Guest guest Posted October 26, 2001 Report Share Posted October 26, 2001 Priya Sriman Anandji! Jai Srimannarayana! WE are happy for your fair comment. Understanding the Prama:na, The authority, and sticking on to that while deciding or coming to an understanding, is very difficult task, it seems. Yet, we need to put it forth for right understanding. Our mangalasasanams to you all on the eve of Vijayadasami. =chinnajeeyar= --- Anand Pra Bha <pb1990a wrote: <HR> <html><div style='background-color:'> <DIV>Jai Srimannarayana.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>It was very interesting to read the various questions posed by bhagavathas and Swamyji's responses. While some of the questions are very basic (and some times annoying), Swamyji's responses show that Swamyji is a very good teacher in showing patience in answering the queries and thereby encouraging 'curiosity' or 'kuthoohala' or jignasa. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>On the question of authority ('pramana' -as relating to valmiki ramayana versus ramayana by other authors), adiyen may be permitted to share adiyen's experience in dealing with students. Some of my Phd students and MSc students find it difficult to understand the concept of authority when they are in the beginning of their study. They think that just citing an article in any journal is the authority. Then over a period of time they learn that some journals are usually of better quality than other journals. However, that does not mean everything published in a good journal is automatically of good quality. Then, they realise that irrespective of where it is published, the more important question is how some one has dealt with the problem concerned and whether they have interpreted the existing body of knowledge correctly or not. With further experience, they also learn that every article or book will have what are called 'core arguments' and others called 'supporting arguments' and yet others called 'passing judegments'. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Thus, an expert in fire fighting may have a core argument as to what is the best fire fighting system to be installed; they may have supporting arguments based on past performance of different fire fighting systems and also various potential causes of fire and so on; they may also make a passing judgement that in general metal pipes are better than plastic pipes for water supply. We take the fire fighter's opinion on the most crucial matters of fire fighting and we simply ignore their opinion about what material to use for water pipes. On that we take the opinion of the plumbing engineer. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I just mention this because, over a period of time, I hope that after listening to Swamyji's discourses and through independent reading etc., our Bhagavad bandhus on the JETUSA list also go through this learning curve and are able to ask better and deeper questions. Till then, Swamyji's patience and kindness alone can encourage this process.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Adieyn may be forgiven if I spoke too much.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 28, 2001 Report Share Posted October 28, 2001 Priya Sriman Anandji! Jai SRimannarayana! Your analysis about the Prama:nas is really educative and wonderful. For us who follow the Vedic lineage, the Pra:ma:nikatha (authoritativeness) has been established in a very strict way. That is like this. VE:DAS : The most unquestionable Prama:nas, not written by anybody, including "God Himself". They are apourushe:yas. That means no one has ever created them. They are by themselves, like Wind, Space, Water and Earth etc. There are rules and strict instructions, howmany manthras and howmany letters are here in each Ve:da andhow they have to be pronounced, the intonation etc., are also fixed. if someone includes something we can easily understand that. SMRUTHI:S : There are somany Sages and rishis composed these smruthi:s, on different subjects. These scriptures main deal with the topics related to Karma practices, right from the birth to death and even after death what are is to be done. Though there are somany Smruthi:s, only those smruthies are accepted by the authoritarians,which do not speak anything against the Ve:dic recommendations. Whatever Ve:da condemned that must not be practiced at any cost by anyone. Those, which Ve:da recommends may or may not be possible to practice all, at a stretch. Yet, do them slowly. No problem. That is accepted. That means stoping "donts" and try to do whatever "dos" recommended by the Ve:das. You can take those Smruthi:s which follow this system only. ITHIHA:SAM: THis is ancient history of this earth and of mankind. Only Sri:ra:ma:yana and Srimad Maha: Bha:ratham are considered under this catagory. Even there, those parts are accepted as authority for practice, which follow the rules of No.1 & 2. For those Ithiha:sas, Sri Sages Va:lmi:ki and Sri Ve:da Vya:sa are only the scholars, accepted by the world. No others, for, they have witnesses the events, wrote them faily, with all the authoritativeness and got the acceptance also by the rest of the world. PURA:NAM: There were 18 Pura:nams, written by Veda Vyasa, very big in volumes. Of those, only 6 Sa:twic pura:nas are accepted by the world. Other 12, have two catagories viz. Ra:jasa & Tha:masa Pura:nas, which may not present all the things, suitable for Sa:twics. They go against the Smruthis, Ithihasas & Ve:das too. So those 12 are not accepted as authority as the above are. A:GAMAS: Those a:gamas only are accepted, which follow the accepted above Prama:na Parampara:. PRABANDHAMS: Those scriptures, written at different time, by different people and devotees are called "Prabandhas". Then those prabandhas are only accepted, which follow the accepted Diety of accepted A:gama, in an accepted Prama:na lineage. Here is upward compatibility. WE are sure you understand that. Valmi:ki Ra:ma:yana, falls in this Prama:na list. Some portions of that scripture also was not accepted for practice to Sa:twics, like Ganga birth etc., Tulasi Ra:ma:yana, did not fall in this catagory of Prama:nas, so also, the Iyyappa's. Yet, we need not throw them out. Appreciate the language, the Bhakthi Bhava in that and be happy, and then leave it there only, but do not push it into the Va:lmi:ki's work. Then there won't be any controversy. This observation is always important in deciding any divinely matters for no one had ever seen those things. Jai SRimannarayana! =chinnajeeyar= --- Anand Pra Bha <pb1990a wrote: <HR> <html><div style='background-color:'> <DIV> <P>Jai Srimannarayana.</P> <P>After sending the mail to Swamyji, adiyen was worried whole of last evening, if I spoke too much and whether in hurry I spoke with ahankara (as though I am knowledgeable). I include myself in the groups of people (bhagavathas) who are asking you basic questions out of our ignorance. Swamyji's reply today has dispelled my fears and has once again confirmed Swamyji's kindness and patience in educating us. </P> <P>Adiyen may kindly be permitted to add a few words from adiyen's very limited knowledge of logic and science. From what little I have learned I see the following sequence in terms of pramana:</P> <P>*Basic axioms - statements or knowledge accepted as fundamental truths (so we do not test them - because we cannot test them)</P> <P>*First order axioms - also accepted as truths. but are constructs based on two or more of the basic axioms.</P> <P>*Premiss - these are statements with a cause and effect link. (A therefore B; or A is true therefore, B should be true).</P> <P>*Hypotheses - testable premisses; </P> <P>*Theory - A premiss that has passed the test either through logic or observation. </P> <P>*Based on axioms and theory, then we can develop further testable premisses.</P> <P>(An example I have in mind is: alphabets are the basic axioms - we do not ask why 'a' comes before 'b' or why 'a' is written in this way; words which are combinations of alphabets are first order axioms - we do not ask why a combination of three letters such as f,a, and n which themselves have no meaning forms a word called 'fan' which has a meaning. Using various letters and words (i.e., axioms), we form sentences: however, every random combination of words does not become a meaningful sentence. Only combinations of words which pass the test of logic or observation become meaningful sentences. Through this we build up our knowledge. Any new sentence that is now formed cannot automatically add to our knowledge- it has to agree with knowledge that we already developed. Therefore, a sentence such as 'The bus is on the table' may sound meaningful and may pass the test of grammar but we all know that such a sentence is not meaningful because in ordinary circumstances bus cannot be on the table; bus is heavier than table. The only possible contexts when this can be true are for example, in outer space where gravity has little effect or when the sentence is about a toy bus which is, indeed, on the table. And so on.) </P> <P>If we apply this to our system of knowledge, </P> <P>- The basic axioms are God's own words which are the only ultimate truths (which out of His kindness He has given it to us in the form of Vedas or Bhagavadgita and so on). </P> <P>-the first order axioms are our itihasas, given to us by sage Valmiki and sage Vedavyasa and perhaps, Upanishads and sutras as well.</P> <P> -theories: By interpreting the basic and first order axioms, out poorva acharyas have given us a rich body of theories - in the form of Divya prabandham, various commentaries to sutras, and so on.</P> <P>-hypotheses:Various other people from time to time construct premisses (just hypotheses) but these premisses do not automatically become theories just because it has been constructed. Unless the premiss has been established either through logic or observation (based on already established truths as pramana), these cannot become theories. The Rameswaram episode or Harihara putra episode etc., can thus be hypotheses but cannot be theories.</P> <P>On why our itihasas such as Valmiki Ramayana should be first order axioms and not premisses like anything else subject to testing - This I think Swamyji may kindly clarify. </P> <P>But from what little I have understood from Swamyji's various pravachanas and writings, these are various things our poorva acharyas including Bhagavad Ramanuja clearly established beyond any doubt. Also, as Valmiki Ramayana has been endorsed by Lord Rama himself, its authenticity is established.</P></DIV> <DIV>Once again, adiyen may kindly be forgiven for talking too much. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Adiyen, Dasan</DIV> <DIV>Anand<BR>--------<BR><HTML></DIV> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.