|NITAAI-Veda.nyf > All Scriptures By Acharyas > Baladeva Vidyabhushana > Prameya Ratnavali > Ninth Prameya|
atha pratyakshanumana-shabdanam eva pramanatvam
shrutih pratyaksham aitihyam
atha—now; pratyaksha—direct perception; anumana—logic; shabdanam—and Vedic authority; eva—certainly; pramanatvam—sources of evidence; yatha—just as; shri-bhagavate—in the Shrimad-Bhagavatam (11.16.17); shrutih—the four Vedas; pratyaksham—direct perception; aitihyam—the Puranas and historical records; anumanam—and logic; catushtayam—four sources of evidence.
9. Direct Perception, logic and Vedic revelation are three sources of actual knowledge:
This is described in the Shrimad-Bhagavatam (11.16.17): "The Four Vedas, direct perception, the Puranas and Vedic histories, as well as logic are four sources of actual knowledge."
pratyaksham anumanam ca
pratyaksham vyabhicari yat
pratyaksham—direct perception; anumanam—logic; ca—also; yat—to which; sacivyena—favorable; shuddhimat—pure; maya-munda—of those bewildered by the illusory energy of the Lord; avaloka—in the vision; adau—beginning with; pratyaksham—direct perception; vyabhicari—evidence; yat—which.
Direct perception and logic are actual sources of knowledge when they confirm the authoritative statements found in Vedic revelation. Only foolish persons bewildered by the illusory material energy of the Lord accept the misleading evidence of direct sensory perception.
anuma cati-dhume 'drau
atah pramanam tat tac sa
svatantram naiva sammatam
anuma—logic; ca—also; ati-dhume—with much smoke; adrau—on a mountain; vrishti—by rain; nirvapita—extinguished; agnike—on a fire; atah—from this; pramanam--evidence; tat—this; tat—and that; ca—also; sva-tantram—independent; na--not; eva—certainly; sammatam—considered.
Logic and mental speculation are inconclusive and unreliable sources of knowledge. They may be compared to the forest fire on top of a hill which has just been extinguished by showers of rain, and thus yields no light, but only a great quantity of smoke. Intelligent persons to not therefore consider logic and sensory perception to be independent and infallible sources of knowledge, but rather they are dependent assistants to the principal source of knowledge: the Vedic revelation.
anukulo matas tarkah
shushkas tu parivarjitah
anukulah—favorable to the knowledge revealed inthe scriptures; matah—considered; tarkah—logic; shushkah—dry; tu—but; parivarjitah—rejected.
When logic confirms the Vedic revelation, it should be accepted, but otherwise not.
TEXT 5 (a)
tatha hi vajasaneyinah
atma va are drashtavyah shrotavyo mantavyo nididhyasitavyah. iti.
tatha hi—furthermore; hi—indeed; vajasaneyinah—Yajnavalkya explains in the Brihad-aranyaka Upanishad; atma—the Supreme Personality of Godhead; vai—certainly; are—O Maitreyi; drashtavyah—should be seen; shrotavyah—should be heard; mantavyah—should be understood; nididhyasitavyah—should be meditated upon; iti—thus.
The proper use of logic is described by Yajnavalkya Muni in the Brihad-aranyaka Upanishad (4.5.6): "O Maitreyi, one should directly perceive the supreme Personality of Godhead by hearing about Him from a bona-fide spiritual master. In this way one con properly understand His position, and constantly meditate upon Him."
TEXT 5 (b)
naisha tarkena matir apaneya proktany eva jnanaya preshtha.iti.
kathake—in the Katha Upanishad; na—not; eshah—He; tarkena—simply by logic; apaneya—is brought; proktani—the elucidations of a bona-fide spiritual master; eva—certainly; jnanaya—for actual knowledge; preshtha—O dear Naciketa; iti—thus.
Logic which has no foundation in scriptural revelation is described in the Katha Upanishad (1.2.9): "My dear Naciketa, simply by logic one will never be able to understand the Supreme Personality of Godhead, but only by the descriptions of a realized spiritual master."
ki 'trartho 'bhimato bhavet
ity adyam uhanam tarkah
shushka-tarkam tu varjayet
smritih—the Smriti-shastra; ca—and; purvapara—with the previous Vedic authorties; avirodhena—not in disagreement; kah—what; atra—in this connection; arthah—the meaning; abhimatah—accepted; bhavet—may be; iti—thus; adyam—beginning; uhanam—guesswork speculation; tarkah—logic; shushka—dry; tarkam—logic; tu—indeed; varjayet—one should reject.
The Smriti-shastra confirms: "One should reject the dry logic that considers: 'How important is it that one's reasoning follow the conclusion previously described in Vedic revelation? It cannot be very important.' Such logic leads one to the process known as speculative guessing."
TEXT 7 (a)
yac caupanishadam brahma
tasman mukhya shrutir mata
na—not; aveda-vidusham—dried-up philosophers who do not accept the Vedic conclusion; yasmat—for this reason; brahma—of the Supreme Personality of Godhead; dhih—the proper understanding; upajayate—is produced; yat—which; ca—and; aupanishadam—described in the Upanishads; brahma—the Supreme; tasmat—therefore; mukhya—most important; shrutih—the Vedas; mata—are considered.
The Supreme Personality of Godhead is described in the statements of the Upanishads, and for this reason Vedic revelation is the best of all sources of knowledge. They who spurn the Vedic revelation do not have the power to properly understand the Supreme.
TEXT 7 (b)
tatha hi shrutih
navedavin manute tam brihantam. iti.
aupanishadam purusham pricchami. iti.
tatha hi--furthermore; shrutih—the Vedas explain; na—not; aveda-vit—one ignorant of the Vedic revelation; manute—understands; tam—Him; brihantam—the greatest; iti—thus; aupanishadam—described in the Upanishads; purusham—Supreme Person; pricchami—I am inquiring about; iti—thus.
This conclusion is confirmed in the Vedas:
"One ignorant of Vedic knowledge cannot actually understand the Supreme." (Shruti-shastra)
"Please tell me about the Supreme Personality of Godhead who is revealed in the Upanishads." (Brihad-aranyaka 3.9.26)