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

[Rajaram Venkataramani]

*Thanks for this. Taking Vedas as axiomatic truths is logically acceptable
as long as one is able to handle objections. The only problem is that
objections and defence will go on as with any axiomatic system. A better
approach would be an inferential proof that lalitAlAlitaH alluded to but
have not seen that formulated in clear terms. In the mean time, there is no
harm in pursuing with word-meaning(object) concept of the mimamsakas to see
if it is defendable in current times. *

On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 2:41 PM, Raghav Kumar <raghavkumar00 at gmail.com>wrote:

> 1. Before seeing Sabara bhAShya, you may find it even more helpful and
> easier to see the BSB devatAdhikaraNam 1.3.28- to 1.3.30; where the
> idea of information etc mentioned by you is presented to some extent
> in very clear terms.

*I will. *

> 2. The eternal connection between the word and its meaning, holds good
> for both laukika (non-Vedic) as well as Vedic sentences. Then what is
> the difference ?

*Based on the conjecture that an object = information (i.e. meaning of the
word),  we can say that the words can exist in 5 possible states. One is
when words are non-different from the object.  Second, words reveal the
object as they are but are distinct from the object. Third, they distort the
object. Fourth, they cover the object. Three and Four are laukika where as
One and Two are vaidhika. *
**
*As an object can be transformed in to another, the inference is that the
differentiation between objects is not real. Therefore there is only one
object. So, in the fifth state all words are non-different from this one
object. *

3. A small digression is required here to see the difference between
laukika and vedic sentences
If you are ok with the idea that this universe is an intelligent
creation, even as an architect has a plan "a priori" which is then
unfolded and actualized. Then this plan of an architect which resides
in a template form in him, is nothing but "information" and all
information is encapsulated in symbols. Any set of symbols which
encapsulate information are nothing but "langauge".  Now the sum total
of all the AkRti-s, the templates or designs for all entities and
species, living and non--living is there in the Veda ; so says the
Veda itself. Including the plan for how these entities will mutually
react and interact ; all such possible inter-connections between these
entities are mentioned; i.e., karma and karma-phala. Such information
(Veda) should have existed in some potential form even before the
design was implemented (the world was created).

The plan of a building cannot be said to come into existence after the
building has been built.
*It is logical but then rests on the assumption or belief or logical support
for the existence of Ishwara. When we logically establish Vedas are valid,
we cannot start with the knowns rather than unknowns such as Ishwara. *

"sarveShAm tu sa nAmAnikarmANi ca pRthak pRthak, vedashabdebhya evAdau
pRthak samsthAsca nirmame" "all the different names and forms and also
the karma-s and also the various stages of life, He created from the
Vedic words themselves"

"sa bhUriti vyAharat sa bhUmimasRjata" - He uttered the word bhUH and
thereby created the bhUloka
* *
"Ete asRgram-indavas-tiraHpavitram-AshavaH vishvAn-yabhisaubhagA"
(Chandogya brAhmaNa)
"He created the devata-s by thinking of the word "EtE",; men by the
word "asRgraM; the manes by the word "indava"; the planets by the word
"tiraH-pavitraM; the hymns set to music by the word "AsavaH, the
shAstras used after the hymns by the word vishvAni, and by the word
"abhisaubhagAH", he created the other beings."
*Correlating with the state theory of the information stated above, before
the word bhU is uttered it is in the fifth state one with the speaker as are
other words such as EtE, asRgraM, indava, tiraH-pavitraM, AsavaH,
abhisaubhagAh etc. Once it is uttered perfectly, it is in the state One -
non-different from the particularized object. When it is repeated perfectly
by someone other the speaker, it is in state two, revealing the particular
object. When it is incorrectly repeated, it is in state three, distroting
the particular object. When it is forgotten, it is in state four, hiding the
particular object. So, one can say that when the original speaker goes to
sleep, He forgets all the words leading to dissolution of objects. When He
wakes up, He recollects and utters them, leading to creation. *
**
*It would be interesting to see if all this can be established logically. *