Ram Garib garib_ram at yahoo.co.in
Sun Mar 26 15:36:52 CST 2006

Thanks Sri Sadananda for your analysis of karika in
layman's language. I understand that you have
expressed reluctance for entering into arguments, and
it is not my intention either. Just some doubts that
cropped up:

--- kuntimaddi sadananda <kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com>

> a).  Brahman is
> all pervading
> existence and b) Brahman is the material cause for
> Jagat, which includes
> all objects.  Shruti says – yatOvA imAni bhUtAni
> jAyante, yena jAtAni
> jIvanti, yat prayam tyabhisam vishanti, 
> brahmeti – That from which
> the whole universe arises, by which it is sustained
> and into which it
> goes back is Brahman – Thus Brahman becomes
> adhiShTAnam or substantive
> for all objects.  

It seems that the demands of this shruti are fulfilled
by taking Brahman to be just the material cause of

A pot is jAyate from earth, jIvati from earth and
finally vishati into earth. Therefore material cause
fulfills this shruti completely. 

If we test efficient cause on the criteria of this
shruti, we find that a pot is jayate from potter, but
niether jIvati from potter, nor vishati into it.
Therefore based on this shruti, we should be justified
in concluding that Brahman is only the material cause
of jagat. There seems to be no need to stretch
efficient cause also into brahman.

> Confirming this sruti says existence alone was there
> in the beginning
> and it is one without a second.  

Since "existence" cannot "not exist", saying that
"existence alone existed" is a tautology. Therefore,
this meaning fails mimamsaka's "apurvata" criteria.
Why do I need a shruti pramana, which could otherwise
be derived from the structure of the language itself?
Shruti would make sense only if it meant "existence
of..." instead of an abstraction like pure existence.

With regards,
Ram Garib

Yahoo! India Matrimony: Find your partner now. Go to http://yahoo.shaadi.com

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list