[Advaita-l] neha nAnAsti kiMchana

[S Jayanarayanan]

--- Jay Nelamangala <jay at r-c-i.com> wrote:
> Dear Kartik Jayanarayanan,
> 
> >That interpretation leads to the nonsensical
> equation
> >of guNa = kriya = GYAna = etc. 
> 
> We are not solving algebraic equations here.
> 
> Watch out for Shruti before you call it nonsensical.
> 

Read my statement carefully before you warn me of
anything. I specifically said the *interpretation*
that you've given is nonsensical. 

> "parAsya shaktihi vividhaiva shrooyatE svAbhAvikI
> jnAna bala kriyA"
> (Parabrahman's achintya-adbhtuta-shakti which is
> natural to Him,

Surely, your Parabrahman is conscious? So you see
distinctions in Parabrahman such as consciousness and
achintya-adbhtuta-shakti. 

> > 
> > Since Brahman in advaita vedAnta is the Supreme
> > Reality, it means there are no distinctions in
> > Reality. 
> > 
> Brahman in dvaita and v.advaita is also Supreme
> Reality.
> 

dvaita teaches that Brahman is *part* of a Reality
that consists of Brahman, jIva, world, etc. Therefore,
according to your school, Brahman is NOT Reality, but
only a *subset* of Reality. 

Hence, in dvaita, there are distinctions in Reality. 

> What do you mean no distinctions in Reality?

Simply that there are no distinctions in Reality.

> Advaita teaches pAramArthika satyatva, vyAvahArika
> satyatva,
> prAtibhAsika satyatva etc.   
> So, it is advaita that teaches distinctions in
> reality.

Not so. The terms "vyAvahArika" and "prAtibhAsika"
explain the descriptive for "satya". They are only
conventionally or provisionally real which means they
are NOT Real. It is like a guest referring to the
guest room as "my room" when it is actually "the
host's room", yet the guest's reference is deemed
"socially true". 

Another (better) example: Newton's laws are false. Yet
they are taught as "true" in every high school. 

-Kartik

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
http://calendar.yahoo.com