[Advaita-l] veda is eternal implies jnAnI returns as a seeker ?

[श्रीमल्ललितालालितः]

*श्रीमल्ललितालालितः <http://www.lalitaalaalitah.com>
lalitAlAlitaH <http://about.me/lalitaalaalitah/bio>*



On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 19:46, Raghav Kumar <raghavkumar00 at gmail.com> wrote:

> i am just spinning of a new thread on this.
> the discussion so far -
> > since the  vedas are eternal, they cannot be different in another kalpa ,
> but then
> > Janaka, a mukta in one kalpa, having to be born as a seeker/samsari in
> > another and seek jnana through the same Yajnavalkya and attain 'abhayam'
> > only to be born again in another kalpa and so on.
>
> sri lalitAlAlitaH said - "therefore vedic should not be placed in history.
> none of the mantra-dRShTR Rishis etc actually physically existed ever on
> earth in mithila or magadha etc which about came later on."
>

Wrong interpretation. I just said that veda-s were not created after these
events.
Saying this doesn't mean that anything with same name,etc.never existed.

we should note that the mImAmsakas did not have to deal with this question
> of the jnAnI since for them sRiShTi is changeably eternal or perennial
> (shAshvatam) and did not have a beginning either.
>

That's wrong.
mImAMsakas accept GYAna and mokSha, though they are not alike those of
vedanta-system.
See vedAntakalpalatikA for it @ http://bit.ly/pF7cjz


> so do we have to necessarily accept that every single rishi mentioned in
> the
> veda never physically existed ever on earth or elsewhere. Neither has
> Mithila or Magadha any connection to geographical locales in bhAratavarsha
> ?
>

No.


> "Do you know "why" a cow has come to be? because it finds mention in the
> veda.


'go'-shabda doesn't say a specific cow, but jAtI. So, if you say that
Ishvara created cows by saying 'go'-shabda ; I'll have no problem.


> similarly every single entity which forms part of the cosmos had its
> template in the Veda.


Saying 'template' you are making clear my views.


> similarly the Veda mantras which are actually infinite in number, are
> the master-plan or template for the universe in every kalpa past, present
> and future.


As far as I know, a pramANa is that which produces GYAnam of things which
are not subject of any other mean of knowledge. That is why mImAMsakas say
dharma is subject of veda-s. uttara-mImAMsakas add brahman as it's subject
too. No one says that their purpose is to create world. It's a new view for
me. I'll need some scriptural proof to generate faith in it.

If you say that for Ishvara veda-s are tool of creation and for us tool of
knowledge, then it will prove either veda-s of Ishvara and different.
Different, because tattvamasi is definitely not useful for creation.



> in that sense, the veda mantra itself unfolds and manifests
> itself as a historical situation such as the vidvat-sadas of janaka and the
> goings-on there in that situation.


Just said that, it will make veda apramANam as it's main purpose will become
to help Ishvara to remember and create things.


> The Veda mantras mentioning "go" (cow)
> had the power to make the creature called a cow emerge through some or the
> other process of gradual manifestation.


Not a specific cow- to be clear.
Now, from where you received this knowledge of 'gradual manifestation' ?
Supporting words from scriptures are needed.


> In a particular kalpa, one small set of veda mantras is revealed from the
> infinite knowledge-bank of Jagat-kAraNam brahma.


Any proof ?
I heard it just now.
It will prove that veda-s which are revealed in different kalpas are
different.
Ishvara gave brahmA veda-s - is known to all, but he gives specific part in
specific kalpa is a new idea.
Moreover, if different veda-s(mantra-s for your clarity) are revealed in
different kalpa-s, they must create non-identical kalpa-s and each kalpa
must miss some entities, as some specific animals, etc., to be different.



> In this manner even if the
> situations are actually historical,


Cow has a jAtI and the word 'go' denotes that. So, it created cow in a
kalpa.
Now, ' janakatvam', 'magadhatva' , etc. are jAtI and are revealed and
created by word magadha and janaka, etc. :- this will be position according
to your view. No one accepts such jAtI. You will say to imagine, but we will
not. We have no genuine word from shastram for it.


> there is no compromise and we can
> continue to maitain that the vedas enjoy apaurusheyatvam etc., because
> **the
> mantras preceded the situation**.


I already said that if janaka, etc. are seen after creation of veda-s, and
same thing happens with them, even then it just happens by kAkatAlIya-nyAya.

Because, if in any case it doesn't happen, veda-s will be proved false and
useless for Ishvara.


> But then is there not a problem whether
> the same jnAnI will have to again enact the role of a seeker. No. Because,
> another different set of mantras from the infinite, eternal bank of veda
> mantras which sarvajna-Isvara has at his disposal, will unfold in the next
> kalpa. the present set of actors do not represent the limit of the infinite
> knowledge of Sarvajna-Ishvara."
>

Already asked source of knowledge.


> (please also see shAstra-yonitvAt bhAshya of brahma-sUtra - where it says -
> "when even sages like pANiNi can be seen to have much more knowledge than
> what they actually demonstrated, what to speak of Ishvara who has ordained
> this entire dispensation
> of beings, classes etc to emerge.


If Ishvara created veda-s, then they are not eternal and apauruSheya .
He is not like pANini. So, don't compare him with pANini.

this can be seen in conjunction with the
> idea that all "objects"  in the cosmos are nothing more than the names
> representing them as in vAcArambhaNam vikAro nAmadheyam.h.


vAchArambhaNam doesn't say that name creates objects. Ask V. Subrahmanian,
he has done more research on it.
Even if I accept that anyhow to please you, it will create problems. Now
every word, including laukika one, will become equal to veda as it helps
creating objects.


> there is no need
> to look for any solid material to create this universe.


Amazing.
You are saying something which is unacceptable by all, even mImAMsakas.


> the names are
> enough. accordingly the veda is the eternal infinite repository of those
> names, a small portion of which manifests in each kalpa.)
>

Already questioned this view.