[Advaita-l] On rationality; was "Vedas are not apauresheya according to the Vedas ?"
bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com
Thu Jan 24 06:10:26 CST 2013
I am afraid you are not getting my point here.
I think to prove veda-s are apaurusheya, you are depending on mainly two
sources. They are :
(a) Veda-s are aparusheya because veda-s themselves say so.
(b) Veda-s are aparusheya because some parusheya texts say so.
Here (a) cannot be held valid as I explained in my previous mail.
And (b) too cannot be the valid means for the group who are arguing that
paurusheya grantha-s are not free from defects. So, to prove veda-s
apaurusheyatva you have two possible ways :
(1) accept veda-s are apaurusheya because it is an unconditional
axiomatic statement floated by traditional Acharya-s, being a traditional
follower you have to accept it without further questioning.
(2) accept that veda-s are apaurusheya because it has been said like that
in some paurusheya grantha written by jeevan muktha Acharya(s), in whose
words I have complete faith.
No.(2) is what you are using here mainly by quoting H.H. commentaries
which is again a parusheya work. Anyway, both these stands mainly based
on faith and in No. (2) there is a further extended belief that though it
is paurusheya grantha, there will not be any defects/ fallacies with
regard to whatever written there!!
As I said earlier, for the traditionally polished mind both these stands
are acceptable but not so for the outsiders who are questioning our stance
on veda-s apaurusheyatva. If you say, this aparusheyatva is not meant
for outsiders for any debate then it is as good as saying 'apaurusheyatva'
status of the veda-s is just a belief system existing within the circle of
vaidhika dharma followers.
Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
From: V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>
To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta
<advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
Date: 01/24/2013 03:34 PM
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] On rationality; was "Vedas are not
apauresheya according to the Vedas ?"
Sent by: advaita-l-bounces at lists.advaita-vedanta.org
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com> wrote:
> Hare Krishna
> Likewise, a person can approach the veda-s too by thinking that it is a
> work of perfectionist or a thorough person (like rishi like veda vyAsa,
> shuka, ramaNa, shankara bhagavatpAda etc.), who documented/worded his
I think you have missed what the HH is saying and are proposing something
that the HH has questioned!! How did that person attain such a
perfection? What sAdhana he followed and who prescribed that sAdhana? If
it is AptavAkya, how did that Apta become qualified to be so? These are
the questions the HH asks and finally arrives at the apauruSheya veda to
the source from which all this has to descend. There will be no infinite
regress as you think.On the other hand there will be an end to this trail
at the apauruSheya veda stage. No one can question further: 'how and from
whom did the Veda know?' for the Veda is not a person, puruSha. This is
the only way the topic can be understood and appreciated.
And what is to be remembered in all this is that the Veda apauruSheyatva
not intended to be an answer to nAstika-s. It is meant for those who are
within the sampradaya but might get questions at some stage or the other.
It can come up at the stage of one's vedanta shravana stage. It might also
help those others outside the sampradaya who might find the argument
convincing enough to take to the teaching of the Vedanta. Many youngsters
of our own sampradaya who have not applied their minds to this can very
well ask questions on this and here the apauruSheyatva will be immensely
helpful. And the rule: 'shrutyanugRhIta tarka' is applicable here too.
Also to be noted, in this very context, is that, the 'journey' that I
mentioned is not extraneous to the Bh.Gita; it can be charted within the
Gita itself: We see that even the Lord, while giving out the teaching of
Brahman, acknowledges the authority of the Veda rather than His own:
yadakSharam vedavido vadanti vishanti yadyatayo vItarAgAH
yadicChanto brahmacharyam charanti tat te padam sangraheNa pravakShye
8.11. which is reminiscent of the KathopaniShat mantra:
sarve vedA yatpadamAmananti....where even the Acharya Yama does not say
teaching is his; he points to the authority of the Veda. Again we see in
the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad: 'tam tu aupaniShadam pRcchAmi where the
PuruSha that is sought to be known is not anyone's imagination (like a
novelist's character) but someone who is known in and through the
Upanishads alone. See how impersonal all these luminaries, even the Lord,
are when it comes to acknowledging the authority of the Veda which itself
is no person. And what is more, even the Upanishad itself acknowledges
authority of the Upanishads!!
For the 'vedAntakRt vedavideva chAham' of the Bh.Gita 15th chapter
says: 'vedAntArthasampradAyakRt' [Bhagavan Krishna is saying that He is
originator of the teaching sampradaya of the purport of the Vedaanta
(Upanishads)] thereby preventing anyone from thinking that the Lord is the
author of the Vedanta.
To unsubscribe or change your options:
For assistance, contact:
listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list