Historicity & eternity
The element of personal authorship in the वेदमन्त्र-s, where the words of a mantra are directly relevant and meaningful to the immediate context of the ऋषि who visualizes it from within, does not contradict the pre-existence or eternity (if you will) of the वेद.
An example to understand: Tradition clearly tells us that विश्वामित्र “saw” a particular सूक्त when attempting to cross the confluence of 2 rivers (RV 3.33 “प्र पर्व̍तानाम् उश̱ती…”). He addresses the rivers with a particular intention in real time.
This need not & does NOT negate the fact that RV 3.33 predates विश्वामित्र. Just as ईश्वर exists here within time & without, so too the वेद exists both within time (& can thus acquire legitimate historical meaning) & without (& thus refers to things beyond time) simultaneously. Thus, historical contexts as described in tradition will never contradict any theological framework within which you want to place the वेद, whether you want to claim that it is अपौरुषेय & thus eternal, or that it is the first creation of ईश्वर and thus predates all else. Any such contradiction is purely in your head and your own inability to view things without contradiction.
Thus, the वेद can be simultaneously an expression of a human’s (albeit exalted) real-time praise of the देव-s & the देव-s’ revelation.
Imagination
Eternal (or simply pre-cosmic) existence of Veda is not at all mutually exclusive with the idea of different layers of the Veda “manifesting” in historical time at different points as part of an evolutionary trajectory, with the latter idea having a clear basis in at least four Paurāņika accounts.
The only traditionalists who are incapable of seeing non-contradiction in this are those who have taken up a Vrata to be completely unimaginative.
There is also no contradiction between eternal/pre-cosmic existence of Veda in Īśvara’s mind & the very human aspect of authorial input/creative inspiration behind a Vedamantra.
Think about a Deva and his Avatāra. The Avatāra is taught to be eternal. Every phase of the Avatāra’s life (as child, as grown man, etc) eternally exists in a sublime form even before this cosmos came into existence, and way before the earthly parents of the Avatāra were born. Apply same logic to Veda.
Unfortunately, those who can talk for hours about eternity of Sāketaloka or Goloka or the eternity of forms which we only know from stories set on this earth—they are unable to imagine even this and might even get upset at this.
There is no need to change the end-conclusions (eternal existence of Veda or pre-cosmic existence if you are a Siddhāntī or the like) but you can always update the arguments to reach those same end-conclusions.
Throughout history, different teachers came up with different arguments to explain or defend the exact same point of belief. Your obstinate refusal to even hear out someone coming up with a different explanation for the same belief doesn’t make you pious. It just makes you an agent of ossification.
deva-s not narcissistic
And no, the fact of it being the देव-s’ revelation does not make the देव-s narcissistic. Why so? For reasons twofold:
- i. It can only be narcissistic self praise if it is an act of communication, where the conveyance of the meaning (i.e. praise) is of primary importance to the deity. But no; it is the sonic quality of the मन्त्र that predominates. What is being transmitted or revealed by the देव to the ऋषि is primarily a set of sounds, that happens to be meaningful and relevant to the ऋषि’s immediate context.
-
- The deity’s identity with the मन्त्र praising him. The deity is not praising himself. He is merely revealing himself. The वेद itself makes this clear. From शतपथ-ब्राह्मण 6th Kaṇḍa, 5th Adhyāya, 1st Brāhmaṇa, 2nd Kaṇḍikā. This idea is also beautifully described in this article by @blog_supplement.
Decided to do the above thread real quick as neither traditional scholars nor the likes of those with sympathies for Hindu dharma are going to move forward with their rigid thinking.
Phonic shifts
core bits are nitya, historical bits are not.
seems (more) reasonable. Else no allowance for kalpa-bheda, corruptions, phonic shifts etc..
Source: TW
Every variation with phonic shifts also exists in him and is received by the Rși at the appropriate time.
If Īśvara is omniscient & omnipresent, then one should have no problem believing that every infinitesimal evolutionary step of every language existed in Him before manifesting in historical time at the appropriate moment. And one should have no problem that certain forms & registers in the evolutionary trajectory of Sam̐skṛta were blessed by Him to become, in the course of history, repositories of mantras with divine meanings.
There is randomness as a fundamental part of the universe - by the Ishvara’s design. So, every small thing can’t be predetermined - even by Ishvara. Else no “free will” as well.
All I am saying is that the whole set of combinations of words, their dialect variants (ļ -> D in RV->YV), etc all exist in Ishvara (whether nitya or simply purAtana). He causes the appropriate words to be received by a specific RSi as per the RSi’s freewill, capability, inborn knack for words, etc. There is nothing to contradict freewill here.