[Advaita-l] Apaurusheyatva of Veda

Bhaskar YR bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com
Tue Sep 13 05:17:18 CDT 2011

Hare Krishna

All I was trying to convey was that the mahAvAkya cannot be a first time
discovery by somebody. 

>  Ofcourse, I would agree that tattva that mahAvAkya convey cannot be a 
new discovery by somebody, But is there any problem if we say, 'vAkya' 
that which explaining the 'tattva' must be having a linguistic origination 
at some point of time by someone who is 'perfect' to see & realize this 
tattva and capable enough to word it. 

The case of vAmadeva is sometimes cited by pUrvapakShin-s as a case of 
liberation without mahAvAkya shravaNa. An advaitin would answer that such 
liberation is not possible. vAmadeva would have heard the mahAvAkya either
in a previous janma or while still in his mother's womb.

>  That is OK, I dont have any issue in accepting that his current janma's 
jnAna is the result of his previous janma's vedAdhyayana.  But this does 
not mean what he learnt in his previous janma is necessarily a aparusheya 
veda text. As you know, veda itself talking about vAmadeva and his 
realization in mother's womb. 

The pramANatvam of smRti grantha-s is derived from the shruti.

>  Yes, we consider shruti as antya pramANa..but how does it prove that 
shruti is unauthored texts?? 

Also, I was only addressing the issue of apauruSheyatva within the context
of what is essential for advaita-vedAnta. 

>  My question still remain, does this apaurusheyatva tag is indispensable 
to hold  veda as valid antima pramANa??

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list