My Reply: Part1

[Guest guest]

Dear Fellow MAdhvas:

 

I thank Sri N.A.P.S Rao, Dr. Rajaram Cavale, Sri Jayakrishna

Nelamangala, Sri Shrikant Kanekal and others for their

well-thought inputs in reply to the young Christian and his

confused ramblings on our SanAtana dharma. In the course of

things, opinions will differ as also styles and methodologies

of on how to tackle such things. This is understandable. It

only reinforces ShrImadAcArya's teachings that each of us are

unique. Further, it would be an incredibly boring world if all

of us agree to everything wholly and completely. There would

be no discussion after that!

 

Anyway, ladies and gentlemen, below is the first part of my

reply to the youngster. In order to break the tedium for the

reader I am putting the replies in relatively small portions.

 

Dear XXXX,

 

1. " If I were asked under what sky the human mind has most

fully developed some of its choicest gifts, has most deeply

pondered on the greatest problems of life, and has found

solutions to some of them which well deserve the attention

even of those who have studied Plato and Kant---I should point

to India. And if I were to ask myself from what literature,

we here in Europe, we who have been nurtured almost

exclusively on the thoughts of Greeks and Romans, and of one

Semitic race, the Jewish, may draw that corrective which is

most wanted in order to make our inner life more perfect,

more comprehensive, more universal, in fact more truly human, a

life, not for this life only, but a transfigured and eternal

life----again, I should point to India. "

(a fragment from Lecture 1 of the book " INDIA, WHAT CAN IT

TEACH US? " by F. Max Muller (1823-1900), Distinguished Professor

of Sanskrit & Indology, OXFORD UNIVERSITY

 

(Since the youngman is so enamoured of OXFORD!!)

 

2. " I have found a language which is akin to our own, a

language more perfect than the Greek in grammatical structure

and more copious than the Latin... "

(Sir William Jones, on his discovery of Sanskrit and its

connections with the languages of Europe around 1789 at the

proceedings of the Royal Asiatic Society)

 

(So, here is a Christian Colonial Englishman who has tacitly

admitted that Sanskrit, the language of the Vedas, Ramayana

etc. is MORE PERFECT than the Greek, the language of the New

Testament!!)

 

 

3. XXXX talks about the circular reasoning of the Hindus. Let

me point out something here.

 

When a Christian is asked: " How do you know that God exists? "

He replies: " Because the Bible says so. " If he is asked: " Why

should I believe the Bible? " He replies: " Because it is God's

Word. " IS THIS NOT CIRCULAR REASONING?

 

On the other hand, the Hindus who also resort to Scripture

(i.e. the Vedas) to prove God's existence, do NOT regard God

as the Author of the Vedas. Instead they regard the Vedas as

being CO-ETERNAL with God thus avoiding the above circular

reasoning!

 

I will post Part 2 later.

 

with kindest regards to all,

Hari-vAyu smaraNa

B.N.Hebbar

[Guest guest]

Dear Mr. Hebbar,

Thank you for the kind remarks about my off the cuff reply.

I find that your first part is excellently crafted - as you have

taken a leaf out of our revered teacher - Acharya Madhva himself

- giving indisputable quotes. Wish you even more success and Joy

in this effort.

I would like to suggest that you may consider elaborating the

concept of Apaurusheyathva further so that it is also

understandable to a young unbiased mind - though it goes against

the " normal " concepts of human compositions. The reason is

clear. As Saint Vadiraja has pointed in Yukthimallika, All

prophet based religions must inevitably suffer from the basic

problem - which prophet to accept?. Birth religion is obviously

no criterion. If Miracles are cited like the Resurrection of the

Christ - I am sure that all " self-respecting " prophets would

have stories of such miracles attached to them, either factual

or by sheer myth-making. To assert that such a prophet can be

accepted as the only true one, by any one who is not himself as

learned as the prophet should be - is meaningless. It will be

like an undergrad student certifying Einstein as a competent

physicist! Thus one runs up against the basic impossibility of

certifying the prophet logically and accepting blind faith -

" Believe and be saved - kind of thing. The obvious doubt - what

happens if one is wrong in the belief can not just be answered -

leading to the circular reasoning you mentioned.

Acceptance of Apurusheyathva of the Vedas not only fulfills this

need for an authoritative composition speaking about the nature

of the Supreme Being , but there is enough evidence in their

construction, traditions etc to justify this belief. The

question is very well discussed in Vishnuthathvaviniranaya.

I hope you will not find this suggestion - as impudent - as I

have written what ever came to my mind without too much

cerebration.

regards

NAPSRao