Anumana

[Guest guest]

Sri Sudarshan has tangentially raised two topics, which I feel are very worthy

of a longer discussion in this forum.

 

 

First, on the relation between the four Vedas and Vedanta :

 

"The Vedic, more specifically Vedantic, tradition recognizes the following

"alternate ways" which one can resort to in one's pursuit or apprehension of

"para-brahmi-c" Truth :

....

(4) "yag~nyam" ---- the Truth attained through the Vedic deed of

sacrifice

 

Way No. (4) above i.e the path of "yagn~yam" is not generally regarded as a

"pramANam" in the strict Vedantic sense."

 

The 'why' of this fact has been something I have given some thought to. Given

the fact that the practice of yagnya is central to the Vedas ( eg. yagnena

yagnam ayajanta devaa:/taani dharmaani prathamaanyaasan ), and the Vedas are

structured around the cosmic (both micro- and macro-) act of yagnyam, it seems

curious that Vedanta takes a diametrically opposite approach, denying the act of

sacrifice.

 

The external act of yagnya is internalized as self knowledge. Karma is almost

abandoned in favor of gnyaana. This a fundamental change that indicates that the

Vedanta system is literally, the end of the Vedas, the Vedic system and thought

pattern.

 

I would like to learn from all your comments and thoughts on this, from a

philosphical viewpoint. The most compelling social/historic argument I have seen

in support of this shift would probably be the economics-based argument of D. D.

Kosambi in his history.

 

 

Second : In regard to empiricism - which is may be a close translation of

anumaana : Sri Sudarshan says :

 

Inference" or "anumAna" is, in other words, the vehicle which carries us from

"known truths" to "unknown Truth" .... from "mere appearance" to "essential

Truth". "

 

This empiricism, or inference, is however repeatedly indicated as an

untrustowrthy method by Vedanta. However, whether it be Sri Shankara's example

of mistaking a rope for a snake on a dark night, or Sri Mukkur Swami's example

that was related here, the classic example given for the overthrow of empiricism

hinges on the possibility of fallacy - or of inference based on incomplete

observation. viz : "We cannot always rely on our senses to reveal material

truth. How much more unreliable they would be then, to perceive eternal truth ?"

 

I agree that the more we look at science, the more we seem to see that a

"complete observation" is a myth, especially in quantum levels. However, even

non-Heisenbergian incomplete observation can take us quite a distance is

day-to-day practical science and technology, as we practice it.

 

My question is : Is it possible to justly accuse this Vedantic denial of

empiricism for the decay of technology and scientific progress in historical

medieval and pre-medieval India? That this caused a holdover of feudal social

patterns well into this century?

 

Again, I would like to learn from all your comments and thoughts on this, but

this time from a different viewpoint.

 

With my respects,

 

Sundar

 

--------------------

Get free personalized email at http://.iname.com