[Advaita-l] Accepting Possibility of Error in Sastras

[STEVE]

Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya at yahoo.com> wrote:

>Dear friends,
>
>It will be good if you can give the transliterated version of the text of the V.78 & 79, i n case typing out the Devanagari script is a botheration. May be Sastriji can help.
>
>Regards,
>Sunil KB
>
>
>
>
>________________________________
> From: Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya at yahoo.com>
>To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> 
>Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 5:34 PM
>Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Accepting Possibility of Error in Sastras
> 
>
>Dear friends,
>
>Quote
>However, we see that Madhusudana says in Siddanthabindu (v 79),
>"The scriptures may state something that is merely the outcome of
>delusion".
>Unquote
>
>I shall be thankful if RV or any other member can kindly give the Sanskrit texts of v. 78 &79 of Siddhantabindu in Devanagari script (unicode).
>
>Regards,
>Sunil KB
>
>
>________________________________
> From: Rajaram Venkataramani <rajaramvenk at gmail.com>
>To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> 
>Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 6:22 AM
>Subject: [Advaita-l] Accepting Possibility of Error in Sastras
> 
>In many religions, the scriptures are considered inerrant. We also consider
>the sastras to be the authroity. There is a lot of logic given to establish
>why sabda is pramana. There are stories such as Kumarila Bhatta's
>where complete acceptance of the authority of the sastras is
>reinforced. However, we see that Madhusudana says in Siddanthabindu (v 79),
>"The scriptures may state something that is merely the outcome of
>delusion". Here he admits that sastras can be erroneous. Though the
>tradition accepts the vedic model for creation, we see that there is a
>recognition of a contradictions there that is to be resolved through
>reason. For example, Gaudapada says (I.23), "In the matter of being
>created, whether from the already existent or from the non-existent also,
>the Sruti is equal, that is
> supporting both views. What is associated with
>or fortified with logical reasoning holds not the other".  The importance
>of reasoning is also stressed by Madhusudana, "The creation of names and
>forms by Him who does the triplication in BSB 2.4.20 in only an explanatory
>statement and cannot nullify quintuplication which is established by
>reasoning".  Sankara himself says, forget where, "Even a thousand sruti
>statements cannot make fire cold." In his bhashyas, we often see him quote
>sruti and then the opponent makes a logical counter to sruti. Sankara does
>not dismiss off the opponent saying that there cannot be a logical
>opposition because already the point has been established using sruti. He
>defends his position using logic.
>
>Are there conditions in which sastras can be accepted as erroneous? I am
>not talking about a presumption of error in sastras without evidence. But
>when there is concrete evidence
> based on pratyaksha and anumana that shows
>that the sastras are not correct, what is the valid traditional response?
>_______________________________________________
>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
>_______________________________________________
>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