The festival day of Guru Purnima is widely observed by all devout Hindus as a mark of reverence to Gurus. Though the term Guru denotes teachers in general, in this context, the reference is specifically to Rishis who are the expounders of Dharma and spiritual preceptors. It is also the day in the honor of Maharishi Vyasa, the greatest of all Rishis in the Hindu tradition, who can be viewed as both as a person as well as an icon or symbol.
Vyasa is traditionally remembered in four major ways:
1) Veda Vyasa, the compiler of the four Vedas
2) Krishna Dvaipayana Vyasa, son of Rishi Parashara and Satyavati, a fisherwoman who later became the queen of Hastinapura and the author of the first and original rendition of Mahabharata
3) Badarayana Vyasa, the author of the Brahma Sutras, cornerstone of Vedanta philosophy
4) Purāṇa-kartā Vyasa, the author of the eighteen Puranas.
The literal meanings for the word Vyāsa include a) distribution, separation into parts b) compilation and arrangement. Both these activities were very much interconnected in the methodology by which ancient wisdom and ancestral knowledge got codified into scriptures and preserved for posterity. In all the above-mentioned four cases, we can see Vyasa(s) performing this role, apart from being the creator(s) and author(s) of new scriptures.
Logically, it is impossible that all the four attributions apply to one single historical personality, because the scriptures belong to vastly different periods in history.
The Kurukshetra war of the Mahabharata is variously dated from 400 BCE to 5500 BCE by multiple scholars and researchers. However, the range 2250–1280 BCE proposed by Ashok Bhatnagar can be considered as the most suitable, as it satisfies the textual evidences and also archaeo-astronomical considerations. This was the period, closely after the war utmost by a century, during which the compilation of Vedas into four books Rig, Yajur, Sama and Atharva reached completion and the first rendition of the Mahabharata happened (It must be remembered that the Vedas themselves are much older. Composition of the Vedic hymns by Rishis started at a much earlier period and it took more than a millennium and a couple of centuries by the time we come to the Mahabharata period).
There is a large scholarly consensus that the first two Vyasas mentioned above are essentially the same and can be identified as a single distinctive historical person, Krishna Dvaipayana Vyasa. He is as much historical as Socrates, Buddha or Confucius. Vaishampayana, Suta Ugrasravas and Sauti, the successive redactors of the Mahabharata text belong to the same Vyasa tradition through disciple lineage.
The third one, Badarayana Vyasa is a distinct Vedantic scholar of a later date and belongs to the period when the ṣad-darśanas, Six Philsophical Systems got consolidated as distinctive, separate schools of philosophy. He is typically dated in the range of 200 BCE to 200 CE.
The earliest date for the initial versions of most Puranas is given around 200 BCE and they reached their final form around 5th-6th century CE. Some of them like Bhagavata Purana underwent still further editing, modifications and regional variations up to 10th century CE and Bhavishya Purana saw updates as late as 17th century CE. Given this fact, the adamancy of some orthodox sections and individuals claiming the authorship of one Chiranjeevi (ever-living) Vyasa to all the Puranas is laughable. Holding the entire Purana collection as a Pramanas (primary scriptures for irrefutable verbal testimony) does not have solid ground. It defies not just modern logic and rationality, but even the strict Nyāya-Tarka logic of the Hindu tradition.
So, the fourth is not one person, but many Vyasas. It denotes multiple different later day sages and authors who belonged to different periods, various philosophical schools and different theistic traditions like Shaiva, Vaishnava, Shakta etc. This is the reason why there are vastly different variations of the same Puranic stories in different Puranas and there are references to Nanda, Maurya, Satavahana royal dynasties, Yavanas (Greeks), Shakas, Hunas etc. Here Vyasa should be regarded as nothing more than a honorific appellation or a title to the multiple anonymous authors of the Puranas.
It can be argued that this is chiefly the concern for researchers, scholars and historians and does not affect the pious common, practicising Hindus in any manner. I beg to differ. It is utmost necessary and important that all modern Hindus are exposed to this knowledge so that they don’t fall into totally avoidable silly confusions and doubts and break their heads. Such knowledge will give them a more matured and balanced perspective to delve into their holy books and assimilate the teachings of the scriptures.
Even with this knowledge, there should not be any problem or mental barrier for the Hindus to revere and worship Vyasa as an eternal icon, as the reservoir of all knowledge that is Dharmic and spiritual. Just like the wisdom he epitomizes, Vyasa also transcends time and space, we can say, in a spiritual sense.
नमोऽस्तु ते व्यास विशालबुद्धे फुल्लारविन्दायतपत्रनेत्र ।
येन त्वया भारततैलपूर्ण: प्रज्वालितो ज्ञानमय: प्रदीप:॥Salutations to thee, O Vyāsa of all-excessive intelligence, whose expansive vision is like the fully-opened lotus flower and who, by means of the oil of the Bhārata epic, has lit the Lamp of Wisdom
— Gītā Dhāynam
“O thou, venerable first of poets, interpreter of the numinous, whatever by thy name among mortals, O Author of this Song (Gita) whose maxims transport the spirit to the eternal and divine heights of an inexpressible felicity; I incline myself profoundly before thee in one everlasting adoration for thy sacred words”.— Friedrich Von Schlegel (1772–1829), renowned German poet, philosopher and Indologist
