9

We know that the Vedas are considered as both Apaurusheya and the most authoritative among all Hindu Shastras.

But do the Vedas themselves speak about their authoritative nature?

AFAIK, such authoritative nature of the Vedas can only be proved by taking help of other Hindu Shastras like the Smritis and the Puranas. But i may be wrong.

For example. this answer mentions that both the Vyasa Smriti and the Devi Bhagavatam say that the Vedas are the supreme authority as far as Hindu Scriptures are concerned.

But, can the same be proved from Vedas themselves?

NOTE- Please answer with only Veda Samhita Mantras as references.

Improve this question
8
  • I'll add a proper answer later maybe, but this verse comes to mind (BG 15.15). Krishna says He is "Vedanta-krit", and krit can be translated, among other things, as creator. If you see Krishna as being non-material (the way most Vaishnavas understand), then something created by Him would be apaurusheya. Similar references are there for BG itself (BG 4.1) and Srimad Bhagavatam (cannot remember verse, but Krishna says the original 4 verses of Bhagavatam to Brahma after Brahma performs tapasya/austerity).
    – Advaita Charana dasa
    Apr 9, 2017 at 12:18
  • 2
    @AdvaitaCharanadasa You have to answer only with mantras from Veda Samhitas .
    – Rickross
    Apr 9, 2017 at 12:19
  • 2
    @AdvaitaCharanadasa Veda Samhitas- the core part of the Vedas. No not Vedanta Sutras. They are not even part of the Vedas.
    – Rickross
    Apr 9, 2017 at 12:25
  • 2
    @AdvaitaCharanadasa If u don't know what Veda Samhitas are then i am afraid u won't be able to answer this. Actually Vedas= The Samhitas. The Aranyakas, Brahmanas and the Upanishads are like supplementary texts to the Veda Samhitas .
    – Rickross
    Apr 9, 2017 at 12:51
  • 1
    @Rickross it's a propaganda everywhere, here usually, to consider themselves inline with Vedas just by having commentary on BrahmaSutras. And calling other system non Vedic if they don't have commentary on Vedanta Sutra when the truth is all philosophies who are not inline with Samhitas (not worshipping all gods with equal eyes) are non Vedic.
    – ㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤ
    Oct 15, 2017 at 16:35

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
3

Brahma Sutra 1.3.29 with the commentary of Sankara has a Rig Veda reference. It says(http://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/brahma-sutras/d/doc62753.html):

  1. From this very reason also (results) the eternity (of the Vedas).

Since the objects are eternal, that is, gods etc. as types are eternal, the Vedic words are eternal. This establishes the eternal nature of the Vedas. The Vedas were not written by anybody. They are impersonal and eternal. The Rishis only discovered them but were not authors of the Vedic texts.

“By means of their past good deeds (the priests) attained the capacity to understand the Vedas; (then) they found them dwelling in the Rishis” (Rig-Veda 10.71.3),

which shows that the Vedas are eternal.

In his Sri Bhasya, Ramanujaji in his commentary on verse 1.3.29 references Svetasvatara Upanishad 6.18. That verse says (Swami Gambhirananda translator):

He who created Brahma in the beginning and who, indeed, delivered the Vedas to him,--in that very Deity, who is the revealer of the knowledge regarding the Self, I, being very desirious of Liberation, seek refuge.

Ramanuja refers to the supreme authority of the Vedas in several places in his Sri Bhyasa. In his commentary to verse 2.2.35 he quotes several Upanishads to support his view. He says:

...The Upanishads declare clearly that the ultimate Reality, the supreme Person, can be known only through the Vedanta texts and not through any other means of knowledge. "I ask you of that supreme Person taught by the Upanishads' etc. (Brihadaranyaka Upanishad III.ix.26). Again, the Vedanta texts declare that this supreme Person is both the efficient and the material cause of the world, 'He desired, "Let me be many, let me be born"....He created all this that exists' etc. (Taittiriya Upanishad II.6); 'That Being willed, "May I become many, may I grow forth", It created fire' Etc. (Chandogya Upanishad VI.ii.3)...

A person who accepts the authority of the Vedas is astika - orthodox. A person who does not accept the authority of the Vedas is nastika - hetrodox - not a Vedantist, not a Hindu.

Improve this answer
7
  • The same mantra was given in the answer to my other question about vedas being authorless. But as i have said there, i have not understood how that mantra proves the apaurusheya nature of the vedas. Similarly i fail to understand how it proves that the vedas are the most authoritative.
    – Rickross
    Apr 6, 2017 at 11:48
  • When the thread starter has explicitly mentioned that he is looking for references directly from the Vedas then why are you making irrelevant answers ? is there any mantra which says that no human has authored it ?
    – Rakesh Joshi
    Apr 7, 2017 at 13:11
  • @RakeshJoshi Read my answer again. There is a direct reference from the Rig Veda.
    – Swami Vishwananda
    Apr 8, 2017 at 8:01
  • So you mean the authority of Vedas has not been spoken in the Vedas themselves? it is something that has to be accepted?? And one who does not do so is not a Hindu!? Again which scriptures provide such a narrow definition of Hinduism?
    – Rickross
    Apr 9, 2017 at 5:21
  • 1
    See also Brihadaranyaka U. II.iv.10; also see "Vedanta Paribhasa" section entitled 'The Authority of the Vedas Explained' at the end of Chapter IV. available here - estudantedavedanta.net/… . Many, many, many commentators have said that to not accept the vedas is nastika. For one, see here in the 'Introduction' pages ii-iii - wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/brahma-sutras/d/doc62753.html
    – Swami Vishwananda
    Apr 9, 2017 at 10:12
1

Most of my answer uses this article as its source (the section on Origin of Vedas). I also took notes from some other articles, but this one includes all of them. Here's the relevant excerpt:

Yajurved 31.7 clearly states that Rigveda, Yajurveda, Samaveda and Atharvaveda were originated from Him – the ultimate Ishwar who is omnipresent.

Atharvaveda 10.7.20 reiterates the same essence beautifully. It says that Rik, Yajuh, Sama and Atharva originated from the ultimate Ishwar. It asks “Which deva (provider ofbliss/knowledge) gave the Vedas?” And answers that the One who is controlling and maintaining the entire universe is the creator of Vedas. Atharva is like the mouth of that Ishwar, Samaveda is like the hair on the skin, Yajurveda is akin to the heart and Rigveda is the Prana or source.

Shatpath Brahman 14.5.4.10 states that Ishwar, who is present even beyond the Akash/Sky created the Vedas. The way breath goes out of body and then comes in, during inception of creation, Ishwar creates the Vedas and illuminates the world, and in the phase of dissolution (Pralay), Vedas no more remain in world. However just as a sapling remains inside the seed, Vedas still remain in knowledge of Ishwar, unchanged.

Shankaracharya writes in commentary on Geeta 3.15 that Vedas are actually never created or destroyed. They merely get illuminated and de-illuminated but remain in Ishwar.

Rigveda 10.190.3 states that the creation remains same in all cycles and hence even the constitution of the creation – the Vedas – also remain exactly the same.

One other reference that I saw being referred to was from the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, though that would not be one of the samhitas. I'm just including it here since I did find it (let me know if you would prefer I not include it):

Brhadaranyaka Upanishad(2. 4. 10) As from a fire kindled with wet faggot diverse kinds of smoke issue, even so, my dear, the Rg-Veda, Yajur-Veda, Sama-Veda, Atharvahgirasa, history, mythology, arts, Upanishads, verses, aphorisms, elucidations and explanations are (like) the breath of this infinite Reality. They are like the breath of this (Supreme Self). (translation found here)

Improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .