(nibbana) = (Nirguna Brahman) ?

[Jaldhar H. Vyas]

On Mon, 29 Sep 1997 un824 at FREENET.VICTORIA.BC.CA wrote:

>
> IMO, the astika shastras would be arguably wrong if they really were
> equating buddhist nirvana with nothingness.

You can argue.  But at some point you ought to show evidence :-)

> This leads me to wonder...
>
> What is the epistemological status of the astika shastras?
> Is it a tenet of the orthodox faith to believe they are unerring
> in their totality? How much can an orthodox follower of vedanta
> disagree with explanations and arguments in the astika shastras
> without being in trouble? What other parts of the vedic system
> are considered to be unerring, which debatable, etc.?
>

An Astika is someone who says asti (yes it is so) to three questions.  Is
there a soul or atma?  Is there a God?  and Are the Vedas a pramana
or valid source of knowledge?  The nastiks or heretics are those who say
nasti (It is not so) to one or more of these questions.

Astika schools (which are not limited to Vedanta schools) do not
neccessarily agree on the rationale for saying asti.  For example an
Advaita Vedantin would believe the  God is brahman and the same as the
atma.  A Dwaita Vedantin would disagree.  A follower of Nyaya would claim
the Vedas are valid because they are written by God which no Vedantin or
Mimamsaka would agree with.  So there is a lot of room for debate.

They all seem to agree that Buddhism is wrong though!

--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at braincells.com>
I got engaged! See the pictures ==> http://www.braincells.com/jaldhar/sagpan