[Advaita-l] NOTES ON MANDUKYA UPANISHAT AND KARIKA - INTRODUCTION -1.

[Siva Senani Nori]

--- kuntimaddi sadananda <kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com> wrote:

>              NOTES ON MANDUKYA UPNISHAD AND KARIKA
> 
> We can further differentiate the inherent qualifications as two types: 
> those that are necessary (swAbhAvika laxaNa) and those that are
> necessary and sufficient (swarUpa laxaNa). (In my recent discussions
> with Swami ParamArthanandaji, he mentioned that such kind of distinction
> has not been done before, but agreed that it should be done.  He
> suggested to use the term swarUpa for the necessary qualification and
> the term swarUpa laxaNa for necessary and sufficient qualification. 
> Here I am using swAbhAvika and swarUpa terms for each, since both may be
> laxaNas).  

I understand that Sri Sadananda does not want to be drawn into a discussion and
that his terminology has the sanction of H. H. SwAmi paramArthnandajI. Yet, one
question is nagging me which I pose to the learned members of this forum.

One of the defects of laXaNa is said to be ativyApti, literally 'spreading
beyond' [the object-set to be defined]. In the case of sugar, if sweetness is
said to be the laXaNa, it suffers from ativyApti because such a definition
would allow many other substances, including Equal, to be classified as sugar.
C6H12O6 as a definition of sugar would not suffer from such a dosha. Such being
the case is there a need to introduce two more technical terms swAbhAvika and
swarUpa laXanas?

Senani

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com