[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Encyclopaedia Britannica's entry on 'Vedanta'
editor.csm.uc.edu (digest editor) wrote:
>
> > From shrao@nyx10.cs.du.edu Sun Jun 4 04:51:53 1995
>
> > I am not certain Jainism is considered naastika-vaada; it is
certainly
> > outside the pale of Vedanta, because it relies on prophets rather
than on
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > Shrutis, and because it does not honor Vishnu -- but it may not state
the
> > absence of a Creator as Buddhism does.
> >
>
>
> This is not true. Jain dharma does not rely on prophets at all. Jains
> have tirthankars, twenty four of them. Mahavir Swamiji being the last
in the
> line. Tirthankars are not messangers of God or the incarnation of
> God. They are merely teachers, who after their tapachariya
(penence/meditation
> ) have achieved a higher state of knowledge and existance (siddhi).
>
Perhaps my use of 'prophets' was too loose, or undefined. Let me explain.
In Vedanta, it is recognized that knowledge can come from three sources:
pratyaksha (observation), anumaana (logic), and aagama (scripture). When
the knowledge is about extra-sensory entities like dharma, mukti, a
Creator, etc., then the first two, pratyaksha and anumaana, are both
considered useless. So we are left solely to aagama.
Now, there are two kinds of aagama, according to Vedanta. The
"powrusheya" or authored aagamas, like the Puraanas, the Mahaabharata, or
even the Bible, the Talmudic texts, the Koran, etc. The other are the
"apowrusheya" aagamas, like the Rg and other Vedas.
Now, with all this, I can define 'prophet' in the limited sense in which
I used it, to mean "any person who propounds extra-sensory knowledge, by
direct teaching, or by authorship, without recourse to the apowrusheya
texts." That is, any person who makes a claim about mukti, nirvana, etc.,
or about the presence or otherwise of a Creator, but does so of his/her
own knowledge and not by recourse to apowrusheya texts, is a prophet.
Regards,
Shrisha Rao
> regards,
>
> ajay shah
> ajay@mercury.aichem.arizona.edu
>
