What is Vedanta? - 02

When we read the books of reference, namely Sastras, people like me will be facing a problem. That is, you will find high philosophical points being discussed. Suddenly statements about the social system, about castes will crop up. They were thinking of society only in such terms in those times. But in our times we need not take such statements into consideration. At least I do not consider them at all. My focus is on the philosophical and theological points, which are interesting and which can contribute to our modern dialogues of human thought. It is so nearly in all books of the old of all cultures world over. There will be many ideas and opinions which are irrelevant to our human development in the ancient books in general. Only we must pick and choose what is relevant to us and will be relevant to the future times. But there will be persons always in nearly all cultures, who will be focusing on social, domestic and personal opinions. That is why I said, if you give up even at the start the three discriminations or biases viz., discriminating between human beings on the basis of birth or race, discriminating between men and women, discriminating between religions, you will go a long way in choosing the great and relevant thoughts in the writings of ancient masters over irrelevant opinions of the past. 

Sayana strikes a very sane note when he states the meaning of Veda. That which is beyond perception and inference is what is called 'transcendent to the world' or 'beyond the world'. Only in that direction Vedas come in as the guide. What is within perception and inference, that is, questions regarding the world, should be approached on the basis of perception, inference and science. But do you think anybody will take note of this and do course correction? No. Rather they will be pleased to indulge in the statements favouring caste and age-old customs and will argue, 'are not these very statements found expressed by the very same Sayana, whom you quote? How can you pick and choose one statement from an author and leave out the other?'. But really I always pick and choose the best and strong points, not only from the ancient masters, but from any author I happen to study, irrespective of the author being ancient or modern. That is why even in the cases of Sri Ramakrishna or Sri Ramana or Swami Vivekananda, when people hunt for some rare instances in which they might have expressed some chance random opinions on occasions and retort to me saying 'your Ramakrishna has also said like this', I have no problem in ignoring such statements by anybody and take only the best and the most relevant to humanity. 

The secret is what has been told by Sayana in such beautiful terms - 'don't confuse the questions of the world and the spiritual quest. For questions beyond the world, Vedas come in as the guide. For the questions of the world your own perception, inference and science are sufficient.' With this clarification let us proceed. 

This meaning of the 'Veda' becomes more and more relevant when we reach Vedanta. It is made a firm epistemological basis by Vyasa in the beginning of his magnum opus, viz., Brahma Sutra. But again, first, what is Vedanta? Is Vedanta the same as Veda or different? Is Vedanta, as the name seems to suggest the end portions of Vedas? Veda anta. It is better to clarify ourselves on this point. Again these little clarifications go a very long way in steering us towards right directions. Regarding this question of Veda plus anta, end portions of Vedas are Vedanta, the idea which was already one of the explanations in the circles of pandits, seems to have settled down as the only meaning with the introduction of the printed book by the western powers. It was convenient for the researchers and book-writers and article-writers to discuss about Vedanta starting with an initial statement to this effect, that the Vedanta constitutes the end portions of Vedas. As if in a printed book the last chapters are added may be at the same time or at a later time, researchers began to think of such possibilities in the case of Vedas and Vedanta. Other meanings like 'Nirnaya of the Vedas', 'conclusions of the Vedas' or 'essence of the Vedas' were lost sight of. Here Vedanta was denoting the Upanishads that come in the Vedas. But all the Upanishads do not form the last portions. Some come in the middle, some in the start, some intermixed with the forest speculations. But no, the convenience of one meaning resembling our contemporary culture weighs more heavily than the true perspective. And for all that, the Vedas were not initially printed books or written manuscripts but chanted and orally preserved. We must remember that.

Of course, the Upanishads are what are called Vedanta proper. But why is it called so? Not because it is the last portion of the Veda, but because the Upanishads form the 'anta' of the Vedas. The conclusions, the nirnaya or ascertained import of the Vedas. So to say, the Upanishads form the essence or secret import of the Vedas. That is, Vedas are only various ways of leading the aspirants to the stage when they can understand the real secret which is about 'beyond world'. 

Srirangam Mohanarangan 

***