0

Which philosophical arguments support claims like

  • The Vedas are the eternal truths of God, or

  • Veda has existed forever and will exist forever?

Which pramāṇas – e.g., pratyakșa, anumāna, śabda – support such type of statement?

See one of the answers to What went wrong in the practise of Hinduism?

Jo Wehler
  • 20,817
  • 2
  • 26
  • 77
  • I find that answer annoying, embarrassing... And disturbing. Because it is near enough to truth that I can't say it's wrong. And it's wrong enough that I am appalled. To be frank my [summarily deleted answer](https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/q/64989/37256) is way less contentious and more objective than that answer (or any answer I could write in rebuttal) And any answer I could write would likely get likewise summarily deleted midway through discussion. So this comment must suffice. – Rushi Aug 07 '19 at 06:31
  • There is no logical argument for accepting the Vedas as the eternal truths of God. To assert or accept the vedas as the authority in things transcendental, is that which separates different Indian philosophical schools into astika (orthodox) and nastika (heterodox). The eternity of the vedas is established in the rig veda 10.71.3. See Brahma Sutra verse 1.3.28-29 (here - https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/brahma-sutras). From these you will see that it is pratyaksa and sabda. – Swami Vishwananda Aug 07 '19 at 06:43
  • @Swami Vishwananda Your answer confirms that „accepting the Vedas as the eternal truths of God“ is a controversial issue in Indian philosophy. You point to important Indian schools (Buddhists, Jains, Lokāyatas) which reject this assessment. I do not understand: How do other Indian schools arrive at the estimation that a property like „being the ethernal truth of God“ can be verified by pratyakşa, i.e. is present before the eyes. Concepts like „God“ or „ethernal“ are big words. And it is controversial whether these concepts have a reference object at all. – Jo Wehler Aug 07 '19 at 21:11
  • @Swami Vishwananda The Brahma Sūtra 1.3.28 simply states (śabda): The world originates from the Vedic word. And this is known by anumāna and pratyakşa. Do you find the subsequent language theory in Saṅkara‘s bhāşya a convincing argument? – Jo Wehler Aug 07 '19 at 21:11
  • see sankara's commentary on 1.3.28. I included 1.3.28 as sankara's commentary lends itself to a greater understanding of 1.3.29 and the commentary of 1.3.29. – Swami Vishwananda Aug 08 '19 at 09:53
  • On your first comment, pratyaksa refers to perception. On a sensual level it can be interpreted as 'seeing' or as perceiving through one of the 5 senses. But 'God' or 'It' is Spirit, 'It' cannot be perceived by the 5 senses, beyond the perception of the 5 senses. God can only be perceived through a supersensual experience. – Swami Vishwananda Aug 08 '19 at 10:13
  • All the schools did not arrive at a 'God'. The Introduction to the Brahma Sutra translation referenced gives a short summary of this. Sharma's "A Critical Survey of Indian Philosophy" as it is a good intro to the different (and differences) of the different schools. https://archive.org/details/IndianPhilosophyACriticalSurvey It is in print and as been so since its first pub in the 60s. The internet copy is an early edition, and doesn't have some of Sharma's edits later in life. He goes into the Nyaya school's analysis of different pramanas and their adaption by different schools. – Swami Vishwananda Aug 08 '19 at 10:18
  • you might like also this work, it goes into detail as to the what are the different means of knowledge (pramanas) and what is meant by the eternity of the vedas. The authority and eternity of the vedas starts on p 116. http://estudantedavedanta.net/Vedanta%20Paribhasa%20of%20Dharmaraja%20Adhvarindra%20-%20Swami%20Madhavananda%20[Sanskrit-English].pdf – Swami Vishwananda Aug 13 '19 at 09:19
  • @Swami Vishwananda Thank you for pointing to Madhavananda. But first I have to study "Daya Krishna: Indian Philosophy. A New Approach". – Jo Wehler Aug 19 '19 at 21:27

0 Answers0