[Advaita-l] Pancikarana vs. Trvrtkarana (Analysis)

Sunil Bhattacharjya sunil_bhattacharjya at yahoo.com
Thu Jul 23 00:31:30 CDT 2009

Dear Vidyasankarji,

I agree. This "Samana" indicates a parallel relationship.

A statement that both "Dvaita" and "Advaita" are true, as Sri Ramakrishna Paramhansa used to say, is a "Samana" statement. However Advaita recognisaes Dvaita through Vyavaharika Satya  but Dvaita does not recognise Advaita and that makes Advaita inclusive of Dvaita but the reverse is not implied.


Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

--- On Wed, 7/22/09, Vidyasankar Sundaresan <svidyasankar at hotmail.com> wrote:

From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <svidyasankar at hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Pancikarana vs. Trvrtkarana (Analysis)
To: "Advaita List" <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
Date: Wednesday, July 22, 2009, 8:21 PM

> Sankara's special reference to 'Samana Nyaya' admits only inclusive
> relations between Trvrtkarana and Pancikarana. Hence I avoided options you


Again, I beg to differ. The chAndogya bhAshya reference to samAna nyAya admits only a parallel relationship, not inclusive and not exclusive ones between trivRtkaraNa and pancIkaraNa.


To explain this in detail will require quite some discussion, so I will postpone that till the weekend.




Windows Live™ SkyDrive™: Store, access, and share your photos. See how.
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