[Advaita-l] akdhandaakara vRitti - My mistake
Keshava PRASAD Halemane
k_prasad_h at yahoo.co.in
Sun Jul 5 07:10:26 CDT 2015
namastE. praNaams My Dear श्रीमल्ललितालालितः
Thank you for your patience in responding in spite of the irritation caused thereby.
Now, therefore, allow me repeat in my own words, from what i have understood from your writings in this forum : [BTW i haven't yet studied advaitasiddhi / vEdAntaparibhASha - i may need much more time for that]
We are talking about vyavahAra - vRtti-janya-jnAna - in particular. Let us consider any object in the vyavahArika that is the usual perceptible world, say a simple ghaTa. A knowledge of the ghaTa arises from the ghaTAkAra-vRtti as usually understood. What will be that knowledge of the same ghaTa arising from an akhanDAkAra-vRtti associated with it? Will it be the same knowledge, or different? I guess that it will be different because of the fact that the ghaTAkAra-vRtti is different from the akhanDAkAra-vRtti associated with it. If different, how different will be those two from one another? "ghaTAkAra-vRtti-janya-jnAna of the ghaTa" -and- "akhanDAkAra-vRtti-janya-jnAna of the ghaTa". Keshava PRASAD HalemanemOkShakaamaarthadharmahjanmanaa jaayatE jantuḥ | samskaaraat hi bhavEt dvijaḥ || vEda-paaThaat bhavEt vipra | brahma jnaanaat hi braahmaNah ||
On Sunday, 5 July 2015 5:07 PM, श्रीमल्ललितालालितः <lalitaalaalitah at lalitaalaalitah.com> wrote:
On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 4:38 PM, Keshava PRASAD Halemane via Advaita-l <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
Is it possible for one to have an akhaNDAkAra-vRtti [niShprakAra-vRtti] associated with an object in the physical world, say a ghaTa or a paTa like object? OR is it that an akhaNDAkAra-vRtti [niShprakAra-vRtti] is by definition always associated with only brahma-vastu?
You know, anyone will hate to say same thing again and again. I'm telling this about second question.
If you understand that I was refuting it's relation with brahma-vastu only, then it makes sense to deduce that I accept that this vRtti is possible for other objects. Otherwise, why should I insist to cover सोयम् and प्रकृष्टप्रकाशश्चन्द्रः etc.?
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list