According to the Hindu religio-philosophy Mimamsa (Ref. 1), a genuine Hindu religious text needs to be compatible and in agreement with the Srutis (Vedas). In other words, the edicts and practices mentioned in the particular holy text (religious book or writing needing validation) should conform to the Srutis. Srutis, which are mentioned in the Gita (the Bhagavad Gita), include the Vedas (Rig, Yajur and Sam) and the (Vedantic) Upanisads. Note, the Bhagavad Gita is considered an Upanisad (also called the Gita-upanisad) because the spiritual and philosophical content of Bhagavad Gita is Upanisidic in nature.

There are many literary texts (books) in Hinduism which are classified as Srutis, Smritis, Puranas (Itihasas) and Epics etc. The Srutis or Vedas (meaning, literally, the acquired or compiled knowledge) belong to the earliest times when information used to be recorded and stored on papyrus and parchment etc. and transmitted from one person to other mainly through oral process (as sruti, by hearing). Since the Vedas, the most ancient Hindu texts, have stood the test of time, they are considered eternal or sanatana (timeless) and the religion (Hindu religion) based on them (Vedas) called Sanatana Dharma. Needless to say, the most important texts in Hinduism, representing the foundation of Hindu religion and philosophy, belong to the category of Srutis or Vedas.

Smritis, Puranas (Itihasas) and Epics, on the other hand (unlike the Sruti or Vedas), belong to the ancillary or secondary category. They sometimes can be used to support the Srutis on various moral issues, social traditions, and historical events etc., but only if they remain realistic and are compatible with the Srutis (the Rig Veda, especially), without violating and contradicting the Srutis (Ref. 1).

Although there are several texts that form the Srutis, there is a definite hierarchy or precedence related to their order. Rig Veda stands at the top in significance as a Sruti, because it is recognized as the oldest or the most ancient Hindu scripture. Next in the Sruti hierarchy is Yajur Veda, followed by Sam Veda and then the Upanisads. The reason to also include Upanisads in the Srutis is that they are considered as the Vedanta or Vedas’ finale, which indicates that the Upanisads were directly tied to the Vedas. Note that, in some cases, Upanisads even form an integral part of the Vedas, e.g. the Isha Upanisad in the Yajur Veda.

Since the Rig Veda is the first among Srutis, any other text (another Veda or Smriti etc. needing a religious acceptance or validation) needs to be in agreement with the Rig Veda, or it, at least, should not be in direct opposition to the essential themes of the Rig Veda. The philosophical rules on the inquiry and investigation of a text with respect to the Vedas (especially the Rig Veda) are based on Purva Mimamsa philosophy or the Mimamsa (Ref. 1).

As the Yajur Veda and Sam Veda agree quite well with the Rig Veda, they are considered as legitimate Srutis. Similarly, Upanisads also can be shown conforming to Vedic standards and they therefore form a part of the Shrutis.

Note, while there is a scriptural compatibility among the Rig Veda, Yajur Veda, Sam Veda and the Upanisads, same cannot be said of many other texts. For example, in spite of Atharva Veda being called a Veda, it fails to meet the Mimamsa criterion (Ref. 1) because of its contradiction of Rig Veda on several key issues, such as Atharva Veda lending support to magic and sorcery etc. which are strongly condemned in the Rig Veda. Thus, the Atharva Veda is not considered a genuine Veda or Sruti, in spite of having Veda in its name and being named after the famous ancient Vedic sage Atharvan.

Perhaps the real author of the Atharva Veda was someone else and a lesser known person (not Sage Atharvan and he used the famous name (Atharvan) to make his spurious compilation famous as Atharva Veda. Moreover, there are no references to Atharva Veda in the Srutis. The Bhagavad Gita also makes no mention of Atharva Veda, even though the Bhagavad Gita mentions the Rig Veda, Yajur Veda, Sam Veda and the Vedanta (Upanisads). This indicates that the Atharva Veda was not thought as an important text (thus fit to be ignored) by the ancient Sages. Or, perhaps, Atharva Veda is of a recent origin and might not be known to sages during ancient times. Needless to say, the Atharva Veda is a spurious text having little scriptural merit as a genuine Veda / Sruti.

The same thing, as for the Atharva Veda, is seen in the case of Manusmriti being a spurious text, and not as a genuine Hindu holy / religious text. As Atharva Veda in its title misuses the famous Vedic sage name Atharvan, the Manusmriti misuses in its title the name of famous Vedic sage Manu. The Manusmriti also contradicts the Rig Veda on several key issues including the caste (vocation categories) and women (Refs. 2 & 3).

While the Rig Veda does not undermine and denigrate vocations (castes) and women anywhere (including the hymns referring to Sage Manu explicitly), the same is not the case with Manusmriti (bearing the name of famous Vedic Sage) where there is a considerable denigration of caste (vocation labels) and women. This indicates that Vedic Sage Manu's name was tied in the title of Manusmiti superficially and post-Vedically;  Manusmriti being of later or post-Vedic origin (as Manusmriti makes several mentions of the Rig Veda, but the Rig Veda makes no mention of the Manusmriti).

Regarding the Puranas (including the Itihasas) and Epics, they basically represent the ancillary (secondary) texts and are not considered as part of Vedas (Srutis). Puranas generally describe the same story of creation and evolution while changing emphasis on different deities, characters and places from one text (Purana) to the other. Puranas also do not adhere strictly to the rules of Mimamsa, which raises questions about their authenticity and applicability. Sometimes, Puranas and Smritis, in violation of Mimamsa (Ref. 1), might even allude to the worship and prayer involving humans and the body parts (including sex organs and relating to the sexual activity), which, needless to say, has little spiritual merit and belongs primarily to the category of Tamas (Mode of Darkness).

The Epics (including different versions of the Ramayana and the Mahabharata) narrate the stories and folklores from the past and they provide lessons and examples on morality. As there is no strict Mimamsa evaluation of the Epics, they are not accorded the status as a genuine Sruti (Veda).


(1) Subhash C. Sharma, “The Purva Mimamsa philosophy,” May 24, 2004, http://www.oocities.org/lamberdar/purva_mimamsa.html

(2) Subhash C. Sharma, “Manu, smriti and the medical paradox,” May 29, 2004, http://www.oocities.org/lamberdar/manu_smriti.html

(3) Subhash C. Sharma, “Hindu Caste System & Hinduism: Vedic vocations (Hindu castes) were not related to heredity (birth)” (yr. 2001) http://www.oocities.org/lamberdar/_caste.html

(4) Mahabharata by C. Rajagopalachari, B.V.B. (Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, Mumbai, India, 1996)

....................................................................................

*Subhash C. Sharma, "Compatibility of a text with the Srutis (original post)," Sept. 2, 2006, https://www.oocities.org/lamberdar/sruti_compatibility.html