[Advaita-l] akhanDaakara-vRtti

[Venkatraghavan S]

For example in the sentence "this is that devadatta", the underlying
devadatta, could be a man, woman or even an animal. That sentence doesn't
convey those attributes about devadatta, hence it is akhandArtha.
On 8 Jul 2015 09:02, "Venkatraghavan S" <agnimile at gmail.com> wrote:

> Namaste Anand ji,
> Thanks for clarifying. This is my understanding, I think its the same as
> what you are saying:
>
> 1) "this devadatta" has attributes, "that devadatta" has attributes.
> 2) the underlying devadatta has attributes.
> 3) however, the sentence this is that devadatta, simply says this
> devadatta = that devadatta. That statement doesn't tell us anything about
> the attribute of the underlying devadatta, nor does it require the presence
> or absence of attributes in the underlying devadatta. It simply says the
> underlying object is one, without talking about the attribute of the
> object. Therefore its an akhandArtha vAkyam.
> 4) the knowledge that this sentence "this is that devadatta" produces is
> akhandArtha vritti.
>
> Regards,
> Venkatraghavan
>  On 7 Jul 2015 18:41, "Anand Hudli via Advaita-l" <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 1:09 PM, kuntimaddi sadananda via Advaita-l <
>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>> > Chandramouli ji - PraNAms
>> >
>> > In the case of soyam devadattaH - as Sadananda yogi illustrates as an
>> example of jadajahallakshNa. Lakshana involves not vaachyaartha but
>> lakshyaartha and jahat ajahat involves bhaga tyaaga - where contradictory
>> parts have to be rejected and only equate the non-contradictory - here
>> unchanging entity. How fast this is done is of no consequence. Viveka
>> involves nithya anitya vastu viveka. In this example the buddhi does
>> instantly or slowly by remembering that devadatta depending on how sharp
>> that memory is - some times more prodding may be required to recapitulate
>> that devadatta.  It can be instant process but the mind has to drop the
>> two
>> contradictory attributes to arrive at oneness of this and that devadattas
>> or aham and tat -In the case of Devadatta  mind may do fast but in the
>> case
>> of tat tvam asi - the previous notions inhibit seeing that equation. Soyam
>> devadattaH is classical example to illustrate the jahdajahallakshaNa - in
>> illustrating the viveka
>> >  required to appreciate the tat tvam asi
>> >
>> > Yes I know Shree Aandaji - Not sure if he is particularly interested to
>> join. One can try. I am ccing this to Him, if he cares to comment.
>> >
>> > Hari Om!
>> > Sada
>> >
>> >
>>
>> I am not sure what exactly is being discussed, so I'll just say this. I
>> remember seeing comments to the effect that anything with attributes
>> cannot
>> be the object of  "nirvikalpaka" or indeterminate perception. However, we
>> have the example of "this is that Devadatta". Both the Devadatta seen now
>> as "this" and the Devadatta seen earlier as "that" have attributes. They
>> are both men, with parts such as hands, feet, etc. What is going on here?
>> Although Devadatta is very much a perceivable person with attributes, the
>> crucial point here is that the perception "this is that Devadatta" does
>> not
>> involve any of those attributes. It is exactly expressing an identity
>> between two objects, this Devadatta and that Devadatta, nothing less,
>> nothing more. So there is no "appeal" made to any attribute in the
>> knowledge "this is that Devadatta", although Devadatta does have
>> attributes. Obviously, the same Devadatta could be an object of
>> determinate
>> perception, "Devadatta is stout", "Devadatta is short", etc.
>>
>> Anand
>> _______________________________________________
>> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>>
>> To unsubscribe or change your options:
>> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>>
>> For assistance, contact:
>> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>>
>