Rig Veda to Purana - maintaining continuity - Part 1

I have often wondered that if our ancient chronicles are true then how can there be such a wide divergence between Vedas and Puranas as per the interpretation of Western savants and their desi followers, esp. if the chronicler of both are Veda Vyasa. Then either all our ancient texts are false or fundamental interpretations are grossly incorrect. Vedas are mostly considered to be nature worship by a group of marauding invaders who thrust upon an alien culture on a native population whom they labelled as Dasyus or Dasas and themselves as Arya or noble. Puranas and Mahabharata Ramayana are largely considered to be mythologies though off late there are some scholars who grudgingly admits that after all "some portions" of these stories may be true though largely they are figments of imaginations of wonderfully fertile brains.

After a careful deliberation and study I would like to contend that there is no discontinuity from Vedas to Puranas, and the divergences among the scriptures are perfectly explicable. If my findings are mere conjectures then that of scholars are also the same, because both are human interpretations, both are based on logic and intellect. In my case I have based my logic and reason based on conclusions derived by men of integrity and renunciation such as Swami Vivekananda and Aurobindo who had no selfish motives, while the Western scholars and their desi followers have based their own conclusions upon the works of other Western scholars, most of whom were driven by the need for recognition, name, fame, and money and other spurious motives and hence are not above suspicion. So in the worst case, with due humility the conclusions made by Vivekananda and Aurobindo are equally good or bad and there is no conclusive evidence that what the Western scholars have theorized are gospel truths and therefore we should accept all of them at face value.

The first and the foremost thing is, Vedas and Puranas are not disjoint, they are only intended for different target audiences. In the case of Vedas it the royal sages and men of wisdom who wants either high heaven or spiritual progress depending in individual needs, and in case of Puranas it is the common, ignorant masses who would never understand the intricacies in Vedas and who would need simple stories which would hide Vedic truths in them for the sincere seekers and which would encourage the path of devotion rather than the paths of actions and contemplation of Vedas and Upanishadas. Devotion is for common men who cannot tread on the paths of action or contemplation. Mahabharata and Gita infact serve as vital sources for the continuity. Mahabharata is largely Purana based but with a different flavor which is often borrowed from the Vedas. Gita is predominantly a commentary on the entire Vedas, particularly the Upanishadas - Sarvopanishada Gabhoh, dogdhah Gopalanandanah. 

First let us start with Rig Veda. All scholars agree that these are the oldest, though they rely on a medieval interpretation, that of Sayanacharya, for speculating on the mysterious verses and their esoteric meanings. Some of them have most disdainfully written it off as mere chants of few nature worshippers whose society was predominantly rural, with cows and agriculture as prime stay. Others have given it a relatively sober standing - of being poetic and beautiful, though devoid of spirituality.

A closer scrutiny of the Rig Vedic hymns however tells even a layman like me that there is much more to it than Western scholars could get out of it through their limited knowledge of Sanskrit, over dependence on Sayana and their own superiority complex. The first hymn in Madhuchchhandas Vaishwamitra says that Agni, though art the first principle of all sacrifices, thou art lovable, thou art the priest, thou art the presiding Hotri, though art the Ritwik and though art the boon giver. This bears an uncanny resemblance to the sloka in Bhagavat Gita chapter 24 - Brahmarpanam Brahma havir Brahmagnau Brahmanahutam Brahmaiva tena gantavyam Brahmakarmasamadhina - all the sacrifices are intended towards the Brahman, the supreme being. The Supreme Being himself is the offering, the fuel, the fire, the oblation and the end result is also stemming from Brahman, by one who is verily nothing but Brahman.

It is in Rig Veda that we also find great Vedantic thoughts - Ekam Sat, Viprah Vahudhah Vadanti - an effort to bind together the hymns and praises towards different Gods, and also the hymns which declare oneself as the Supreme Being, almost in the same lines of "Aham Brahmasmi" - "Aham Ruderibhi Vasubhis carami aham Adityai uta Viswadevyai". Both Aurobindo and Swami Vivekananda refused to believe that Vedas were rudimentary hymns of nature worshippers or dealt with only sacrifices. There are many such verses which would point to one Cosmic principle being addressed by various names by various enlightened sages.

Then how do we explain the prevalence of the Gods Indra, Agni, Mitra-Varuna, Aswins, Ribhus, Saraswati and others Gods in Rig Veda, which are almost absent in Puranas? How do we explain the transition of Indra, for instance, from being God superior (most of Rig Vedik hymns were directed at Indra and Agni) to that of merely king of gods in later Vedic tradition and in Puranas, with many imperfections which are surprisingly human?