Vedas Word of God
God is Just and His revelation must be revealed for all of mankind. The revelation must meet the following criteria:
1. Revelation must take place in the very beginning of human creation.
God gives His Divine Knowledge to mankind from his first appearance on earth. Truth is one and is for all, in all ages, depriving none. True revelation in its entirety, therefore, must exist from the very beginning of all creations.
2. There should be conformity with the laws of nature without any contradictions.
The Vedas being eternal are free from any historical references. They are in total conformity with the laws of nature and there are no contradictions. This cannot be said of other religious books.
3. The third chief test of Revelation is that it should not be opposed to Science and Reason.
Vedas teach to do the research and invent things for the comfort and joy for all human beings. They even provide the basics foundation for research. They clearly say that one must use reason, logic and rational before accepting things.
From ‘Light of Truth’ — Evidence that prove the Vedas to be divine revelation.
The book in which God is described as He is, viz., Holy, Omniscient, Pure in nature, character and attributes, Just, Merciful, etc., and in which nothing is said that is opposed to the laws of nature, reason, the evidence of direct cognizance, etc., the teachings of the highly learned altruistic teachers of humanity (A’ptas), and the intuition of pure souls, and in which the laws, nature, and properties of matter and the soul are propounded as they are to be inferred from the order of nature as fixed by God, is the book of Divine revelation. Now the Vedas alone fulfil all the above conditions, hence they are the revealed books.
Five Tests of One Truth (Light of Truth)
1. The Vedas and nature of God
All that conforms to the teachings of the Vedas, nature, attributes and characteristics of God is right, the reverse is wrong. The Vedas were revealed in its entirety in the beginning of creation for all of mankind, depriving none, and it is free of historical references.
2. Laws of Nature
All that tallies with laws of nature is true, the reverse is untrue; e.g., the statement that a child is born without the sexual union of its parents, being opposed to the laws of nature can never be true.
3. The practice and teachings of A’ptaas i.e., pious, truthful, unprejudiced, honest, and learned men. All that is unopposed to their practice and teachings is acceptable and the reverse is unacceptable.
4. The purity and conviction of one’s own soul
What is good for you is good for the world. What is painful to you is painful to others. This ought to be the guiding principle of one’s conduct towards others.
5. Eight kinds of evidence: Direct Cognizance, Inference, Analogy, Testimony, History, Deduction, Possibility, Non-existence/Negation.
DIRECT COGNIZANCE
Praatyaksha is that kind of knowledge, which is the result of direct contact of the five senses with their objects, (As of eyes with light, or ears with sound, or nose with fragrance, of tongue with flavors, of tactile sense with objects that give rise to the sensation of touch) of the mind (faculty or organ of attention) with the senses, and of the soul with mind. (Nyaaya Shaastra)
But this knowledge must not be that of the relation of words with the things signified, as of the word “water” with the fluid called “water”, For example, you ask your servant to bring you some water. He brings water, puts it before you, and says: “Here is water, Sir.” Now, what you and your servant see is not the word “water” but the object signified by it. So you have the direct knowledge of the object called water.
1. This knowledge must not be of temporary or transient character, i.e., not the product of observation under unfavorable circumstances; for example, a person saw something at night and took it for a man, but when it was daylight he found out his mistake and knew that it was not a man, but a pillar. Now, his first impression of the thing was of a temporary or transient nature, which gave place to permanent knowledge later on, when the true nature of the thing was revealed in the light.
2. It should be free from all elements of doubt, and be certain in character. For example, you see a river from a distance and say: “Is it water there or white clothes spread out to dry?” Or take another example, you see a man from a distance and say: “Is it Deva Datta standing there or Yajna Datta?” Now, as long as you are in doubt and consequently not sure about a thing you observe, your knowledge cannot be called Pratyaksha (Direct Cognizance). To be that the element of doubt must be absolutely eliminated from it.
Briefly therefore, that knowledge alone is said to be Direct Cognizance, which is not the outcome of the relation of name with the object signified by it, nor gained under circumstances unfavorable for observation or experiment (Hence transient in character) nor into which any element of doubt enters.
INFERENCE
Anumaana— Literally it means that which follows direct cognizance. Two things have been observed to exist together at some time and place, when on some other occasion, one of the two is observed, the other, i.e., the unknown can be inferred. For instance, you see a child and you at once infer that he must have had parents. Again, seeing the smoke issuing from behind a hill you infer the existence of fire. You infer the previous incarnation of the soul from observing unequal joy and sorrow in this world at the present moment.
Inference is of three kinds:
1. Purvavat — is one , in which you reason from cause to effect, e.g., the inference of coming rain form the sight of clouds; or, again, you see a wedding and naturally infer that some day the wedded couple will have children. Or, again, you see students engaged in the pursuit of knowledge and you infer that some day they will become men and women of learning.
2. Sheshavat — inference is one, in which you reason from effects to causes. Examples, you see a flood in the river, and infer that it must have rained on the mountain from which the river issues. Again, you see a child and at once infer that the child must have had a father. Again, you see this world and infer the existence of the Spiritual cause — the Creator, as well as of a Material cause — the elementary matter. Or, again, take another example, when you see a man in pleasure and pain, you at once infer that he must have done a virtuous or sinful deed before, since you have noticed that the consequence of a sinful act is pain, and that of a virtuous deed, pleasure.
3. Aaamaanyatodrishata — is that kind of inference, in which there is no relation of cause and effect between the known datum and the thing to be inferred, but there is some kind of similarity between the two. For example, you know that no one can get to another place without moving from the first, and hence, if you find a person at a certain place, you can easily infer that he must have come to the latter place by moving from the first.
ANALOGY
Upamaana — is the knowledge of a thing from its likeness to another. The thing which is required to be known is called Saadhya, and that which becomes the means of this knowledge from some kind of likeness between the two is called Saadhana Examples: — a man says to his servant: ”Go and get Vishnu Mittra”. The latter answers that he does not know him, as he has never seen him before. There upon the master says: — “You know Deva Datta, don’t you?” Upon the servant’s answering in the affirmative, his master continues: “Well, Vishnu Mittra is just like Deva Datta.” So the servant went out to find Vishnu Mittra. As he was passing through a street, he saw a man very much like Deva Datta, and thought that, that man must be Vishnu Mittra, and forthwith brought him to his master. Or, take another example, you want to know what a Yak is. Well, some one tells you, it is just like an ox. Next time you go to a jungle and happen to see an animal very much like an ox, you at once know that it is the Yak you asked your friend about. Now this kind of knowledge, i.e., knowledge of Vishnu Mittra from his likeness to Deva Datta and of a Yak from its likeness to an ox is called Upamaana or knowledge by analogy. The words Vishnu Mittra and Yak are called Saadhya, whilst Deva Datta and ox are called Saadhana, in the above two instances.
TESTIMONY
Shabda (literally, word) “The word of an A’pt (altruistic teacher) is called Shabda.” Nyaaya Shaastra. An A’pt is a person who is a thorough scholar, well versed in all the sciences and philosophies, physical and spiritual, is virtuous, truthful, active, free from passions and desires, imbued with love for others, and who is an altruistic teacher of humanity solely actuated with the desire of benefiting the world by his knowledge, experience and convictions. God being the truest and greatest of all A’ptas, His word the Veda is also included in shabda (Testimony).
HISTORY
“Itihas is that which tells us that such and such a person was so and so, he did such and such a thing. In other words, Itihaas is the history of a country or the biography of a person.” Nyaaya Shaastra. The experience of the past recorded in history can be applied to solve many a difficult question of the day.
DEDUCTION or CONCLUSION
Arthaapatti — It is a conclusion which naturally follows from the statement of a fact; for instance, one says to another: “Rain falls from clouds” or “and effect flows from a cause.” The natural conclusion that can be drawn from the above statement is: “There can be no rain when there are no clouds,” or “no effects follow when a cause does not exist.”
POSSIBILITY
Sambhava — When you hear a thing, the first thing that enters your mind is whether such and such a thing is possible. Anything that runs counter to the laws of nature is not possible, and hence it can never be true; for example, if you are told that a child was born without parents, such and such a person raised the dead to life again, or made stones float on the sea, lifted mountains, broke the moon into pieces, was God incarnate, or saw horns on the head of a man, or solemnized the marriage of a couple born of sterile mother. You could at once know that it could not have possibly happened, being opposed to the laws of Nature. That alone is possible which is in conformity with the laws of nature.
ABSENCE or NEGATION
Abhaava — You infer the existence of a thing in some other place from its absence from the place where you were told you find it; for instance, a gentleman said to his man: “Go and bring the elephant from the elephant-house.” He went there but found that the elephant was not there. He naturally concluded that he must be somewhere near about. So he went out and looked about for the elephant and found him not very far from its proper place and brought him to his master.
These eight kinds of evidence have been briefly described. Their number can be reduced to four if History be included under Testimony, and Deduction, Possibility, and Negation under Inference.
It is only by means of these five criterias that a man can ascertain what is right or wrong and not otherwise.
The Six Causes for Anything to Exist
1. Nothing in this world can be produced without proper application.” Mimansa”
2. “Nothing can be done or made without the expenditure of time.” Vaisheshika”
3. “Nothing in this world can be produced without the material cause.” Niyaya “
4. “Nothing can be made without the requisite skill, knowledge and thought.” Yoga “
5. “Nothing can be made without the definite combination of atoms.” Sankhaya “
6. “Nothing can be made without a Maker.” Vedanta”
This shows that the creation of the world or anything created even by man can never come into existence without these six causes.
Note: Mimansa, Vaisheshika, Niyaya, Yoga, Sankhaya and Vedanta are philosophy books written by seers based on the Vedas. Light of Truth is written by Maharishi Dayanand Sarsvati based on the Vedas.
