The Vedas are really an exposition of the Gunas or the attributes of nature. This is so as the Gunas are the most important part of nature; for it is chiefly in this form that it appears
to us, when we look at it from a distance or in a broad perspective.
The Gunas are said to be born of Prakrti or nature in the same sense in which a child is born; for there is a natural desire to have something that will last for
some time. And that is why Prakrti creates Gunas and lives through them. It is also for the same reason that we praise knowledge (for it lasts); and the more complete the knowledge the longer it lasts.
Thus the most perfect knowledge belongs to the Supreme. However, we find that knowledge is connected to action.
We see that certain results follow from certain causes. So we might say that broadly speaking, certain special results will follow from certain special causes. The idea of knowledge and
action is the same as has been explained in the previous systems. Nevertheless, there must be a law governing the two; but such a law has not yet been discovered, and a mere statement of their relationship
would be useless.
An Objection: We cannot deal with the question in a popular way, because that is already known and has no bearing on the idea of a law. It maybe argued that all
that can be said in the matter ha already been said, and nothing more can be added now. Further, it maybe contended that it is impossible, in a number of places, to construe the text of the Vedas in the
light of action; and so it is best to regard these books as consisting of hymns of praise addressed to the gods.
According to some, the Vedas deal with the problem of the soul as their principal subject matter. However, this is not correct, as we find that they deal with the world of prakrti or nature,
which is not permanent. This has been stated to be their subject matter; and that is how they are taught and explained. Further, all Vedic literature is of the same kind, as they deal with the problem of
action. They tell us what actions to perform and how to perform them. We find that man is always engaged in action; and this should enable us to acquire definite knowledge in regard to the law of action.
Any contradiction of the fact that there is action everywhere should be disregarded; for we know that it is impossible. Moreover, if there is consistency of this kind of meaning throughout, we must not drag
in some other meaning; specially, as against it, a reference to a law would be inappropriate. Again, if it had been the intention of the authors of the Vedas to expound a law, the language of the text should
have been different.
An Answer: There is a good reason for coming to the conclusion that the Vedas deal with the law of Prakrti or nature, because the same can be proved, and we can get
it from the text itself. The text of the Vedas does indeed support the view that it refers to the praise of the gods; but that is its first or direct meaning, without being pressed into some other sense.
But even as praise it appears to be meaningless; and we might ask if it is not improper to have praise that is meaningless. While we cannot deny that the text does refer to the praise of the gods, we hold
that, it is in this way that it is commonly understood. It is only in a secondary sense, that the primary idea is that of being a law. We are, however, prepared to agree that, if the text does really refer
to the laws of Prakrti or nature, this conclusion should be based on well-established facts, and not on some special statements or analogies; for the latter would nullify the very idea of law. But, as a matter
of fact, we get the idea of law from the text of the sacred books themselves. For we get this meaning from the very language of the text, when we apply correct grammatical rules. But he alone will understand
who is learned or wise, for the language needs to be properly understood.
How to understand the text: We cannot get the correct meaning of words from their common form; but we can do so by referring them to Prakrti or nature, which is described as
"achetana" or inanimate. That, however, should be done when the common meaning is contradictory; and a student of the Vedas can easily find out the real meaning of the text in this way. The reference to the
laws of nature should be made when we are unable to understand the correct meaning of the text and are confused. Further, we should understand that it would be meaningless for the Vedas to refer to something that is
ephemeral. It may, however, be argued that the meaning of words cannot be a special one; but in this connection we might repeat that the text has a secondary meaning which refers to the praise of the gods.
Narach PHILOSOPHY
