[Advaita-l] (Alleged) Internal Inconsistencies in the Advaita Tradition

Rajaram Venkataramani rajaramvenk at gmail.com
Mon Jun 27 16:18:59 CDT 2011

I saw that the links were more of a survey of different opinions but will
definitely re-read them if you say that it reconciles the differences. I
think your opinion that there can be multiple models is valid. IMO, maya is
anirvacaniya and hence it is possible to come up with alternate explanations
of vyavaharika satyam - a sort of metaphysical subjectivism. Also, each
acharya has an intellectual tendency which decides how he frames the problem
and solution to metaphysical problem within the framework of the tradition.

My point in asking the question is to learn how the tradition views the
differences, if they indeed perceive them.
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 9:59 PM, Vidyasankar Sundaresan <
svidyasankar at hotmail.com> wrote:

> > Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 20:43:06 +0100
> > From: rajaramvenk at gmail.com
> > To: advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org
> > Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] (Alleged) Internal Inconsistencies in the
> Advaita Tradition
> >
> > Hare Krishna. I dont know why you say that the internal inconsistency is
> > an allegation. There are two primary classifications
> >
> I'm sure Sri Anand Hudli will address the details of your concerns if he
> wishes to,
> but it is sometimes a fruitless exercise to talk around in circles. Please
> re-read the
> four links that he sent to his earlier posts and work through them in a
> little more
> detail. I would also like to point out to you that what one sees as an
> internal
> inconsistency is not necessarily so in another's viewpoint. I am butting in
> here
> only because I fully agree with him that the so-called inconsistency is
> indeed only
> an allegation.
> To really "get" advaita, one needs to give up a lot of one's
> preconceptions. It is
> like having to give up the preconceptions based on classical physics in
> order to
> truly get into quantum physics. There, a photon is neither merely a wave,
> nor
> merely a particle, nor merely a combination of both, although described as
> if it
> were indeed both a particle and a wave. So also in advaita, a jIva (or for
> that
> matter, ISvara) is neither merely a pratibimba, nor merely an AbhAsa etc.
> Turning to the advaita concept of adhyAsa, you would agree, I suppose, that
> your
> current characteristic of being son of so-and-so, living in such-and-such a
> place,
> holder of this-or-that educational degree, employee of such-and-such a
> company
> etc do not really characterize your true nature. I would like you to think
> about
> how these incidental characteristics of your current situation relate to
> the jIva
> that is in your physical body. How separable are these from jIva-hood? I
> trust
> that if you can see through this issue, you will be able to understand that
> each
> author in the advaita tradition uses one or the other model of jIvahood, in
> order
> to explain a certain point in a certain way. Some authors use multiple
> models
> in the same text. That one sees an inconsistency is more a function of
> one's
> perspective, rather than a reflection on that particular author or on the
> tradition
> as a whole.
> Please do not see my words above as a personal comment. It is easy to say
> jIva and objectify the word and talk about it as if it were an entity
> amenable to
> external analysis. Rather than arm-chair theorizing about jIva and ISvara,
> I think
> it is high time we all reminded ourselves that when we say jIva, we are
> really
> talking about our own selves, not some external entity out there.
> Regards,
> Vidyasankar
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list