[Advaita-l] Apaurusheyatva of Veda

[Bhaskar YR]

It is precisely to rule out any *possible* defect in the Veda, however
infinitesimally small that possibility may be, it has to be accepted as
apauruSheya. Any work created by a human would be open to at least the
possibility of some defect somewhere in the work. And such defects could
lead to an inconsistency. 

praNAms Sri Ananda Hudli prabhuji
Hare Krishna

Thanks a lot for spending your precious time to participate in this thread 
prabhuji.  I am really indebted to it.  Hope you wont mind if I share some 
fundamental problem which I am facing in accepting the consistency in veda 
pratipAdita vichAra. 

Above you said, the tag apaurusheyatva is a must to avoid any defect and 
inconsistency in veda-s.  But if we take veda pratipAdita vichAra 'as 
such' at different parts of veda/vedAnta, it is very difficult (IMO, 
nearly impossible) to find any consistency/uniformity if not 'defect'. Let 
me take the example of most important teaching of veda i.e. brahman, at 
one place it talks about saguNa, sAkAra brahma and at other place it 
denies the same & says it is nirguNa, nirvishesha, niravayava etc. yatO 
vAcho nivartante aparApya manasa saha..na tatra chakshurgacchati, na 
vAggacchati, nO manaH it says at one place and at another place the same 
vedAnta insists manasaivedaM AptavyaM neha nAnAsti kiMchana and tad 
vijnAnArthaM  gurumevAbhigacchet, AchAryavAn purushO veda etc.  All these 
declarations in shruti-s show that 'the direct reading' of shruti would 
not help us to find any sort of consistency in brahma vishaya itself. 

And next is creation, again, here also, the presentation of shruti is not 
consistent at any stretch of imagination. Rigveda exclaims 'kO addhA veda 
ka iha pravOchat, kuta AjAtA kuta iyaM visrushtiH?? whereas prashna says 
he created life, from life faith, ether, air, light, water, earth, senses, 
mind and food. And from food vigour, tapas, mantra-s, religious works, the 
worlds and in the worlds, the name etc., if we go to Itareya, it gives 
some different account, it says Atman alone in the beginning, he thought 
'let me create the worlds' and then he created these worlds, ambhas, 
mareechis, mara and ApaH etc., mundaka gives us the spider example to 
explain creation, and fattening of brahman through tapas & burst into 
creation, taitereeya says something else...If we look at these 
explanations, we will come to know, veda/vedAnta as a whole definitely not 
consistent in presenting an uniform order of creation.  Again to see any 
consistency in these contradictions, we again depend upon 'paurusheya' 
'AchArya vAkya' & try to reconcile all these with some methodology like 
adhyArOpa-apavAda, kArya-kAraNa etc.  And this Acharya vAkya also towards 
this reconciliation varies from saMpradAya to saMpradAya claiming 
'consistency' in their own tradition. 

In short what I am trying to say here is, if we take & treat the 
veda-s/vedAnta as a direct reference or a direct source material for the 
settlement of any aloukika or indriyAteeta vichAra,  thinking that it is 
self-sufficient (svataH prAmANya) we definitely fail to find any sort of 
consistency or uniformity in scriptural conclusions.  We badly & 
helplessly have to depend on our 'AcharyOpadesha' which is again a 
paurusheya!!?? 

And prabhuji, what about grammatical errors (vyAkaraNa dOsha) in veda-s?? 
Though I am not competent to say anything on this, during bhAshya shAnti 
classes, I used to hear like ' as per grammar it should have been like 
this, but what to do, this is shruti, we have to accept whatever is there 
in it as final'!! 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar