[Advaita-l] Re: [advaitin] Re: Origin of vedas

Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian rama.balasubramanian at gmail.com
Mon Jul 24 12:43:11 CDT 2006

On 7/23/06, bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com <bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com> wrote:

> I have a small doubt here...in bruhadAraNyaka we have list of R^shis who
> have realised the ultimate (brahma jnAni-s in R^shi paraMpara)...whether
> shruti predicted future brahma jnAni's & mentioned those names or this
> upanishad *written* after these R^shis realisation??  Considering the
> traditional belief that vEda-s are apaurushEya, we have to say it is
> former.  But if that is the case, how can shruti excluded the names of
> shankara bhagavadpAda, ramaNa etc. etc. who we consider with utmost faith
> as brahma jnAni-s??  just a curious academic question..nothing to disturb
> our firm conviction in shruti-s apaurushEyatva...

Per the mImA.nsA shaastra, the names/personalities mentioned in vedas
have no historical connection. As per Sri Mahasannidhaanam, if the
names and incidents happen to correspond with any historical incidents
from the itihaasas/puraaNas it is purely coincidental. So the list of
"realized" people can only be taken as arthavaada or an
advice/injuction to strive for realization.

Sri Shankara strictly adheres to mImA.nsA rules when it does not
contradict advaita. So he interprets itihaasas and puraaNas in the
same upanishad to mean the *un-historical* inclidents related in the
vedas itself and not as the usual puraaNas or itihaasas. Of course
Sureshvara thinks this is durukta and states so in the vaartika. He
interprtes the passage to mean the usual puraaNas and itihaasas. But
it seems most advaitins follow Shankaras opinion on this matter.


More information about the Advaita-l mailing list