I found a Hindu website called Agniveer in which it is proclaimed that Buddha accepted the Vedas. For this, it provides the translation from Sutta Nipata with Pali text. I was wondering whether this is the correct translation or it is mistranslated.
Here you go -:
Vedas in teachings of Mahatma Buddha
In Sutta Nipat 192, Mahatma Buddha says that:
Vidwa Cha Vedehi Samechcha Dhammam Na Uchchavacham Gachhati Bhooripanjo.
People allow sense-organs to dominate and keep shuffling between high and low positions. But the scholar who understands Vedas understands Dharma and does not waver.
Sutta Nipat 503:
Yo Vedagu Gyanarato Sateema …….
One should support a person who is master of Vedas , contemplative, intelligent, helpful if you desire to inculcate similar traits.
I state that one who acquires Ahuti in Havan of a Vedic scholar gets success.
These are just a few examples from works of Mahatma Buddha
Mahatma Buddha did not reject Vedas per se, but the malpractices happening in name of Vedas . For example, if you call someone – He is a Neta of India – today, he may get offended and feel as if you have called him corrupt and manipulative. This is not because Neta word in itself means ‘corrupt’, but because this is what we see of the so-called Netas today.
Similarly, when Mahatma Buddha questioned birth-based casteism, animal sacrifice and other nonsense practices, he was answered that Vedas sanction so. Thus, like any sane morally upright person would do, Mahatma Buddha stated that: “If Vedas sanction these evil practices, then I reject Vedas.”
Had Gautam Buddha obtained an opportunity to study the actual Vedas and not go by the false notions prevailing, he could no way have issued such a statement.
“That man here who is wise, and has true understanding,
who has released the shackle of repeated existence,
he is craving-free, not troubled, not yearning—
he has crossed over birth and old age, I say.”
Vidvā ca yo
so Buddhajayantītripiṭakagranthamālā vedagūnaroidha,
Bhavābhavesaṅgamimaṃvisajja;
Sovītataṇhoanīghonirāso,
Atārisojātijarantibrūmī”ti.
From hovering over the Pali one see that the word vedagū has the dictionary entry: SuttaCentral
vedagū
masculine
one who has attained the highest knowledge.
So veda does appear, but I don’t think it is in the sense that the website takes it to mean. I understand veda means knowledge in Sanskrit: Vedas - Wikipedia
and here are some Pali definitions: SuttaCentral
veda
masculine
religious feeling; knowledge; the brahmanic canon of authorised religious teaching.
…
I’d be interested to hear a more scholarly analysis!
Seems so wrong, on so many levels, that it is hardly worth giving those, who advance such opinions, any serious consideration what so ever.
Updated; Apologies @Abhinav for the brusqueness of the comment above
To be clearer, and show why I believe it is wrong view, I’d like to highlight that the person making that statement, seems to be doing so from the position that they have a more informed view than the Buddha did - that The Buddha made a mistake, that they are able to identify and so teach us what the Buddha would have said, if he had access to the right knowledge.
Now I don’t know about anyone else, but I feel pretty confident that The Buddha KNEW exactly what he was talking about. That the Buddha had overcome delusion and was able to see things as they truly are.
I have confidence in The Buddha and not in the person who thinks he is cleverer than the Buddha Gautama. Hence I don’t have confidence that the material you have cited is very reliable.
Thanks for raising this here, it is an important question. There is much disinformation, so it is important to check things out.
Unfortunately, the website is presenting Hindutva arguments, which are not intended to help understand the Buddha (or the Vedas for that matter), but to enforce an ideological position.
Allow me to make a few points.
Firstly, it would be nice if they used the internationally-accepted standard for writing Pali. I understand that they are writing for an Indian audience, but there is really no reason not to use the standard form. It just invites confusion.
As pointed out, the term vedagū is one of the many brahmanical terms that the Buddha repurposed. The brahmins used it to mean “master of the Vedas”, while the Buddha used it to mean “wisdom-master”. You’ll find a list of such terms, with Buddhist definitions, at for example MN 39. This is an extremely well-known technique used by the Buddha, and no reputable scholar would mistake it.
The verse said to be “192” is in fact PTS verse no. 792. Here the word veda is used in its primary sense of “knowledge”, as explained in the early canonical commentary on this line: Vedeh ti vedā vuccanti catūsu maggesu ñāṇaṃ “By knowledges” means: knowledges are said to be the knowledge of the four paths … (etc.)"
As to wheher the Buddha rejected the Vedas completely, or merely then-contemporary corruptions, this has a grain of truth to it. The Buddha did on several occasions criticize the contemporary brahmins, saying that there was a more pure practice in the past. See, for example, the Brahmanadhammika Sutta at Snp 2.7. However this does not mean that the Buddha accepted the Vedas; for the brahmanical tradition has always been richer than just one set of texts. In the Tevijja Sutta (DN 13) he compared the brahmins to the blind leading the blind, and explicitly included the original seers of the Vedas.
The Vedas and post-Vedic literature are one of humanity’s greatest spiritual works, and reveal a great deal about not only how the ancient Indians lived and worshipped, but about humanity. I believe that the mutual study of Buddhist and brahmanical literature is far richer than treating either of them alone. But to do so, we have to respect the individual voices and perspectives of the people speaking. They are not us. And we do them and history a disservice by pretending that they are nothing more than a backup for our modern ideologies.
Since I am an Indian I will use Pali in Devanagari as it’s I am uncomfortable with Latin-Roman script for Pali and Sanskrit . Here is my attempt to answer the question , I won’t be discussing specific corrections in numbering of verses as discussed by others
The premise lies in the meaing of the word वेदगू (Classical Sanskrit equivalent word would be वेदगः ) now as a grammatical analysis shows the word is made of वेद + गू
As per Traditional Pali Grammar Payoga Siddhi by Vanaratana Medhankara (13th century)
वेदं गच्छतीति वेदगू this means Master of Vedas (literally Go to Veda) is Vedagū ,
So Moggallāna Vyākaraṇa(12th century) agrees: “गमा रू” functions in the agent-case (कत्तरि), not object-case. So Vedagū = one who goes to the Veda, Pāragū = one who has gone beyond.
Now some of us would think that Veda word is “re-defined” as Path of Highest Knowledge but I don’t think we have to do this as same can have usuages linked to it even within Hindu Tradition “Mastery of Vedas”doesn’t always mean literal memorisation of Vedas rather having reached the goal of Moksha though the text by themselves may or may not considered highest knowledge depending on sects , somtimes in Puranas it used for Suta Ji despite being a outside Dwijas for he was a learned in Lilas( Playful acts) of Bhagvaan Shiva and Bhagvaan Vishnu .
Anyways it just means it’s not a sudden break from Vedic Tradition .
The Classical Sanskrit equivalent of the word as per the roots of word would be वेदगः which as per Apte Sanskrit-Hindi Dictionary means
पुं. वेदः-गः - वेदान्त दर्शन का अनुयायी
(Follower of Vedanta Philosophy)
However during time of Buddha Vedanta as Philosophical system wasn’t fully developed though concepts from Upanishads surfaced . So logically, वेदज्ञ meaning Knower of Vedas is more closest to reflect the concept of this word.
Now let’s do some critical analysis of answers by others like Bhikku Sujato’s point number 2
Yes , there are usuages for word वेदगू where Brahmins used to mean master of Vedas is seen within Pali Texts like
Here vedagū (“knower of the Vedas”) is immediately followed by a reference to chaḷaṅga (“the six limbs”). In Brahmanical tradition, the six Vedāṅgas are well known—Śikṣā, Kalpa, Vyākaraṇa, Nirukta, Chandas, and Jyotiṣa—disciplines auxiliary to the study of the Vedas. The juxtaposition of vedagū with chaḷaṅga makes it abundantly clear that the canonical passage is describing one who has mastered the Vedas along with their six Vedāṅgas.
However I disagree with the latter that part of means only “wisdom-master” even after reading MN 39 because this seems to rather qualities or spiritualisation of such kind of person, any exposure to modern day Hindi, Marathi or even Sanskrit literature for that matter you can see the similar things like in works regarding Sai Baba (see below image) one can see usuage like does this mean Vedas , Puranas etc use re-definition to doing service of Sadguru (True Guru) instead of Text ??
infact for Buddha one can do self task to to record statistically who other person is called a “Brahmin” (another brahmanical term ) used by Buddha which was allegedly re-defined , noting cases for when the person was a brahmin by birth and when he was not , for vast majority of cases you see him accepting usual meaning rather than “re-definitions” infact the way say modern ISKCON or Arya Samaj does only Brahmin by KARMA is new concept, ancient traditions though emphasisng this doesn’t usually challenge the norms as revolutionaries
Now coming to point 3 of Bhikku Sujato,
Well there is a catch here , the same commentaries like Dhammapala’s and Upasena’s actually also accept meaning Vedas as scriptures though interpreting them through doctrinal lens of Anitya, Anatma, Dukkah , still the point holds that scripture Vedas was accepted interpretation infact on a verse where Buddha is allegedly giving “re-definition”
वेदानि विचार्य केवलानि श्रमणानां {ब्राह्मणानां च}||
सो सर्ववेदनासु वीतरागो सर्ववेदनाम् अतीत्य वेदको ति ||
note {} is re-construction based on PALI verse
Having fully examined the Vedas of ascetics and brahmins, detached from all experiences, therby gone beyond all [Vedas (pali) or All feelings (hybrid sanskrit)] is a true Master of Vedas.
Commentary by Dhammapala (Pali) on Suttanipata 535
५३५. एवं ततियगाथाय वुत्तपञ्हे विस्सज्जेत्वा चतुत्थगाथाय वुत्तपञ्हेसुपि यस्मा यो चतूहि मग्गञाणवेदेहि किलेसक्खयं करोन्तो गतो, सो परमत्थतो वेदगू नाम होति. यो च सब्बसमणब्राह्मणानं सत्थसञ्ञितानि वेदानि, तायेव मग्गभावनाय किच्चतो अनिच्चादिवसेन विचेय्य.तत्थ छन्दरागप्पहानेन तमेव सब्बं वेदमतिच्च या वेदपच्चया वा अञ्ञथा वा उप्पज्जन्ति वेदना, तासु सब्बवेदनासु वीतरागो होति, तस्मा तमत्थं दस्सेन्तो ‘‘इदं पत्तिन’’न्ति अवत्वा ‘‘वेदानी’’ति गाथाय पठमपञ्हं ब्याकासि.यस्मा वा यो पविचयपञ्ञाय वेदानि विचेय्य, तत्थ छन्दरागप्पहानेन सब्बं वेदमतिच्च वत्तति, सो सत्थसञ्ञितानि वेदानि गतो ञातो अतिक्कन्तो च होति. यो वेदनासु वीतरागो, सोपि वेदनासञ्ञितानि वेदानि गतो अतिक्कन्तो च होति. वेदानि गतोतिपि वेदगू, तस्मा तम्पि अत्थं दस्सेन्तो ‘‘इदं पत्तिन’’न्ति अवत्वा इमाय गाथाय पठमपञ्हं ब्याकासि.
Having answered the questions in the third verse, he explained the questions in the fourth verse as well. This is because Vedagū is truly the name for one who has put an end to defilements through the four path-knowledges. And one who,for the development of the path (? towards Nirvana), has thoroughly investigated the Vedas , those known as scriptures by all recluses and brahmins based on their function—that is (for realising) impermanence and so on (? Anatma, Dukkha of samsara)—and has, in that context, surpassed all those Vedas. By abandoning desire and lust, he surpassed or reached all Vedas , alternatively (whatever ) feelings arise, but toward all of them he is free from passion (or detached) , it is to show this meaning that he answered the first question in the verse as “Vedānī,” without saying, “this is an attainment.” . Alternatively, because one who thoroughly investigates the Vedas with the wisdom of discernment and then, by abandoning desire and lust, surpasses all the Vedas, he has truly gone to, known, and transcended the Vedas known as scriptures. Similarly, one who is dispassionate toward feelings has also gone to and transcended the Vedas understood as feelings. One who has gone to the Vedas is also called Vedagū. Therefore, it is to show this meaning as well that he explained the first question in this verse without saying, “this is an attainment.”
Clearly Vedas as scripture is a valid interpretation because it’s written सत्थसञ्ञितानि in Pali or शास्त्रसंज्ञितानि in Sanskrit. The interpretation of investigating Vedas and removing attachments seems like Buddha’s way of teaching though I doubt if he viewed Vedas as authorities as he did some criticisms towards rituals though that applies only to fourth pudgal not prior to that , either way he wasn’t against Vedas as many people believe including at Tevijja Sutta (though that deserves a separate discussion ) as he didn’t need to be.
Regarding Knowledge of four path interpretation it actually means reaching Arhatahood and infact it may have been the case the old Theravadins followers of Buddha thought of it as same as ultimate goal of Vedas which is Moksha or Nirvana as they say.
since we are discussing this I want you to know that vedagU is also described to mean as one who has reached Nirvana (निब्बानगतो निब्बानप्पत्तो) , eternal (अच्चुतगतो अच्चुतप्पत्तो) . There is another meaning as “knower of seven Dharmas” , and others too but I think of them as qualities or spirtualization .
Note however a peculiar meaning of vedagū is that of “soul” is found in Milind Panha.
Welcome to the D&D forum! We hope you enjoy the various resources, FAQs, and previous threads. We encourage you to use the search function for topics and keywords you are interested in.
We also ask you to please take a moment now to familiarize yourself with the Forum Guidelines. May some of these resources be of assistance along the path.
If you have any questions or need further clarification regarding anything, feel free to contact the moderators by including @moderators in your post or a PM.
