tat-poṣa-kārī tarkas tv apekṣata eva
tat-poṣa-kārī tarkas tv apekṣata eva |
(Govinda-bhāṣya on Vedānta-sūtra: 2.1.11)
“Reasoning which supports that [i.e., Śruti] is certainly necessary.”
Reasoning
mahāśakti-vilāsātmā bhāvo’cintya-svarūpa-bhāk
mahāśakti-vilāsātmā bhāvo’cintya-svarūpa-bhāk |
raty-ākhyā ity ayaṁ yukto na hi tarkeṇa bādhitum |
(Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu: 2.5.92)
“This bhāva, known as rati, by constitution an expression of the supreme potency [i.e., the hlādinī-śakti], and [thus] possessed of an inconceivable nature, is not fit to be assailed with argument.”
yatnenāpādito’py arthaḥ kuśalair anumātṛbhiḥ
yatnenāpādito’py arthaḥ kuśalair anumātṛbhiḥ |
abhiyuktatarair anyair anyathaivopapādyate ||
(Vākya-padīya: 1.34; cited in Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu: 1.1.46)
“Even a meaning established with assiduity by expert logicians is refuted [lit., proven to be otherwise] by others more proficient [in various forms of reasoning].”
purāṇaṁ pañcarātraṁ ca
purāṇaṁ pañcarātraṁ ca vedāḥ pāśupatās tathā |
atipramāṇāny etāni na hantavyāni hetubhiḥ ||
(Yājñavalkya Ṛṣi; cited in Hari-bhakti-vilāsa: 12.421)
“Purāṇas, Pañcarātras, Vedas, and Pāśupatas—these are highly authoritative and should not be controverted with arguments.”
duṣkaraṁ parama-jñānaṁ
duṣkaraṁ parama-jñānaṁ tarkeṇātra vyavasyati |
śrutir dharma iti hy eke vadanti bahavo janāḥ |
na tv etat pratisūyāmi na hi sarvaṁ vidhīyate ||
(Mahābhārata: 8.49.48–49)
[Bhagavān Śrī Kṛṣṇa recounts to Arjuna a statement of Indra:] “Complete understanding [of dharma] is difficult to attain. In this regard [i.e., in regard to proper understanding of dharma] one ascertains it with reasoning. Many persons says, ‘Dharma is śruti.’ While I do not oppose this [i.e., this view], it is not applicable to everything.”
tarko’pratiṣṭhaḥ śrutayo vibhinnā
tarko’pratiṣṭhaḥ śrutayo vibhinnā
nāsāv ṛṣir yasya mataṁ na bhinnam |
dharmasya tattvaṁ nihitaṁ guhāyāṁ
mahājano yena gataḥ sa panthāḥ ||
(Mahābhārata: Vana-parva, 313.117; cited in Caitanya-caritāmṛta: 2.17.186, 2.25.57)
“Reasoning is inconclusive, the Śrutis are variegated, and one whose opinion is not distinctive is not a ṛṣi. The nature of dharma is [thus] hidden in secret. [Therefore,] That by which a mahājana has gone is the path.”
ekā bhūr ubhayor aikyam
ekā bhūr ubhayor aikyam ubhayor dala-kāṇḍayoḥ |
śāliśyāmākayor bhedaḥ phalena paricīyate ||
(Mahāsubhāṣita-saṅgraha; Subhāṣita-ratna-bhāṇḍāgāra)
“Both have the same soil, and both have identical shoots and stalks. The difference between rice and millet is known by the result.”
phalena phala-kāraṇam anumīyate
phalena phala-kāraṇam anumīyate |
(Gopāla-campū: Uttara-campū, 6.21; Kṛṣṇa Sandarbha: 149; cited in Caitanya-caritāmṛta: 3.1.91)
“The cause of an effect is inferred from the effect.”
acintyāḥ khalu ye bhāvā
acintyāḥ khalu ye bhāvā na tāṁs tarkeṇa yojayet |
prakṛtibhyaḥ paraṁ yac ca tad acintyasya lakṣaṇam ||
(Mahābhārata: 6.5.12, 12.5.22; cited in Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu: 2.5.93; Laghu Bhāgavatāmṛta: 1.5.111; Tattva Sandarbha: 11, and Caitanya-caritāmṛta 1.17.308)
“Do not assess inconceivable states of being (bhāvas) with argumentation; that which is beyond the [material] elements is the characteristic of the inconceivable.”