[Advaita-l] apaurusheyatva of veda-s
Siva Senani Nori
sivasenani at yahoo.com
Fri Aug 19 10:01:21 CDT 2011
Therefore the scientific laws and theories are on par with (as apaurusheya
as) the ideas and knowledge revealed by the vedic karma kAndam. Both are
useful, provisional and are subsequently seen to be not absolutely true.
How would that go !! .
- The short answer is: against what SankarabhagavatpAda taught.
- Many subscribe to this notion that a) Vedas are actually composed and compiled by the families of Visvamitra, Vasistha etc.; b) that to impress the seeker it is said to be apaurusheya; c) that one, while being sympathetic to this particular aspect of pedagogy, is smart enough to see through this deception; and d) that one would still accept all the good that the Vedas have to teach, without bothering about the paurusheyatva of Vedas.
- This, however, is a trap. Brahman is not something that can be solely deduced; all that reasoning can come up with is only a hypothesis. It is possible to know that there is Brahman only due to the testimony of the Vedas; if they are paurusheya, they cannot be testimony. Smritis are valid means of knowledge because they are based on the Vedas.
- This has been discussed many times on this list, say in May 2007. Here is a link to messages in May 2007: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/2007-May/subject.html
- Also, this is something that won't get settled over emails. One needs to study the scriptures and Sastras to appreciate this and thus develop the deep respect for Vedas that is a pre-requisite (Sraddhaa - faith - is a part of the Samaadi shaTkam) to study Vedanta.
Here is wishing you good luck in studying more deeply, more of the relevant works. Meanwhile, if you carry the notion that Sruti might indeed be apaurusheya, it might be useful.
N. Siva SenaniFrom: Raghav Kumar <raghavkumar00 at gmail.com>
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list