Epitome
The previous section has provided a diversity of views regarding the Veda. Starting
with what later parts of the Veda have said about its earlier parts and mere recitation of
it, and after referring to the views of some sutras, Smrtis and literary works, as well as
of Kautsa and Bhartrmitra, it has briefly outlined the views of four darśanas (philosophical systems) and Vyākaraṇa. The positions of the two Mimāṃsas, (purva, prior, and uttara, later) are passim in the first chapter and earlier sections of this chapter.
These are followed by presenting the perspectives offered by the Manusmrti, the Brhad-devata, the Ramayana, Srimad Bhagavatam and the Bhagavad Gita.
The various views may be classified as follows. There were
# 1. Those who thought the Veda contained only gibberish, but potent when uttered
— a ridiculous theory; it would make the Veda a collection of incantations and would make morality meaningless.
# 2. Those who held that its injunctions and prohibitions have no moral effects, a theory which would be correct only if all action has no moral effect;
# 3. Those who rejected its authority on the ground that only sense perception and inference can be the sources of truth; that would be the position of the Lokāyatas or Cārvākas.
# 4. Those who would admit the teachings of the omniscient too to be sources of valid knowledge, but deny omniscient authorship to the Veda. Of these, the Jainas and Buddhists is an intelligible viable position if transcendence (the trans-empirical, param) is
denied; for the irreligious and the atheistic can be congruent (of course, not necessarily) with the moral, while the religious and the theistic are also not necessarily so. But, according to Gaudapada and Udayana or Jabali and Carvi on logical or scientific grounds transcendence can be neither proved nor disproved; while its denial can be demolished, and argumentative affirmation of it can be destroyed. Curiously, all the adharmic (non-moral) men indulging in evil actions (duskrta) whom Rāma and Kṛṣṇa fought and destroyed were neither atheistic, nor avaidic. They were worshippers of (four-faced) Brahma or Siva, performers of Vedic rites and askesis. Hanuman found
fire-sacrifices and Vedic chanting in the houses of all the demons (rākṣasas) in Lanka.
The previous section has provided a diversity of views regarding the Veda. Starting
with what later parts of the Veda have said about its earlier parts and mere recitation of
it, and after referring to the views of some sutras, Smrtis and literary works, as well as
of Kautsa and Bhartrmitra, it has briefly outlined the views of four darśanas (philosophical systems) and Vyākaraṇa. The positions of the two Mimāṃsas, (purva, prior, and uttara, later) are passim in the first chapter and earlier sections of this chapter.
These are followed by presenting the perspectives offered by the Manusmrti, the Brhad-devata, the Ramayana, Srimad Bhagavatam and the Bhagavad Gita.
The various views may be classified as follows. There were
# 1. Those who thought the Veda contained only gibberish, but potent when uttered
— a ridiculous theory; it would make the Veda a collection of incantations and would make morality meaningless.
# 2. Those who held that its injunctions and prohibitions have no moral effects, a theory which would be correct only if all action has no moral effect;
# 3. Those who rejected its authority on the ground that only sense perception and inference can be the sources of truth; that would be the position of the Lokāyatas or Cārvākas.
# 4. Those who would admit the teachings of the omniscient too to be sources of valid knowledge, but deny omniscient authorship to the Veda. Of these, the Jainas and Buddhists is an intelligible viable position if transcendence (the trans-empirical, param) is
denied; for the irreligious and the atheistic can be congruent (of course, not necessarily) with the moral, while the religious and the theistic are also not necessarily so. But, according to Gaudapada and Udayana or Jabali and Carvi on logical or scientific grounds transcendence can be neither proved nor disproved; while its denial can be demolished, and argumentative affirmation of it can be destroyed. Curiously, all the adharmic (non-moral) men indulging in evil actions (duskrta) whom Rāma and Kṛṣṇa fought and destroyed were neither atheistic, nor avaidic. They were worshippers of (four-faced) Brahma or Siva, performers of Vedic rites and askesis. Hanuman found
fire-sacrifices and Vedic chanting in the houses of all the demons (rākṣasas) in Lanka.