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

[kalyan chakravarthy]

Namaskaaram,

> > One can understand that avyaya means that soul has no death or decay.
> > But how does avyaya mean that the soul has a nature and that is
>eternally
> > constant?
>
>Asked and answered.
>
> > How does it show that this nature is eternally constant?
>
>Ditto.

On the contrary, eluded.

>I am not linking damnation to it; I am just pointing out the relevance of
>the prefix in light of the maxim `asAdhAraNyena vyapadeshA bhavanti'.  By
>the way, you still have not met the burden of proof in regard to your
>claimed interpretation of the prefix.

Already said that the maxim does not necessarily show that the transit must
be eternal. The maxim can as well show the prolonged duration of the
transit. A pre-requisite for eternal transit is the eternal existence of
such dark worlds which again has not been indicated(definitely not by andHam
tamah).

>Not so separately, however, in the noun-phrase meaning "dark worlds" and
>the verb "fall into."  That is the point.  Therefore, one cannot say that
>"fall into" repeats something *already indicated by* "dark worlds" as you
>claimed.

The claim was not that of repetition but of giving stress or support. You
will understand it if you contrast it with "going into dark worlds".

> > Either you have not read Sri Adi Shankara's interpretations, or you have
> > forgotten them or you are simply bluffing.
> >
> > Mundaka Upanishad 2.2.4 is enough to show you are wrong.
>
>?  Hardly.  You have in any case not provided any hard evidence or
>interpretation of commentary; I am least inclined to honor your bare
>assertion (elsewhere too).  You in any case seem to prefer unspecified
>translations (as per your word elsewhere) and not the original, which is
>one reason I am disinclined to trust your understanding.

The translations are advaitic translations. In the brihadaranyaka upanishad
1.2.1, the word AtmA is not taken as meaning either the individual or
supreme Self but is read as the mind. If you accept it, then you are eating
your own words. If you deny it, then I can rest assured of your ignorance of
advaitic interpretations.

>Once again, the maxim of `asAdhAraNyena vyapadeshA bhavanti'.  Pay
>attention!

Once again, the maxim does not show the necessity. Understand that the
necessity is being questioned.

Best Regards
Kalyan




_________________________________________________________________
Find a partner. For life. http://www.shaadi.com/ptnr.php?ptnr=hmlql
Meet at Shaadi.com