svataḥ-pramÄṇa veda satya yei kaya
'laká¹£aṇÄ' karile svataḥ-prÄmÄṇya-hÄni haya
svataḥ-pramÄṇa - self-evidence; veda - Vedic literature; satya - truth; yei - whatever; kaya - say; laká¹£aá¹‡Ä - interpretation; karile - by making; svataḥ-prÄmÄṇya - self-evidential proof; hÄni - lost; haya - becomes.
“The Vedic statements are self-evident. Whatever is stated there must be accepted. If we interpret according to our own imagination, the authority of the Vedas is immediately lost.â€
Out of four main types of evidence — direct perception, hypothesis, historical reference and the Vedas — Vedic evidence is accepted as the foremost. If we want to interpret the Vedic version, we must imagine an interpretation according to what we want to do. First of all, we set forth such an interpretation as a suggestion or hypothesis. As such, it is not actually true, and the self-evident proof is lost.
ÅšrÄ«la MadhvÄcÄrya, commenting on the aphorism dṛśyate tu (VedÄnta-sÅ«tra 2.1.6), quotes the Bhaviá¹£ya PurÄṇa as follows:
á¹›g-yajuḥ-sÄmÄtharvÄÅ› ca bhÄrataá¹ pañcarÄtrakam
mÅ«la-rÄmÄyaṇaá¹ caiva veda ity eva Å›abditÄḥ
purÄṇÄni ca yÄnÄ«ha vaiṣṇavÄni vido viduḥ
svataḥ-prÄmÄṇyam eteá¹£Äá¹ nÄtra kiñcid vicÄryate
The Ṛg Veda, Yajur Veda, SÄma Veda, Atharva Veda, MahÄbhÄrata, PañcarÄtra and original RÄmÄyaṇa are all considered Vedic literature. The PurÄṇas that are especially meant for Vaiṣṇavas (such as the Brahma-vaivarta PurÄṇa, NÄradÄ«ya PurÄṇa, Viṣṇu PurÄṇa and BhÄgavata PurÄṇa) are also Vedic literature. Therefore, whatever is stated in such PurÄṇas or in the MahÄbhÄrata and RÄmÄyaṇa is self-evident. There is no need for interpretation. The Bhagavad-gÄ«tÄ is also within the MahÄbhÄrata; therefore all the statements of the Bhagavad-gÄ«tÄ are self-evident. There is no need for interpretation, and if we do interpret, the entire authority of the Vedic literature is lost.
