[Advaita-l] Dvaita Vaada - Vadiraja Teertha's Nyayaratnavali Slokas 310 - 314 Pativrataa Stree

[H S Chandramouli]

Dear Sri Sadanandaji,

Namaskarams. Reg your observation <<  Yet, that akhandaakaara Vritti has to
arise in the mind only where the inherent identity of I am both as a
subject and I am as substantive of the object arise based on understanding
of scriptural statements via shrotavyaH, manthavyah, nidhidhyaasitavya,
which are again vidhi vaakyas until that understanding takes place.>> ,
what about the vakya << "AtmA vA are draShTavyaH" >> . Is this considered a
vidhi vakya ? My understanding is that it is not whereas the vakya <<
shrotavyaH,
manthavyah, nidhidhyaasitavya >> is considered so. Please clarify.

Warm Regards

Chandramouli

On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 6:28 PM, kuntimaddi sadananda via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

>
> Shree Anand – PraNAms and thanks for the excellent summing up the inherent
> problems in the analysis of the identity/difference of dRik-dRishya
> duality. Atma being aprameyam or not an object of knowledge, can neither be
> witness or nor witnessed. The inherent problem in all these theories is
> trying to jump across the vyaavahaarika to paaramaarthika; and therefore
> every analysis is bound to be problematic. Transactionally, mind itself
> acts as substantive of both the subject-object duality – both as
> knower-thought and known-thought or aham vRitti and idam vRitti – both in
> the external or internal perceptions – that involves sense or sense-less
> input.
>
> Self-realization also has to occur at the upahita chaitanya level only
> with akhandaakaara vRitti – as I am – I am - without the qualifications or
> attributive objectifications of –this- this, staring with the mind itself.
> Yet, that akhandaakaara Vritti has to arise in the mind only where the
> inherent identity of I am both as a subject and I am as substantive of the
> object arise based on understanding of scriptural statements via
> shrotavyaH, manthavyah, nidhidhyaasitavya, which are again vidhi vaakyas
> until that understanding takes place.
> Just my 2c
> Hari Om!
> Sadananda
>
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Fri, 5/8/15, Anand Hudli via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
>  Subject: [Advaita-l] Dvaita Vaada - Vadiraja Teertha's Nyayaratnavali
> Slokas 310 - 314 Pativrataa Stree
>  To: "advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org" <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
>  Date: Friday, May 8, 2015, 12:37 AM
>
>  Perhaps, VAdirAja's contention that
>  the advaitin admits the subject and
>  object of a cognition must necessarily be different is not
>  without a basis
>  in an advaitic text, albeit this principle is taken out of
>  context and
>  applied cleverly in the nyAyaratnAvali in an attempt to
>  discredit the
>  abheda shruti. The influential work, nyAyamakaranda of
>  Anandabodha, for
>  example, is concerned with, among other things, arguments
>  with naiyAyikas,
>  PrAbhAkaras, Buddhists, and others on the Self-luminosity
>  or
>  Self-manifestedness (svyaMprakAshatva) of Atman and JnAna as
>  well. To
>  understand what Anandabodha is saying when he rules out the
>  identity of the
>  subject and object in a cognition, we need to be aware of
>  the nature of his
>  arguments in the nyAyamakaranda. First, according to
>  naiyAyikas, knowledge
>  of jnAna is one of the attributes of the soul Atman, in
>  which it inheres,
>  jnAnAdhikaramAtmA, as the tarkasaMgraha says. Atman is the
>  substratum or
>  adhikaraNa in which jnAna inheres by means of the samavAya
>  (inherence)
>  relation. Further, many naiyAyikas maintain that the Atman
>  is revealed in
>  an inner perception of the mind, which they call
>  "mAnasapratyakSha". This
>  mental perception, mAnasapratyakSha takes place
>  independently of external
>  senses and is of the form "I know", "I will", "I feel", "I
>  wish", etc.
>  However, even in such "inner perceptions", the Atman is not
>  presented as
>  itself, but only as the substratum of jnAna, sukha, duHkha,
>  icchA, and
>  yatna. To give a rough analogy, when we see a pot placed on
>  the ground, the
>  substratum of the pot is the ground, and the perception of
>  the pot is the
>  "foreground" perception, while that of the ground is the
>  "background"
>  perception. The ground is undoubtedly perceived, but only as
>  the substratum
>  of the pot, not in isolation. Even so in the case of the
>  inner perception,
>  "I know", knowledge is perceived as inhering in its
>  substratum, the Atman.
>  For this reason, a naiyAyika would describe the
>  adhikaraNatA
>  (substratum-ness) of Atman (in a somewhat complicated way)
>  as,
>
>  "jnAnatva-avacchinna-samavAya-saMbandha-avacchinna-jnAna-niShTha-AdheyatA-nirUpita-adhikaraNatA."
>  Thus, in short, the Atman is an object of inner perception,
>  mAnasapratyakSha.
>
>  In total contrast with the above, the advaitins hold that
>  jnAna is not an
>  attribute of Atman, but jnAna *is* Atman/Brahman, vide
>  satyaM jnAnam
>  anantaM brahma, prajnAnaM brahma, etc. And Atman is a
>  self-luminous entity,
>  which does not require another entity to reveal it. Rather,
>  the
>  self-luminous Atman reveals/manifests other objects in the
>  empirical
>  (vyavahArika)  world, which themselves are not
>  self-luminous. Cognition or
>  jnAna, is also self-luminous and manifests itself. This
>  being the case,
>  Anandabodha argues that the Atman cannot be an object of
>  cognition, in the
>  sense objects of the empirical world are. He neatly sums up
>  his argument:
>  saMveditA na saMvidadhInaprakAshaH
>  saMvitkarmatAmantareNAparokShatvAtsaMvedanavaditi | The
>  Cognizer cannot
>  depend on Cognition for His manifestation, because He is not
>  an object of
>  Cognition, (but) directly reveals Himself, just as
>  Cognition.
>
>  In other words, the Atman is the subject or witness of all
>  empirical
>  cognitions, and it is self-luminous. Being the subject, it
>  cannot be an
>  object of cognition. Anandabodha refutes the theory of
>  mAnasa-pratyakSha of
>  the naiyAyikas thus: kartRkarmaNoraikAtmyAnupalambhAd, no
>  khlavangulyaivAngulI spRshyate chidyate vA
>  dharayaivAsidhArA|  The Atman
>  cannot be the object of a vRtti (modification of the mind)
>  because the
>  subject and object of a cognition cannot be the same, just
>  as a finger
>  cannot touch itself, nor can a sword cut itself. It is also
>  natural to
>  expect that Anandabodha was well aware of Shankara's bhAShya
>  dealing with
>  the topic of adhyAsa and upanishad statements such as "na
>  dRShTerdraShTAraM
>  pashyeH" (you cannot see the witness of vision), taM
>  pratyagAtmAnaM
>  dRShTerdraShTAram na pashyeH, ataH naiva darshayituM
>  shakyate gavAdivat
>  (hence It cannot be pointed out objectively like a cow),
>  etc. To sum up,
>  the Atman cannot be an object of a cognition in the sense an
>  empirical
>  object can be. It cannot be known in the sense an empirical
>  object can be.
>  However, Shankara's adhyAsa bhAShya's point about the Self
>  being the
>  "asmatpratyayaviShaya", as was pointed out, must be
>  remembered in
>  interpreting vAkyas such as "AtmA vA are draShTavyaH", etc.
>  In fact,
>  Sureshvara, in his Br. Up. vArtika, says that the AtmA vA
>  are draShTavyaH
>  vAkya cannot be an injunction, in the sense of an injunction
>  to perform an
>  act, precisely because the realizer (draShTR) and the
>  realized (draShTavya)
>  have to be different in order for such an injunction to
>  exist. When there
>  is no difference between one who is enjoined to perform an
>  act and the
>  object of the act, no such injunction is possible.
>
>  द्रष्टृद्रष्टव्ययोर्भेदे
>  सत्येवं धीर्विधीयते।
>  नियोज्यविषयाभेदे
>  घटते न विधिर्यतः॥९७॥
>  (vArtika on Br. Up. 4.5.6)
>
>  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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>