[Advaita-l] Re: Advaita-l Digest, Vol 1, Issue 32
jay at r-c-i.com
Fri May 30 20:22:41 CDT 2003
Let us see what makes sense for this sootra
"Om IkshatErna ashbdam Om"
I am aware of the fact that some interpret this to refute
the school of sAmkhya.
This is how that interpretation goes ( correct me if I am wrong) :
chAndOgya says 'sadEva sOmya idamagra Aseet' and if sAmkhyas
say that jagat-kAraNa (creator) is pradhAna or prakrti which is denoted
by ashabdam in the sootra. This sootra has come
about to show that those sAmkhyas are wrong. They are wrong because
upanishat says "tadaikshata" meaning it creates with knowledge.
Therefore, "ashabdam na" or Creator is not prakrti.
But prakrti is jada, it has no knowledge. Therefore, the jagat-kAraNa is
not prakrti but it is Brahman".
There are several problems in such an interpretation:
1) First of all, to say that sAmkhyas say "Prakrti is ashadba" and then
to refute it is incorrect, because sAmkhyas do not say Prakrti is ashabda.
2) Sri VedavyAsa has dealt with sAmkhya in the second chapter in
detail, and so to say Sri VedavyAsa has refuted in 1.1.5 and repeated
it again in II.2.1-10 is against the
"alpAksharam asamdigdham sAravat vishwatOmukham
astObham anavadyam" nature of the sootras.
3) Too many assupmtions have to be made on the text of the sootra
(pradhAnam) na (jagatkAraNam) ashabda (tvAt)
There are more number of words assumed than the original number of
words in the sootra itself !!.
Do you need some more reasons to see why this position is not tenable?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Vidyasankar Sundaresan" <svidyasankar at hotmail.com>
To: <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
Sent: Friday, May 30, 2003 4:34 PM
Subject: [Advaita-l] Re: Advaita-l Digest, Vol 1, Issue 32
> >To remove being jeeva-nishTa, and to become Brahma-NishTa - one needs to
> >understand and implement teachings of VedOpanishats & Geetha in one's
> >attain the Highest Good.
> This sentiment is fine, but I would still like to know whose
> you follow for these sUtra-s. As far as I know, it is not
> but I am unaware which bhAshya explains the Ikshaty adhikaraNam as you do.
> Besides, if these sUtra-s are meant to further expound on the previous
> sUtra-s on samanvaya and SAstra-yonitva, there is no need to consider
> as a separate adhikaraNa at all.
> Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online
> want to unsubscribe or change your options? See:
> Need assistance? Contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list