[Advaita-l] Nyayasudha Objections 1
svedagarbha at gmail.com
Fri Feb 26 10:55:28 CST 2016
On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 5:11 AM, Venkatraghavan S via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> Namaste Sri Subbuji,
> Regarding Sri PurandaradAsa's explanation for the limitation of words to
> describe the infinite guNAs of Brahman, the context of where this vAkya
> occurs in Taittiriya doesn't lend itself to that interpretation. Here the
> context of shruti is when talking about Brahman as pancha kosha vilakshaNa,
> and not occurring where the vibhUtis of the Lord are being described.
Isn't it His vilakShaNattvaM itself His vibhUti?
> Going back to other arguments made in this context. Just because shruti
> cannot refer to Brahman, it does not mean that it ceases to be a pramANa
> for Brahman, and one cannot use shruti vAkya in support of advaita.
This is the bigger epistemological question -- can we treat a source as
pramANa if it generates knowledge only by lakShya which is not known so
apriori by any other pramANa(s)?
> For shruti to be a pramANa, it is sufficient if it generates brahma pramA,
> which it does, through mahAvAkya. This link between the need to referr to
> mukhyArtha and pramaNatva does not hold.
How can even it generates brahma pramA by lakShyartha, unless Brahman is
known apriori from other sources other than shruti? Can 'ganga' pada
generates the concept of bank in one's head if one were never ever seen a
bank by pratyaksha?
> The attempt made by the other member to paint advaita as unvedic, is
> totally preposterous.
I am sorry, it was not meant in a negative connotation when "unvedic" word
was used. What really meant was that it is an "what-if" analysis where if
the pramANa used is other than shruti, then such position would be
non-vedic. "Non-vedic" is better choice of word than "unvedic".
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list