[Advaita-l] definition and criteria of Truth

[V Subrahmanian]

On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 5:24 AM, subhanu saxena <subhanu at hotmail.com> wrote:

>
> V. Subramaniam wrote:“I am not readily able to trace the Bhashyam sentences
> where the Acharya
> talks about the Truth as free from these three criteria in one place.”
>
> Namaste, we find these 3 mentioned in the same place in īśāvāsyopaniṣad
> bhāṣyam 18.
>

Thank you very much for the reference.  The three words: avidyA, samshaya
and ajnAnam are used in one sentence there.

>
> I suspect what Guy is referring to are the 3 criteria that have their roots
> in nyāya-vaisheṣika regarding the valid cognition of truth, namely
> conformity with the object (sārūpya), the competence to lead to fruitful
> action (samartha-pravritti-janakatva) and coherence  with other established
> truths (samvādi). There is an echo of this in BUB I.iv.14
>
> The Vedanta tradition has added that it cannot be sublated or contradicted
> (viz Panchadasi III.29 Satyatvaṁ bādha-rāhityaṁ jagad-bādhaika-sākṣiṇaḥ,
> bādhaḥ kiṁ-sākṣiko brūhi na tva-sākṣika iṣyate .That which cannot be
> contradicted in the three periods of time can be regarded as Truth, Vedanta
> paribhāṣā 1 abādhitārthaviṣayajnānatvam). As per Shankara the anvaya is that
> which is immutable, ever unchanging, is satyam and the vyatireka is that
> which undergoes modification is anritam. Vide BGB II.16 yad-viṣayā buddhir
> na vyabhicarati, tat sat | yad-viṣayā vyabhicarati, tad asat.
>

This in fact is the other way of presenting the Acharya's own Taittiiriya
bhashya  definition of 'satyam and anRtam' that we have just seen in this
very thread.  So, according to Advaita satyam is not only ever-lasting but
also never-changing.  PrakRti might qualify in the first requirement but not
in the second and is therefore anRtam.

Regards,
subrahmanian.v

I believe Citsukha in tattva-pradipika has also commented on this and maybe
> list members can provide the references
> Regards
> Subhanu
>