Question on method of arriving at conclusions

[Ian Goddard]

 On 7/6/96, anand hudli observed the dualist's measure of "real":
 >
 > Let us look at what the dvaitins mean by reality.
 > Vyasatirtha, one of the three luminaries of Dvaita, says in his magnum
 >  opus, the nyaayaamR^ita:
 >   trikAlasarvadeshIyanishhedhApratiyogitA sattochyate| meaning
 >   "not being the counter correlate of negation with respect to ALL
 >    three periods of time and space is reality." If something
 >   exists in *at least* one of the three periods of time, past, present
 >  and future, then it is regarded as real.

IAN: The relational unification of anything, A, with all that it
is "external" to it, ~A, exists at all times. At * no * point in the
space-time continuum can A be shown to exist free from relation to ~A.

Therefore, due to the physical fact of the relative nature of identity,
duality -- where "duality" implies separation -- cannot be shown to
exist in any of the 3 periods, and thus duality fails to satisfy
the requirements for labeling duality as "real" as set forth
by the dualists themselves !! So much for duality!


 > Further, from  viewpoint of Brahman too, the world is real.
 > It is all Brahman! What is being denied is the
 > reality of the duality in the world.

IAN: Well stated. Every appearance of duality is the confirmation
of nonduality due to the unitary nature of relational identity in
which the nature of A is entirely a derivative of the A/~A relation
and can never exist free from this holistic unified relation.


Law of Identity: A is A, relative to not-A. A = (A + ~A)

Law of Nonidentity: If there is 100% A, there is 0% A. A = ~A

absolute reality: http://www.erols.com/igoddard/reality.html