[Advaita-l] Logical Basis of Apaureshyatva

[Rajaram Venkataramani]

On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 2:26 AM, kuntimaddi sadananda <
kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Shree Rajaratnam - PraNAms
>
>
**
> I thought I gave logic for saying the statements are not logical.
>
> Here again.
>
>

You need to prove your logic by establishing a vyaapti with dRiShTanta. The
> ball is your court. Miimaamsa does not provide you vyaapti that you need to
> establish the apourusheyatvam on logical grounds - On Scriptural grounds,
> Yes I believe that! If belief of the scriptures to establish the
> apourusheyatvam then we are having a circular arguments. The belief that
> they are apourusheyatvam is just sufficient- no need to establish using
> miimaamsa for that. That is what I called as self-fulfilling prophesy.
>

*I have used deductive reasoning, used in many areas of study, where a
conclusion is considered true as long as it necessarily follows from the
premises. I have not called for faith or use of shastras as the basis of
the reasoning to prove that there are eternal apaureshya texts that give
knowledge because the modern audience is not inclined to accept on faith
especially of the Hindu genre.  Unless my premises or deduction are shown
to be wrong, no one can fault the conclusion. *
Next how is Vedanta pramANa and not the other scriptures? Vedanta is
pramANa because it provides mahaavaakya that equates aham as Brahman -
without these mahaavaakyaas- there is no liberation as Shankara says in
VivekacUDAmaNi -
na yogena saankheyna karmaana no na vidyayaa
bramhaatmaikatva bodhena mokshaH sidhyati na anyathaa||
If any Scripture that provides the equitation jivo brahma eva - then that
becomes a pramANa only. No other scripture other than Vedanta does that.
Hence Faith in Vedanta which I call as science of absolute reality is
required to discover the true nature of oneself. It is not just who am I
investigation and also involve what is this world and the identity of
oneness of subject-object duality. Hence Advaita stands tall even among the
other Vedic matham. For that faith or Shraddhaa is required - shraddhaavan
labhate jnaanam.

*Vedanta is not a pramana according to the tradition. It is the conclusion
based on Vedas as the pramana and applying anumana etc. within the
framework of Vedas as pramana. I am happy to be corrected.*
**
Yes you can take it as my opinion, if you wish. For me apourusheyatvam is
not needed to have a faith in the statement tat tvam asi. It is not
illogical (not saying it is logical),
Hari Om!
Sadananda

>
>
>
> --- On Sun, 11/6/11, Rajaram Venkataramani <rajaramvenk at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> If shraddha alone is enough, then all faiths will be equally valid. As
> differents faiths are mutually contradictory, none of them can be
> considered true. Both Islam and Christianity, for example, assert they are
> the only path. Both of them cannot be true. Or we have to take a position
> that all faiths are valid for its followers. Then the question will be if
> all the followers are equally qualified. If the answer is yes, then there
> cannot be two faiths. If the answer is no, then all faiths cannot be equal.
> Then we are again forced to grade faiths as relative truths. This counters
> our original proposition stated above that all faiths are equally valid.
>
> I do not know if you consider your position to be that of the traditional
> acharyas. In my opinion, it is not the case. Our traditions have defended
> the Veda Dharma with impenetrable fortress of logic. Specifically with
> respect to apaureshyatva, it was defended with logic to deal with
> objections raised at different points in time.
>
> If you agree that my statements are logical and irrefutable, then you
> cannot say that logic cannot be applied to defend apaureshyatva. If you say
> that my statements are illogical, you have to show what is the flaw in the
> logic. A mere assertion on your part will not dismiss the defense.
>
> *There is a lot of work to do in this if I have to publish this as a
> paper.  Once it is done, I hope schools in the US and Europe as well as
> India teach Vedas are apuareshya instead of the current indological view
> point. I hope that this discussion proceeds is in the right direction. *
> **
> Best Regards
> Rajaram Venkataramani
>  _______________________________________________
> 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
>