[Advaita-l] Apaurusheyatva of Veda

[Ramesh Krishnamurthy]

On 13 September 2011 14:30, Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com> wrote:

> (i)  Finally,  I am not able to understand what is going to fall on our
> head if we say tattvamasi, ahaM brahmAsmi ityAdi mAhAvAkya-s are the
> 'worded' revelation of some mahAjnAni-s just like vAmadeva's findings ahaM
> manu, ahaM sUrya etc.
>
>

All I was trying to convey was that the mahAvAkya cannot be a first time
discovery by somebody. If it were so, then that somebody would have employed
other pramANa-s (such as pratyakSha etc) to discover the mahAvAkya and we
would have never had any need for shAstra pramANa. In fact, the very nature
of the mahAvAkya precludes the possibility of it being substituted by any
other pramANa.

The case of vAmadeva is sometimes cited by pUrvapakShin-s as a case of
liberation without mahAvAkya shravaNa. An advaitin would answer that such
liberation is not possible. vAmadeva would have heard the mahAvAkya either
in a previous janma or while still in his mother's womb.

The pramANatvam of smRti grantha-s is derived from the shruti.

Also, I was only addressing the issue of apauruSheyatva within the context
of what is essential for advaita-vedAnta. Vidyasankar has already explained
the issue from a broader vaidika perspective.