Answers by Shri Kesava Rao Tadipatri
 |
| Rangoli by Smt.Padmini Rao, Coimbatore |
Note: KT denotes Shri Kesava Rao Tadipatri
1. How do we reconcile epistemological flawlessness of shruti with its ontological pAratantrya ?
KT: Onto-logically if that is categorized as paratantra, then it implies that such ontological flaw is there. If epistemological flawlessness need not imply ontological flawlessness, then where is the need to reconcile?They are two different things.
"apUrNatA" is described as one of the four destructions in case of sentients. apUrNatA and asvAtantrya go together and likewise pUrNatva and svAtantrya go together.
2. How do we address upajIva virOdha in this case of ontological conclusion of vEdas are dependent on Brahman, when such conclusion itself being depending on prior acceptance of faultlessness of vEdas?
KT: I am restating the problem and also adding one more question.
2E is expansion of 2. Question 3 is added; 3E is expansion of 3.
2A and 3A are answers.
2. Is "upajIvyavirodha" posited as follows ?
2E: Why are vedas faultless? Because they are not composed by any author and so is devoid of the flaws of an author. If they are not composed, they should have been independent. However, it is stated that God alone is independent and so Vedas are not independent. If they have the fault of dependence, how can they be faultless?
2A: The problem is with the following conclusions:
2A-1: "If they are not composed, they should have been independent."
2A-2: "If they have the fault of dependence, how can they be faultless?
"authorlessness" and "independence" can not be linked. Why?
We talk of "authorlessness" and "authoredness" only for "jaDa-s".
We talk of "independence" and "dependence" for only sentients.
If a sentient is dependent, then it has a flaw. It can be seen that dependence flaw automatically leads to apUrNata. The faultlessness of vedas is not "absolute flawlessness", but just episetomological flawlessness.
Hence there is no upajIvyavirodha. They are not composed and still they are dependent. They are eternally dependent on the Lord and yet they are flawless in their contents.
3. Also an additional question/doubt is whether it has the flaw of AtmAshraya or anyonyAshraya or chakrakAshraya?
3E: Why Vedas are flawless? Because there is no author. Why should 'not mentioning author' in Vedas and hence its authorlessness is to be taken as true? Because they are flawless.
3A: The problem is with the following conclusion:
"Why should 'not mentioning author' in Vedas and hence its authorlessness is to be taken as true? Because they are flawless."
The authorlessness of vedas is not concluded 'just on the basis of not mentioning the author'. There are several arguments that go into it. So the question of "vedas declaring the authorlessness" does not arise. Then the next step "Because they are flawless" also is inapplicable.
Hence there is none of those flaws.
Shri KrishNArpaNamastu !!!
Comments
Post a Comment