[Advaita-l] Apaurusheyatva of Veda

Rajaram Venkataramani rajaramvenk at gmail.com
Wed Sep 14 01:36:43 CDT 2011

It is a brilliant explanation. But one can argue that the naturalistic
explanation for the formation of world (big bang) and life  (evolution) are
simpler and based on observed phenomena. So, one should accept scientific
theory instead of Purusha Suktam or Puranic descriptions, which involves
more complex and unseen forces. If one accepts the scientific theory, then
there is no evidence for God or eternal scriptures. These are simply recent
human inventions in the long span of time - just blind beliefs. How does
Shankara counter atheism based on scientific thinking? Which schools of
ancient thought are closest to the philosophy of modern science? It is
probably a separate thread.

Note: I know the Gaudiya Vaishnava counter to the philosophy of modern
science and their justification for the use of the products of scientific
thinking. It is good but not water-tight.

On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 4:42 AM, Anand Hudli <anandhudli at hotmail.com> wrote:

> In his bhAShya on 1.3.29, Shankara BhagavatpAda says, "svantantrasya
> karturasmaraNAdibhiH sthite vedasya nityatve...", the eternality of Vedas
> is
> established because they are not known to have an author or authors. Note
> that this is not the same as saying the author or authors of the Vedas are
> not known, as for example in the case of an anonymous work. If we consider
> the Rg Veda, every mantra can be traced to a Rishi, but this Rishi is not
> the author of that mantra. He is said to be the draShTA or the seer. He
> "saw" the mantra that already existed. For many generations, the Vedas were
> orally handed down from one generation to the next. There was never any
> time
> when someone said, "The Vedas were composed by this author or these
> authors."
> In fact, one can argue that eternality of the Vedas (nityatva) and their
> unauthored-ness (apaurusheyatva) are two sides of the same coin. One
> follows
> from the other. If eternality is accepted, there can be two possibilities.
> Either they are authored like other works or not. If they are authored, the
> author(s) would have to be created afresh every time after a Pralaya so
> that
> the Vedas would come into existence again. And the author(s) would have to
> compose exactly the same way they did before the Pralaya. This is,
> obviously, a heavier assumption to make than accepting that the Vedas are
> without an author. In logic (Nyaya) this principle of accepting a
> conclusion
> that needs lighter explanation as opposed to a heavier one is called
> lAghavatva or the principle or parsimony or Occam's razor.
> Anand
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list