[Advaita-l] Scholarly Article on Why Vedas are Valid

Rajaram Venkataramani rajaramvenk at gmail.com
Sun Oct 16 05:50:57 CDT 2011

```On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 9:24 AM, Raghav Kumar <raghavkumar00 at gmail.com>wrote:

> On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 10:43 AM, Rajaram Venkataramani
> <rajaramvenk at gmail.com> wrote:
> > *Thanks for this. Taking Vedas as axiomatic truths is logically
> acceptable
> > as long as one is able to handle objections. The only problem is that
> > objections and defence will go on as with any axiomatic system
>
> Instead of saying the "the Vedas are axiomatic truths", we should be
> just saying "the Vedas are truths."  or "Vedic sentences convey valid
> knowledge"
>
As you know, there are three ways in which the term axiom is used. In
Mathematics, there are logical axioms which are universally true (e.g. x !=
- x). There are non-logical axioms which are true in a limited sense (e.g. x
> - x, true for postive integers). There are non-mathematical axioms, which
are self-evident and true in the context of a theory (e.g. "Time is
continous" and "Time is discreet", both are true and self-evident in a
limited sense of a theory). I think that "Vedas are truths" is an assumption
and falls in the category of the third type of axiom. If this axiom serves
an useful purpose (e.g. performance of an yajna as per Vedas to produce
rain), then they are as valid as any theory in an empirical system such as
Applied Physics. Given God is omnipotent is an axiomatic truth of the
non-logical type. If God exists and is omniscient, then he will be
omnipotent because one who is omniscient cannot be unaware of any means
to achieve any goal. It is valid as long as the existence of an omniscient
God is. "I exist" is a logical axiom because it is universally true. It is
self - evident and not contradicted by pratyaksha or anumana. What do yout
think?

For all sentences, the meaning of the word is intrinsic to the word though
the intepration is different. I think the speciality of the Vedic sentences
lies in their identity with meaning, which is significant if we prove that
all objects are information only.

```