Relation between History and Purāṇa

It was Vyāsa who first taught the Itihāsa (which denotes actual traditional history)–Purāṇa (which signifies any old tale or events of the ancient past of whether quasi–historical or mythological nature or that happened and existed in former times) tradition to one of his distinguished disciples, Romaharṣana (or Lomaharṣana), who belonged to the class of Sūta (Popularly known as Sūta Romaharṣaṇa). He is turn taught into his son Ugrasravas and six disciples, at least five of whom were Brāhmaṇs. Thus tradition was handed down from generation to generation. It is noteworthy that the ‘Itihāsa-Purāṇa’ tradition had three “main constituents–myth, genealogy and historical narrative” (ākhyānas, upākhyānas, gāthās etc.). Ever since the Vedic age, the ‘Itihāsa-Purāṇa ’ existed as inter-twined or inter-related. Both had become synonymous and were complementary to each other. In the beginning no clear distinction was made between the two. But, subsequently, they developed as two distinct subjects of special study. In the Yājñavalkya Smṛti (1.3) and the Viṣṇu Purāṇa (3.6.28) the Purāṇa (in the sense of Itihāsa-Purāṇa ) has been mentioned as one of the fourteen branches of learning.

The antiquity of Itihāsa-Purāṇa tradition can also be proved. The earliest reference to the word ‘Purāṇa ’ occurs in the Ṛgveda .^[1] In the same text it has been again used in the form of a gāthā or narrative.^[2] In the Atharvaveda the Purāṇa has been used first singularly along with the three other Vedas^[3] and then conjointly with Itihāsa in the form of historical narrative.^[4] In some of the Brāhmaṇas too, the Itihāsa–Purāṇa have been used together and it has been categorically stated used together and it has been categorically stated that they were composed along with the Vedas , they very much form as one of its parts and they are equally important.^[5] In the Āraṇyaka^[6] and Upaniṣadas^[7] also, the Itihasa–Purāṇa have been mentioned along with the Vedas .

The Purāṇas appeared as writ-large or in the enlarged form of the Vedas . That is why, the ‘Itihasa–Purāṇa ’ have been referred to in the Vedic and Purāṇic literature^[8] and some other reliable sources as the fifth Veda (Itihasa-Purāṇam pañcama Vedānam Vedam ) along with other four Vedas . The information supplied by Kautilya is also worth quoting. According to him, the three Vedas , the “Sāma, Ṛk and Yajus are the threefold (Scripture). The Atharva-Veda and the Itihāsa-Veda are also the Vedas .^[9] He also defines the Itihāsa as, ‘Itihāsa means the Purāṇa , Itivṛtta (history), Ākhyāyika (tale), Udāharaṇa (illustrative story), the ‘Dharmaśāstra and the Arthaśāstra .^[10]

The ‘Itihāsa–Purāṇa ’ and the Vedas were closely related and equally important. But from one particular Purāṇic text it appears that the Purāṇas were considered relatively more important than the Vedas .^[11] For the correct interpretation, explanation and analysis of the data contained in the Vedas , the sound knowledge of the ‘Itihāsa –Purāṇa ’ was essential which is evidenced by both the Mahābhāratā^[12] and the Purāṇas .^[13]

Some of the Purāṇa text call themselves as “Purāṇna Itihasa (ancient history) in support of their historicity, which can be testified to by the evidences furnished therein.^[14]

Apart from the Purāṇas , the ‘Itihāsa-Purāṇa ’ tradition includes the two epics–the Rāmāyaṇa and the Mahābhārata . The Mahābhārata , in particular–bespeaks the truth as it is said in the text that it is not only a reliable history, but the best of all the available histories of the contemporary period. It is further stated that this history is well attested by the Purāṇas and the Vedas .^[15] From the first and the last parvas of the Mahābhārata it distinctly appears that this history bearing the name ‘Jaya’ (Jayonametihāsa ……….”) was originally composed by Kṛṣṇa Dvaipāyana Vyāsa. It is said to be a treasure house of knowledge.^[16] That the Mahābhārata is part of history, can be supported by the statements of V.S. Agarwala^[17] and C.V. Vaidya.^[18]

In the old treaties the relation between the Purāṇa and ‘Itihasa ’ is very deep that these two issues have been mentioned together as named ‘Itihasa-Purāṇa ’. Though Itihāsa is a different subject yet there is a wrong thought, that the Purāṇa is Itihāsa which is an apocrypha. After words to overcome the complexity of the relationship between the Purāṇa and Itihāsa they are known as the two separate subjects. In the Chāndogya Upaniṣad Śankarācārya has cleared the difference between the Purāṇa and Itihāsa . Śankaracārya says that the Purāṇa and Itihāsa both are mentioned in the Veda . “urvaśī hāpsarā , pururavasarmeḍaṃ cakame ”etc. the ‘śatapathabrāhmaṇa ’ (11/5/1/1) is considered as Itihāsa but “asadvā idamagra āsīt ” etc.

The description of creation is considered as the Purāṇa –

“itihāsa ityurvaśīpururavasoḥ saṃvādādiḥ ‘urvaśī hāpsarā ” ityadi brāhmaṇameva | purāṇam ‘asadvā idamagra āsīdityadi ” ||—śāṅkarabhāṣya

In a brief sense the Purāṇas describe not only the “Sarga-pratisarga-Vaṃśa-manvantarāni-Vaṃśānucharitam” but also charity–pilgrimage vow and the incarnation (avatar). But the surface of history is different from the Purāṇa . Itihāsa narrates the ancient story. So, history belongs also a vast surface. Itihāsa is not only a narrator of the ancient incidents but also Itihāsa learns us about the ancient social, economic, politics, religious and culture. The Atharva Veda has accepted the word Purāṇa at first to create some scripture in a mantra (25/6/10-20). There are also available the usages separately of word Purāṇa and Itihasa in some ancient Vedic literature. Where somebody consider ‘Itihasa ’ as a part of the Purāṇa , but somebody think that Purāṇa is a part of Itihāsa . Kautilya described in his ‘Arthaśāstra ’ that the Itihāsa is a sum of “Purāṇā-Itivṛtta-Ākhyaiykā-Udāharana-Dharmaśāstra-Arthaśāstra ………”.

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

Ṛgveda–3/5/54/9, 3/5/58/6.

[2]:

Ibid–9/6/99/4

[3]:

Atharvaveda–11/4/7/24

[4]:

Ibid–15/1/6/11-12

[5]:

Śatapatha Brahmana–11/5/6/8, 11/5/7/9, 13/4/3/12-13, 14/6/10/6, Gopatha Brahmana–1/10/2/10

[6]:

Taittirya Āraṇyaka–2/9

[7]:

Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣada

[8]:

Gopatha Brāhmaṇa–1/10, Chāndogya Upaniṣada–7/1/2
“ṛgvedaṃ bhagavo Sdhyemi yajurvedaṃ sāmavedamātharvaṇaṃ caturthamitihāsapurāṇaṃ pañcamaṃ vedānāṃ vedam | ”
“itihāsa purāṇaṃ ca pañcamo veda ucyate ”–Śrīmadbhāgavata 1/4/20
“itihāsa -purāṇāni pañcamaṃ vedabhīśvaraḥ ”–Śrīmadbhāgavata 3/12/39, Matsya Purāṇa–53/3
In Patanjali’s Mahābhāṣya also it is said that–catvārovedāḥ ............ itihāsa purāṇam
Nyāyadarsana, Vātsyāyanabhāsya–4/1/62

[9]:

Arthaśāstra–Bk-1, Ch.-3.

[10]:

Ibid–Bk-1, Ch.-5

[11]:

Nārada Purāṇa–2/24/17
“vedārthādadhikaṃ manye purāṇārtha varānane |
vedāḥ pratiṣṭhitāḥ sarve purāṇe nātra ”

[12]:

Mahābhārata, Ādi Parva–1/204
“itihāsapurāṇābhyāṃ vedaṃ samupabṛdhyeta |
vibhetyalyaśrutād vedo māmayaṃ preharisyati || ”

[13]:

Vāyu Purāṇa–1/201–203
Nārada Purāṇa–Uttarabhāga 24/18

[14]:

Vāyu Purāṇa–103/48, 51
Matsya Purāṇa–72/6

[15]:

Mahābhārata–Ādiparva 1/17, 24-25, 48-52, 62-63, 11/31-33, 56/15-16.

[16]:

Ibid–56/19, 25-27, Svargārohana Parva–5/39, 43.

[17]:

Bhārata Sāvitri (An in-depth historical study of the Mahābhārata) by Vasudeva Sharan Agrawala, Vol.-1, P.P.–17, 21, 27–30, 48–52; Vol.–3, P.–229.

[18]:

The Mahābhārata: A criticism (Delhi. 1966) P.P. 50.