Verse 3108-3113

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation by Ganganath Jha:

रागद्वेषादियुक्ता हि प्रवक्तारो यथा यथा ।
तथा तथाहि रक्षन्ति स्वाध्यायं सुतरां ननु ॥ ३१०८ ॥
कस्य किं दुर्बलं को वा कस्मात्पूर्वं प्रपाठकः ।
कः स्वरक्षामतां कुर्यात्को भिन्द्द्यादपदे पदम् ॥ ३१०९ ॥
इति यस्य हि संरब्धाः सन्ति रन्ध्रगवेषिणः ।
कथं न नाम निर्दोषं स पठेद्वेदमादृतः ॥ ३११० ॥
शुद्धाश्चेदभ्युदासीनाः स्युर्वेदाध्यायिनो नराः ।
आचक्षीरन्परैरेवं न ते वेदं विनाशितम् ॥ ३१११ ॥
ततः कालेन महता तूपेक्षितविनाशितः ।
अन्य एव भवेद्वेदः प्रतिकञ्चुकतां गतः ॥ ३११२ ॥
रागद्वेषादियुक्तांश्च रुन्धद्भिर्वेदनाशिनः ।
सर्वदा रक्षितो वेदः स्वरूपं न प्रहास्यति ॥ ३११३ ॥

rāgadveṣādiyuktā hi pravaktāro yathā yathā |
tathā tathāhi rakṣanti svādhyāyaṃ sutarāṃ nanu || 3108 ||
kasya kiṃ durbalaṃ ko vā kasmātpūrvaṃ prapāṭhakaḥ |
kaḥ svarakṣāmatāṃ kuryātko bhinddyādapade padam || 3109 ||
iti yasya hi saṃrabdhāḥ santi randhragaveṣiṇaḥ |
kathaṃ na nāma nirdoṣaṃ sa paṭhedvedamādṛtaḥ || 3110 ||
śuddhāścedabhyudāsīnāḥ syurvedādhyāyino narāḥ |
ācakṣīranparairevaṃ na te vedaṃ vināśitam || 3111 ||
tataḥ kālena mahatā tūpekṣitavināśitaḥ |
anya eva bhavedvedaḥ pratikañcukatāṃ gataḥ || 3112 ||
rāgadveṣādiyuktāṃśca rundhadbhirvedanāśinaḥ |
sarvadā rakṣito vedaḥ svarūpaṃ na prahāsyati || 3113 ||

“As there go on appearing on the scene expounders of the veda who are beset with love, hatred, etc.,—people become more and more careful in the preserving of the Vedic text. to this end, they go on investigating all such minute details as—(a) Which scholar has a weak memory?—(b) Who was the earlier scholar?—(c) Who would commit mistakes regarding accents?—(d) Who would be breaking up words in the wrong places?—When there are so many enthusiastic scrutinisers busy with the guarding of the various points of danger, why cannot the serious reader study the Veda free from flaws?—If Vedic scholars, though themselves pure and honest, were indifferent towards the purity of the Veda, they might be unable to notice the Vedic text mutilated;—and in this way in course of time, the Veda, disregarded and mutilated, would become something quite different, a mere semblance of the Veda.—Under the circumstances, if the Veda is constantly and carefully guarded by persons who keep a check upon persons beset with love and hate bent upon mutilating the Veda,—then the Veda will never lose its real form (3108-3113)

 

Kamalaśīla’s commentary (tattvasaṃgrahapañjikā):

The following Texts set forth Kumarila’s answer to the argument that ‘the view should be accepted that the Veda is the work of a Person recognised as free from defects’.—[see verses 3108-3113 above]

(a) The memory, etc. of which scholars are weak?—(b) who has learnt the Veda from whom (e) who is likely to commit mistakes in the Accent, etc.?—(d) who would read the text, breaking up the words in the wrong place?—when in regard to each reader of the Veda, all these points are being critically examined by Vedic scholars who are enthusiastically devoted to their task,—how can any reader of the Veda, under the circumstances, not read the Veda with care?

What is meant by this is that, under the circumstances, as there can be no suspicion regarding the validity of the Veda,—why should the view be admitted that ‘the Veda is the work of a person definitely recognised as free from defects’?

For instance, if students of the Veda, pure and honest themselves, were indifferent and did not notice the mutilations of the Veda being carried on,—then it would be possible that in course of time, that Veda would become a mere semblance of the original. As a matter of fact, however, the said pure-minded Vedic scholars are ever alert in putting a check upon people beset with Love and Hate bent upon mutilating the Veda,—the Veda is always carefully perceived. How then can it ever lose its original form?—(3108-3113)