reposting again

[K. Sadananda]

>
>I am a little confused about the above. Is the claim that mAyA is
>postulated because of Sruti-based anupalabdhi pramANa, or is it
>that the appearance of jagat is based on the anupalabdhi?
>
>Note that mAyA as triguNAtmikA prakRti is mentioned throughout gItA.
>It is not something new invented by Sankaracarya or borrowed from
>some Buddhist school. If any other school is to be identified in this
>context, we have to look for prakRti according to sAMkhya and/or yoga.
>
>Vidyasankar

Vidya -

Implication, as I understand, is the use of  maaya as sadasat
vilakshaNa is shruti based anupaladbi rather than directly shruti
statements to that effect.

In B.G geeta - my recollection is maaya  is used in reference to
parameswara shakti but not in the sense of sat asat vilakshaNa.
daiviim esha guNamayi mama maayaa durathyayaa.  I am not sure if
there is any  specific references to maaya in the sense it is defined
in advaitic traditions in Giita either.    Equation of maaya to
prakR^iti we have to go back again to the referenced swataaswatara
Upanishad statement.

Am I wrong?

Hari Om!
Sadananda




--
K. Sadananda
Code 6323
Naval Research Laboratory
Washington D.C. 20375
Voice (202)767-2117
Fax:(202)767-2623