred fire (Agni Kunda)
yu
3 Chants Mantras in high pitch
Udgatr
u
4 The presiding officer who ensures smooth running of the
Brahm programme
a

SAMHITAS

There is no need to refer to every god. Let us concentrate on a few without omitting any stratum;
again, Prithivi and Nadi (river) from Prithivi stratum; Indra, Vayu, Parjanya, Apaha and
Apamnapat from Antarikasha Stratum and Varuna, Surya and Savitru from Dyu statrum. No
god enjoyed the same status throughout. The numbers of suktas actually determine their ranks at
any given time. From this angle, among gods of Prithivi stratum, Agni is supreme. There are
two hundred suktas dedicated to this one god. Agni is all pervasive in wood, Jatharagni in
animals, etc. These forms are confirmed to the earth. In mid-air (Anthariksha) Agni is present in
the form of lightning and in Dyuloka (deep space) Agni is in the form of Surya. These
descriptions perfectly agree with common sense. The third form of Agni is supposed to be
superior to the rest. Here first identification is achieved. In his third form Agni is the same as
Surya. If Agni is equated with energy, and it is perfect to equate so, then he becomes the Lord of
the Universe. This is a poetic usage. In fact, the Rigveda is full of such usages. Hence it is very
important to extract what appears to be a sound measure according to science and philosophy.
Accordingly, Lord of the Universe is to be understood as the prime source, i.e., energy, which is
all-pervasive as far as physics is concerned. He is identified not only with Surya but also with
Varuna, Rudra, Maruta, etc.

3
There is only one sukta, which is dedicated to Prithivi alone. But if we consider the spirit with
which Prithivi is propitiated, then we will understand that its significance is by no means
undermined. There are other suktas in which Prithvi is propitiated in conjunction with another
god, viz, Dyuhu. Though this association, there is an unconscious attempt to depict the origin of
life. There was, and is, no other way to explain the origin of life. It shows that the Rigveda
attempted to discover not only the origin of the Universe but also life. The association between
Dyuhu and Prithivi is so strong, according to the Rigveda, that they are treated as pair always.
This point becomes clear when we learn that these two gods are addressed as dyavaaprithivi.
Sayana puts it in a slightly different manner. He calls it dviroopaa prithivi, i.e., two forms of
Prithivi.

A significant aspect of the Rigveda is the importance of rivers recognized by the Veda. The
rivers which find places in the Veda are very few; Saraswati, Sarayu, Sindhu, Ganga, Yamuna,
Shutudri, Parushri, Mardvridhe and Arjikiye. The river Saraswati is not only the principal
source of life but also of knowledge.

Agni is the most sought after among the gods of Prithivi and Indra corresponds to Agni among
the gods of mid-air. There are two hundred and fifty suktas in praise of Indra. If we put together
the suktas dedicated to Agni and Indra, then they will occupy a little less than half of the
Rigveda. Indra is essentially a war-god. The importance given to him indicates that there were
frequent battles between Aryans and their enemies. They had every reason to protect themselves.
It is true that the Aryans migrated from some other part of the world (it is conjectured that
Aryans originated from north pole region), then, surely, they are to be regarded as invaders. If
so, did they have any moral right to disturb and dislodge the original inhabitants? It may amount
to anachronism to judge their attitude on this basis. Going in search of food and shelter was a
common place phenomenon in those days among human beings and even now among animals.
In this respect, there is no difference between men and animals. In fact, migration among human
beings is still there, but in a different manner. Perhaps ethical aspect involved in such activities
was totally unknown in distant past.

In all suktas one description of Indra dominates. Only valour is distinctly noticeable in these
suktas. It only speaks of turbulent atmosphere prevalent in those days. Valour cannot be
described without legend. An enemy, Vritra, was created. What is important here is the way in
which Vritra is killed. It is a never-ending process. The Veda proclaims that the destruction of
Vritra takes place in future also. There are two ways in which it can be understood. Fight with
enemy is never ending. This is one meaning. Another possibility is that the destruction of Vritra
may be a symbol of eradication of recurring natural phenomena, which are inimical to men‟s
well being. The suktas mention resurgence of helpful natural phenomenon, which are the results
of Vritra’s destruction. Again, there is ambiguity here. Another example substantiates this
ambiguity. There is one sukta, which describes how Indra facilitated the Sunrise when he
destroyed the chariot of Ushas. As long as twilight (here ushas) persists there is no sunrise. In
saying so, it is true that the Veda is putting the cart in front of the horse. But then, let us
remember that the Veda has resorted to poetic language, which accounts not only for beauty but
also ambiguity in expression. Obviously, this is not what is expected in any philosophical
enterprise. However, at this stage, the Veda had not yet matured to become philosophical.

4
Let us consider Vayu (air), Parjanya (cloud) and Apaha (water) together because the very
possibility of life depends partially on these natural things. In some places instead of Vayu, the
Veda uses another name vata. In Nasadiya sukta, it is hinted that Vata is another name for Vayu.
There are three suktas in Rigveda, which exclusively propitiate Vayu; elsewhere Vayu is
propitiated in conjunction with other gods. Two attributes of Vayu puzzled the Aryans; motion
and all pervasiveness. Whenever they experienced puzzle they say divinity. This is (Vayu) one
example. One sukta addressed to Parjanya is interesting. The suktas which address Parjanya
contain references to a cow which gives milk and a cow which does not. Parjanya is glorified by
comparison with cow which gives milk. Milk indicates rainfall and cow symbolizes Parjanya.
After all, there could be no rains without clouds. So this takes us to Apaha (water). In one sense
Parjanya, Apaha and Nadi gods are related. How can clouds shower rainfall? This phenomenon
explains partly in straight language and partly in poetic language. Due to the Sun‟s heat water
gets evaporated and the cloud is filled with water vapour, which returns as rains. This
explanation is factual. This is followed by poetic description; Indra used sword (vajrauidha) to
dissect the clouds to release water imprisoned inside. Such poetic expressions on many
occasions have given rise to difficulties.

Apaamnapat in a unique god. It is an instance of two gods merging into one god. Apaamnapat
is Agni present in water while many gods can be directly related to nature and some indirectly; in
some other cases (like the present one) it is not possible to find any correlation.

Among the gods of Dyuhu stratum Varuna, Surya and Savitru are important. Varuna’s function
is to maintain rita a point mentioned in the previous unit. Twelve suktas praise Varuna. The
distinction in functions which Indra and Varuna discharge is rather subtle in expression when
expressed in Sanskrit destruction of „vritra’ and protection of „RITA’. It should be noted that in
pronunciation there is very subtle difference. Like any other god, Varuna also is omnipresent
and substratum of all. Surprisingly, Varuna was dislodged from his coveted place during later
stage. It was Indra who replaced Varuna. The sequence of events points to priority. Self-
preservation is primary. Morality is meaningless when my own existence is at stake. This
simple psychological truth does not defend tendency to sideline morality. An empirical approach
neither defends nor criticizes. Any attempt to the contrary is only an over-reaction. A human
being is always a human being.

Surya and Mitra do not denote separate gods. Not only Mitra, but also Varuna and Agni are
regarded as one god by the Rigveda. If we regard function as the parameter, then even that
difference cannot be traced between Surya and Mitra. For one reason, Surya supersedes all other
gods. All other gods need not be propitiated every day. But then Surya is propitiated every day.
Identity with anything brings with it sentiments or emotions. It is the origin of poetry. This is
what happens in Vedic literature. Surya is regarded as the eye of the gods. Ushas symbolizes
twilight. Day begins only when Surya followed twilight. Hence, the imagination that Ushas
brings Surya. Perhaps, whole of the Rigveda is in the poem-style for this reason. When poetry
reigns, philosophy takes back seat.

Eleven suktas are reserved for propitiating Savitru. Again, distinction between Surya and
Savitru is blurred. Savitru not only lights the world but also enlightens the inner world of man.

5
Savitru is one god, which stimulates intellect. In these respects, Surya is treated on par with
Savitru.

One more aspect with respect to gods has to be mentioned. There are male gods and also female
gods. Ushas, Saraswati, Prithivi are a few among them. While male gods are characterized by
activity, valour and exercise of authority, female gods are characterized by grace, mercy,
sustenance, nursing and so on. It is likely that even during those days woman was adept at
nursing both body and mind. It is perfectly understandable that man imagines god in his own
mould because he cannot imagine god in any other mould.

THE LESSER GODS OF THE RIGVEDA AND SECULAR SUKTAS

All gods propitiated in the Rigveda are not necessarily of high reputation. Generally it is
believed that references to witch craft are found only in Atharvaveda. However, it is not so. The
tenth division of the Rig veda also includes such suktas. They are called „Abhichaaraka suktas’.
They are very few in number. But it is not a reason to ignore these suktas. In fact, among noble
gods a few have still less number of suktas in their favour than these lesser gods. The aim here is
to wish for nullifying what one does not want. Destruction of enemy is one among them. This is
one evil, which anybody wants to destroy. Another evil is extramarital relation. In this case the
husband is guilty and his wife prays god to harm her rival. In the text, the word „Sapatni’ is used
to refer to her rival. It should be noted that though Indra and Agni are propitiated here also, their
functions remain unaffected.

Secular suktas refer to day-to-day life. Three aspects deserve to be mentioned. One sukta
mentions that a widow can marry her husband‟s brother. For reasons unknown, it never was in
practice, at least, after lapse of the Vedic period. Second aspect refers to one sukta which says
„pancha jaata vardhayantee ! Considering the fact that in purusha sukta there is reference to
Chaturvarnya, the word „Panchajaata' may refer to the birth or lower Varna according to one
theory. In the said sukta, the word Varna does not appear. Can we interpret „Jaata’ as Varna?
It is very difficult to answer this question. There is no explicit or implicit reference to
untouchability either.

Among secular suktas „akshasukta’ describes the fate of gambler. It shows that gambling is as
old as human civilization. suryaasukta, which has laid down the proceedings of marriage, shows
that among Rishis, there were women. They are not necessarily wives of Rishis. Surye, the
daughter of Savitru is the Rishi of Surya sukta.

BRAHMANAS

The word „Brahmana’ is used here in neuter gender. This word refers a class of literature called
liturgical literature. These works are essentially prosaic contrary to Mantras found in Samhitas.
The main content of the Brahmanas is to specify prescriptions (Vidhi) and proscriptions
(Nishedha) while performing yagas. All Vedas, in course of time gave rise to Brahmanas. This
particular class of literature is also very vast. These works required a few centuries to develop. It
is surmised that the age of the Brahmanas ranges from 200 B.C. to 3000 B.C.

6
Two Brahmanas originated from the Rigveda. One Mahidasa Aitareya composed „aitareya
brahmana’. „kaushitaki brahmana’ is another. The authorship of the latter is not known. Some
scholars say that Kaushitaki Brahmana is the same as Shankhayana Brahmana. According to
Aitareya Brahmana, one yaga called agnishtoma is primary and all other yagas are its different
forms, sometimes distorted also. Therefore, the description of this yaga is given in detail.
However, Aitareya Brahmana is neither spiritual nor philosophical. Indeed, this criticism
applies to all Brahmanas. From this Brahmana another aspect becomes clear. Chaturvarnya got
transformed to caste system at that point of time only. For example, some Brahmanas clearly
mention that shudra can only be a labourer and vaishya can only be an agriculturist.

Kaushitaki glorifies another yaga called Soma-yaga. Another Vedic god Somapavamana is the
presiding deity of this yaga. The drink Soma is also associated with this deity. It marks
deviation from the Rigveda of Mantra age in replacing Agni by Vishnu. Another aspect worth
mentioning in this regard is resistance to the sacrifice of animals and meat eating.

ARANYAKAS

Two Aranyakas are associated with the Rigveda; Aitareya and Shankhayana. Though the names
of the Brahmanas and the Aranyakas are same, content of one differs from that of the other. An
important aspect of Shankhayana Aranyaka is that one chapter is dedicated to the discussion on
some aspects of grammar. Last two chapters of this Aranyaka constitute the basis of Aitareya
Upanishad. Shankhayana Aranyaka has fifteen chapters of which 3rd to 6th chapters constitute
the basis for Kaushitaki Upanishad.

Check Your Progress I

Note : a) use the space provided for your answer.

b) Check your answer with those provided at the end of the unit.
1) Define Suktas in the Rgveda
......................................................................................................................................................
......................................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................................
2) Write a short note on Brahmnas
......................................................................................................................................................
......................................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................................

4.3 STRUCTURE OF THE YAJURVEDA

7
The Yajurveda is in two forms, Krishna Yajurveda and Shukla Yajurveda. While Shukla
Yajurveda is in verse style, the former is prosaic and also poetic. Perhaps Krishna Yajurveda is
so called because of this admixture. However, the reason is not very significant. Both forms
have a common goal. This Veda gave utmost prominence to the performance of yaga. In this
respect, the Brahmanas of the Rigveda are more in common with the Yajur veda. It is said that
Krishna Yajurveda had eighty-five schools out of which only four are extant. They are called
(a). Taittiriya (b). Maitrayaneeya (c). Katha and (d) Kapisthala.

SUBJECT MATTER

Since Yajurveda gives prominence to yagas, there is description of several yagas. It is sufficient
to just name them; paurodasha, yajamana, vajapeya, rajasuya, somayaga are some of them.
Authoritative commentary on this Veda is written by Sayana, which helps us to understand the
significance of yaga. Taithiriya School described these yagas. In addition to this description, it
also consists of Ghana paatha just as the Rigveda consists; this was designated in order to
simplify the Vedic language, which was complicated at that point of time. Maitrayaneeya School
describes ashwamedha yaga in addition to the above mentioned yagas. But for this addition
there is no other difference as far as yagas are concerned. This school has borrowed nearly 1700
Mantras from the Rigveda. Katha School describes agnishtoma, agnihotra yagas in addition to
yagas already mentioned. In terms of number katha is more voluminous with eighteen thousand
Mantras and Brahmanas. Not much is known about the fourth school since the concerned
literature is available in patches. One Rishi by name Kapisthala is the founder of this school.
The Krishna Yajurveda was founded by Vaishampayana while his student Yajnavalkya founded
Shukla Yajurveda. In Indian tradition, we hardly come across a student who finds defects in his
teacher and provides a different system. As per records, Yajnavalkya belongs to this category.
The form of this text resembles the Rigveda.

The Shukla form also describes all yagas mentioned earlier. In addition, it gives a detailed
description of the construction of altar; number of bricks required and shape of the altar. From
this Veda, we can understand that everyone is not eligible to perform any and every yaga. There
are three chapters, which are devoted to one yaga known as sautramani can be performed by a
dethroned king, or a lover of cattle or a person who does not have access to Soma drink. The
specification also says that after the yaga is completed, he should drink Somarasa.

Significance is attached to the description of the killing of Purusha. There are conflicting
versions about this description. According to one version, the description is only symbolic. By
Purusha if we understand man, then it does not really mean that man was sacrificed. According
to another version, human sacrifice was not something uncommon because there is a reference to
human sacrifice in Aitareya Brahmana. An interesting and incredible corollary is that in those
days human sacrifice was not necessarily a taboo. This conclusion substantiates what was said
earlier (Unit 3, 3.2) that the Vedic thought is to a large extent an extension of tribal culture.
Therefore even if it is possible to prove that Purushamedha is only symbolic, it is not sufficient
to prove that human sacrifice was not unknown.

BRAHMANAS

8
The Brahmanas which belong to the Yajurveda are extant; Taittiriya belongs to Krishna
Yajurveda and Shatapatha belongs to Shukla Yajurveda . References are made to another
Brahmana called Kaathaka which is extinct. These Brahmanas are extensions of respective
samhitas. Hence the content remains more or less the same but for a few additions. It is
sufficient to mention these additions. Among yagas „nakshatreshti’ is an addition. It includes
the description of twenty-eight stars. Among them fourteen are called deva and the remaining
Yama. The second aspect is the specification of Mantras, which have to be chanted during
ceremonies like coronation, chariot ascending, etc. Two conclusions can be drawn; one,
monarchy was held to be very important and second, performing yagas was sacred. This was in
tune with the spirit of the Yajurveda. In fact, the number of yagas mentioned in the Brahmana is
quite big. The most interesting yaga, however, is Vishwasruja, which was performed,
purportedly, for one thousand years by the gods. As the name itself indicates the universe came
into existence thanks to the performance of the yaga. We find here an attempt to explain the
birth of the universe. This particular aspect needs attention. Religion and mythology assert that
the whole universe was created instantly, which is, surely, incredible. The Bible takes one step
ahead and says that the god required six days to create the universe. When compared with the
former, the latter is several thousand times slower. However, Vishwasruja yaga outsmarts Bible
in saying that the process of creation of universe took one thousand years. Science discloses that
several billions of years were required for the universe to evolve. Therefore the Taititriya is
closer to science than any other workin this respect.

Shukla Yajurveda has two schools; kaanva and madhyandina. Shatapatha Brahmana belongs to
both these systems. First reference to Pitru yajna can be discerned in this Brahmana. Pitru yajna
is regarded as one of the pancha yajnas, the other four being deva, atithi, brahma yajnas and
bhootabali. Study of the Vedas is called Brahma yajna. Bhootabali is offer of food to all
creatures. Shatapatha Brahmana is so called because it has one hundred chapters. It is said to be
the most exhaustive work in this field. Hence it provides more information than any other
Brahmana. This particular Brahmana gives a very different description of yaga. According to
this interpretation, any yaga has two faces; physical or external (bahiryaga) and psychological or
internal (antaryaga). It is difficult to decide whether the latter can also be called spiritual.
Accordingly, sacrifice has to be made twice, one for will power or determination and the other
for speech because in the absence of any one of them, it is impossible to perform yaga. To
maintain independence and hence co-operation of „will‟ and „speech‟ it is necessary to use
separate instruments for two acts of sacrifice. sruva is the equipment used to offer sacrifice,
which represents will power. Likewise, srak is meant for speech. There is difference in posture
also. Sacrifice, which is associated with will power, should be made while sitting and the second
one has to be made while standing. Lastly, this particular Brahmana contains words like arhat,
shramana, pratibuddha, etc., which were later, used by Jainism and Buddhism.

ARANYAKAS

Brihadaranyaka and Taittiriya Aranyakas are two Aranyakas, which belong to this Veda. The
first one is also an Upanishad. Since it will be taken up for discussion later, it can be omitted for
the time being. The Aranyakas do not constitute distinct texts. Any Aranyaka, for that matter, is
restricted only to discussions often on matters pertaining to inner significance of yagas, and this
discussion matured later in the Upanishads. Taittiriya Aranyaka is important only for one

9
reason. Two pramanas (ways of knowing), which become prominent later, viz., „Pratyaksha’
and „Anumana’ are use for the first time here. Otherwise, there is nothing new in this Aranyaka
worthy of any serious study.

4.4 STRUCTURE OF THE SAMAVEDA

This Veda has two parts; purvaarchika and uttaraarchika. Aarchika means collection of Riks or
Mantras. Instead of Samhita, the word Aarchika is used here. First part has six hundred and
fifty Mantras and second part has one thousand two hundred Mantras. However, some Mantras
of Purvaarchika (Prior collection) have been repeated in Uttaraarchika (Posterior collection). If
repetition is ignored, then we find approximately one thousand six hundred Mantras. Out of
them, only about one hundred are original. The rest of the Mantras have been lifted from the
Rigveda. Out of supposed thirteen schools of this Veda, only three are extant; ranaayaneeya,
kauthuma and jaimini. Even though this Veda, to a very great extent, is not original with
reference to Mantras, it enjoys unique position for two reasons; this was organized for the sake
of Udgatru, who has a definite role to play in the proceedings of yaga (see unit 4.1). Secondly, it
set definite tone and style to the chanting of Mantras. It shows that these three Vedas do not
compete with each other, but they are mutually complementary. Mantras from the Rigveda,
method of execution from the Yajurveda and a definite style of chanting from the Sama may
complete the process.

SUBJECT MATTER

The subject matter is unique in the sense that the style of chanting itself is its theme. The
emphasis upon style is so great that it became the source of classical music in India. The Sama
Gana is of four types (a). graamageya or chanting in society, (b). Aranyaka Gana or chanting in
forests, (c). Ooha Gana, chanting during Soma yaga and (d). Oohya Gana or secret chanting.
Perhaps there was no difference between chanting and singing during this period. In each
category there are several types and again, this number differs from one school to another. If we
put together all varieties, we arrive at a staggering figure; it adds up to more than six thousand
types. Philosophically, it does not have any importance. It is not even necessary for our purpose
to correlate the notes of Sama with the „Seven Notes (Sapta Swara)‟ of classical music. So we
shall only restrict to mere mention of some aspects. Here the Mantras undergo change in six
different ways. The changes occur to suit „Sama music‟.

Samagana itself has five parts: (a). Prastaava (initiating) one who initiates is called Prastotru,
(b), Udgeetha sung by udgathru, (c). Pratihaara sung by Pratiharta , (d). Upadrava sung by
udgatru and (e). Nidhana sung by the entire team at the end.

BRAHMANAS

There are nine Brahmanas, which belong to the Sama veda, of which only three have survived.
Instead of explaining the method of performing yagas, Sama veda explains the structure of
„Gana’ with reference to yaga. It shows that the Brahmanas of the Samaveda also are directly
related to yagas. In addition, this Veda describes in detail the function of Udgatru, which is not
found in other Brahmanas. Tandya Brahmana, which has explained this aspect, has given to us

10
denotation of large numbers. For example, niuta is one million; nyarbuda is for one billion and
so on. Another Brahmana called shadvimsha refers to idols and protective measures to be
followed at the time of natural calamities. Reference to idols indicates the beginning of idol
worship. Samavidhana is third one which serves as reference work to Smrutis and Kalpa Sutras.

Check Your Progress II

Note : a) use the space provided for your answer.

b) Check your answer with those provided at the end of the unit.
3) Explain the structure of the Yajurveda?
......................................................................................................................................................
......................................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................................
4) What are the five parts of Samagana ?
......................................................................................................................................................
......................................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................................

4.5 STRUCTURE OF THE ATHARVAVEDA

Even though the Puranas claim that this Veda was composed by Veda Vyasa, there is no reason
to accept this theory if the same Veda Vyasa wrote the Mahabharata. It is a well known fact
that this Veda belongs to the post-Mahabharata age. Pippalda, a Rishi, is said to be the founder
of this Veda. This particular aspect contradicts the belief that the Vedas are Apaurusheya
because this belief does not exclude the Atharvaveda. Surely, it is not possible to hold both
Apaurusheya theory and authorship of any Veda, without getting trapped in contradiction. It is
said that this Veda had nine schools out of which only two schools viz. Pippalada and Shaunaka
have survived.

SUBJECT MATTER AND THE BRAHMANA

This particular Veda is wholly independent of liturgy. Hence, nowhere do we find any reference
to yaga or reference to gods. However, we cannot conclude that this Veda is wholly secular.
There are nearly ten issues described out of which one refers to atonement and another to
ultimate truth. In this respect, it comes close to the Upanishads. There are descriptions
pertaining to therapy, longevity, routine life, etc. There are references to several diseases like
jaundice, tuberculosis, etc. Since therapy included herbal medicines, this Veda must be the
source from which Ayurveda developed.

Gopatha Brahmana is the only Brahmana, which has survived. This is an exceptional
Brahmana because it has nothing to do with yagas, even though there are references to yaga.

11
This Brahmana makes a strange claim that the Atharvaveda is a precondition to the study of
other Vedas.

4.6 LET US SUM UP

All Vedas developed from initial stages of Mantras to the Upanishads. In the case of
Atharvaveda alone there is quantum jump from „Brahmana‟ to 'Upanishad’. The Mantras of the
Rigveda mainly aimed at propitiating gods, whereas the Yajurveda systematized the performance
of yaga. Thereby such performance became institutionalized. Thanks to qualifications ascribed
to such performance, chaturvarnya became powerful; but women had far more respectable place.
Remarriage of widow was permissible. Performing yaga was a way of life. At least one
Brahmana has the distinction of discussing cosmology. Human Sacrifice is a debatable issue.
The Samaveda is unique because it is said to be the source of music. The Atharvaveda is more
secular than any other Veda. While the Samaveda is the source of music, the Atharvaveda is the
source of Indian system of medicine, viz., Ayurveda. Hence, all these Vedas put together
complete the requirement of human life.

4.7 KEY WORDS

Anachronism: An anachronism (from the Greek “ana” = “against” and “chronos” = “time”) is
an error in chronology, especially a chronological misplacing of persons, events, objects, or
customs in regard to each other.
Ayurveda: Ayurveda (the science of life) is a system of traditional medicine native to India, and
practiced in other parts of the world as a form of alternative medicine. In Sanskrit, the word
Ayurveda comprises the words āyus, meaning „life‟ and veda, meaning „science.‟
Liturgy: A liturgy is the customary public worship done by a specific religious group, according
to its particular tradition.

4.8 FURTHER READINGS AND REFERENCES

McDonell, A.A. Vedic Mythology.London: Kessinger Publishing, 2007.

M. Hiriyanna. Outlines of Indian Philosophy. London: George Allen and Unwrn, 1958.
S. Radhakrishnan. Indian Philosophy. Vol. I. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2000.
S.N. Dasgupta. A History of Indian Philosophy. Vol. I. New Delhi: Motilal Banarasidas, 1988
Vaidya, C.V. History of Vedic Literature. Kolkata: Sahitya Academy, 1992.

4.9 ANSWERS TO CHECK YOUR PROGRESS

Answers to Check Your Progress I

12
1. The Rigveda consists of suktas, which were specially meant to be chanted only when yagas
were performed. There are ten such suktas, which are called „Apree sukta’.

2. The word „Brahmana’ is used here in neuter gender. This word refers a class of literature
called liturgical literature. These works are essentially prosaic contrary to Mantras found in
Samhitas. The main content of the Brahmanas is to specify prescriptions (Vidhi) and
proscriptions (Nishedha) while performing yagas. All Vedas, in course of time gave rise to
Brahmanas. This particular class of literature is also very vast. These works required a few
centuries to develop. It is surmised that the age of the Brahmanas ranges from 200 B.C. to 3000
B.C.

Answers to Check Your Progress II

1. The Yajurveda is in two forms, Krishna Yajurveda and Shukla Yajurveda. While Shukla
Yajurveda is in verse style, the former is prosaic and also poetic. Perhaps Krishna Yajurveda is
so called because of this admixture. However, the reason is not very significant. Both forms
have a common goal. This Veda gave utmost prominence to the performance of yaga. In this
respect, the Brahmanas of the Rigveda are more in common with the Yajur veda. It is said that
Krishna Yajurveda had eighty-five schools out of which only four are extant. They are called
(a). Taittiriya (b). Maitrayaneeya (c). Katha and (d) Kapisthala.

2. Samagana itself has five parts: (a). Prastaava (initiating) one who initiates is called Prastotru,
(b), Udgeetha sung by udgathru, (c). Pratihaara sung by Pratiharta , (d). Upadrava sung by
udgatru and (e). Nidhana sung by the entire team at the end.

13
1. The Rigveda consists of suktas, which were specially meant to be chanted only when yagas
were performed. There are ten such suktas, which are called „Apree sukta’.

2. The word „Brahmana’ is used here in neuter gender. This word refers a class of literature
called liturgical literature. These works are essentially prosaic contrary to Mantras found in
Samhitas. The main content of the Brahmanas is to specify prescriptions (Vidhi) and
proscriptions (Nishedha) while performing yagas. All Vedas, in course of time gave rise to
Brahmanas. This particular class of literature is also very vast. These works required a few
centuries to develop. It is surmised that the age of the Brahmanas ranges from 200 B.C. to 3000
B.C.

Answers to Check Your Progress II

1. The Yajurveda is in two forms, Krishna Yajurveda and Shukla Yajurveda. While Shukla
Yajurveda is in verse style, the former is prosaic and also poetic. Perhaps Krishna Yajurveda is
so called because of this admixture. However, the reason is not very significant. Both forms
have a common goal. This Veda gave utmost prominence to the performance of yaga. In this
respect, the Brahmanas of the Rigveda are more in common with the Yajur veda. It is said that
Krishna Yajurveda had eighty-five schools out of which only four are extant. They are called
(a). Taittiriya (b). Maitrayaneeya (c). Katha and (d) Kapisthala.

2. Samagana itself has five parts: (a). Prastaava (initiating) one who initiates is called Prastotru,
(b), Udgeetha sung by udgathru, (c). Pratihaara sung by Pratiharta , (d). Upadrava sung by
udgatru and (e). Nidhana sung by the entire team at the end.

13