Does Veda have myth/s in it?

[paarsurrey]

If yes, are there claim and reasons given in it for it?
Veda means “knowledge”. Myth is no knowledge.
Myth is based on superstition not reality or knowledge.
Thread open to all human beings.

Regards

 

[sun rise]

Every religion has myths associated with them, including Islam.

 

[psychoslice]

Osho : History can take no note of truth; history consists of facts. In India we have two different systems. One we call history; history takes note of the facts. Another we call purana, mythology; it takes note of the truth. We have not written histories about Buddha, Mahavira or Krishna, no. That would have been dragging something immensely beautiful into the muddy unconsciousness of humanity.

 

[Madhuri]

I think that the Vedas are very allegorical. I do not take a lot of it literally. What I take most seriously is the philosophical scriptures such as the Upanishads (which are part of the Vedas) and books like the Bhagavad Gita. Other than these, I think that many of the stories are symbolic. They are full of deep meaning but it takes much study to understand that meaning. That's why the Upanishads are great as they are the philosophical conclusions of the Vedas.

 

[Aupmanyav]

There is a lot of history too in RigVeda.

 

[ratikala]

Namaskaram , ..

agreeing with Madhuri , ....in many respects it is allagorical , ..in others it is a literary masterpeace which contains Subtle sound vibrations that contain Knowledge of God himself , ....but above all the Vedas are Apaurusheya ; self existing truths revealed through Shabda ; sound , ....they are Sruti ; revealed literature first transmited oraly now transmited in written form , ...

Myth is no knowledge.
Myth is based on superstition not reality or knowledge.

this is the difference between Sruti and smriti , ....Revealed or heard , ......many people are mistakenly beleiving that what is handed down since antiquity is mythology only because they do not understand its basis , Upanisads likewise have root in the vedas thus are Revealed truths , .....

even the Puranas and Itihasa's are considered Histories not Mythologies , ....people prehaps mistake them for legend without true basis , ....when intruth there is firm basis , it is just that , as in the Vedas the true content needs to reveal itself in the mind by way of realisation through continued meditiation .

 

[LuisDantas]

If yes, are there claim and reasons given in it for it?
Veda means “knowledge”. Myth is no knowledge.
Myth is based on superstition not reality or knowledge.
Thread open to all human beings.

Regards

Myth is very much knowledge. It gives people a common language, a measure of awareness and understanding of the community's moral values and goals.

Those are invaluable resources to encourage effective mutual understanding.

 

[ratikala]

Namaskaram ji ,

Osho : History can take no note of truth; history consists of facts. In India we have two different systems. One we call history; history takes note of the facts. Another we call purana, mythology; it takes note of the truth. We have not written histories about Buddha, Mahavira or Krishna, no. That would have been dragging something immensely beautiful into the muddy unconsciousness of humanity.

I do not understand why Osho says this , .....Puranas in Vedic culture are are considered to have historical basis , I think it is just that they often appear to be simple in form as if they were story telling , ....thus mistake has arrisen .

take for instance the Baghavata Purana which gives accounts of the incarnations of Visnu , some take these to be mythological but their basis is in extreme antiquity , we need to remember that these accounts have been handed down through countless generations , in the course of time these puranas have taken on mythalogical status as perhaps the content seems too fantastical to be actual , ...this perhaps happend gradualy as the accounts became embelished over the years due to genuine love which maginifies some aspects of the content , whilst on the other hand we must allow for the fact that accounts get distorted through lack of clear understanding and translation ,

 

[Sunstone]

Myth is no knowledge. Myth is based on superstition not reality or knowledge.

You certainly have a fun and wacky definition of "myth".

As far as I can see, myths are often enough poetic expressions of truths, usually psychological truths. But hey, who likes poetry anymore? Or truths, for that matter?

Thread open to all human beings.

Is that a hint I'm not wanted?

 

[ratikala]

Namaskaram Luis ji

Myth is very much knowledge. It gives people a common language, a measure of awareness and understanding of the community's moral values and goals.

on one hand yes I can agree with this in that Myth frequently caries metaphor which caries meamingfull guidelines , ...
but whilst metaphorical tretises may help to expand the heart and mind they do not or canot give understnding of the Absolute , ...none the less they are of great value for what they are .

 

[LuisDantas]

but whilst metaphorical tretises may help to expand the heart and mind they do not or canot give understnding of the Absolute ,

No idea why you think so, but it is an interesting thing to learn.

 

[paarsurrey]

Myth is very much knowledge. It gives people a common language, a measure of awareness and understanding of the community's moral values and goals.
Those are invaluable resources to encourage effective mutual understanding.

Whatever the usefulness of the myths, but, does Veda have myths in it? That is the question to be probed into. I request everybody who has read Veda to quote such myths one by one, and I am sure that the Veda believers will let us know that they are not myths at all. Please
Regards

 

[ratikala]

Namaskaram Ji

You certainly have a fun and wacky definition of "myth".

As far as I can see, myths are often enough poetic expressions of truths, usually psychological truths. But hey, who likes poetry anymore? Or truths, for that matter?

true true , ....Myth and legend frequently contain vestages of truths embelished opon by the countless generations who have fondly handed them down , ....

but in very strict Vedic terms there is a great difference between the Knowledge contained within the Vedas and Mythology which whilst it contains Knowledge canot be said to be Direct or Unadulturated Knowledge , .....


forinstance the Saraswati River refered to in the Rig Veda untill very recently had been denegrated to the status of being a mythalogical river especialy by non Hindu translators purely because it could not be found on a material platform , yet more recently satalite images can clearly define the dried basin of the once great river so this now becomes an indistutable reality .

similarly much doubt as to the authenticity of the Vedas has placed over its content by translators who although well meaning are not sufficiently educated in Vedic Culture as to be able to understand their true Purport


the OP says , .....Veda means “knowledge”. myth is not Knowledge , ....

Veda means “knowledge”. Myth is no knowledge.
Myth is based on superstition not reality or knowledge.

this makes sence to me from a Vedic perspective in that Veda is reveled knowledge of Absolute truth and reality ,
it is like the evidence given by the satalite images showing indisputably the actuality of the Saraswati River .

Mythology may speak of the Mighty Saraswati , this may give us a sence of feeling that we understand what a mighty river may have been like , but it does not give actual Direct Knowledge .

 

[LuisDantas]

Whatever the usefulness of the myths, but, does Veda have myths in it?

It does. But your understanding of the word is flawed to the point that it is pointless to attempt to give you an answer.

 

[ratikala]

Namaskaram Luis ji

but whilst metaphorical tretises may help to expand the heart and mind they do not or canot give understnding of the Absolute ,

No idea why you think so, but it is an interesting thing to learn.

Veda although it may be wraped in an aparently poetic form , is in some respecs very Scientific in that it deals in actualitys not hear say , .....of course you have only my word for this unless you wish to take up long decipleship to a master who can instruct in the true meaning contained with in the Vedas , .....

if I can only try to give a simple explanation , .....

if one reads a Mythalogical tretise one may draw inspiration from any metaphor contained within , this metaphor may even change ones way of looking at life , it may touch the heart and change ones attitude , ....wonderfull as this is it is very different from Direct Revealed Knowledge which is knowledge in its fullness having this Knowledge compells one to act rather than inspires one to act , this can be likened to Dharma once understood in its fullness it becomes ones irefutable duty , this is something stronger than mere inspiration

 

[psychoslice]

Namaskaram ji ,



I do not understand why Osho says this , .....Puranas in Vedic culture are are considered to have historical basis , I think it is just that they often appear to be simple in form as if they were story telling , ....thus mistake has arrisen .

take for instance the Baghavata Purana which gives accounts of the incarnations of Visnu , some take these to be mythological but their basis is in extreme antiquity , we need to remember that these accounts have been handed down through countless generations , in the course of time these puranas have taken on mythalogical status as perhaps the content seems too fantastical to be actual , ...this perhaps happend gradualy as the accounts became embelished over the years due to genuine love which maginifies some aspects of the content , whilst on the other hand we must allow for the fact that accounts get distorted through lack of clear understanding and translation ,

Yea, I don't really know if its facts or mythology, and for me personally it doesn't matter, the truth that many have experienced way back then and even now, can never be conceptualized, so whatever and however beautiful this truth is put into words, doesn't make the words itself truth, its where the words point to.

 

[paarsurrey]

paarsurrey said: ↑
Veda means “knowledge”. Myth is no knowledge.
Myth is based on superstition not reality or knowledge.

the OP says , .....Veda means “knowledge”. myth is not Knowledge , ....
this makes sence to me from a Vedic perspective in that Veda is reveled knowledge of Absolute truth and reality ,
it is like the evidence given by the satalite images showing indisputably the actuality of the Saraswati River .
Mythology may speak of the Mighty Saraswati , this may give us a sence of feeling that we understand what a mighty river may have been like , but it does not give actual Direct Knowledge .

Thanks and regards

 

[Satyamavejayanti]

Whatever the usefulness of the myths, but, does Veda have myths in it? That is the question to be probed into. I request everybody who has read Veda to quote such myths one by one, and I am sure that the Veda believers will let us know that they are not myths at all. Please
Regards

Namaste,

As you requested one who has read the Veda to respond, I shall take the offer up.

No myths in Veda.

Dhanyavad

 

[HarihOm]

Namaste

I agree there is no myth in Veda, the Puranas maybe Symbolic in parts, but is that Symbology identical with reality, the answer is obviously yes. Many things are hidden and encoded in the scriptures. Not that I am advertising Sri Aurobindo but you may want to read some of his works, I think he sheds good light in English on this very subject.

 

[paarsurrey]

Namaste
I agree there is no myth in Veda, the Puranas maybe Symbolic in parts, but is that Symbology identical with reality, the answer is obviously yes. Many things are hidden and encoded in the scriptures. Not that I am advertising Sri Aurobindo but you may want to read some of his works, I think he sheds good light in English on this very subject.

Thanks for confirming that there are no myths in Veda.
Regards