[Advaita-l] Body is the disease

[श्रीमल्ललितालालितः]

On 21 January 2014 17:36, Srinath Vedagarbha <svedagarbha at gmail.com> wrote:

> In a vAda, when one provides a tarka/anumAna to substantiate his/her stand,
> it is expected in vidvad circles that hEtu used  in such argument is indeed
> accepted as "true" (tAtvIka), at least in such person's own siddhAnta if
> not in opponent's siddhAnta.
>

​There are two ways to see your stand:
1. vAda is not possible if something is not accepted true by both opponents
2. Even if vAda starts, the person who doesn't accept anything true can't
prove anything

Both are not correct.
1.
In case your rule is accepted, then a vAda related to
'trueness/un-real-ness of all things' can't start ever.
If you say that such vAda can not be, then let me assure that vedAntin-s,
shUnyavAdin-s, etc. actually participate in such vAda to prove un-real-ness
of everything you take as granted. And you can't stop them by making rules.
If you do so, in a way you are opposed to vAda, and are clearly biased
towards true-ness. And hence you loose the vAda.
If you don't make rule, then you have to accept that vAda is possible for
even those who don't accept anything true. And, hence you loose.


2.
Now, you have started a vAda with me, who doesn't accept anything as real.
I utter a sentence to prove that everything is mithyA.
Now, if you think that my words don't prove anything and they have no
meaning(because words and meanings are not accepted real by me), better
don't reply me. In this case, I will be announced winner by those who are
neutral and are testing our skills. So, you loose.
And, if you reply, you are opposing your own rule and hence accepting that
my 'hetu' is able. And, hence you loose.


This is the style of refutation which I learnt from shrI-harSha, etc.
I'm writing this just because shrI vaidyanAthan subrahmanian has requested
me to do so.

I've not enough time to go through books and to persuade others with
explanations. So, please pardon me.
I'll be happy to help if I get enough time.

I hope other members have enough knowledge to explain and refute views I've
refuted.

!! mahAdeva !!
​

​




*श्रीमल्ललितालालितः *www.lalitaalaalitah.com