beginningless avidyA and transmigration

Sankaran Panchapagesan panchap at ICSL.UCLA.EDU
Tue Jun 15 16:49:03 CDT 1999


  Thanks (Ramakrishnan) for your long e-mail explaining some things. I am
presently reading the translation of the UpadeSasAhasrI by Sengaku Mayeda,
hoping it will clear things up. I have some general things I am wondering
about. Hope you can clarify it, or at least point me to books where I can
find the details.

> 1. I have been repeatedly telling shruti is a pramANa and regarding
> brahman it's the only pramANa.

I understand this.

Buddhism does not accept shruti as a
> pramANa at all. The naiyyAyikas
make shruti subsidiary to logic, but
> at least they accept it as pramANa. shruti (and smR^iti) can alone
> produce enlightenment. All schools of Buddhism (Indian) use only tarka
> to establish their philosophy. That's a very great difference! So
> there's no question of dismissing differences by saying both schools
> share the same goal. All schools, except chArvakas admit of moxa. Does
> that mean the differences can be ignored?

I have a question on this. According to Mimamsa and Vedanta, Sruti is
apaurusheya, one of the meanings/implications of which is that it is not
composed by any person. How is Sruti then "seen" by the Rshis? By mystic
meditation (yoga?)? Or devotion to the Lord? If that is so, is Sruti or
the equivalent truths "accessible" to anyone who performs the
corresponding meditation with the same devotion, like Christians,
Buddhists, Jains, etc.?

Thanks in advance for your reply,

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list