Re: Traditional dates vs scientific dates
From the Bhakti List Archives
• December 14, 1995
On Dec 14, 3:18am, Jaganath.Bharadwaj@nrecatao.nreca.org wrote: > All this goes back to the example of mistaking a rope for a snake > episodes quoted (I believe from the Chandogya Upanishad) in reference > to evidence of conclusion based on the external senses. It is > accepted unanimously by all schools of Vedanta philosophy (this > includes Advaita, Visisthadvaita and Dwaita) that evidence based on > inference of what can be perceived by the bodily senses are prone to > inaccuracies. I don't think this is a correct reflection of the Visistadvaita viewpoint. As I understand it, there are three pramaaNas, or sources of knowledge: direct perception, inference through logic, and the Veda. Each is completely reliable in its own sphere. In fact, Visistadvaitins beginning with Ramanuja have emphatically argued that unless one has an inherent defect in the sense organ, everything that one perceives is absolutely reliable *within that frame of reference*. In other words, we cannot rely on our eyes to determine things that are suprasensual, such as the nature of the self, God, or their interrelationship. At the same time, sense perception is absolutely valid in determining the nature of any physical entity. The scientific method has very definite validity. Similarly, we are allowed to use logic and inference to determine the age of manuscripts, the cause of smoke, and all sorts of varies and sundry things. However, logic cannot conclusively tell us anything about the origin of the universe, because once again, it is operating outside its frame of reference. Coming to the dating of the Azhvaars: it is generally accepted even by devout Sri Vaishnavas that the Azhvaars lived in the first millenium A.D. Puttur S. Krishnaswamy Iyengar, Dr. K.K.A. Venkatachari and others have looked at the data and have accepted them after careful review. It goes without saying that both of these scholars are devout Sri Vaishnavas. In fact, the introduction to the reprint of the "Holy Lives of the Azhvars" book by A. Govindacharya clearly states that the idea of the traditional dates have been abandoned long ago. The dating of Kali Yuga, etc., are all relatively recent concoctions. They have no basis in Sruti and are arbitrary extrapolations of postulations by ancient seers who wondered about the age of the world and the progressive lawlessness they perceived. Would you similarly literally accept the stories of Adam and Eve, the dating of the origin of the world to 4004 B.C., etc., as in the Christian timeline? I think not. Mani
- Next message: skaushik_at_MIT.EDU: "Re: dates"
- Previous message: Vijay Triplicane: "The not-well-to-do dhivyadhEsams"
- Next in thread: Mani Varadarajan: "Re: Traditional dates vs scientific dates"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]