2

It has been asserted in this answer that the kalpa sutras claim that only the mantras and brahmanas are part of the Vedas, whereas the aranyakas and upanishads are not:

  1. Āpastambhaśrautrasūtra 24.1.31 मन्त्रब्राह्मणयोर्वेदनामधेयम् (mantra brahmanayoh Veda namadheyam)

  2. Bodhyānagṛhayasūtra 2.6.2 मन्त्रब्राह्मणं वेद इत्याचक्षते (mantra brahmanayoh Veda ityacakṣte)

Now the question, what does "mantra" mean and what does "brahmana" mean? Has it been defined anywhere? Does mantra mean samhita portion of vedas?

  • I think its already discussed. Duplicate – Rakesh Joshi Oct 29 '19 at 4:01
3

what does "mantra" mean and what does "brahmana" mean? Has it been defined anywhere?

The Purva Mimamsa Sutras of Jaimini, commented upon by Shabara, have defined the words "mantra" and "brahmana" as follows:

Adhyaya 2, Pada 1, Adhikarana 7: "Definition of 'Mantra'"

Sutra 32 - The name 'mantra' is applied to those texts that are expressive of the said (assertion, of things connected with the prescribed acts).

However, this is not a hard rule as Shabara says:

This definition is only illustrative, as there are certain texts which are not expressive of any assertion and are yet called 'mantra'.

Adhyaya 2, Pada 1, Adhikarana 8: "What is a Brahmana?"

Sutra 33 - To the rest (of the Veda) the name 'Brahmana' (is applied).

What does Jaimini mean by "rest of the Veda"? He means the Brahmanas proper and the Aranyakas, which include the Upanishads, since they form the ending portion of the Brahmanas. This is known because Shabara cites verses from the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad and Taittiriya Aranyaka in his bhashya:

'Ugro ha bhujyam, etc.' (Taittiriya Aranyaka 1.10.2)

So it is established that the kalpa sutras along with the purva mimamsa sutras actually claim that the samhitas, brahmanas, aranyakas, and upanishads all together form the Vedas.

  • Purva Mimamsa is a Indian philosophical school. It cites the supremacy of the vedas and does not assert Isvara. It is not the Uttara Mimamsa of Vyasa. All modern day Hindus are followers of the Uttara Mimamsa. For further reading - archive.org/details/IndianPhilosophyACriticalSurvey – Swami Vishwananda Oct 29 '19 at 5:34
  • 1
    Jha has NOT arrived at such conclusions! This is a classic example of misquoting the scholarly work. – user965167 Oct 29 '19 at 14:38
  • At a closer reading of the cited passage from Ganganath Jha's book in the answer, it will be apparent to any reader that Jha has not cited anything from Upanishads or Puranas to the Adhikarna "What is a Brahmana?"! Jha has NOT arrived at such conclusions! This is a classic example of misquoting the scholarly work. Therefore, based on Jha's work it is NOT established that Aranyakas and Upanishads, Puranas for the part of the Vedas. – user965167 Oct 29 '19 at 14:45
  • @user965167 First of all, it is Ganganath Jha's english translation of Shabara's bhashya. And secondly shabara cites a verse from the taittiriya aranyaka in the section "What is a brahmana?" – Ikshvaku Oct 29 '19 at 15:31
  • @Ikshvaku Jha has NOT reached a conclusion that Upanishads or Puranas are Brahmanas. Taittiriya Brahamana is not Upanishad. So your conclusion ("So it is established") is your own personal and you are free to hold it :) – user965167 Oct 29 '19 at 15:37

You must log in to answer this question.

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