[Advaita-l] Jagat mityam or satyam?
rama.balasubramanian at gmail.com
Wed Jul 14 11:36:31 CDT 2004
Unfortunately, Radhakrishnan was not an advaitin by any stretch of the
imagination. So his comments have absolutely no relevance to advaita,
especially to those of us who insist on following "sa.mkara.
Interpretation of vedic texts require using rules of miimaa.msaa.
Taking one word alone in a whole chapter and arriving at a meaning is
not correct. That's why I pointed out that a single word can be used
in different senses in the same sentence. Another example: satya.m
caan.rtam ca satyamabhavat. Surely no one would contest that satyam
has two different meanings in this single sentence.
I still suggest that the bhaa.syam to that chapter be read along with
the bhaa.syam to janmaadyasya yata.h. I think we can have a fruitful
discussion based on that.
On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 07:49:16 -0700 (PDT), Aravind Mohanram
<psuaravind at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Thanks for the reply. The verse says "satyasya satyam" indicating (as I understand) that Brahman is the Truth of another truth (which is world, its material cause) - and Dr. Radhakrishnan in his principal upanishads notes that actually the world is not false but should be understood as a derivative truth, which he says is also repeated in M. Up. 6.32. And that led to my question.
> Thanks to Sri Sadanandaji for your suggestion.
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list