Srimathe Rangaramanuja Mahadesikaya Namaha
This question was asked by an atheist or so called rational thinker dont wish to name the source but Adiyen have same question
Veda is apourusheyam so we follow. Manu smruthi is written by human then why we call it as Shastram?
Are we forced to accept whatever manu wrote is as per veda?
Dasoham
Adiyen Srinivasan Pranesh
Swami. Please forgive if you find mistakes.
We have two categories of scriptures namely Sruti and Smriti. Sruti represents Vedas, which are eternal. Smriti are interpretation of Mahans from Sruti.
Manu Sashtram is called Manu Smriti. When Smriti is derived from Sruti, what is the difference in following them? If Manu has given something against Vedas as his own understanding, then we can find difference. But, if whatever Manu gave is also based on Vedas only?
Though we say Vedas are eternal, those are transferred to us through generations from the mouth of Mahans only. We didn’t hear them ourselves from sky. Manu is also one among those Mahans who transferred Vedic knowledge.
Vedanta is one among Six Indian Philosophies which follows Vedas (other being Nyaya, Vaiseshika, Sankhya, Yoga and Mimamsa). Siddhantas like Visishtadvaita are trying to convey the same Vedanta in a detailed and understandable manner. If we ask, when we have Vedanta, why should we follow a Siddhanta? Is it right?
When it’s difficult to approach Vedanta directly, we take help of Siddhanta which is also derived from Vedanta only. Siddhanta is also trying to explain Vedanta and there is no difference isn’t it?
Similarly, Smriti are extract of Sruti and hence they are not different from each other. Smriti gives guidance and explains how to apply Sruti.
The main concern of Atheists is Varnashrama, which they mis-understood as caste system. This may be the reason why they hate Manu. They criticize Purusha Suktam also for this reason. This can be counter argued but it is unnecessary. Our job is not to educate Atheists and they will understand when time comes.
Thavaru Irundhal Shamikkanum.
Sarvam Shri Krishnaarpanamastu!
Dasanudasan
Kshamikka
“But, if whatever Manu gave is also based on Vedas only?”
How is this authoritative is the question.
For example, Kamba Ramayanam was approved by mela padi nsrasimhar in SriRangam.
VarnAshramam Velukkudi Swamy has beautifully interpreted it. Thiruvadi and ThiruMugam are from same Perumal’s body (shareeram) so there can be no discrimination.
There is differentiation but not discrimination.
We all fall at Perumal’s feet which means it has higher importance than other parts.
We cannot disregard atheist’s comments we need to know answers or else they might convince the innocents or beginners ( as @Kongil Piraatti bhakthai said).
Dasanudasan
Srinivasan Pranesh Swamy
????????????????
Hare Krishna! Aneha koti namaskaram!
Adiyen’s learning by lord’s mercy: By not accepting veda/acharya’s teachings/prescriptions, the Jiva exercises the “independence” thereby birth and rebirth continues. As is, it is painful experience (due to adharmic nature of the world) now as we stand in this kaliyug today, what to speak of next birth ? But the ‘independence’ is also given by the lord so it is up to the Jiva to either continue in the world (only to go through further suffering and finally fall under lord’s feet) OR fall under lord’s feet in “this” birth itself. Choice is up to the Jiva, which is the ‘independence’ given by the lord himself. Next Q he may ask, why such independence is given by the lord ? otherwise the lord will be merciless dictator in which case there is no question of loving or not loving the lord. And even in that case, birth & rebirth continues.
So a wise ‘Jiva’ would accept lord as a parent who showers causeless mercy on him and serve the lord for his own benefit. Otherwise, he has to serve ‘maya’ (a.k.a the 5 senses and go through all suffering in the world)
Sarvam Krishnaarpanam!
4 types of people who do not surrender to the lord:
Bg 7.15 — சற்றும் அறிவற்ற மூடர்களும், மனிதரில் கடைநிலையோரும், மாயையால் அறிவு கவரப்பட்டவர்களும், அசுரரின் நாத்திகத் தன்மையை ஏற்றவர்களுமான துஷ்டர்கள் என்னிடம் சரணடையவதில்லை.
Bg 7.15 — Those miscreants who are grossly foolish, who are lowest among mankind, whose knowledge is stolen by illusion, and who partake of the atheistic nature of demons do not surrender unto Me.
Sri Velukkudi Krishnan Swamy Thiruvadigaley Sharanam
Nama Sadasey
Dhanyosmi for the answers. One thing is clear for adiyen. We need to learn about Swayambhuva Manu and the lineage. Sri Rama did avatharam in Raghu Kulam and that is an endorsement of the way we should live. Also Sri Krishna did avatharam in Yadu kulam and that is the endorsement of Bhakthi Margam of Gopalakas and Gopikas and the way we should do bhakthi.
Like our perumal did avatharam in Navami and Ashtami respectively to endorse those thithis alias auspicious days.
Similarly Sri Rama forigiven Ahalya Devi this means we also need to forgive on similar circumstances (Visesha Dharmam). Similarly Sri Rama did test of Piraatti (Samaanya Dharmam) and it is not to be done by us.
The one who can forgive Ahalya Devi could easily forgive piratti. By this itself SriRam is telling us some deep meaning of his lifestyle.
Hare Krishna
Sri Krishna Premi Anna Thiruvadigaley Sharanam
Sri Velukkudi Krishnan Swami Thiruvarigaley Sharanam
Srimathe Rangaramanuja Mahadesikaya Namaha
Koti Namaskarams of Adiyen Srinivasan Pranesh
Swamy. I am not discussing further on Manu Sastra or how it is taken by Atheists. However, I can feel your concern. You are worried that Atheism shall not swallow our Dharma.
But, Atheism is not new to India. This existed in the form of Carvaka Philosophy, where people believe only on what they see with physical eyes (Direct Perception).
There are two kinds of people. One who has already decided that God does not exist. He can never be clarified by us.
Another set of people have one leg towards Atheism and one leg towards Spiritualism. They will be double minded seeking logics. If some of our friends are like this, we shall certainly help them move towards spirituality. I believe such people will be ready to listen to our logics.
In that context, let me give the debates of one of our Vedantic Acharyas, who effortlessly dis-proved Atheism in two questions. You may apply this if you find it suitable, to your friends who are in dilemma. This may not work on people those who have already concluded.
Any Philosophy should be able to prove their logics based on pramanas (effective means of knowledge). However, Atheism is dis-proved from their own Pramanas.
1. Atheists don’t believe in Sabdha Pramana or Anumana Pramana. They believe only on what they see directly (Direct Perception).
2. They don’t believe anything beyond body.
Let me give our Acharya’s questions against them.
1. Does Atheists have any arguments based on Pratyaksha. If they have arguments, they are gone because any argument can be based on Anumana only. Simply Pratyaksha cannot make us understand anything.
Do they employ a language to communicate or spread their Philosophy? If yes, then it is done through Sabdha and hence they shall also accept Sabdha Pramana. If they don’t believe in Sabdha Pramana, then they shall not use their mouth to communicate and not use their ears to listen their theory.
So, in this way, Atheism is forced to accept Pratyaksha, Anumana and Agama Pramana as three Pramanas of knowledge.
2. Do Atheists believe in consciouness or not? Is there a difference between living things and non-living things? If so, there is something beyond body.
Body is made of Pancha Boodhas (Vayu, Water, Fire, Earth and Akasa). All these are non-conscious matters and hence they cannot produce a conscious being.
This, we see through differences between living and non-living in front of our eyes.
In this way, we may make them realize that Atheism is illogical and show them the Vedantic way. Rest is left to the Almighty Himself.
However, this will work only on people those who are ready to listen to logics and not on those who already concluded that Atheism is correct. One of Adiyen’s friend was partially biased towards Atheism and was trying to pull others also. But, he slightly changed his views after knowing our Acharya’s debates in favour of Vedantic Pramanas.
Kindly forgive if I have diverted your question.
Daasanu Daasan
Sarvam Shri Krishnaarpanamastu.
