History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v7.c94.359.4

v7.c94.359.4

What they emphasized was that mere reasoning of one or more men should not as a rule be followed if the conclusions arrived at by reasoning are in direct conflict with Vedic and smṛti texts. Śaṅkarācārya clearly states his position on V S II. 1. 1. and 11.²⁴²⁰ Beliefs (such as those of Jains and Buddhists) were held to be heterodox, because they did not acknowledge the authority of the Veda and the sacred tradition, though they often observed Hindu practices and married with Hindus; but within this limit there was room enough for an enormous and bewildering variety of convictions, rites and practices that claimed to be orthodox. This may be illustrated by the attitude of some Upanisads For example, the Muṇḍaka Up. (I 1. 4-5) speaks of two vidyās, *parā* and *aparā*, includes under *aparā* the four Vedas and the six *aṅgas* and *parā* (highest) *vidyā* is that by which the imperishable *brahman* is attained. In the Chān Up (VII. 1. 1-5) when Nārada approached Sanatkumāra for instruction, the former recounted what he had already learnt viz. the four Vedas, Itihāsapurāṇa and other lores; then Sanatkumāra tells him that all that he has studied is mere name and then explains what is better than all those. Muṇḍaka (I. 2 7) condemns *yajñas* as leaky vessels. It is extremely surprising that the Chān. Up. in I. 12.