http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=8&article=1410
An Investigation of Hindu Scripture
The amorphous collection of texts that might be labeled “Hindu
scripture” consists of millions of lines of text written over thousands
of years in several languages. Known as the Vedas, the holy writings of
India are central to contemporary religion, though their authority is in
no way analogous to that of the Bible or the Qur’an in Christian and
Islamic communities. Hindu scripture includes nearly every genre of
literature, some hardly religious at all, and some incredibly
irreligious, at least from a Christian perspective. Philosophical
treatises, folk medicine, erotic poetry, and grammar tomes, as well as
devotional hymns, liturgical manuals, and ethical instructions all find a
niche in the immense and labyrinthine world of Hindu scripture. Most of
the scripture was written by poets, priests, and philosophers, though
some of the later traditional texts were composed by low-caste devotees.
The oldest text, the
Rig Veda, dates back to c. 1400 B.C., while the most recent authoritative works hail from the sixteenth century A.D.
(though some accept as scripture the writings of gurus up to the
present century). Vedic scripture includes the longest single literary
work in the world, the
Mahābhārata, which weighs in at 110,000 couplets (seven times the length of Homer’s
Iliad and
Odyssey combined), as well as the
sūtra
literature, collections of aphorisms so brief that it is said that the
author of such a text would sell his grandson to save a syllable.
Hindu scripture often is referred to collectively as the
Vedas, a Sanskrit word meaning “knowledge” (from the root
vid- “to know”; cognate to
wit,
wisdom). In one sense, Veda refers only to the most ancient writings of
the Indo-Aryan community. This includes the four Vedic collections (
samhitās):
Rig Veda,
Yajur Veda,
Sāma Veda, and the
Atharva Veda. The
samhitās
consist primarily of odes to the gods; most resemble biblical psalms.
On the foundation of these four venerable collections rests the
remainder of vedic literature. To each
samhitā are attached inspired commentaries: the Brāhmanas, Āranyakas, and the Upanishads. Thus, there are four traditions (
Rig, Yajur, Sāma, Atharva) and four categories of text (Samhitās, Brāhmanas, Āranyakas, Upanishads) in the Veda proper.
The historical origin of the Vedas is unknown. Internal evidence
suggests that they were written by Brahmin priests sometime between 1500
and 1200 B.C., though the ethnic persuasion of
those priests and the ideas they recorded remain a mystery. Similarities
between rituals and deities in the religion of Vedic Hinduism and that
of Persia and ancient Europe have led some scholars to attribute the
composition of the Vedas to Aryan migrants from central Asia. Other
scholars acknowledge the Aryan influence, but credit indigenous North
Indians with the production of the Vedas. Theories abound, and the issue
has been politicized and is hotly debated, but insufficient linguistic
and archeological evidence prevents satisfactory conclusions at the
present.
The hymns themselves hint at their historical source. It seems that
many were composed by mercenary poet-priests for wealthy patrons:
several Vedic hymns describe transactions between composers and clients.
“With wisdom I present these lively praises of Bhavya dweller on the
bank of Indus; For he, unconquered King, desiring glory, has furnished
me a thousand sacrifices” (
Rig Veda 1.126.1). There are also
prayers recorded for the well-being of the priests’ source of income: “O
Agni, God, preserve our wealthy patrons with your succors” (
Rig Veda
1.31.12). These hymns produced for individual patrons were probably
then collected and edited by the Brahmin priests for use in the ritual
sacrifice (Mitchell, 1897, p. 17). Over time, Vedas were assigned to
different Brahminical families for preservation through memorization.
The texts were transmitted orally for at least a thousand years before
they were written down. Several methods of memorization were used so
that the words and sounds would be preserved exactly; rote memorization
was supplemented with complex mnemonic devices, such as
ghanapātha
(“dense text”), in which the order of words is ab, ba, abc, cba, abc,
bc, cb, bcd, and so forth (Goodall, 1996, p. x). By this method, Genesis
1:1 would be memorized: in the, the in, in the beginning, beginning in
the, in the beginning, the beginning, beginning the, the beginning God.
The
Rig Veda is the most authoritative of all Hindu scripture, if not for its content, then for its great antiquity. The
Rig Veda
(“Veda of Hymns”) is among the world’s oldest literature—some scholars
date its composition to 3000 B.C., though most estimate the final
recension to have occurred in 1000 B.C. (Basham, et al., 1997, p. 522).
Arranged in ten books, or
mandalas, the
Rig Veda contains 10,028 verses, and is about one and a half times the size of the New Testament. The six oldest
mandalas
are linked to six priestly families who composed, memorized, and handed
down the hymns; books one, and eight through ten, are anthologies of
hymns by various independent poet-priests, and were written later.
The
Rig Veda resembles a hymnal more than a Bible. If pressed to compare the
Rig Veda to Christian scripture, it would most closely parallel the Psalms, though without the historical and moralistic tenor. The
Rig Veda assumes a common knowledge on the part of the reader as to the origin of the Universe and the identity of the gods (
devas,
cognate to divine and devotion), and, like our own church hymnals,
contains no introduction or narrative framework to orient the reader.
One could not pick up a copy of the
Rig Veda and understand modern Hinduism or even the Vedic rituals without significant explanation.
The bulk of the songs in the
Rig Veda are addressed to the chief
gods Indra, Agni, and Soma as petitions for success in battle,
protection, and material prosperity. This hymn addressed to the entire
pantheon is typical of a vedic chant:
Not one of you, ye Gods, is small, none of you is a feeble child: all
of you, verily, are great. Thus be ye lauded, you destroyers of the foe,
you thirty-three Deities, the Gods of man, the Holy Ones. As such
defend and succor us, with benedictions speak to us: lead us not from
our fathers’ and from Manu’s path into the distance far away. You
Deities who stay with us, and all you Gods of all mankind, give us your
wide protection, give shelter for cattle and for steed (Rig Veda 8.30).
Though many gods are recognized (according to this passage, there are
33, but the number of names mentioned throughout the Veda exceeds that
figure), each one is lauded as if it were the highest god, a phenomenon
Max Müller called henotheism, and that some modern scholars call “serial
monogamy” (Sarma, 2003b). These superlative descriptions inevitably
overlapped, and in later passages the gods are identified with one
another or with all. In time, the confusion led to the belief that the
many gods and goddess were but manifestations of one indivisible
transcendental Ultimate Reality. The pantheism of later texts is
foreshadowed in a late Vedic passage: “To what is One, sages give many
names—they call it Agni, Yama, Matarisvan” (
Rig Veda 1.164.46).
At the heart of the Veda Samhitās lay the ritual sacrifice (
yajñā). Like the
Rig Veda, the
Sāma Veda (“Veda of chants”) and the
Yajur Veda
(“Veda of sacrificial prayers”) served as liturgical manuals for the
sacrifice; each of the three was used by one of the orders of Brahminic
priesthood, a sacerdotal system similar in structure to the Mosaic
system described in Numbers 4. The primary purpose of the collections of
hymns was to “propitiate the gods by praises accompanying the offering
of malted butter poured on the fire and of the juice of the Soma plant
placed on the sacrificial grass” (Macdonell, 1917). The songs and chants
and prayers of the Samhitās were read over the sacrifice as part of the
ritual. Incidentally, the sacrifice was not performed for the atonement
of sin, as was the Mosaic sacrifice, but to obtain magically the favor
of the gods, and ultimately, salvation in heaven (
svarga). The fourth Veda, the
Atharva Veda
(“Veda of the Fire Priests”), differs in content from the other three,
and was not used in the sacrifice. Drawing on ancient folk material, the
fourth Veda consists of spells against sickness, sorcery, snakebite,
and bad dreams, as well as incantations to bring about love, good luck,
rain, fertility, and a multitude of other things. It also includes
instructions for wedding and funeral rites.
To each of the four Samhitās was appended a body of inspired
commentary. The Brāhmanas (“exposition on the meaning of the sacred
word”), the first layer of commentary composed about 900 B.C.,
are prose descriptions and explanations of various sacrificial rites.
Named for the Brahmin priests who wrote them, the Brāhmanas wax
philosophical—evidence that the priests wanted not only to enact, but to
understand, the rituals they performed. Unfortunately, any profundity
in the Brāhmanas is undercut by rambling mythology and asinine
digressions. In the introduction to his translation of the Brāhmanas,
Oxford Sanskritist Max Müller railed:
No one would have supposed that at so early a period, and in so
primitive a state of society, there could have risen up a literature
which for pedantry and downright absurdity can hardly be matched
anywhere...These works deserve to be studied as the physician studies
the twaddle of idiots and the raving of madmen. They will disclose to a
thoughtful eye the ruins of faded grandeur, the memories of noble
aspirations. But let us only try to translate these works into our own
language, and we shall feel astonished that human language and human
thought should ever have been used for such purposes. (as quoted in
Robson, 1905, pp. 23-24)
The Āranyakas (“forest teachings”) followed the Brāhmanas without
introducing much new material. Their name derives from the esoteric
nature of the texts—the mystic teachings were handed down from teacher
to disciple in the seclusion of the forests. The Āranyakas reflect an
increasingly abstract conception of the sacrifice—the literal fire of
the sacrifice began to be internalized and symbolically represented as
the “fire” of digestion and the “fire” of sexual intercourse (for the
fully developed doctrine, see
Chāndogya Upanishad 5.18.2 and
Brhadāranyaka Upanishad
6.2.13). The Āranyakas transition almost seamlessly into the final
layer of Vedic commentary, the Upanishads, between 800-600 B.C.
These books are seen as the fulfillment of the Vedas, and consequently
are known as the Vedānta, the “end of the Vedas.” The Upanishads are the
culmination of hundreds of years of reflection, and are much more
rationalistic than the Vedas and Brāhmanas. Their influence is felt even
to the present.
The Upanishads supply the basis of later Hindu philosophy; they alone
of the Vedic corpus are widely known and quoted by most well-educated
Hindus, and their central ideas have also become a part of the spiritual
arsenal of rank-and-file Hindus, while the earlier Vedic texts remain
largely the special reserve stock of priests and scholars (O’Flaherty,
1988, p. 2).
Upanishads (“sitting close to a teacher”) are, like the Āranyakas,
secret teachings transmitted from guru to student. Unlike the Sāmhitas
(the function of which was essentially restricted to sacrificial rites)
and the other two commentaries (which expounded on those rites), the
Upanishads expanded speculation to the entire Universe, especially the
absolute basis of reality (
brahman) and the self or soul (
ātman). The most famous teaching of the Upanishads is “that you are” (
tat tvam asi),
which means that the essence of the self is the absolute. An early
Hindu sage illustrated this by pointing to a hive of bees collecting
nectar. As nectar is collected from many different plants and reduced by
the bees to honey, he explained, so all souls are part of the larger,
indivisible essence of being (
Chāndogya Upanishad 6.9). The
Universe is within the self, and the self is the Universe. Those who
know this essential truth possessed great cosmic power. The Upanishadic
sages realized that this power of knowledge far excelled the power of
the sacrifice: if the soul is identified with the Universe, then whoever
controls their own soul controls the cosmos. Sacrifice affected the
gods only indirectly, but esoteric knowledge was the key to omnipotence
(Edgerton, 1965, p. 29). These books also contain the seeds of the
doctrine of transmigration of souls (
samsāra), the laws of
karma
that govern the transmigration process, mental training associated with
Yoga, and ascetic renunciation (Olivelle, 1996, p. xxiii).
Together these sixteen branches of literature are known as
śruti, meaning “what is heard” (from the root
sru-,
“to hear”). It was “heard” by inspired sages who received this primary
revelation from Brahma, the Supreme Lord. As divine revelation,
śruti literature is considered to be “eternal, intrinsically powerful, and supremely authoritative” (Coburn, 1989, p. 119).
Despite the aura of holiness ascribed to the Vedas, the majority of
Hindus have little access to these writings; they are massive,
technical, and written in an archaic tongue. Much more familiar to the
average Hindu are the colloquial
smrti writings, a secondary set of scriptures considered to be of human authorship and subordinate to divinely delivered
śruti. “While the
śruti texts have retained their authority as holy sources for Brahmanic ritual, philosophical speculation, and recitative
mantras, the functional scriptures of the masses in India have been other texts, most of which are categorized as
smrti rather than
śruti” (Graham, 1989, p. 139).
Smrti (“what is remembered”) explains and elaborates the
śruti,
making them more understandable and meaningful to the general
population—it is an “easier” form of truth. A mythological story of the
origin of the theatrical art describes the role of
smrti:
[The gods asked:] “Since it is not proper that the Vedas be heard by
those of low birth, you should create a fifth Veda for all classes of
people.”
[Brahmā replied:] “I shall compose a fifth Veda, called the Theatrical
Art, based on history, which will convey the meaning of all the
Scriptures and give an impulse to the arts. It will give good advice and
moral lessons, rich in meaning, that lead to good conduct, prosperity,
and fame. It will show the line of proper conduct to the future world” (Nātya Śāstra 1.4.13-15).
Smrti texts were intended to simplify the Vedas for the masses, and to elucidate Vedic teachings in a practical way.
Smrti
was written for the people’s admonition, to illustrate dramatically
through the lives of gods, sages, and kings the proper path of good
conduct (
dharma).
The Samhitās speak of salvation through ritual sacrifice, a ceremony
only the wealthiest patrons could afford; the Upanishads refer to
salvation through knowledge, an avenue inaccessible to all but the most
educated men.
Smrti offered scriptures and a means of salvation through devotion (
bhakti)
to people of all castes and both genders. In this category of
scripture, Hinduism attained its most mature stage. Most prominent among
the s
mrti texts are the Purānas, the Epics, the Dharma literature, and the Agamas, as well as other miscellaneous works.
Purānas (“ancient lore”) are narrative works in the
itihāsa
(“thus verily happened”) tradition, a mythistorical genre describing the
creation of the Universe, the origin of evil, and a history of Indian
civilization focusing on legendary kings, sages, and gods. Woven into
the central narrative are various religious instructions concerning
caste laws, customs, ceremonies, pilgrimage, and temple construction. If
the Vedic
samhitās are like the Psalms, then the Purānas resemble the historical books of Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles. The
Bhāgavata-Purāna
is one of the most popular of the eighteen principle Purānas,
describing in an entertaining and endearing fashion the childhood of
Krishna, who would later become one of the most worshiped gods in the
pantheon. The mythological stories of young Krishna stir feelings of
adoration within the devotee, the pursuit of which can lead to
salvation. There also exist eighteen lesser Purānas of basically the
same narrative structure, called Upapurānas, and numerous other books
called
sthāla Purānas, which record legends of particular
locations and temples. The eighteen most prominent Purānas alone contain
about 375,000 verses—approximately the size of two
World Book encyclopedias.
Also part of the
itihāsa are the great epic poems, the
Rāmāyana and
Mahābhārata, written between 400 B.C. and A.D.
200. Together containing about 124,000 verses, the epics comprise some
of the longest literary works in human history—five times as long as the
Bible. The
Rāmāyana tells the story of Rama, a god-king who rescues his kidnapped wife Sita with the help of the monkey king. The
Mahābhārata
relates a civil war between two groups of cousins that occurred in the
mythical age before the present. Characters in both epics exemplify
proper conduct for kings, soldiers, and persons wishing to attain
rebirth. Many Hindus consider these epics to be the Veda of the masses,
the books that “in all of history...have influenced the largest number
of people for the longest time” (Krishnamurthy, 1999).
Book six of the
Mahābhārata contains the
Bhagavad Gītā, the “Song of the Lord.” This short text (about the size of John’s gospel), though technically part of the
smrti
literature, is popularly considered to be among the holiest revelation
(Coburn, 1989, p. 116). Many compare it to the New Testament as the
definitive piece of Hindu scripture. Ghandi read it once daily. Written
by an unknown sage, the
Gītā tells the story of Arjuna, a general
in the civil war on the eve of battle, and his chariot driver, Krishna,
who is actually an incarnate form of God. Arjuna expresses his
reservations about fighting his cousins to Krishna, who encourages him
by explaining the principles of
dharma and revealing himself as the celestial lord.
About the same period as the sages Vyāsa and Valmiki were composing the
Epics to provide concrete examples of the dharmic code of conduct, the
more formal
dharma shāstras were being assembled. A
shāstra is simply a systematic treatise, though
dharma
is more difficult to translate: the word “subsumes the English concepts
of ‘religion’, ‘duty’, ‘law’, ‘right’, ‘justice’, ‘practice’, and
‘principle’ ” (Doniger and Smith, 1991, p. xvii).
Dharma shāstras
are thus books of law and duty. In this category, the Laws of Manu have
been very influential, as have the more concise Laws of Yājñavalkya.
The Laws of Manu alone is as long as the four gospel accounts, yet it is
just one treatise among about 5,000. In many respects these books
resemble the Levitical code, minus the consistency and ethicality. The
agamas, also known as the Tantras, are sectarian manuals for the worship of particular gods. They cover the three major traditions—
Śaivism,
Vaishnavism, and
Śaktism—and are usually associated with heterodox rites involving sexual intercourse and the consumption of alcohol and meat.
These are only the most influential parts of the
smrti category: there are many more. According to Coburn, “the very concept of
smrti
is that of an authoritative, but open-ended Word” (1989, p. 120). The
size and difficulty of the current body of Hindu scripture is compounded
by the fact that authoritative works are added to the canon on a
regular basis. “[T]o see Hinduism in proper perspective we must remember
that from the time of the Buddha till now, the composition of religious
literature in India has been almost uninterrupted and that almost every
century has produced works accepted by some sect as infallible
scripture” (Eliot, 1968, 1:lxxiv). Surveying this vast, ever-expanding
collection of Hindu sacred writings, it is no wonder that Sir William
Jones remarked: “Wherever we direct our attention to Hindu literature,
the notion of infinity presents itself ” (as quoted in Londhe, 2001).
HINDU CONCEPTION OF THE VEDAS
While recognizing the role that sages have had in the preservation and
transmission of the Vedas, Hindus generally reject the notion that the
Vedas are the production of human ingenuity. Swami Vivekananda, the man
credited with introducing Hinduism to the West, explained the Hindu
outlook on revelation to the 1893 World Parliament of Religions:
The Hindus have received their religion through revelation, the Vedas.
They hold that the Vedas are without beginning and without end. It may
sound ludicrous, that a book can be without beginning or end. But by the
Vedas no books are meant. They mean the accumulated treasury of
spiritual laws discovered by different persons at different times. Just
as the law of gravitation acted before its discovery by humanity, and
would continue to act if all humanity forgot it, so is it with the laws
that govern the spiritual world. The discoverers of these laws are
called Rishis, and we honor them as perfected beings (as quoted in
Londhe, 2001).
Vivekananda summarily stated the orthodox Hindu view of scripture:
scripture is eternal, it is impersonal, and it is much more than letters
written on a page. These qualities apply primarily to
śruti scripture, but depending on one’s definition of
veda, they may also qualify other scripture.
The Mīmāmsā school, a sect devoted to Vedic exegesis, established these principles over two thousand years ago in the
Pūrva Mīmāmsā Sūtras (c. 200 B.C.). There they affirmed the Vedas to be eternal (
nitya) and impersonal (
apauruseya).
To understand these two propositions, insight must be gained into the
Hindu conception of Veda. As Vivekananda pointed out, the Vedas are more
than a mere book—they are eternal knowledge, without author, beginning,
or end. The
Pūrva Mīmāmsā Sūtra likewise asserts that “the sacred Sanskrit-language Scripture known as the
Veda
is not a ‘book’ to be read, nor a source of information about a world
exterior to itself ” (Clooney, 1987, p. 660). One 18th-century pundit
characterized Veda as “that which pertains to religion; books are not
Veda” (
Vedam est, quidquid ad religionem pertinet, vedam non sunt libri)
[Graham, 1989, p. 139]. These increate truths have occasionally been
perceived by humans and recorded in books, but the Vedas are much more
than what is written. Vedic knowledge hangs in the atmosphere as a sort
of ether exuded by the gods; the truth needs only to be grasped by
enlightened disciples whose heightened senses allow them to perceive it.
This is why the most sacred Vedas are called
śruti—they have been heard by holy men. Hence the description of Vedas as sound vibration in the air:
I [Krishna] personally establish the Vedic sound vibration in the form of omkara
within all living entities. It is thus perceived subtly, just like a
single strand of fiber on a lotus stalk. Just as a spider brings forth
from its heart its web and emits it through its mouth, the Supreme
Personality of Godhead manifests Himself as the reverberating primeval
vital air, comprising all sacred Vedic meters and full of transcendental
pleasure (Bhāgavata-Purāna 11.21.38-39).
Krishna (a primary Hindu god, conceived as a manifestation of Vishnu)
declares that the Vedas are within. They are the “reverberating primeval
vital air” that must be heard. Many seek the truth in the hope that
they might grope for it and find it, though, according to this passage,
it is not far from each one of us. Though Christians believe scripture
to be the complete, written record of specific truths revealed by God,
Hindus consider scripture to be the whole of universal truth that may be
discovered. Only fragments of this everlasting knowledge are revealed
in the written Vedas (Daniélou, 1991, p. 280).
Vivekananda also stated that the Vedas are eternal, even preexisting
the gods. This means something significantly different to a Hindu than
it would to a Western Christian with his linear notions of time and
space. To the Hindu, time and space exist only in relation to
perception; when perception is altered (through religious rites such as
meditation) and the Cosmos is seen as it really is, distinctions in time
and space melt away into the Absolute. “Absolute time is an
ever-present eternity” (Daniélou, p. 15). Thus, the Vedas and the gods
both were created, but they both have also always existed. It is not
inconsistent in the Hindu mind to hold that the Vedas are uncreated—that
they were delivered to
brahman at the dawn of creation by the “source of all beings” (
Śvetāśvatara Upanishad 6.18)—and to believe that they were created from fire, wind, and Sun by the god Prajāpati (
Chāndogya Upanishad
4.17.2). These sophisticated beliefs developed over time, however, and
some of the most ancient hymns attribute revelation to the highest god.
“The
Rig,
Sāma,
Yajur and
Atharva, became manifest from the Lord, along with the Purānas and all the
Devas [gods] residing in the heavens” (
Atharva Veda
11.7.24). The scripture and the gods sprang from the “Lord,” Brahma,
who is the manifestation of the Absolute principle of the Universe.
Later passages elaborate this same theme. The influential
Bhagavad Gītā
grounds all things, including the Vedas, in Brahma: “From food are born
(all) creatures; from rain is the production of food; rain is produced
by sacrifices; sacrifices are the result of action; know that action has
its source in the Vedas; the Vedas come from the Indestructible [the
Supreme Being]” (3.15). Likewise, the
Brahmānda Purāna
depicts a four-headed Brahma emitting the four Vedic books from his four
mouths (1.2.8). Ultimately, the Vedas derive from the Absolute Being,
the Immense One. This Absolute god-principle did not create the
scriptures, but as eternal truth they are part of his essence. They are
thought to have co-existed with the Absolute, and pre-existed in the
Absolute. He created the gods and manifested the truth of his presence
to them; they in turn created the written books of the Veda for the
humanity they also made. The eternal Vedas were thus received by the
gods, who entrusted them to humans.
According to the
Brhadāranyaka Upanishad, the method of
transmitting the Vedas from heaven to Earth is similar to the biblical
conception described in 2 Timothy 3:16, wherein Scripture is described
as being “god-breathed.”
As clouds of smoke billow from a fire lit with damp fuel, so indeed
this Immense Being has exhaled all this: Rig Veda, Yajur Veda, Sāma
Veda, the Atharva-Āngirasa, histories, ancient tales, sciences, hidden
teachings (Upanishads), verses, aphorisms, explanations, and glosses –
it is that Immense Being who has exhaled all this (2.4.10).
God, known here as the Immense Being, breathed out the Vedas, not into
specific men, but into the Universe. There the scripture remains, as
smoke lingering from an extinguished fire, waiting to be perceived by
humans. Seven men served as interlocutors between the Supreme and
humanity—men of extraordinary perspicacity who distinguished themselves
by their asceticism and acts of renunciation (see Mitchiner, 2000).
These men were not chosen to be inspired; they were gifted sages with
keen insight into spiritual matters. Their sensitivity allowed them to
perceive those eternal truths that permeate the fabric of space and
time. The revelation they perceived was not confined to a particular
time or place, and if it were to be forgotten, other sages would
comprehend those truths again. The seven, called
rsis, or “seers,” perceived the
śruti
vibrating in the Universe and recorded what they heard/saw. Coburn
notes that the use of two metaphors—hearing and seeing—is intentional;
it represents an attempt to “convey the holistic and supremely
compelling nature of that experience” (1989, p. 109). According to Hindu
tradition, the
rsis recorded their experience because of the
coming Age of Kali, a dispensation when men would be hardened against
spiritual matters. The seven
rsis, along with Vyasa, the compiler
of the scripture, are generally considered to be perfected beings,
greater than humans but less than divine.
The eternal Vedas came from the impersonal Absolute. They were not
personally delivered from God to man, but impersonally manifested. The
Veda was not received by humans, as was the Bible, but perceived by
sages. Though impersonal, the Hindu philosophy of the word is not unlike
that of the Bible. One of the Brahmanas states: “[In the beginning] was
the only Lord of the Universe. His Word was with him. This Word was his
second. He contemplated. He said, ‘I will deliver this Word so that she
will produce and bring into being all this world’ ” (
Tandya Maha Brahmana
20.14.2). Though written centuries before, this passage sounds
remarkably like John 1:1: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word
was with God, and the Word was God.” Just as Christ, the Word, is the
ground of all that exists, so Hindus believe that the impersonal Veda is
the source of the Universe. The Atharva Veda reads: “From the bosom of
the sacred Word he brought forth the world” (4.1.3). A paraphrase of a
modern Hindu prayer states: “Those who are versed in the Vedas know that
the universe is the transformation of speech. It was out of the Vedas
that this universe was first evolved” (Eickler, p. 24). Maharishi Mahesh
Yogi (of transcendental mediation and Beatles fame) explained this
process in more detail:
Ātmā, the Self, is the ground from where the steps of evolution begin. The first step is Śruti, the speech value of expression, Veda.
The second step of evolution is from the speech level to the material
level where the frequencies of sound, frequencies of speech in the
Language of Natural Law, evolve into frequencies of matter which
construct the whole physiology of the ever-evolving material universe, Viśva (Eichler, p.1).
The material Universe did not come into being by omnipotent fiat, or
the intentional will of a purposeful Deity, but by spontaneous evolution
from the eternal Veda. The sounds of the Veda (the Veda
is
sound) became the fabric of the Cosmos. This view is not foreign to
Christianity; by the Word, “all things were created that are in heaven
and that are on earth, visible and invisible” (Colossians 1.16). Yet in
contrast to the impersonal Hindu word, the Christian Word is a living
and personal Being, Who willed the Universe into existence for His own
purposes, Who delivered a temporal revelation to humanity for the
express purpose of imparting saving knowledge, and Who revealed Himself
to man as the ultimate divine knowledge.
FAITH COMES BY HEARING...
It is important to remember that the majority of India’s population has
been illiterate for the greater part of its history (as has been most
of the world). As a result, Hindus typically have relied on the spoken
word to a greater degree than any written text. “The Veda was not
primarily a written text, but the powerful speech that came forth from
the mouths of Brahmans” (Carpenter, p. 63). Words and sounds were very
important in the Vedic tradition, and even in the earliest Vedas the
smallest syllables and intonations were thought to be of divine origin.
“In the actual sounded syllables of the Veda lie the points of contact
with transcendent reality” (Graham, p. 138). Vāc is the female
personification of speech, and might be compared to the personification
of Wisdom in Proverbs 4 (also perceived as feminine). The relationship
between Vāc and Dame Wisdom is interesting, though perhaps a more
accurate comparison from the Hindu perspective is the Word of John 1:1.
Just as that passage equates the Word with God, several vedic passages
divinize the Veda in the form of Vāc. Depicting Vāc as both a
personification of the Vedas and as their progenitor, the
Aitareya Āranyaka
states: “She ‘enters into the seers.’ She gives power and intelligence
to those she loves. She is the ‘mother of the Vedas,’ the consort of the
lord-of-heaven (Indra), containing all the worlds within herself.
‘Hence Vāc is everything’ ” (3.1.6). Alain Daniélou defined speech (Vāc)
as the ground and being of the Universe:
Speech has the power to evoke images and ideas. The process through
which a thought, at first indistinct, gradually becomes definite and
exteriorizes itself is similar to the process through which the divine
thought becomes the universe. The difference is only one of degree. If
our power of thought, our power of expression, was greater, things we
speak of would actually appear. With our limited powers only their image
is evoked. Speech can therefore be represented as the origin of all
things. The cosmos is but the expression of an idea, a manifested
utterance. Supreme Divinity can be represented as the causal word
(sabda-brahman) [1991, p. 38].
The words of the Veda are intrinsically powerful. Every syllable is
sacred, and the repetition of the scripture is auspicious in and of
itself. Eliot notes that it “is sacred sound not a sacred book which is
venerated” (1968, 1:lxxi). The books of the Veda are cherished not for
their great wisdom or moral instruction, but for the holy sounds
contained within. Understanding the text is unnecessary; scriptures’
value lies in its oral repetition. The Veda’s “sanctity often appears to
be inversely related to comprehensibility” (Coburn, p. 112).
Peculiarly, it is not the message of the Vedas that transcends time, but
the words themselves, even “the particular sounds and their precise
verbal order in the corpus (including the variants)” (Lipner, 1994, p.
46).
Christians may be skeptical of this oral approach to scripture, but
they would do well to remember the supremacy of the spoken word in their
own religion. The spoken word indicates presence, while the written
word implies absence. Christ, as the Word, was present among us, and he
represents the highest form of revelation. His ascension to the right
hand of the Father necessitated the written words of the New Testament
so that the disciples might be “guided into all truth” (John 16:13).
Those written words are “living and powerful” (Hebrews 4:12), and
reflect the continuing presence of God in the person of the Holy Spirit.
It is not the immediacy of the Word that sets Christianity apart from
Hindu scripture, however, nor the respect for the spoken word, but the
content.
The Bible contains clear statements that must be affirmed prerequisite
to salvation. Some are of a historical nature, such as “Jesus was born
of a virgin in Bethlehem.” Others are ethical: “Love your neighbor as
yourself.” There are also what might be characterized as theological or
doctrinal truths, which include “Jesus is Lord” and “There will be a day
of judgment.” The power of these statements of scripture derives from a
comprehension of, and conformation to, those truths—not from their
repetition. For instance, Jesus gave the model prayer (Matthew 6:9-13)
to His disciples as an example of prayer that was pleasing to God. To
repeatedly recite the exact words of that prayer today would be of
little use because the effectiveness of the prayer is linked to a
comprehension of the words uttered as well as compliance with certain
moral requisites (such as forgiving others their trespasses, Matthew
6:14-15).
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE SCRIPTURE
Though the Hindu scriptures are immensely significant to the tradition,
they exert surprisingly little influence in the religious life of the
average Hindu devotee. Deepak Sarma stated in an introductory lecture on
Hinduism that “all Hindus orient themselves in relation to the Vedas”
(2003). This is not to say that all Hindus accept the scriptures. It
might accurately be said that atheists orient themselves in relation to
the Bible, yet their position is opposite that of a Christian.
Similarly, Hindus are defined by the degree to which they accept or
reject the Vedic scriptures. Some renounce the holy books on principle:
most notable among these is Gautama Buddha, an Indian prince who
abandoned the Vedas because they reinforced the caste system. Many
reject them for more pragmatic reasons; Lipner observed that “in
practice most Hindus have had no direct access to the Vedas, either in
written form or aurally” (p. 26). The mammoth size and obsolete script
of traditional Sanskrit scriptures renders them inaccessible to the
majority, and even vernacular translations are unintelligible to a
predominately illiterate population. This is true among the clergy as
much as the laity—some of the greatest Hindu practioners of the past
centuries, such as Sri Rāmakrishna, spoke not a word of Sanskrit. “Even
in the most orthodox domains, reverence to the Vedas has come to be a
simple ‘tip of the hat’ made in passing to an idol with which one
intends no longer to be encumbered” (Renou, as quoted in Carpenter,
1992, p. 57). Gupta lamented: “In the present age we take pride in the
mere mention of the Vedas without caring to know about their contents”
(1979).
ELASTICITY
Nonetheless, the majority’s abandonment of the Vedic scriptures does
not diminish the significance of the Vedas to the religion. In the Laws
of Manu, the Veda is held in highest regard:
The root of religion is the entire Veda, and (then) the
tradition and customs of those who know (the Veda), and the conduct of
virtuous people, and what is satisfactory to oneself. Whatever duty Manu
proclaimed for whatever person, all of that was declared in the Veda, for it contains all knowledge.
So when a learned man has looked thoroughly at all of this with the eye
of knowledge, he should devote himself to his own duty in accordance with the authority of the revealed canon.
For the human being who fulfils the duty declared in the revealed canon
and in tradition wins renown here on earth and unsurpassable happiness
after death. The Veda should be known as the revealed canon and
the teachings of religion as the tradition. These two are indisputable
matters, for religion arose out of the two of them. Any twice-born man
who disregards these two roots (of religion) because he relies on the
teachings of logic should be excommunicated by virtuous people as an
atheist and a reviler of the Veda (Manusmrti 2.6-11, emp. added).
The sage Manu elaborates the hierarchy of authority in this passage: Vedas or
śruti literature, secondary or
smrti literature, and one’s own preferences. The Vedas are the most authoritative texts, and ought to be called the “revealed canon.”
Contemporary Western and Indian scholars also acknowledge the
centrality of the Vedas to Hindu religion. Brian Smith emphasized the
role of scripture when he defined Hinduism as “the religion of those
humans who create, perpetuate, and transform traditions with
legitimizing reference to the authority of the Veda” (as quoted in
Flood, 1996, p. 226, n. 26). Lipner points out that “
in theory at
least, the Vedas are the source of saving knowledge” (1994, p. 26,
italics in orig.). Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, Hindu philosopher and first
president of India, identified the Vedas as “the standard of thought
and feeling for Indians” (as quoted in Sawhney, 1999). One might expect
something as important as the “source of saving knowledge,” the
“standard of thought and feeling,” and the “legitimizing reference” of a
world religion to be well defined, yet, in the words of Wendy
O’Flaherty, a revealed canon as mentioned in the Laws of Manu “is a
concept with little meaning for a religion as pluralistic as Hinduism”
(1988, p. xi). Lipner added that “the boundaries of the Vedic scriptures
as they have come down to us are not particularly neat” (1994, p. 42).
Jayaram, a Hindu scholar, admitted that Hinduism “does not rely
exclusively upon any particular source” (2000), and Princeton professor
Donald Lopez noted that it has “no single text that can serve as a
doctrinal point of reference” (1995, p. 5).
As noted above, Hindus do not unanimously accept any single text, or
group of texts, as the authoritative body of eternal truth. Judaism,
Christianity, and Islam each cherish a holy book containing everything
that pertains to life and godliness, but Hindus have no analogous
monolithic text. According to Mahatma Gandhi, “Hinduism does not rest on
the authority of one book or one prophet, nor does it possess a common
creed” (1991, p. 120). As frustrating as this may be from a comparative
religions standpoint, the lack of a definitive text is a source of pride
for many Hindus who feel that tolerance and pluralism are the primary
themes of the twenty-first century incarnation of the religion. Absolute
scriptures lead to dogmatic beliefs, they reason, and dogmatic beliefs
lead to strife and violence.
Nonetheless, it already has been shown that most Hindus have a high regard of the
śruti
texts, most broadly referred to as the Vedas. If any canonical
scripture exists, it is the Vedas, which have been considered a gauge of
orthodoxy (see
Manusmrti 2.6-11, quoted above). During the
Indian renaissance of the 19th century, various reform movements such as
the Brāhmo Samāj and the Ārya Samāj sought to return to the Vedas as
the ground of Hindu spirituality. Nolini Gupta, a Hindu scholar, summed
up the view of one such school of Hinduism: “He who defies Veda is an
atheist, a non-Hindu, an untouchable and a non-Aryan. All the various
religious systems and scriptures of the Hindus look upon the Veda as the
sole authority. What is inconsistent with the Veda is false and
unacceptable” (1979). Veda here is used in the sense of a canon, yet
that canon is left undefined.
Traditionally, the Vedas includes either the four Samhitās or all
sixteen branches of texts (Sarma, 2003a). The texts themselves, however,
list only the
Rig Veda, Sāma Veda, and the
Yajur Veda as canonical; originally, the priests rejected the
Atharva Veda from the
trayi vidya, or “triple veda” (
Bhagavad Gītā 9.20;
Manusmrti
1.23; 4.125). Limiting scripture to a few books tends to be the
exception, not the rule; books are more often added to the Veda and
deemed sacred. In the
Chāndogya Upanishad (a text within the
śruti collection), the Purānas and Itihāsa are described as the “fifth veda” (7.1.2). Vallabha, a 15
th-century theologian, proposed a fourfold canon embodying Veda,
Brahma Sūtra,
Bhagavad Gītā, and
Bhāgavata Purāna
(Lipner p. 60). The Law Book of Yājñavalkya established the Vedas, the
Pūranas, the philosophical system called Nyāya, the exegetical school of
Mīmāmsā, treatises on moral duty (
dharmaśāstras), and the six
classes of work that are auxiliaries to the Veda (pronunciation,
prosody, grammar, word-derivation, astronomy, and ritual) as “the
fourteen bases of knowledge and moral duty” (1.3). A more contemporary
interpretation of Veda comes from the International Gita Society, which
considers not only Hindu texts, but also the Bible and the Qur’an as
scriptures from the Supreme Being. Coburn points out that “
śruti
must be seen as ongoing and experientially based feature of the Hindu
religious tradition” (1989, p. 112). Many other passages could be noted,
each having a different opinion on what texts are sacred and should
thus be listed under the name “Veda.” How does the average Hindu view
this dilemma? “The average man – even the average priest—regards all
these as sacred works without troubling himself with distinctions as to
śruti and
smriti, and the Vedas and Upanishads are hardly within his horizon” (Eliot, 1968, 1:lxxv).
Coburn, in his essay “ ‘Scripture’ in India,” expands further on the
Hindu conception of scripture. He argues that Indian scripture exceeds
written texts—the written word is only one revelatory medium. “[T]he
holy words that are
śruti must be seen alongside other
transforming, sacramental activities, such as philosophical
argumentation, the worship of the divine image form, and the highly
nuanced moods (
bhavas) of Krishna devotees” (p. 112). He also cites Diana Eck’s book,
Darśan,
in which she elaborates the thesis that Hindu images (which some would
refer to as idols) are actually “visual scriptures” (1998). David
Carpenter suggests further that the conduct and judgment of those
Brahmin priests who have memorized the Vedas is considered Vedic, “even
when they went beyond the known Vedic teachings” (1992, p. 62).
WHY THE BIBLE IS SUPERIOR TO HINDU SCRIPTURE
The corpus of Hindu scripture is enormous. A person could spend a
lifetime sorting through the millions of pages of sacred and semi-sacred
texts. Even the most orthodox sections of scripture are many times
larger than the Bible. Clarke, in an essay on Hindu scripture, defended
his limited treatment of the Vedas with this description of his subject:
“How large, how difficult to understand! So vast, so complicated, so
full of contradictions, so various and changeable, that its very
immensity is our refuge!” (1875, p. 81). Recall that the four Veda
Samhitās are about the size of the Old Testament, and the Upanishads
number over 100. Among the
smrti literature, the Epics are five
times the length of the entire Bible, each of the 18 principle Puranās
is about the size of the Old Testament, and over 5,000 texts of varying
length belong to the
dharmaśāstra tradition. The Bible seems
concise in comparison, containing only 23,314 verses in the Old
Testament and 7,959 verses in the New. An average Western library or
bookstore stocks some abridged compilation of the Vedic Samhitās, the 13
principle Upanishads, and the
Bhagavad Gītā, but only the most
specialized libraries carry full versions of even the major scriptures. A
Hindu equivalent of the Gideon missionary society would have to donate
an entire library of books to hotels rather than a single volume to each
room. Of course, Hindus have little interest in proselytizing, so it is
not really a problem.
If the size were insufficient to deter an honest seeker of truth, the
incomprehensibility of the scripture certainly would. The Bible was
written originally in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. Though Bible students
rarely master the original languages, sufficient lexical aids exists so
that the original meaning can be understood with relatively little
difficulty. Hindu students are not so fortunate. Since the Vedas were
delivered from an impersonal source (the “Absolute”) there can be no
original meaning. “[T]he Veda has no author, no meaning beyond the words
and the sacrificial actions themselves; one cannot appeal to a
pre-verbal intention to get beyond the words” (Clooney, 1987, p. 660).
Incidentally, as Clooney points out in his essay, postmodernists find
this approach to understanding texts refreshingly in line with their own
views.
English translations are available for the primary scriptures, yet even
the most careful translations are difficult to understand. Most English
translations of the Bible are on the reading level of a 6-12th grader,
yet the same cannot be said of the Vedas. “Many [of the Vedas] are
written in a style which even educated men find very difficult to
understand; and, if they have to be studied in the original, only a very
small part of them can possibly be mastered by one man” (Mitchell,
1897, p. 247). Archaic Sanskrit (also called Vedic), the language of the
Rig Veda, is a dead language, and inaccessible to most Hindus.
Other scriptures are written in classical Sanskrit, Prakrit, Tamil, and
other regional dialects. The possibility of interpretation is further
hampered by the belief that the Vedas consist of sacred sound, not
written text.
Were the language difficulties to be sorted out, the problem of
incomprehensibility would remain. Hindu scripture contradicts itself
time and time again. One might expect works separated by thousands of
years to disagree (and they do), but these contradictions are found even
within individual texts. There are logical contradictions, conceptual
contradictions, and even factual contradictions. This may be explained
partially by the Hindu conception of scripture, as explained by Eliot:
“The Hindu approaches his sacred literature somewhat in the spirit in
which we approach Milton and Dante. The beauty and value of such poems
is clear. The question of whether they are accurate reports of facts
seems irrelevant” (1968, 1:lxxi). Apparently, contradiction is not
regarded as evidence against the Vedas’ divine origin. Hindu scripture
confirms this suspicion, and actually embraces the contradictions. The
Laws of Manu recommends that both sides of a contradiction in the Veda
be accepted as authoritative: “But where the revealed canon is divided,
both (views) are traditionally regarded as law; for wise men say that
both of them are valid laws” (
Manusmrti 2.14). Regarding the
contradictions inherent in the Upanishads, the collection of texts
considered by Olivelle to be the “vedic scripture
par excellence
of Hinduism” (1996, p. xxiii), Robson remarked: “It is hard to say what
philosophical opinion might not be supported from the Upanishads, for
the most contradictory statements find a place in them” (1905, p. 28).
Likewise the Puranās, so holy as to be called “the fifth veda” (
Chandogya Upanishad
7.1.4), are “for the most part intensely sectarian; one denounces
beliefs and rites which another enjoins” (Mitchell, p. 260). Coburn
stated that, when it comes to Hindu scripture, “sanctity often appears
to be inversely related to comprehensibility” (p. 112).
Hindu scripture is for all practical purposes useless to the average
Hindu for these and other reasons. This, of course, assumes that all
Hindus have access to the scripture. Traditionally, Hindu society is
divided into four castes, the Brahmin (priestly class), Kshatriya
(ruling class), Vaiśya (merchant class), and Śūdra (outcastes). The
first three classes are known as the twice-born, and only the males of
those classes are allowed to read the Vedas. All women and males of the
Śūdra class are excluded because of their “impurity” (
Manusmrti 2.164-172). These restricted groups do have access to the
smrti writings and devotional literature, but the most sacred
śruti texts are forbidden. The religion itself restricts to a select few the scripture that purportedly contains saving knowledge.
There is much morally reprehensible material within the Vedic
literature. One 19th-century writer, speaking specifically of the
Puranās, underlined the true nature of the Hindu scripture: “The
instructions which it professes to give are useless, where they are not
scandalous and criminal. The only things clearly to be understood, are
the profane songs, the obscene ceremonies, and the other indecencies
connected with the prescribed festivals” (as quoted by Goodall, 1996, p.
xxxviii). The immoralities endorsed by Hindu scripture range from
racial prejudices and rigid social hierarchies to rape and murder.
For instance, the earliest Vedic texts, which are traced back to the
Aryan invasion of the Indian subcontinent, reflect the racial biases of
the invaders. It seems that the Aryans were a fairer-skinned people of
Persian descent, whereas the indigenous peoples (Dāsas) whom they
subjugated were of a darker skin color and Negro-Australoid features.
One prayer directed to the warrior god Indra petitioned him to “give
protection to the Aryan color” (
Rig Veda 3.34.9). Another passage
lauds Indra’s victory over the dark-skinned natives: “He, much invoked,
has slain Dāsas and Simūs [dark-skinned natives], according to his
will, and laid them low with arrows. The mighty Thunderer [Indra] with
his fair-complexioned friends won the land, the sunlight, and the
waters” (
Rig Veda 1.100.18). According to Mitchell, the “language
in which the Vedic poets speak of these enemies is uniformly that of
unmingled, vehement hatred” (1897, p. 19). Critics might observe that
the Old Testament is also guilty of ethnic cleansing; however, the
Israelite battles were drawn over moral lines, not ethnic or racial (see
Bass, 2003).
Though the historical picture is unclear, it seems that the Dāsas were
incorporated into the Aryan social hierarchy as the lowest class (
Rig Veda 10.90.12). Evidence for this comes from the Sanskrit word for class,
varna, which means “color” (cognate to the English varnish).
More disturbing than the Vedic treatment of race are the pervasive
references to sex, and the its role in the religious ritual. The
Kāma Sūtra
of Vatsāyayana is one of the most infamous Hindu texts. Known as the
“Aphorisms on Love,” or more popularly as the “Sex Manual,” the
Kāma Sūtra celebrates sexual love (
Kāma
is the god of love, in many ways similar to Cupid). In addition to
explicit information for use between husbands and wives, there are also
sections entitled “Concerning the Wives of Other People” and “Concerning
Prostitutes,” both providing advice on how to procure such forbidden
fruit. The
Kāma Sūtra is but one text among many. One entire category of
smrti literature known as Tantras is dedicated to the worship of the goddess principle,
Śakti.
The esoteric teachings within that body of texts describe various
sexual rites that represent the spiritual union of the worshipper’s soul
with the goddess. Violence and sexual perversion penetrates even the
most orthodox scripture. The
Brhadārankyaka Upanishad, for instance, condones rape:
Surely, a woman who has changed her clothes at the end of her
menstrual period is the most auspicious of women. When she has changed
her clothes at the end of her menstrual period, therefore, one should
approach that splendid woman and invite her to have sex. Should she
refuse to consent, he should bribe her. If she still refuses, he should
beat her with a stick or with his fists and overpower her, saying: “I
take away the splendor from you with my virility and splendor”
(6.4.9,21).
Bestiality is likewise advocated. A particularly solemn rite for the
early Vedic religion was the horse sacrifice. Though it probably was
performed rarely, it is mentioned frequently in the Vedic commentaries.
Note one section from the
Śatapatha Brāhmana: “Then they draw out
the penis of the horse and place it in the vagina of the chief queen,
while she says, ‘May the vigorous virile male, the layer of seed, lay
the seed’; this she says for sexual intercourse...” (13.5.2.1-10).
Examples such as this could be multiplied. To the list of atrocities in
the Vedic scripture may be added human sacrifice (
Aitaraya Brahmana 7.13-18), as if pornography, bestiality, rape, racism, inequalities were not enough.
The Bible is the authentic, authoritative, and final revelation of the
true God. Though written over a period of 1,400 years by forty very
diverse men on two continents, The Book is completely unified and free
from error. A single theme is expanded upon throughout—the redemption of
man through the Messiah. The Bible was confirmed by predictive
prophecies and the miracles of the inspired men who wrote it. The moral
laws contained within are more reasonable and consistent than that of
any other religious or naturalistic system. By contrast, the Hindu
scriptures have no final, objective authority; according to one Hindu,
“all scriptural knowledge is lower knowledge” (Jayrama, 2000).
Subjective religious experiences are generally preferable to written
texts. Hindu scripture contains little that is noble, just, pure,
lovely, virtuous, or praiseworthy. Allegedly a progressive revelation,
Hindu scripture contradicts itself both within particular texts and as a
body of literature. The Bible, also a progressive revelation, never
corrects itself, but only compliments and fulfils that which has been
written. Different Hindu scriptures present completely different paths
to salvation (liberation)—
karma-yoga (the path of action),
jāña-yoga (path of knowledge), and
bhakti-yoga
(path of devotion). The Vedas contain no predictive prophecy and offer
no miracles to confirm the revelation supposedly sent from God. Thus the
Hindus have no accessible ground of truth, no normative written word,
and no objective moral or religious instruction.
REFERENCES
Basham, Arthur, J.A.B van Buitenen, and Wendy Doniger (1997), “Hinduism,”
The New Encyclopaedia Britannica (Chicago, IL: Encyclopædia Britannica), 15th edition.
Bass, Alden (2003), “The Warring Destruction of the Canaanite People,”
Apologetics Press [On-line], URL:
http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2277.
Bishku, Tridandi and Swami Bhakti Vijnana Giri (no date), “The Supremacy of Srimad Bhagavatam over the Vedas,”
Sri Narasingha Chaitanya Matha [On-line], URL: http://www.gosai.com/dvaita/madhvacarya/srimad-bhagavatam.html.
Carpenter, David (1992), “Language, Ritual and Society: Reflections on the Authority of the Veda in India,”
Journal of the American Academy of Religion, 60[1]:57-77.
Clarke, James Freeman (1875),
Ten Great Religions: an Essay in Comparative Theology (Boston, MA: James Osgood and Company).
Clooney, Francis X. (1987), “Why the Veda has No Author: Language as Ritual in Early Mīmāmsā and Post-Modern Theology,”
Journal of the American Academy of Religion, 55[4]:659-684, Winter.
Coburn, Thomas (1989), “ ‘Scripture’ in India,”
Rethinking Scripture: Essays from a Comparative Perspective, ed. Miriam Levering (Albany, NY: State University of New York Press).
Daniélou, Alain (1991)
The Myths and Gods of India (Rochester, VT: Inner Traditions).
Doniger, Wendy and Brian Smith (1991),
The Laws of Manu (London: Penguin).
Eck, Diana (1998),
Darśan: Seeing the Divine Image in India (New York: Columbia University Press).
Edgerton, Franklin (1965),
The Beginnings of Indian Philosophy (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press).
Eichler, Detlef (no date) “The Churning of Vedic Knowledge,” [On-line], URL: http://sanskrit.safire.com/Knowledge.html.
Eliot, Charles (1968 reprint),
Hinduism and Buddhism: An Historical Sketch (New York: Barnes & Noble).
Flood, Gavin (1996),
An Introduction to Hinduism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Gandhi, M.K. (1991),
Hindu Dharma (New Delhi: South Asia Books).
Goodall, Dominic (1996), “Introduction,”
Hindu Scriptures (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press).
Graham, William (1989), “Scripture as Spoken Word,”
Rethinking Scripture: Essays from a Comparative Perspective, ed. Miriam Levering (Albany, NY: State University of New York Press).
Hopkins, Thomas (1971),
The Hindu Religious Tradition (Encino, CA: Dickenson).
Jayaram, V. (2000), “Hinduism in the Context of Texts,”
Hinduwebsite [On-line], URL: http://www.hinduwebsite.com/hinduintrod3.htm.
Krishnamurthy, V. (1999), “Ancient Scriptures of Hinduism,”
Gems from the Ocean of Hindu Thought, Vision, and Practice (Mumbai, India: Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan), [On-line], URL: http://www.geocities.com/profvk/itihasa.html.
Lipner, Julius (1994),
Hindus: Their Religious Beliefs and Practices (London: Routledge).
Londhe, Sushama (2001), “Hindu Scripture,”
A Tribute to Hinduism, [On-line], URL: http://www.atributetohinduism.com/Hindu_Scriptures.htm.
Lopez, Donald, ed. (1995),
Religions of India in Practice (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press).
Macdonell, Arthur (1917), “Excerpts from A Vedic Reader for Students,”
Hinduwebsite, [On-line], URL: http://www.hinduwebsite.com/sacredscripts/vedicreader.htm.
Mitchell, J. Murray (1897)
Hinduism Past and Present (Oxford: The Religious Tract Society).
Mitchiner, John (2000)
Traditions of the Seven Rsis (New Delhi: New Delhi).
O’Flaherty, Wendy Doniger (1988),
Textual Sources for the Study of Hinduism (Totowa, NJ: Barnes and Noble).
Olivelle, Patrick (1996), “Introduction,”
Upanisads (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
Robson, John (1905)
Hinduism and Christianity (Edinburgh and London: Oliphant, Anderson, and Ferrier), 3rd edition.
Sarma, Deepak (2003a), “Hinduism(s) and the
Vedic Foundation,” Yale University, September 9.
Sarma, Deepak (2003b), “The Upanisads,” Yale University, September 16.
Sawhney, Simona (1999), “Remembering the Veda: Accumulations of Interest,”
The Literature and Culture of the Indian Subcontinent in the Post-Colonial Web, [On-line], URL: http://www.postcolonialweb.org/india/religion/hindu/sawhney1b.html.
Viswanathan, Ed (1999) “All Details about Hindu Culture,”
Indolink Forum, [On-line], URL: http://www.indolink.com/Forum/Parents/messages/623.html.
Predictive
prophecy is one of the Bible’s grandest claims. Either the biblical
prophets legitimately predicted the future, or they did not. And if they
did not predict the future, then the prophets were either intentionally
misrepresenting the future or were hopelessly delusional in thinking
they could predict it. With so much at stake, then, it is no surprise
that skeptics often target biblical prophecy. If they can prove just one
part of one prediction false, then the inspiration of Scripture topples
to the ground (cf. 2 Peter 1:21).