anandabodhashibira epistemology 2013

7/23/2019 AnandabodhaShibira Epistemology 2013

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/anandabodhashibira-epistemology-2013 1/22

ëq h Ìu c UÈ

¥ÀæªÀiÁt«ZÁgÀEpistemology

Vijayananda J

Krishna Kadiri

28th April 2013



What’s that .. Epistemology?

• Study of knowledge Eleents of Knowledge Sour!es of Knowledge Valid knowledge" #n$alid knowledge" %ou&t



Schedule

• 'ow do we know( ) A dis!ussion E*aples fro daily life E*aples fro aths" s!ien!e

• +raditional ,raework - .raana)$i!hara• A &rief peep into .raanas" their s!ope"

!lassifi!ation et!/• %is!ussion - whi!h praana to use for what • hats ne*t



We will focus only on facts

• ,a!ts Sun rises in the east

anohan Singh is the . of #ndia

•

4eliefs #f Sa!hin hits a !entury" the #ndian tea will lose the

at!h

• 5pinions South)#ndians are hardworking

+his dosa is too &ig



How do we know that…

• +here is a pot in the house• # a hearing a song•

+he food is tasty• +he perfue sells good• #t is !old in the night •

+here is no pot here• +here was a pot yesterday• # e*ist




• #f we put sugar in the paanaka" it will taste

sweet• #f we put ri!e on fire along with water" it will

&e!oe soft • She likes e• Another person is li$ing or dead




• .a$an is not at hoe &e!ause # talked to hi

on at his offi!e landline nu&er just now/• 'e !annot see/• #t A6 rain today/• +here was one ango/ #f 7aa" akshana"

4harata did not eat it" who ate it




• 4ritish #n$asion happened• 6our great)grand)father fought for

#ndependen!e• Kalidasa !oposed eghaduuta• Sri adh$aa!haarya e*isted•

+here is a hea$en soewhere



How do we know…

• #n aths -29100:102

√2 is irrational

Any nu&er di$ided &y 1 result in the sae nu&er

+here is no round)s;uare

• #n S!ien!e -

<ewtons first law+here is no !oet &etween sun and earth now

#t is in!orre!t to assue that hea$ier o&je!ts fall ;ui!ker



How do we know - Answers

1/ .er!eption ¥ÀævÀåPÀë ,ro sensory organs et!/ ,ro EA¢æ0iÀÄ (indriya=

• All e*aples of >pot" >!old at the night et!/ pertain to per!eption/

• 4ut EA¢æ0iÀÄ indriya is not sae as >sensory organ/ #ndriya is ateendriya/

#ndriya is the shakti within the sensory organ/

• .ariikshita pratyaksha : tested per!eption

• #ndriyas ha$e liitations/ Eyes !annot sell/

•

%enial of an o&je!t !an happen only fro that #ndriya" whi!h itspresen!e !an &e affired/ ?Sell !an &e affired only &y nose" therefore la!k of sell

!an &e affired only &y nose" not &y eyes=/

• eory is !ogni@ed &y anas/

• Sakshi ?ji$a= !ogni@es - self" spa!e" tie/ <ot generated &y #ndriya/




2/ #nferen!e" logi!" reasoning sing reasons" in$aria&le !on!oitan!e et!/

#f B is there" 6 will also &e there/ e see only B" &ut infer 6 &e!ause of in$aria&le relation &etween

the/

•

C£ÀÄªÀiÁ£À anumAna not !dou"t’#

• <ot Soke itself" &ut Knowledge of Soke 9 ªÁå¦Û?$yApti=/ Vyapti is understood after repeated

o&ser$ations et!/

• C#f the road is wet" it ust ha$e rained last night/ <o&ody poured water/ So it ust ha$e

rainedD/ e did not see" hear" sell the rain/ #t is only >inferred &ased on the reason that

road is wet/

•

anuAna is used to know things that are not dire!tly per!epti&le" &ut the hetu isper!epti&le/ ,ire is not a$aila&le to pratyakSha" &ut Soke is/




• S!ien!e and aths use inferen!e e*tensi$elyF• #n aths -29100:102 - dire!t proof

√2 is irrational - proof &y !ontradi!tion

Any nu&er di$ided &y 1 result in the sae nu&er - atheati!al indu!tion

+here is no round)s;uare - %edu!tion

• #n S!ien!e -<ewtons first law - 7epeated o&ser$ations

+here is no !oet &etween sun and earth now - %ire!t per!eption

#t is in!orre!t to assue that hea$ier o&je!ts fall ;ui!ker - +ested per!eption




• 3. Agama, Scripture ) +e*ts or Senten!es without any istakes or wrong

inforation

• 6our great)grand)father fought for #ndependen!e &e!ause your grand)father

told so and he is trust)worthy/

• 4ritish #n$asion happened &e!ause there are any histori!al artifa!ts -

do!uents" letters" photographs" &iographies of so any people/

• Kalidasa !oposed eghaduuta - it is in history &ook/

• Sri adh$aa!haarya e*isted - it is in history &ook

• +here is a hea$en soewhere - it is in the Veda

• %o we dis&elie$e peoples words &y default or do we &elie$e the 5ne or two people

lying is a!!epta&le" &ut what a&out so any people ies" in!orre!t inforation happen !oe when there is a reason for the to lie/ hen no su!h reasons are there"

truth is told &y default/ E$en 1 or 2 people lie when there is a reason/



How do we know - Summary

• .ratyaksha - for knowledge o&tained through indriyas

• Anuaana - ,or knowledge o&tained through a pro!ess of reasoning

•

Agaa - ,or knowledge o&tained through te*ts ?ore a&out this" later=



Elements of $nowledge

• Su&je!t : Vishaya

• Validity : prAA<ya

• hoe$er has the knowledge : knower : praAtru

• +ypes of Knowledge Valid knowledge : praA ?this is a pot=

#n$alid knowledge : &hraa ?this is a snake=

%ou&t : sashaya ?#s that a tree or a an=

• Sour!es of knowledge generate $alid knowledge" unless there is a C.754ED/

# see things !orre!tly unless # ha$e jaundi!e/

# !annot infer fire" if # did not know that Chere$er there is soke" there is fireD/

# !an trust peoples stateents unless # think that they ay &e lying or e*aggerating/



Agama continued...

• Two types of texts Authored +e*ts

nauthored +e*ts : Veda/

•

nauthored +e*ts are free fro istakes/ All istakes happen onlydue to authors/ +herefore te*ts without authors ha$e no istakes/

#f Author is ignorant" it A6 lead to istakes in te*t

#f Author does not want to gi$e !orre!t inforation" it A6 lead to istakes

#f Author is in!apa&le ?does not know proper language" &lind" deaf et!/= then it A6 lead to

istakes/ #n the !on$erse" whene$er there are istakes in te*ts ?or spee!h=" definitely then the author is

responsi&le/

So how !an there &e istakes in unauthored te*ts



%an there "e an unauthored te&t?

• 4ut how !an there &e te*t without author +he rule that all te*ts ha$e authors is known only through #ndu!ti$e reasoning/ Just like

we know that any nu&er di$ided &y itself gi$es 1" without di$iding e$ery nu&er we

know/

E*!eptions in indu!ti$e reasoning are identifiied when we see the" just like we identify

0 as an e*!eption to the a&o$e rule/ #t fails when 0 is di$ided &y 0/• So how do we identify e*!eptions in rule regarding te*ts and authors

#rrespe!ti$e of whether su!h te*ts e*ist or not" what is the rule to

identify an e*!eption ?,alsifia&ilityF entioning when ones theory

will go wrong=/

#t is only if they are reputed to &e unauthored/ 'ow u!h reputed As u!h as neededto reo$e the possi&ility of a lie or de!eption or ignoran!e/

+his !riterion is et only &y $edas/ So they are an e*!eption/

• Author)not)known is not sae as <o)author/ Akasha does not ha$e a

!reator" we dont say Akashas !reator is not known/



When to use Agama

• hen that knowledge !annot &e o&tained through per!eption or

inferen!e

• E*aples ) %hara" adhara" what to do" what not to do" s$arga"

naraka - how do we get this knowledge <ot through .er!eption &e!ause no&ody !an see" hear" tou!h the

<ot through inferen!e" logi! ?tarka=F lÉ cÉ AlÉÑqÉÉlÉÉSÏlÉÉÇ AÉaÉqÉÇ ÌuÉlÉÉ mÉëÉqÉÉhrÉÇ kÉqÉÉïÌSwÉ Ñ ?Anuana and pratyaksha" without the aid of Agaa" !annot &e!oe praA<a for

dhara and others=/

5nly through Agaa

• ore e*aplesF pApa" pu<ya <ot doing sandhyA$andana will result in pApa/ 'ow do we know

5ne should fast on ekadashi/ 'ow do we know

5ne should not eat during e!lipsesF 'ow do we know

.urpose &ehind applying gopi!handana



So what are Agamas?

• Apaurusheya Vedas is the priary Agaa/ Anything that is in line with the is $alid ) sadAgaa

Anything that is not in line with the is in$alid ) durAgaa

• aha&harata ?in!ludes 4haga$adGita and Vishnu)sahasranaa=

• 7aayana ?not Valikis" &ut the original 7aayana written &y 'ayagri$a=

• 4rahasutras

• .an!haratras

Why not Shaiva tantra, Shaakta tantra?

Veda)$iruddha

•

Satt$ika puranas/ Why not others?

Veda)$iruddha



'nterpretation of Agamas

• 5thers too a!!ept Agaas" &ut partially/

• eak rules of interpretation/ ike >aha &rahaasi/

• A!haryas ain ruleF na !ha anu&ha$a$irodhe Agaasya prAA<ya/ ?Agaa is not $alid if it !ontradi!ts esta&lished anu&ha$a/ So no Agaa !an &e $alid" if its

interpetation says that you are infinite God=/

• So how do we interpret?

• sing 4rahasutras

• Why should we trust Brahmasutras?

• 4e!ause they are logi!al" are &ased on Vedas" and are written &y ost

trustworthy 4eing - Sri Veda$yasa/

• How do we know he is trustworthy?

• ,ro shaastra/ Shaastra says <arayana is Veda$yasa and all words of God are

praana/ Sar$a &haga$ad$a!hana praA<a

• +hen why not 4uddha - 4e!ause of la!k of shrotranukulya(



(id we miss any )ramanas?

• #llustrations are not praA<as/ +hey are only for e*planation/ Ji$a erging into God are like pouring water into water/

• C# guess that #ndia will win the at!hD - #s this praA<a

• tilityF #f # study E!onoi!s &ook" # will &e!oe su!!essful/ +herefore it is

praA<aD - is this !orre!t .rayojana does not ean praA<a/ Siilarly"

worshipping Santoshi aa or ayyappa ay result in teporary good" &ut it

does not ean they are supported &y praA<a/



शमधकषर मसಶಮಧಕಷರಮ!"#

shr#adh$esha)Krishnarpanaastu

anandabodhashibira epistemology 2013

Documents