Did Vedas exist before The Bhagavad Gita ?

[paarsurrey]

If so who is the actual author of the Vedas? Please
Thread open to all human beings

Regards

 

[Aupmanyav]

Yes, Vedas are older than BhagawadGita. The difference in language proves that.
See the list of writers of RigVeda hymns here: http://www.bharatvani.org/books/rig/ch1.htm
I do not know for sure but perhaps such list exist for other Vedas too.

 

[Kapalika]

If so who is the actual author of the Vedas? Please
Thread open to all human beings

Regards

Aup is correct, but I would add that the Vedas is the oldest texts in Hinduism. The Mahabharata was written later. Also, according to some traditions the Vedas are have no author and are considered eternal truth.

Personally, I think any scripture however true or authorless still by necessity of human limitation will not be totally pure and will be thus limited by human perception or understanding in the process of transcribing the divination or revelation. But this would also follow for even Christian, Islamic, or any other text.

Even if whatever truth, god, what have you, were to dictate the perfect contemporary words to communicate it 100% precisely, any human reading it would still have this same problem from their own perception of it. Much more so the more they are removed from the contemporary writing of it.

So I don't know if actually saying something has an author or doesn't, or even crediting who wrote it will have any real weight on the validity of any one interpretation, if we even assume X or Y scripture is divine in the first place.

With the Vedas, if it had human authors their names have been last to the annuals of time, and any writers might of necessarily authored it in secret. Though I doubt this is so. I suspect that the idea that the Vedas are eternal stems from the fact that it was probably written over a period of time by many different people and it collected into a coherent piece of scripture that transcended any one author and revealed to those who read it truths that were considered eternal. Thus the Vedas as the vessel of this truth was likewise considered eternal and without author, not being distinguished from that which it carried (Dharma ect).

 

[HarihOm]

Namaste,

Veda was originally Oral, but even this is Apaurusheya it has no human author, its a discovery, Veda also mean knowledge, to access Veda one needs Darshan or vision.

What is the date of Bhagavad Gita, Krsna Ji Himself said he instructed this science to the Sun God Vivasvān, Vedas and Bhagavad Gita have nothing to do with Dates.

 

[paarsurrey]

Namaste,
Veda was originally Oral, but even this is Apaurusheya it has no human author, its a discovery, Veda also mean knowledge, to access Veda one needs Darshan or vision.
What is the date of Bhagavad Gita, Krsna Ji Himself said he instructed this science to the Sun God Vivasvān, Vedas and Bhagavad Gita have nothing to do with Dates.

One may like to read #2 above. Please
Regards

 

[sayak83]

If so who is the actual author of the Vedas? Please
Thread open to all human beings

Regards

The extensive list of authorship of each and every hymn of the Rig Veda and the Yajurveda is available as a seperate ancient work called Anukramani-s by Saunaka and Katyayana. The ones for Samveda and Atharvaved has been lost. These texts identify the author of each verse of the respective Veda-s.

The authorship implies the human rishi to whom the revelation came. The word apurusheya means "revealed" i.e. "not created by human thought". It does not mean that a human being did not exist to whom the verse was revealed to and who first recited it.

Gita is recited later than the Veda-s but is also a revelation.

 

[paarsurrey]

The extensive list of authorship of each and every hymn of the Rig Veda and the Yajurveda is available as a seperate ancient work called Anukramani-s by Saunaka and Katyayana. The ones for Samveda and Atharvaved has been lost. These texts identify the author of each verse of the respective Veda-s.
The authorship implies the human rishi to whom the revelation came. The word apurusheya means "revealed" i.e. "not created by human thought". It does not mean that a human being did not exist to whom the verse was revealed to and who first recited it.
Gita is recited later than the Veda-s but is also a revelation.

Please quote the verses from Veda where it has been claimed and reasons given. Right? Please
Regards

 

[sayak83]

Please quote the verses from Veda where it has been claimed and reasons given. Right? Please
Regards

Quote what?

 

[Aupmanyav]

One may like to read #2 above.

Why does @HarihOm has to agree with me? We are comfortable together with our different views.

 

[Satyamavejayanti]

If so who is the actual author of the Vedas? Please
Thread open to all human beings

Regards

Namaste,

The Gita is after the Veda.

the author of Veda is unknown, some peple assume the author of the samhita are the rishi mention in the sukta/mantras. but traditionally the rishis are considered mantra dhrashta (seer/observer/discoverer) not rachna (writer/creator/maker).

 

[paarsurrey]

• Friend @Satyamavejayanti say:

"The Gita is after the Veda.
the author of Veda is unknown, some peple assume the author of the samhita are the rishi mention in the sukta/mantras. but traditionally the rishis are considered mantra dhrashta (seer/observer/discoverer) not rachna (writer/creator/maker)." One may like to see his full post of
Sunday at 10:08 PM #10​

• Friend @sayak83 says:
  "The authorship implies the human rishi to whom the revelation came. The word apurusheya means "revealed" i.e. "not created by human thought". It does not mean that a human being did not exist to whom the verse was revealed to and who first recited it.
  Gita is recited later than the Veda-s but is also a revelation." One may like to see his full post of
  Thursday at 9:05 PM #6

Regards

 

[Jainarayan]

Namaste,

The Gita is after the Veda.

Indeed! for how else would Sri Krishna be able to say

sarvasya caham hrdi sannivisto
mattah smrtir jnanam apohanam ca
vedais ca sarvair aham eva vedyo
vedanta-krd veda-vid eva caham

I am seated in everyone's heart,
and from Me come remembrance,
knowledge and forgetfulness.
By all the Vedas am I to be known;
indeed I am the compiler of Vedānta,
and I am the knower of the Vedas.

BOOYAH!!! We win!!!

 

[sayak83]

• Friend @Satyamavejayanti say:

"The Gita is after the Veda.
the author of Veda is unknown, some peple assume the author of the samhita are the rishi mention in the sukta/mantras. but traditionally the rishis are considered mantra dhrashta (seer/observer/discoverer) not rachna (writer/creator/maker)." One may like to see his full post of
Sunday at 10:08 PM #10​

• Friend @sayak83 says:
  "The authorship implies the human rishi to whom the revelation came. The word apurusheya means "revealed" i.e. "not created by human thought". It does not mean that a human being did not exist to whom the verse was revealed to and who first recited it.
  Gita is recited later than the Veda-s but is also a revelation." One may like to see his full post of
  Thursday at 9:05 PM #6

Regards

I am not seeing any difference between my and Satyameva's position. So...
Gita refers to the Vedas several times. So obviously the Gita is recited after the Vedas. Duh.

 

[paarsurrey]

Indeed! for how else would Sri Krishna be able to say

sarvasya caham hrdi sannivisto
mattah smrtir jnanam apohanam ca
vedais ca sarvair aham eva vedyo
vedanta-krd veda-vid eva caham

I am seated in everyone's heart,
and from Me come remembrance,
knowledge and forgetfulness.
By all the Vedas am I to be known;
indeed I am the compiler of Vedānta,*
and I am the knower** of the Vedas.

BOOYAH!!! We win!!!

*Vedanta (IAST, Vedānta, Sanskrit: वेदांत) or Uttara Mīmāṃsā is one of the six orthodox (āstika) schools of Indian philosophy.[1] The term "Vedanta" stands not for any one comprehensive doctrine but for the divergent philosophical views that developed on the basis of a common textual connection. This common texual connection is called the Prasthanatrayi - a collective term for the Principal Upanishads, the Brahma Sutras and the Bhagavad Gita.[2]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vedanta

**"Knower" does not mean the one who revealed Veda. Right? Please
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

I am not seeing any difference between my and Satyameva's position. So...
Gita refers to the Vedas several times. So obviously the Gita is recited after the Vedas. Duh.

I did not mean that you two differ with one another, rather to confirm it. Please
Regards

 

[Jainarayan]

*Vedanta (IAST, Vedānta, Sanskrit: वेदांत) or Uttara Mīmāṃsā is one of the six orthodox (āstika) schools of Indian philosophy.[1] The term "Vedanta" stands not for any one comprehensive doctrine but for the divergent philosophical views that developed on the basis of a common textual connection. This common texual connection is called the Prasthanatrayi - a collective term for the Principal Upanishads, the Brahma Sutras and the Bhagavad Gita.[2]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vedanta

**"Knower" does not mean the one who revealed Veda. Right? Please
Regards

Do you have any idea what any of that copy/paste from Wikipedia means?

 

[paarsurrey]

Aup is correct, but I would add that the Vedas is the oldest texts in Hinduism. The Mahabharata was written later. Also, according to some traditions the Vedas are have no author and are considered eternal truth.
Personally, I think any scripture however true or authorless still by necessity of human limitation will not be totally pure and will be thus limited by human perception or understanding in the process of transcribing the divination or revelation. But this would also follow for even Christian, Islamic, or any other text.
Even if whatever truth, god, what have you, were to dictate the perfect contemporary words to communicate it 100% precisely, any human reading it would still have this same problem from their own perception of it. Much more so the more they are removed from the contemporary writing of it.
So I don't know if actually saying something has an author or doesn't, or even crediting who wrote it will have any real weight on the validity of any one interpretation, if we even assume X or Y scripture is divine in the first place.
With the Vedas, if it had human authors their names have been last to the annuals of time, and any writers might of necessarily authored it in secret. Though I doubt this is so. I suspect that the idea that the Vedas are eternal stems from the fact that it was probably written over a period of time by many different people and it collected into a coherent piece of scripture that transcended any one author and revealed to those who read it truths that were considered eternal. Thus the Vedas as the vessel of this truth was likewise considered eternal and without author, not being distinguished from that which it carried (Dharma ect).

Some people say the Rishis wrote Veda some say Krishna wrote it. Krishna is not even mentioned in Veda. Is he? Please clarify.
Regards

 

[Terese]

Some people say the Rishis wrote Veda some say Krishna wrote it. Krishna is not even mentioned in Veda. Is he? Please clarify.
Regards

Pranam Paasurrey ji, Krsna during the time of His appearance in our Dwapara Yuga did not write The Vedas then, nor did Vyasa-deva wrote it, nor was it written 10,000 years ago, 18 million years ago or any number. The Vedas are an eternal truth, and exist beyond the conceptions of 'beginning' or 'ending'. I hope my answer was satisfactory to you

 

[The_Fisher_King]

Some people say the Rishis wrote Veda some say Krishna wrote it. Krishna is not even mentioned in Veda. Is he? Please clarify.
Regards

If someone believes that Krsna is the Lord of all, then I think it's quite easy to see why they might believe that Krsna wrote or is the source for the Vedas. Whether he is mentioned or not (as Krsna) doesn't matter.

 

[The_Fisher_King]

Pranam Paasurrey ji, Krsna during the time of His appearance in our Dwapara Yuga did not write The Vedas then, nor did Vyasa-deva wrote it, nor was it written 10,000 years ago, 18 million years ago or any number. The Vedas are an eternal truth, and exist beyond the conceptions of 'beginning' or 'ending'. I hope my answer was satisfactory to you

Just want to say I really like the pic under your signature!