You are here: SriPedia - Ramanuja - Archives - Apr 2002

Ramanuja List Archive: Message 00107 Apr 2002

 
Apr 2002 Indexes ( Date | Thread | Author )
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]


Dear Sri Mani,

I think you walked into the realm of logic and
evidence here.

As I see it there are two ways to approach such
issues. One is to believe in what has been said
and discredit the issue only upon the supply of 
incontrovertible evidence; the other is to 
disbelieve what has been said until incontrovertible 
evidence is supplied to prove the issue. It appears 
that you have chosen the latter patth. Nothing 
wrong with that except that you appear to be trying 
to challenge the former method without reasonable 
basis (notwithstanding your request for evidence,
I am basing my assessment of your stand, on your
statement "what hearsay is worth").

I will explain why I think your stand is 
unreasonable. 

I can see your viewpoint that independent sets
of documents can be accepted as validation of
an event. However, the lack of such "evidence"
does not constitute denial of the fact. Furthermore
even the existence of independent and timely works
cannot be 100% proof as there can and will be
challenges on the validity of the text (such
as add-ons and tamperings).

So, it really comes down to your starting value
system. If you chose disbelief as the starting 
point then you are forced to question everything. 
Surely, even statements such as Vedas being sabdha 
pramanams are unacceptable under this system as 
the evidence can be construed as being from a 
biased party - or to be more correct, there is no
proof that the evidence itself is untouched and 
unbiased.

The only time I see that such issues need to be
challenged are when they appear contradictory to
other facts/stories within the same belief system
or if they are used as evidence in denouncing
other philosphies or people.

The bigger problem I see is in the selective 
acceptance of evidences and frankly I have been no
less guilty than any other in that matter.

The bottom line is how does it all fit in together.
We know that Sri Anandazhvar was a great disciple
of Sri Ramanujar. We know that he had phenomenal
respect for his teacher. Is it likely that he
built a sannidhi for his acharya - absolutely.
Is it possible that he did not and someone else
who had great respect for him added that into his
legend - yes it is. But do we have to doubt that 
he actually did - no factual reason to doubt it, 
in the absence of contrary evidence.

adiyEn madhurakavi dAsan
TCA Venkatesan





[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index ] [Thread Index ] [Author Index ]
Home Page
http://www.ibiblio.org/sripedia
ramanuja-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
To subscribe to the list