[Advaita-l] Is the eternity and apaurusheyatva of Vedas

[Siva Senani Nori]

Sir
I have gone though the exhaustive note of Sri Chittaranjan Naik on apaurusheyatva and enjoyed the presentation based on Sastras. I am certain that someone like Sri Naik who has gone to such depth of Sastras fully agrees that, as per Sankaracharya, only that tarka which is Srutyanugriheeta is acceptable. 

Regards,
Senani 
 
  On Mon, 10 Jun 2019 at 3:56 PM, Bhaskar YR<bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com> wrote:   praNAms Sri Sivasenani Nori prabhuji
Hare Krishna

Apaurusheyatva of Veda (or Ishvara whose nishvasa is Veda) is a matter of belief.

>  yes, it is a belief that has to be there to consider it untya pramANa.  We should not take the risk of convincing this stand of tradition to the outsiders those who donot have any traditional barriers to believe this.  

Vedapraamaanya does not necessarily require Apaurusheyatva. 

>  Yes that is what the point can vaidika argue who consider veda as pramANa and not necessarily apaurusheya.  Are we not considering smruti (like Geeta etc.) and nyAya prasthAna ( vedAnta sUtra-s) as valid pramANa along with shabda pramANa.  And as a matter of fact by merely looking at the text (pada - vAkya) we cannot categorically declare it is apaurusheya veda or otherwise.  For example, in mAndukya up., Agama prakaraNa for us is gaudapAda  virachita and the same text has been considered as apaurusheya veda by dvaitins.  So, there is no foolproof parameters to conclude whether one particular text is anAdi or Adi, written by someone at one particular point of time.  Its all within the traditional barriers as axioms.  No bonafide traditionalist would dare to question the stand of tradition since the time immemorial.  

>  But Sri Chittaranjan prabhuji thinks that it is not mere belief, veda-s can be established as apaurusheya by faultless logic too to even outsiders.  And the main source for that is nyAya school.  I am cc'ing him, if he finds the time I am requesting him to participate.  

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar