[Advaita-l] Dvaita Vaada - Vadiraja Teertha's Nyayaratnavali Slokas 310 - 314 Pativrataa Stree
H S Chandramouli
hschandramouli at gmail.com
Fri May 15 02:02:23 CDT 2015
Dear Shri Anandji,
Thanks for the very interesting and informative interaction.
On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 10:55 AM, Anand Hudli via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> Dear Shri Chandramouliji,
> You wrote:
> Since Bhamati is a commentary on the Bhashyam , is it clearly mentioned
> therein whether the above view is an independent view of Sri Vacahaspati
> Mishra or Sri Appayya Dikshita , or is it their interpretation of the
> held by Sri Bhagavatpada ?
> It may not have been explicit and clear in my message, but Appayya Dikshita
> does quote shAnkara bhAshya on the samanvaya sUtra (1.1.4) in explaining
> the bhAmatI view that there is no vidhi. Therefore, (in the bhAshya on
> 1.1.4), in the matter of AtmajnAna, after denying a vidhi, it is asked,
> "for what purpose are the semblances of vidhis such as AtmA vA are
> draShTavayaH shrotavyaH...?" The bhAShya says that it is for turning one
> away from objects of natural activity (ata eva samanvaya sUtre
> AtmajnAnavidhinirAkaraNAnantaraM bhAShyam- kimarthAni tarhi "AtmA vA are
> draShTavyaH shrotavyaH" ityAdIni vacanAni vidhicChAyAni?
> svAbhAvikapravRttiviShayavimukhIkaraNArthAnIti brUmaH- ityAdi).
> Also, Appayya Dikshita addresses what appears to be an acceptance of a
> vidhi in 3.4.47 by the bhAShyakAra and says it is only an appearance of a
> vidhi that is accepted, in accordance with the bhAShya on 1.1.4.
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list