[Advaita-l] On rationality; was "Vedas are not apauresheya according to the Vedas ?"

[Bhaskar YR]

praNAms
Hare Krishna

but it is the Veda alone which establishes Brahman. This point has been 
made by BhagavatpAda in his bhAshyam under "tattu samanvayAt" (1.1.4), 
wherein the very first point of discussion ends with the assertion 
"tasmAtsiddham brahmaNaH SAstrapramANakatvam

>  Here, in this very sUtra bhAshya,  shankara further clarifies how the 
shAstra is the pramANa for knowing the brahmaN.  Here objection is : if 
brahman is not an object of any action, then it cannot be maintained that 
tha shAstra is the means of knowing it.  For this shankara replies : Not 
so, for the shAstra purports to wipe off the distinctions superimposed 
(adhyArOpita) on brahman by avidyA.  The shAstra does not indeed propose 
to teach brahman as such and such an object, but it teaches as no object 
(aprameya) at all, being the inmost Self and removes all distinctions 
created by avidyA such as the jnAntru, jnAna and jneya.  bhagavatpAda 
elsewhere in sUtra bhAshya Atman or Self as is well-known is no 
adventitious thing for any one, for He is self-established. 

> so, in short shruti is called pramANa (means of knowledge) by courtesy 
since it removes the distinction superimposed on brahman by avidyA and it 
(shAstra) cannot categorically say such and such is brahman!! 

>  I know this observation would add nothing to the context of this 
discussion but we can always keep it as a side note while saying shAstra 
is antya pramANa to establish brahman.

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar