[Advaita-l] Nyayasudha Objections 1

V Subrahmanian v.subrahmanian at gmail.com
Wed Feb 24 23:29:58 CST 2016

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 1:27 AM, Srinath Vedagarbha <svedagarbha at gmail.com>

> Even Dvaitins are not saying in a sense Brahman is object. All they are
> saying Brahman is jnEya and has IkShaNeattvaM and hence sUtrakAra's used it
> as a hEtu in that sUtra Om IkShattEH  na aShabdaM Om. Other member was
> denying that hEtu does not fit in Brahman.

From the beginning of this discussion when the word 'IkShattEH' was used, I
have been unable to understand exactly what that word means according to
the Dvaita interpretation of that sutra. From what you have said so far:
'that Brahman is known, or knowable, seen, etc.'  it is not clear how that
word in that sutra fits this meaning.  For, in my understanding, if the
sutra should mean: 'because Brahman is seen/known', then the word should be
'īkṣyate' 'ईक्ष्यते’ , in the karmaṇi prayoga, (indirect speech), which
will mean: (Brahman) is seen, or known. But the word in the sutra is
'ईक्षतेः’ The meaning the Advaita bhashya gives to that word is:
ईक्षतिकर्तृत्वं ब्रह्मणः एव श्रवणात् (’तदैक्षत, बहु स्याम्, प्रजायेय इति’
(तैत्तिरीय), वेदबाह्यस्य जडस्य प्रधानस्य तदसम्भवात्, न प्रधानं जगत्कारणम्,
अपि तु चेतनं ब्रह्म वैदिकम्.  [कथमशब्दत्वम् ? ईक्षतेः =
ईक्षितृत्वश्रवणात्कारणस्य । bhashyam for 1.1.5]

How will that word ''ईक्षतेः’ of the sutra give the meaning: 'because
Brahman is seen/known' in the passive voice?

> What you are saying now is you are accepting jnEyatvam in Brahman, and
> that is enough for the case.

The jneyatvam is not the way that Brahman is an object but as that which
has to be known.  It is in the sense of ज्ञातव्यम्.


> /sv

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list