[Advaita-l] shaDdarhana and other unorthodox schools

Ram Garib garib_ram at yahoo.co.in
Fri Jan 26 08:42:20 CST 2007

Sri Ramesh Krishnamurthy wrote:

> Just as a bureaucrat's opinion about academic
> matters means nothing,
> an academic's opinion about our darshana-s means
> nothing.

It depends. 

I agree to it as far as spiritual wisdom is concerned.

However when our sages(and their disciples) use
completely secular tools such as logic or mathematics
or epiestemology, shouldn't they be tested on the same
bench mark as reserved for western philosophers? When
the great AchAryAs of indian schools established their
systems, they probably used whatever cutting edge
tools were available to them at that time in other
branches of philosophy. Today, those branches have
grown much beyond anyone's imagination, however, our
arguments continue to be based on a logic and
mathematics that is now only of historical interest in
the west. For example advaita and dvaita both use
their distinctive epiestemology (largely based on
mImAmsA) yet none of them actually define 'logical
necessity', thus leaving enough scope for anyone with
a clever mind to keep playing with the arguments.

Then how can we say that academic's opinions about our
darshana-s mean nothing?

With regards,
Ram Garib

Yahoo! India Answers: Share what you know. Learn something new

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list