Was Adi Shankaracharya (or later Advaitists) able to logically prove (i.e., by using tarka) that Brahman is eternal? I would like to see the logical argument without using shabda pramana.
If it is proved that brahman exists then by definition its eternal– YOu will not knowJun 27, 2022 at 15:04
first, wikipedia is not a scriptural source. seecond, if you wish to quote, links are not quotes. you need to summarize your question in your question. second, you might like to read Gaudapada's Karika of the Mandukya Upanishad, specifically chapters 1 and 2. here - wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/mandukya-upanishad-karika-bhashya– Swami VishwanandaJun 28, 2022 at 10:52
1@SwamiVishwananda A scriptural source isn't needed to define tarkaśāstra as it's philosophical. OP added link for the benefit of those unfamiliar with this logical debate technique. Question is asking for the pakṣa used to logically determine Brahman's eternal nature. The question is appropriate to HinduismSE, imo, is because philosophy sites (and most university courses) almost exclusively discuss Western philosophy. Ask there and they will send people here. Adi Shankaracharya utilized philosophyical techniques within the context of Hinduism, so the question is appropriate for Hinduism SE.– Rubellite YakṣīJul 3, 2022 at 20:52
The basic requisite is for you to mention a statement & only then a debate (Tarka) starts. Thus you must quote something in disposition or favour of Parabrahm.– Chamunda dasJul 10, 2022 at 1:33
It is not possible. Infact God cannot be proved using tarka.
Refer to Brahma Sutra and its Bhashya by Adi Shankara Acharya
Brahma-Sutra 1.1.3: Sanskrit text and English translation.
शास्त्रयोनित्वात् ॥ ३ ॥
śāstrayonitvāt || 4 ||
śāstrayonitvāt—The scripture being the means of right knowledge.
- The scriptures (alone) being the means of right knowledge (with regard to Brahman, the proposition laid in Sutra 2 becomes corroborated).
This Sutra makes the idea expressed in Sutra 2 clearer. If any doubt has been left regarding the fact that Brahman as the origin etc. of the world is established by scriptural authority and not by inference etc. independently of it, this Sutra makes it clear that Srutis alone are proof about Brahman
Traka shastra is purely philosophical. And indeed Brahma can be proved by tarka alone too. Because, to make some other religion guy understand Brahma you can't use Shastra pramana. It would be like puking a textbook which one have learnt overnight. Thus, tarka is best way. But, wait the gyana to do tarka comes from Shastras itself. For example if someone wants to prove existence of something alone by philosophy, one have to first believe it is there. And this belief comes from Shastra. Thus, I see Tarka as application of shastra that you learnt over years. (Although tarka is considered adham) Jul 10, 2022 at 1:30
@Chamundadas Why dont you provide a source where "Brahman" is proven by Tarka alone then?– SMJoeAug 23, 2022 at 14:49