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

[Anand Hudli]

Dear Shri Chandramouliji,

You wrote:
   Since Bhamati is a commentary on the Bhashyam , is it clearly mentioned
   therein whether the above view is an independent view of Sri Vacahaspati
   Mishra or Sri Appayya Dikshita , or is it their interpretation of the
view
   held by Sri Bhagavatpada ?

It may not have been explicit and clear in my message, but Appayya Dikshita
does quote shAnkara bhAshya on the samanvaya sUtra (1.1.4) in explaining
the bhAmatI view that there is no vidhi. Therefore, (in the bhAshya on
1.1.4), in the matter of AtmajnAna, after denying a vidhi, it is asked,
"for what purpose are the semblances of vidhis such as AtmA vA are
draShTavayaH shrotavyaH...?" The bhAShya says that it is for turning one
away from objects of natural activity (ata eva samanvaya sUtre
AtmajnAnavidhinirAkaraNAnantaraM bhAShyam- kimarthAni tarhi "AtmA vA are
draShTavyaH shrotavyaH" ityAdIni vacanAni vidhicChAyAni?
svAbhAvikapravRttiviShayavimukhIkaraNArthAnIti brUmaH- ityAdi).

Also, Appayya Dikshita addresses what appears to be an acceptance of a
vidhi in 3.4.47 by the bhAShyakAra and says it is only an appearance of a
vidhi that is accepted, in accordance with the bhAShya on 1.1.4.

Anand