[Advaita-l] Is the eternity and apaurusheyatva of Vedas a mere belief

[Srinath Vedagarbha]

On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 3:52 PM Venkatraghavan S via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> Namaste Bhaskar ji,
> One way to link the concepts of svatah prAmANaya and apauruSheyatva is as
> follows:
>
> If we accept Vedas have svatah prAmANya, then what they reveal is
> intrinsically valid, unless there is some other pramANa that overrules
> them.


 For that matter, this svataH pramANya is not restricted only to
Veda/shabda.  svatah prAmANya is generic position which argues that a
given cognition (either pratyaksha or shabda) is valid mUlataH unless it is
overridden by a bhAdaka jnyAna. A snake cognition is indeed a real snake
and hence valid unless if you have a bhAdhaka cognition of a rope. In this
case validity for snake perception is just confirmed, and not created
afresh.



> There is shruti which says vAca vIrUpa nityayA and asya mahato bhUtasya
> nisshvasitam rigvedo..etc establishing their nityatva, apauruSheyatva etc.
> Thus if we agree with svatah prAmANya vAda, vedas talking of their anAditva
> etc is itself the pramANa for it, unless there is another pramANa to
> disprove it.
>


Veda's such talks about its own anaaditva and nityatva should not be
considered as pramANa to accept Veda itself.

Fundamental validity for Veda is asserted because its bAdhaka
(pourushEyatva) stands un-established by opponent. When no bhAdaka,
pramANyaM siddham savataH eva cha!

Thus, role of apourusheyatva vaada is to refute any bhAdkatvam only and not
to assert validity afresh. It is not the case as you think that because a
text says about itself that it is nitya make it nitya.  All vedic mention
of its nityatva about itself has no bearing on its validity. If vEdas have
it other way (that anityatva of itself is mentioned), then it is the case
of self defeating.

Regards,
sv