Hinduism Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for followers of the Hindu religion and those interested in learning more about Hinduism. It only takes a minute to sign up.
Sign up to join this community
Bramhana (like Aitareya brAhmana, satapata Bramhana, etc) are said to be part of Vedas and seem to expound the meaning of Samhita mantra and how to do Yajna. They also contain many legends like story of Yajnavalkya, Ajatshatru, Janaka etc.
On the other hand Veda are said to be timeless and not creation of any human.
So how can Bramhana be part of Veda/Shruti when they contain stories of real people?
In this aspect they seem similar to Smritis like Ramayan, Mahabharata etc.
The following is the answer provided by Sri Kiron Krishnan in another site, on the same subject.
Actually, if Vedas refer to the revealed, inspired visions of the sages, then they comprise undoubtedly of only the poetic saṃhitās of the kavis, also called Ṛṣis. The rest of the prose don’t have any metrical constraint, they can vary to any limit, and are works illustrating the use of these verses in some rituals, or speculations related. Only the Ṛks, sāmans having chandases and Yajus formulas comprise of the revealed vision. Rest are human constructs over it, having little to do with the sages or their vision.
But, people. Their beliefs.
Pūrva mīmāṃsakas largely believe that Vedas were revealed only for the purpose of yajñas because that is what is said by Brahmanas and Pūrva mīmāṃsaka scriptures. Thus, the verses of Vedas cannot have any independent existence other than the rituals to which they are applied. And this also makes them consider both mantras and brāhmaṇas as Vedas.
Uttara mīmāṃsakas are clever, for they have already planned great philosophies from easily accessible Upanishads and are too illiterate or too impatient or too contemptuous to learn or even check Vedas and Brahmanas, so they consider Upanishads as Vedas too, though many of these Upanishads are not even composed in Vedic language, and have nothing to do in content with Vedas.
Medieval Hindus tried to make Itihāsas or sometimes even Puranas as fifth Veda too, for they loved stories and were so reluctant to even spend some effort to study Vedas or what they are.
Then came Arya samaj. Dayanand considered only saṃhitās as Vedas, but also honoured Manu smṛti, and believed in karma and rebirth, for reasons only he knows.
Then come our great Hare Kṛṣṇas. For them, saṃhitās are already out of syllabus. Instead, they have two Vedas - Bhagavad Gītā (as it is) and Śrīmad Bhāgavatam. (translated by ISKCON) And they put up great sites having “Vedas” “Vedic” in names, and you will see nothing but SB and BG in them.
The idea about what Vedas are, among people, generally decreases in the order :
Pūrva mīmāṃsakas > Arya samaj > Uttara mīmāṃsakas ~ Medieval Hindus > ISKCON.
