Vedas modified ?

[Onkara]

in islam also God is not in the sky

i just mean that changement can be good but who can change? because the divine message are very subtil and like say gora priya it s inspiration from God

so it s not everybody that can change a religious book

don t you think?

Hi Alishan
I understand what you mean. As someone researching religion, it is useful to completely understand that in Hindu theology the Creator (God) is not separate from creation (you and me), he resides in our hearts. Here are a few quotes:

Mandukhya Upanishad (Vedas)
I-27. Om is indeed the beginning, middle and end of everything. Having known Om thus, one attains immediately the identity with the self.
I-28. One should know Om to be the Lord dwelling in the hearts of all. having known the all-pervasive Om, the intelligent one does not grieve.
I-29. He by whom is known Om which is without measure and possessed of infinite magnitude and which is auspicious, since all duality ceases in it, is a sage and none else.

and Brihadaranyaka Upanishad (from the Vedas)
III-vii-15: He who inhabits all beings, but is within it, whom no being knows, whose body is all beings, and who controls all beings from within, is the Internal Ruler, your own immortal self. This much with reference to the beings. Now with reference to the body.


There are many more examples. For this reason I agree with Riverwolf ji and others who write above how the Vedas were passed down by Sages.

My point is not to change your mind or religion, but to help answer the question. Change is academic and you are welcome to inquire and research. My point in the post above is that change does not change the validity of Truth in Hinduism because Truth resides in you and me too. It comes down to each individual's understanding of the Truth which resides in the Vedas and in creation. I think it will be much easier to undestand Hinduism if you can approach it from without side of the Semitic mindset.

 

[alishan]

yes

but does it mean that anyone that want to change the vedas would be accepted as everything is God ?

 

[Onkara]

yes

but does it mean that anyone that want to change the vedas would be accepted as everything is God ?

Hi Alishan
What do you think, would you accept them?

A person who has realised the truth of the Vedas would not need to change the Vedas. The truth brings that understanding.

If the Vedas were changed by someone who did not know the truth of the vedas then that change may remain false and limited because it would not be true. It would not need to be accepted by those who know the Truth.

If the Vedas have been changed in the past then so be it. There may very well already be variations of scriptures but it doesn't change the Truth. One's own reading of the Vedas will confirm if there is Truth in those copies of the Vedas, it isn't down to blind faith/acceptance, Hindus are permitted to think.

This is my last post on this topic as I don't think I can help further.

 

[Riverwolf]

What exactly do you mean by the word 'recession' in this context?

The various different versions of the same; i.e., the Taittiriya Krishna Yajur Veda.

If the Vedas were never altered in some way (or, rather, evolved separately from each other), shouldn't there only be one type of each Veda, and shouldn't shared hymns all be exactly the same instead of having a few differences here and there?

 

[kaisersose]

What exactly do you mean by the word 'recession' in this context?

The word is recension.

For example, the Shukla Yajur has two recensions - Kanva & Madhyandina - namd after the teachers - the former common in South India and the latter in North India. Though the two are nearly identical, they are not exactly the same.

 

[Riverwolf]

The word is recension.

Oh. Woops!

 

[K.Venugopal]

The word is recension.

For example, the Shukla Yajur has two recensions - Kanva & Madhyandina - namd after the teachers - the former common in South India and the latter in North India. Though the two are nearly identical, they are not exactly the same.

So long as a recension bears the name of the "recensioner", it would be identified as being different from the original - would it not? If the original is still available, where is the problem? The problem, I suppose, would arise when a recension replaces the original and the original is lost without a trace. After all, there are 100s of versions of the Ramayana but the original Valmiki Ramayan is still available.

 

[Riverwolf]

So long as a recension bears the name of the "recensioner", it would be identified as being different from the original - would it not? If the original is still available, where is the problem? The problem, I suppose, would arise when a recension replaces the original and the original is lost without a trace. After all, there are 100s of versions of the Ramayana but the original Valmiki Ramayan is still available.

But is Valmiki's Ramayana truly the original?

Which recensions of the Vedas would you say are the originals, and how would you determine this?

 

[K.Venugopal]

But is Valmiki's Ramayana truly the original?

Which recensions of the Vedas would you say are the originals, and how would you determine this?

I don't think there is any dispute as to whether Valmiki's Ramayana is the original. Also, Valmiki's Ramayana is readily and widely available.

As for the Vedas, much concerning it is still in the realm of scholarship. A popular rediscovery of the Vedas is still in the offing. Its philosophical portion, Vedanta or Upanishads, has made a startling comeback and is today probably the most widely quoted of Hindu teachings, particularly its Advaidic vision. Fortunately, questions regarding authorship, originality etc. of Vedanta are confined to the academicians. Most of the Hindu gurus are having a roaring time tantalizing the world with its scintillating teachings to bother about getting into academic arguments.

 

[Riverwolf]

I don't think there is any dispute as to whether Valmiki's Ramayana is the original. Also, Valmiki's Ramayana is readily and widely available.

But isn't there some question as to whether much of the contents of the book we have now were added in later?

As for the Vedas, much concerning it is still in the realm of scholarship. A popular rediscovery of the Vedas is still in the offing. Its philosophical portion, Vedanta or Upanishads, has made a startling comeback and is today probably the most widely quoted of Hindu teachings, particularly its Advaidic vision. Fortunately, questions regarding authorship, originality etc. of Vedanta are confined to the academicians. Most of the Hindu gurus are having a roaring time tantalizing the world with its scintillating teachings to bother about getting into academic arguments.

IOW, we don't really know just yet?

 

[kaisersose]

I don't think there is any dispute as to whether Valmiki's Ramayana is the original. Also, Valmiki's Ramayana is readily and widely available.

Madhva (13th Century CE) rejected the Valmiki Ramayana as a bogus text. Their position is the Moola-Ramayana (as they call it) is lost.

I do not have details.

 

[Marble]

Madhva (13th Century CE) rejected the Valmiki Ramayana as a bogus text.

Why do they think it's bogus?

 

[alishan]

ok thanks to all of you if have something new you are welcome