[Advaita-l] Apoureshyatva - Faith or Logic?

[Ramesh Krishnamurthy]

On 26 June 2012 12:52, V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com> wrote:
<<So the above ability does not restrict itself to humans.  I do not
see a clear link
between this ability and one being a purusharthi.  So the conclusion
you arrive  at below is not of use for this discussion.>>

I am talking about the ability to take into account something more
than just instinct (such as ethics) in one's decision to act, not act
or act differently. The common laukika view is that animals act on the
basis of instinct, and that only humans can take into account ethical
and other such considerations. The traditional association of
puNya-pApa with actions is based on this ability that humans have. In
general, tradition does not associate puNya-pApa with the actions of
cows, horses, etc

So the point is that it is this ability to rise above instinct and
take autonomous decisions on actions (on the basis of ethical and
other considerations) that makes the dharma puruShArtha relevant for a
jIva.

> No. There is a classic case of the Sringeri Acharya Sri Chandrashekhara
> Bharati Swamiji's dialogue with a Westerner who was enamored by the Vedic
> religion

I am aware of this and it supports my argument.

> So, the Peruvian guy, if he had the burning quest, could have sought and
> got the necessary path for his upliftment that is most suitable for him.

So you accept that this 12th century Peruvian guy is a
dharma/mokSha-puruShArthI?

If yes, do you see that you are actually agreeing with my views?

As long as you are accommodating the Peruvian guy into the framework
of dharma and mokSha, you are essentially agreeing with what I wrote
earlier.