Gentoo studies

[Shrisha Rao]

On Mon, 24 May 1999, N. Ganesan wrote:

> At 5:28 -0500 5/22/99, Shrisha Rao wrote:
>
>  > I have yet to come across any "Western" scholar who understands the
>  >notion of apaurushheyatva ...
>
> Heard Dr. Madhav Deshpande in a Seminar that apaurusheyatva was
> developed later. Do the vedas themselves speak of this
> concept or a later interpretation of vedas?

That's a loaded question, don't you think?  Anything at all can be
considered to be a later interpretation.  However, there is a
self-referential statement which calls itself `nitya' or eternal.  The
complete statement is something like: `tasmai nUnamabhidyave vAchA virUpa
nityayA; vR^ishhNe chodasva sushhTutim.h' (RV VIII.64-6), more commonly
referenced just as `vAchA virUpa nityayA', which has been cited to my
certain knowledge by Anandagiri (comm. on Sureshvara's bR^ihadvArtika),
Madhva (multiple occasions), and Sayana (multiple occasions; see first
part of his RV comm. for instance).  Other statements from the RV are also
cited by various scholars.  I had posted about this "history of
apaurushheyatva" issue back in the first week of March this year (on March
5th or 6th); the Indology server is playing truant so I can't pull the
exact reference right now, but you should have little difficulty finding
it.  It has other references to serve as starting points of inquiry, as
well.

Regards,

Shrisha Rao

> N. Ganesan