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

[श्रीमल्ललितालालितः]

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



On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 17:31, Rajaram Venkataramani
<rajaramvenk at gmail.com>wrote:

> Dear Shri laliAlalitah,
>
> The vedic seers might not have claimed authorship but there is no evidence
> to suggest that they were not the authors.


You are saying that there are no claims of authorship of such a great work,
even then those who are not claiming are authors.
How ?
Because they are not claiming and are seers only.
Great !!!


> So, a modern scholar will not
> accept that a text can be unauthored


What do you mean by 'So' ? You have not provided any logic.

You must say that :
As every word is seen authored, so veda-s are also authored by someone.

Now here we say :
It is essential for a word to be authored, but as author is not perceivable
so there is no author of veda-s.
As a pot if not perceived on table is said to be non-existent there. So,
author which is not perceived proves unauthoredness of veda-s.

especially when it is known that the
> texts reflect the contemporary knowledge of history, geography and science.
>

That's debatable.
We don't accept that veda-s reveal any history, etc.
Why ?
Because what a text conveys is defined by watching it's start-end, etc.
Text is valid for only that portion which is not perceived by any other
means.
Why ?
Because this is inherent to every means of knowledge. For example eyes are
valid for rUpa which is not perceived by any other sense.


> It would be good if we said that Vedas are inerrant.


I said that as long as you are unable to show errors, every knowledge is
valid. This is the way every pramANa works.
Show me errors and I'll show refutations.


> This is the same line
> as taking Vedas as axiomatic truths and showing that they cannot be shown
> to
> be wrong.


You lack basic knowledge of nature of pramANa-s. So, you are talking like
this.
We don't create rules for veda-s and our comfort. We watch our behavior,
etc. and establish them.
We watched every pramANa and it's nature and deduced that every pramANa is
taken valid till it's not proved wrong.
If this is called axiom. Let it be. You and whole world are operating
according to it. Why are you showing discrimination towards vedea-s ?


> The problem with this is that there are statements that will
> contradict established scientific data.


As long as we are able to show errors in Scientific Data, we will accept
veda-s in whole.
But, when they are valid and veda-s says against it, we leave that meaning
of veda-s and find other possible meaning.
Remember, contradiction of pramANa-s arises when two pramANa-s generate
contradicting knowledge about same thing. And the subject of veda-s is
unique to it. So, there are no chances of conflict.
Where ever you see conflict, you are free to apply logic to reach correct
result.


> Theory of Evolution is as grounded
> in genetic and fossil data.


How ?
Genes show similarity.
Fossils tell existence of specific animals.
They don't tell evolution.


> A lot of genetic engineering and medicine
> depends on this today.


They don't depend on evolution.


> Now, Vedas propose a Theory of Creation - Purusha
> Suktam for example leave alone smrti.


You are talking as these studies are devoid of errors.
Present any authentic work on evolution which is not opposed or refuted by
anyone.
Search refutations of evolution theory and you will get a lot. This shows
that it's erroneous too.


> How would you account for such
> "erroneous perception"
>

First of all tell all people who support evolution theory to reach a common
agreement and refute every other theory and refutation of evolution theory.
Once you do this, come to us and call our creation-theory erroneous. Till
then you can't determine ours as erroneous, but you are free to doubt.