[Advaita-l] Dvaita Vaada - Vadiraja Teertha's Nyayaratnavali Slokas 378 - 386 Pratyaksha Part 2

[Venkatesh Murthy]

Namaste

Moreover Adi Sankara has said in his Gita Bhashya -
यत्तु उक्तम् ‘श्रुतिप्रामाण्यात्’ इति, तत् न; तत्प्रामाण्यस्य
अदृष्टविषयत्वात् । प्रत्यक्षादिप्रमाणानुपलब्धे हि विषये
अग्निहोत्रादिसाध्यसाधनसंबन्धे श्रुतेः प्रामाण्यम्, न
प्रत्यक्षादिविषये, अदृष्टदर्शनार्थविषयत्वात् प्रामाण्यस्य । तस्मात् न
दृष्टमिथ्याज्ञाननिमित्तस्य अहंप्रत्ययस्य देहादिसंघाते गौणत्वं
कल्पयितुं शक्यम् । न हि श्रुतिशतमपि ‘शीतोऽग्निरप्रकाशो वा’ इति ब्रुवत्
प्रामाण्यमुपैति । यदि ब्रूयात् ‘शीतोऽग्निरप्रकाशो वा’ इति, तथापि
अर्थान्तरं श्रुतेः विवक्षितं कल्प्यम्, प्रामाण्यान्यथानुपपत्तेः, न तु
प्रमाणान्तरविरुद्धं स्ववचनविरुद्धं वा ।

Even if a hundred Srutis say 'Fire is cold or not brilliant' it is not
valid. Sruti will be valid only for things not available to us by
Sense Perception. If Sruti may say  'Fire is cold or not brilliant' we
have to take a different meaning. Sruti will not contradict other
Pramanas like Pratyaksha. It will not contradict itself.

In Adhyasa Bhashya -

तस्मादविद्यावद्विषयाण्येव प्रत्यक्षादीनि प्रमाणानि शास्त्राणि चेति ।
Therefore the Pramanas like Pratyaksha and Sastra are for person with
Avidyaa only.
Why? पश्वादिभिश्चाविशेषात् There is no difference from animals in Vyavahara.

पश्वादीनां च प्रसिद्धः अविवेकपूर्वकः प्रत्यक्षादिव्यवहारः ।
तत्सामान्यदर्शनाद्व्युत्पत्तिमतामपि पुरुषाणां
प्रत्यक्षादिव्यवहारस्तत्कालः समान इति निश्चीयते । It is a familiar
fact that the animals use their means of perception etc without
discrimination. From this fact of similarity the conclusion can be
drawn that so far as empirical behaviour is concerned the use of the
means of perception of the wise is similar to that of animals.

On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 1:04 PM, Venkatesh Murthy <vmurthy36 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Namaste
>
> Advaiti response - Vaaidiraaja has two objections. He is saying
> Advaitis should not take वाच्यार्थ Literal meaning for 'Tat Tvam Asi'
> and other Abheda Srutis. He is also saying Advaitis have to give
> importance to Sense Perception Pratyaksha. The meaning for Sruti Vakya
> should not be againts Sense Perception. Nobody has the Sense
> Perception experience for 'I am Brahman'. Therefore it is not correct
> to say 'I am Brahman' literally.
>
> First Objection response - He has wasted his effort. Because Advaitis
> are not taking Literal meaning for 'Tat Tvam Asi' and other Maha
> Vakyas. They are using Jahadajahallakshana method.
>
> For the sentence 'I am Brahman' and 'You are That' we have to follow
> the same Jahadajahallaxanaa method. Ishwara is Universal Consciousness
> and Jeeva is Individual Consciousness. The Universal Consciousness is
> because of some Upadhis like being the Lord of all, having all powers,
> having knowledge of all Sarvajnatva and so on. The
> Individual Consciousness is also because of some Upadhis like having
> limited power, limited knowledge and so on. But we have to reject the
> Upadhis of both and take only Consciousness. Why? Because the Upadhis
> are not real. Then both Ishwara and Jeeva are the same Consciousness.
>
> He can see Advaitis are not taking  वाच्यार्थ here.
>
> Second Objection response - Sense Perception is not stronger than
> Sruti. Animals believe in Sense Perception. We have to be different.
> Sruti Pramana is available to us but not animals. There was discussion
> here on Pratyaksha and Sruti. Kindly see the debate -
> http://www.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/2014-October/037611.html
>
> We can use Apaccheda Nyaya from Mimamsa to say Sense Perception can be
> invalidated by Sruti. Even everyday we can see Sense Perception is not
> always true. It is telling us Sun is going round the Earth. But we
> know the truth is Earth is going round the Sun. If you object Sunrise
> and Sunset are giving pleasure to people on the beach we say even
> false things can give pleasure. When you see a movie on a screen you
> can enjoy it even though you know the movie is not real. In a dream
> you can enjoy good things and after waking up also you can enjoy the
> good feeling of the dream.
>
> Commentary - Vaadiraaja has bowled a no-ball. The Umpire has awarded a
> free hit to the batsman. The next ball he hits it over long on for a
> six.
>
> --
> Regards
>
> -Venkatesh



-- 
Regards

-Venkatesh