Conflict between Traditionalism and Rationalism: A Problem with Samkara
INSOFAR AS his Commentary on the Brahma Sfztra goes, Sarikara was not a rationalistic philosopher who, disregarding tradition and carrying on speculation freely and independently, set forth his own argument. He claimed, through and through, to be a faithful expositor of the purport of the scripture (authoritative texts). For him, the Veda was of utmost significance' and of absolute authority.2 Any part of the Veda can be an authority; no part can fail to be an authority." The Veda is absolute concerning what it says; it does not depend on anything else; it is like the sun which shines throughout the universe.4 (Actually, the Vedic texts which he cited were mostly the older Upanisads.) The authority of the Veda is higher than that of the gods. It is by means of the Veda that even the gods are brought to spiritual liberation.5 The Veda was not composed by men; it is authoritative in the sense of being self-revealing; it does not rely on any source.'