[Advaita-l] Apaurusheyatva

[Ram Garib]

--- "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <jaldhar at braincells.com> wrote:

> > -- All we know is that Yajnavalkya turns up one
> day, and claims to have
> > discovered more of the Vedas. How do people judge
> it to be really Veda?
> 
> For one thing, most of the contents of the
> Shuklayajurveda are the same as
> the Krshnayajurveda, just arranged differently.

Re-arrangement works for yajurveda. How about atharva
veda? We know at one time it was not counted among
veda-s. What led to its acceptance as veda?

> Exactly.  We call it Einsteins theory, purely be
> convention.  Now imagine
> someone said "Einstein was a Jew so as Hindus we
> don't have to believe in
> relativity."  That would be absurd right?  This is
> the whole point of the
> doctrine of apaurusheyatva; that we should look at
> the meaning of the
> words of the Rshis instead of trying to second guess
> them based on their
> personalities (or gender etc.)

Apaurusheyatva of veda-s is more of a philosophical
stand than assertion of a fact that occurred (or did
not occur). Consider that sankhya-yoga assertion about
veda-as-the-word-of-God led to cyclical fallacy in
their argument. Apaurusheyatva is an attempt in
improving the philosophical basis of veda as a
pramana. Other than that, it does not seem to have
much use.

With regards,
Ram Garib


		
__________________________________________________________ 
Yahoo! India Matrimony: Find your partner now. Go to http://yahoo.shaadi.com