SECTION ELEVEN

This conclusion is confirmed by the following statements from the scriptures:>

1. Reasoning has no sure basis (it cannot refute the conclusion of the Veda). (Brahma Sütra 2.1.11)>

2. One should not apply reasoning to understand what is inconceivable. (Mahäbhärata, Bhiñma Parva 5.22)>

3. Scriptures are the source of knowledge of the Absolute Truth. (Brahma Sütra 1.1.3)>

4. This is confirmed by the Vedas, because they are the source of knowledge of the Absolute Truth. (Brahma Sütra 2.1.27) >

5. O Supreme Lord, Your Veda is the supreme eye for the forefathers, demigods, and human beings. By it they can understand Your form and qualities, along with the highest goal of life and the means to attain it, none of which can be ascertained otherwise. (Çrémad Bhägavatam 11.20.4)

 ÇRÉ JÉVA TOÑAËÉ COMMENTARY

             Here, using scriptural evidence, Çréla Jéva Gosvämé confirms his conclusion about logic reached in the previous section. Having argued that reason is not the most reliable means of acquiring knowledge, and having used reason to establish this, he now presents appropriate Vedic references as the final proof. Again, this practice of using the Vedas to confirm an assertion from the Vedas should not be taken as circular reasoning. The Vedas are self-luminious like the sun. The sun illuminates itself with its own light, not with the help of any other source. Similarly, only the Vedas can establish themselves as infallible pramäëa.  As explained in the previous section, this is not a defect in the method of çabda pramäëa, or revelation, because if the Vedas indeed carry knowledge of the Absolute Truth, no other pramäëa can verify them.  And those who have approached  Vedic knowledge in the prescribed way have confirmed by direct realization that the Vedas do carry knowledge of the Absolute Truth.

            Another consideration is that knowledge of the inconceivable reality is the objective, and upon analysis no source gives us that opportunity except the Vedas. For example, if all the best logicians, nuclear physicists, astro-physicists, and others in leading departments of science and philosophy from the past, present, and future were to assemble they would be unable to shed any light on the nature of transcendence. Any proposed conclusion will be a subjective speculation, subject to endless refutation and counter refutation. Understanding this, Çréla Jéva Gosvämé goes directly to the heart of the matter by quoting Vedic authority.

            Çréla Vyäsadeva gave the conclusion of all the Vedas in the Vedänta Sütras, also called Brahma Sütras, in short aphorisms. Sütra 2.1.11 says that logic has no absolute stance because logical conclusions are prone to change. Logical conclusions are based upon human perception and intelligence and these faculties are unreliable due to the four defects.  Furthermore, since intellect varies in capacity and type from person to person, so do their conclusions. Logic has its limitations, therefore, it is inconclusive unless supported by the scriptures. In Bhaktirasämåta Sindhu (1.1.46) Çréla Rüpa Gosvämé quotes a verse from the Väkya-padéya (1.34) to this effect:

            "Even the conclusions established with great endeavor by expert logicians are contradicted by stronger logicians and new conclusions are established."

            We have experience of this in the fields of modern science and philosophy with their endlessly theorizing about the origin of the universe and the meaning of life. Logic, therefore, is not a reliable independent method in the quest for knowledge of the Absolute. But this does not mean that all logic is useless. Indeed the conclusion to reject logic as not fully reliable is itself based on logic supported by scriptural references. Logic is certainly to be used to understand the Vedic statements. In this connection, the Båhadäraëyakopaniñad states, ätmä va are drañöavyaù çrotayo mantavyo nididhyäsitavyo maitreyé (2.4.5.) "The Self, my dear Maitreyé should be realized, should be heard of, reflected on, and meditated upon". Here the word mantavya refers to logical understanding. One should apply logic to properly understand the Vedic injunctions, but logic that runs contrary to their conclusions is to be rejected. It can never be superior to the statements of the Vedas, which are free from human misgivings.

            While discussing this topic in Sarvasaàvädiné, Çréla Jéva Gosvämé quotes the Kürma Puräëa:

             "Understanding the meaning of a scriptural statement by deliberating over the preceding and following statements is called logic, but one should abandon dry logic".

            The best of example of dry logic is seen among speculative philosophers. Generally, they reason their way to a prior conclusion, to which they are already attached, and in their determination to establish it they lose all objectivity. They therefore will disregard scriptural injunctions that do not support their conclusions. Ultimately they have no success, because the inconceivable transcendental plane is not understood by any amount of speculation. Such persons interest in philosophy amounts to a futile mental exercise with no tangible result. And, before long, no matter how profound and mesmerizing their vision, some other powerful logician subdues them. The Vedas enjoin, therefore, that those who seek the Absolute Truth should abandon dry logic, but not all logic. Using logic with an aim to understand the Absolute Truth as presented in scripture is accepted by Lord Kåñëa as one of His opulences (B.G. 10.32), vädaù pravadatäm aham, "Among logicians I am the conclusive truth." Thus Srila Jiva Gosvämé has rightly accepted anumäna as one of the pramäëas.

            Çréla Jéva Gosvämé also quotes Mahäbhärata, which explains that logic has it's limitations and should not be applied to inconceivable realities. For example, one will certainly fail to understand Lord Kåñëa's childhood pastimes such as "Dämabandhana Lélä", or His getting tied with ropes, if one resorts to logic. When Mother Yaçodä tried to tie Kåñëa, to her amazement all her ropes joined together fell short, but the black thread around Kåñëa's waist did not break nor did His waist become inflated. Such inconceivable behavior of the Absolute Person is entirely beyond all logical faculties and can only be understood on the authority of Vedic testimony or çabda pramäëa.

            Jéva Gosvämé then quotes two more Brahma Sütras (1.1.3 and 2.1.27) which state emphatically that the Absolute Truth can be understood only from the revealed scriptures. Finally, he quotes from Çrémad Bhägavatam to show that not only human beings but even superhumans like the demigods need the help of the Vedas. Thus he emphasizes the need of the Vedas as the flawless means to understand the Absolute Truth for everyone humans, subhumans or superhumans.

            In the next section, Çréla Jéva Gosvämé begins establishing the importance of the Puräëas over the Vedas.