[Advaita-l] Scholarly Article on Why Vedas are Valid

Siva Senani Nori sivasenani at yahoo.com
Mon Oct 10 22:44:52 CDT 2011

>The argument is that Vedic view is primitive on objects that the senses can perceive. Vedas are not blamed for silence on a subject such as computer science. They are accused of being wrong on a subject such as astronomy. 
>If the theory of evolution is true, then there is no room for saying that Brahma created manasa putras such as Narada, Sanat Kumara and Sapta Rishis. This means that we cannot claim to belong to the gotra of a particular rishi. 

- Can we have the specific instances? To my knowledge, the Vedas do not say anything wrong about astronomy; nor is the word maanasa-putra used in the Vedas. Both these instances are from outside the Vedas - from books on Jyotisha and Puranas / smritis, which are not Vedas.

>It is not only the Christian missionary scholars who said this but nitya agnihotirs such as PV Kane and Ganapati Sastry.  

- This is a different topic altogether: Times Make the Man or Man Makes the Times. 

- Even if an Indian, a nitya-agnihotri (? - I doubt Kane was one in a strict sense) to boot, says these, the answer that we are only dealing with a sample is valid.

> of scrutiny. I am discussion with an expert on astrology on predicting share prices. He says he is able to achieve 70% accuracy. I want to get it to the level of 100% accuracy. 

- I do not think it is possible* or desirable. The traditionalists say that Vedic rituals today do not yield results with that level of accuracy due to errors in procedure.

* It is said Parvati devi has cursed those capable of 100% true prediction with instant death, if the future were revealed. They might know, but are forbidden from speaking it out.

N. Siva Senani

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list