[Advaita-l] On rationality; was "Vedas are not apauresheya according to the Vedas ?"

[Srinath Vedagarbha]

>

> Dwaitins and Gaudiyas have a cogent argument based on Madhwa and Jiva

> respectively. It is worth evaluating. Mani Dravid Sastrigal did present a
cogent

> and logical Advaita view. I plan to catch up with him to clarify doubts.



As far as I know there is no effort in any classical Advaitic texts
(excluding modern texts) on elaborated arguments defending apouruShEyatvaM.
May be I am wrong.



SV


On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 11:50 AM, <rajaramvenk at gmail.com> wrote:

> If apauresheyatva has to be accepted because the tradition says so, then
> there is no reason to give logical arguments to opponents including the
> famous "show me the author". In fact, follower of any faith can accept the
> tenets of his faith blindly.
>
> The fact is apauresheyatva was established and defended using logic by
> mimamsakas and vedantins in the past. We don't study them and evaluate them
> critically or upgrade those arguments for modern context.
>
> Dwaitins and Gaudiyas have a cogent argument based on Madhwa and Jiva
> respectively. It is worth evaluating. Mani Dravid Sastrigal did present a
> cogent and logical Advaita view. I plan to catch up with him to clarify
> doubts.
> Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com>
> Sender: advaita-l-bounces at lists.advaita-vedanta.org
> Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 16:42:16
> To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta<
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
> Reply-To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta
>         <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
> Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] On rationality;
>  was "Vedas are not apauresheya according to the Vedas ?"
>
> As I have repeatedly said, let us not bother about the outsiders. Ishwara
> will take care of them.  Since it is no problem for both of us, we shall
> go
> the way our elders have gone.  At least for me, it was as natural as fish
> taking to water.  So is it with the millions of astika-s.
>
> praNAms Sri Subbu prabhuji
> Hare Krishna
>
> Thanks for your patience and clarification.  As I said earlier, if we,
> both, are standing under the same vedic umbrella, there is no need for any
> discussion on aparusheyatva vAda.  Nor I would  be asking for any pramANa
> to prove that aparusheyatva.  A simple clarification from our bhagavatpAda
> or any traditionally respected Acharya about veda nityatva and
> apaurusheyatva would be enough for me accept it and  to restrict myself
> from asking further question.  Questions & doubts arise once you come out
> of that traditional box & started looking at it as  an outsider, that is
> what I did by assuming the role of devil's advocate !!  Anyway, it pinches
> me somewhere that I cannot take my sAmpradAyik stand on aparusheyatva of
> veda-s to outside to show the supremacy of my shAstra over other religious
> texts and works.
>
> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
> bhaskar
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>