[Advaita-l] Logical Basis of Apaureshyatva

Vidyasankar Sundaresan svidyasankar at hotmail.com
Mon Nov 7 07:34:28 CST 2011

> I am of the opinion that veda apaureshyatva has to be defended from
> logical, historical, scriptural, philosophical, scientific and relgious
> perspective. The discussions on this forum and inputs from the learned
> members is indeed a great help in shaping my defense. It is a detailed
> topic and have completed the draft of the defense from a logical
> perspective. I request the members to review this and point out
> flaws as well as suggestions to improve the same.

Rajaram, may I suggest the following? If you have already approached Sri
Mani Dravid Sastri to learn something about these issues in a traditional way,
please wait to digest all that is taught before formulating your writings. I do
not mean to put a damper on your youthful enthusiasm, but sometimes, well
reasoned reflection is an absolute must.
I am going to address only a few basic issues below, for want of time on my
part. As you want to come up with a more or less independent defense of the
veda and its apaurusheyatva and nityatva (these two attributes are distinct,
by the way), my comments are also going to be divorced from any traditional
discourse about the veda.
> 1. All sounds, whoever or whatever makes it, are vartransformations of
> the frequency of a fundamental sound. Let us call that hum as Om.

Define vartransformation and fundamental sound above. Also, by frequency,
do you mean the unit known as Hz, 1/second? It is not clear to the reader
if this is the case. If yes, how do consonontal stops originate and how do 
they correlate with this frequency? Sound is nothing more than a name to
describe traveling pressure waves in a medium, so how do you propose to
explain the existence of a sound as fundamental at the moment of the origin
of the universe (presuming you want to align your explanation to the Big
Bang theory)? Why is it a hum and do you conceive of it as possessing a
pure frequency? Why not a clatter of noise, involving multiple discordant

Finally, even if so, explain why the existence of such a fundamental sound
should be accepted by anyone and why it should further be accepted to be
the same as Om. Explain why this first postulate of yours, which involves a
lot of concepts, needs to be accepted on a logical basis, without any SraddhA
in these concepts and in the symbolism of Om-kAra.
All the other points that you have elucidated can wait...
ps. Does your formulation have anything to do with Pythagorean notions of
the music of the spheres? 		 	   		  

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list