Basic HTML Version
ww.th ea rya sa maj .org
The Terminology of the Vedas 7
that the portions belong to two distinct epochs, is itself grounded
upon the insufficiency of the mythological method. If they could
interpret the whole of the Vedas by the one mythological method,
there could be no need of separating them. This, they could not,
and therefore the isolation. The justification of the partial character
of the mythological method depending upon the correctness of the
assignment of the various epochs, such assignment has no authority
save the insufficiency of the mythological method. Thus, then, is
the partial character of the mythological method unconsciously
regarded as self-sufficient. The first method, then, out of the three
enumerated in the beginning of this subject, considered
independently, proves insufficient; considered in conjunction with
philology, fares no better; and lastly, fails in contrast' with the
philosophic character of the Vedas. We will now consider the
second method.
One of the most successful method of unravelling ancient
literary records is the antiquarian or the historical method. It
consists in approximating, in so far as possible for the interpretation
and explanation of the records in hand, to the books and general
literature of the period to which it belongs. For the obvious reason
that direct evidence is always to be preferred to second-hand
information, this method is next in value to none, but to the direct
evidence of the senses. Now, in so far as in historical research,
where the study of the past epoch is concerned, one has inevitably
to fall for information on the literature and historical record of the
period with which he is concerned; an examination of the
conditions, which render such evidence valid and a labour on it no
unfruitful task, is essential to establish the canons of historical
research. The veracity of our knowledge of past events depends
upon two factors on this method; firstly, on the faithfulness of the
records we obtain of the event or events of the period; and secondly,
on the faithfulness of our interpretation of the records. We would
forgo an analysis of the first factor as this factor is amenable, for
the estimation of its evidence, to laws which do not come within
the compass of our subject. The interpretation of the records is
what directly concerns us.
The excellence of the historical or the antiquarian method
lies in the fact that it renders our interpretation of past records less
liable to error. And the reason may be thus explained. Language,