Tat tvam asi?

[S. V. Subrahmanian]

Dear Sri Jaladhar,

I should acknowledge at this point that I need to think and learn more on this.
 You have raised certain valid objections and points.  This paragraph is an
example:

> Right which is why I do not say it is the buddhi per se.  But ask yourself
> what is involved in the process of negation?  To understand the difference
> between two things must have some idea no matter how tentative of the
> lakshanas of the two things.  The negation of non-being cannot happen
> unless one has an idea of being.  Where did that idea come from?

I had skipped the fact that "idea of being" right now is only in the buddhi.
You have pointed to certain fallacies in my line of thinking.  I don't have
answers.  Atleast I have learnt that some things are wrong in my understanding.
 I am happy.  Hopefully I will learn as I put in more effort.

> Yes but such surrender by itself cannot be enough.  There also has to be a
> positive cognition of identity.  And that knowledge might not be of an

You have been quite consistent in this line of thought (across various threads
of discussion on this list).  I have read thoughts contrary to this too.
Assuming the eyes are open:

Is it not enough if the clouds are cleared?  Is seeing the sun an extra step?
Is it not an automatic result of the clearing of clouds?


=====
Regards,
SVS.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send FREE Valentine eCards with Yahoo! Greetings!
http://greetings.yahoo.com