[Advaita-l] Veda as source of dharma.
dvnsarma at gmail.com
Sun Oct 9 09:35:50 CDT 2011
On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 7:36 PM, Praveen R. Bhat <bhatpraveen at gmail.com>wrote:
> Hari Om, Sarmaji,
> 2011/10/9 D.V.N.Sarma డి.వి.ఎన్.శర్మ <dvnsarma at gmail.com>
> > अथातस्सामयाचारिकान् धर्मान् व्याख्यास्यामः।(1.1)
> > धर्मज्ञ समयः प्रमाणम्।(1.2)
> > वेदाश्च।(1.3)
> > The first place is given to the instruction of people who know dharma.
> > Second place is given to Veda.
> I'm just wondering about what the terminology "people who know dharma"
> means. To my understanding it perhaps means those that follow the tradition
> (of dharma). Then naturally, the question would arise as to where did they
> learn the dharma from? Tracing back in the tradition, I'd assume that it
> would lead to one rishi or another, which would mean shruti.
> Tradition comes from father to son, society to the individual etc.
It need not necssarily be from the vedas at some point.
Just from one rishi to another does not constitute sruti. In such a case
their daily utterances should all be sruti.
> > Gautama Dharmasutra says.
> > तुल्यबलविरोधे विकल्पः।(1.4)
> > If the veda and instruction of people who know dharma are opposite and
> > of equal strength either can be followed.
> mImAMsakAs hold that even smritis are based around a lost/untraceable Vedic
> injunction and equally valid source of dharma. When they are 'perceived' to
> be opposing, they prefer the shruti.
> The point is, as far as mimamsakas are concerned when vedic injuction is
there only that
has to be followed not the other. There is no scope at all for the above
Why do we hanker for far fetched and twisted interpretations?
> --Praveen R. Bhat
> /* Through what should one know That owing to which all this is known!
> [Br.Up. 4.5.15] */
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list