[Advaita-l] advaita and vedas

[Aditya Varun Chadha]

On 5/10/06, Aditya Varun Chadha <adichad at gmail.com> wrote:
> The point is that "advaita", as used by those who are authorities on
> the subject, signifies not only the concept of "non-duality", but also
> a _tradition_ of adhyayan with its predefined set of assumptions and
> vocabulary (language) and methods.

> advaita is a term that signifies
> _tradition as well as metaphysics_, I am not an "advaitin" so to
> speak, but only a non-dualist. even extreme Sufis are non-dualist. I
> can claim that I am a believer and student of "creationless
> nondualism", but I cannot claim that I am an "ajAtivadI advaitin",
> because the latter term has cultural, traditional and orthodox baggage
> that it cannot (and should not) be seperated from.

This basically resolves the discrepency between what Sri Jayanarayanan
was saying (the eternal existence of "words"), and what I was saying
(the eternal existence of _concepts_ that our words represent, not the
words themselves). The thing to realize is that every word has a LOT
of baggage associated with it that is implicit. for example "advaita"
is not merely "non-dualism", it is much more. so "advaita" and
"non-dualism" eternally exist as different words AS WELL AS different
concepts. no two sounds ever really "mean" the same thing. so while
what I was saying (that it is the meanings, the concept behind words
that are eternal) is correct, it is also correct that every
non-identical pair of uttered sounds represents a non-identical pair
of concepts, and thus words themselves can be said to exist eternally.

So my current goal is not "jIvanmuktI", but say "realization of
chunkyhood". they are NOT the same as long as both are given the EXACT
same definition, down to every syllable and intonation.

--
Aditya Varun Chadha | http://www.adichad.com | +91 9840076411 (M)
Room#1024, Cauvery Hostel | IIT Madras | Chennai - 600036 | India