Dvaita and Sophistry - Part 3(Inherent natures of jivas)

[Vidyasankar]

I have been keeping out of this thread, for there is a deep fundamental
divide between the dvaita and the advaita understandings of the topics
being discussed. So, I'm thankful that Jaldhar has started to restate and
clarify the traditional view. Only a couple of points -

>In his BSB (1.3.1) Sri Sankara has explicitly stated his understanding to
>be that the word AtmA is *always* (samyak.h) used to refer to one thing
>and that no other meaning may be applied: Atmashabdashcha
>paramAtmaparigrahe samyak.h avakalpate, nArthAntaraparigrahe.  I could
>scarcely have conjured a more supportive statement were I able to have
one
>made to order.
>

1. samyak.h does not mean "always" and it certainly does not mean
"everywhere". It means, "well, correctly, properly" etc. In other words,
it is inappropriate, in the context of Brahmasutra 1.3.1, to think of
AtmA, the support (Ayatana) of heaven (dyu), earth (bhU), etc (Adi), as
anything other (arthAntara) than paramAtmA.

2. Note that there are various other places in the commentaries where
Sankaracharya himself glosses the word AtmA as sharIra (body) or as manas
(mind), depending on the source text he is explaining at that point. I can
give a whole list from the sUtra, gItA and upanishad commentaries, if
needed, but leave it to interested readers to check this for themselves.

Regards,
Vidyasankar