[Advaita-l] apaurusheyatva of shruti-s - Sri Vidya prabhuji's clarification in Jan'09

[Bhaskar YR]

praNAms Sri Yadu prabhuji
Hare Krishna

On 9th of Jan 2009, Sri Vidya prabhuji clarified the following with regard
to apaurusheyatva of shruti-s...I hope his clarification is quite relevant
to our present discussion. (My original mail appended at the end of this
mesg.)


// quote //

Bhaskar :

> I have a small doubt here about apaurusheyatva of 'text' of
shruti-s...whether text ( here if it means manuscript of the shruti) itself

Sri Vidya prabhuji :

When you say manuscript, I hope you only mean the actual words of the veda.
A manuscript is a text that is written down and if anything, the veda is
not
a text that is written.

bhaskar :

> has the *apaurusheya* status or the jnAna that is embedded in these texts
has the apaurusheya status?? If the wordings (text) of the scriptures

Sri Vidya prabhuji :

Both, because the jnAna has to necessarily be conveyed through the words.
It wouldn't make any sense to say that only the specific words are
apaurusheya or that only the jnAna conveyed by the words is apaurusheya.
However, jnAna is different from karma, is it not? Any action presumes an
agent. That is all I meant when I said you cannot extend the quality of
apaurusheyatva to action

// unquote //


Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar


My original question:

praNAms
Hare Krishna

I have a small doubt here about apaurusheyatva of 'text' of
shruti-s...whether text ( here if it means manuscript of the shruti) itself
has the *apaurusheya* status or the jnAna that is embedded in these texts
has the apaurusheya status??  If the wordings (text) of the scriptures
itself has the apaurusheya status then we have to say these wordings which
denote certain acts should also have to have the status of apaurusheya.
Otherwise we have to say these prayOga-s/karma-s have been *first*
theoritically explained in apaurusheya shruti-s, later on some karmi-s (say
pUrva mImAmsaka-s)  have implemented and followed the rituals/prayoga-s
*practically*...I am unable to understand which would be the ideal scenario
here to say only text is apaurusheya but practicals of these contents are
not apaurusheya...Does it not mean to say texts/sentences  that denote the
brahma jnAna is apaurusheya but brahma jnAna itself NOT apaurusheya??
Kindly clarify.

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar