[Advaita-l] Nyaya Sudha Objections 1

[Venkatraghavan S]

The dvaita objection was that as a rule the lakshyArtha of a word cannot be
known if its vAcyArtha is not known. The vAcyArtha of Brahman is
unknowable, hence it's lakshyArtha is unknowable - therefore samanvaya is
not possible. That was the purvapaksha argument.

The answer given was that in the case of bhAga tyAga lakshaNa, that rule
does not hold good. In "soyam devadatta", the directly perceived
devadatta's attributes (mukhyArtha) are eliminated to reveal his underlying
devadattatvam, which is the common substratum of sa: and ayam. It cannot be
said that the lakshyArtha of devadattatvam is unknowable because the
mukhyArtha of devadattatvam is unknowable.

Similarly NirguNa Brahman is known by lakshyArtha, by eliminating all
attributes from any thing (be it a blade of grass or Ishvara) until all
that is left is sat, chit and ananda. In avAntara vAkyAs nirguNa brahman's
lakshyArtha is known indirectly (paroksha). It is only when mahAvAkyas are
properly understood, that lakshyArtha is directly understood (aparoksha) as
oneself.

As lakshyArtha of nirguNa brahman is knowable, samanvaya is possible.

Regards,
Venkatraghavan

On 9 Feb 2016 9:51 p.m., "Srinath Vedagarbha" <svedagarbha at gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 1:05 AM, Venkatraghavan S via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
>> Here the objection is that unless mukhyArtha is known, vAcyartha cannot be
>> known.
>>
>> That is why we have jahat-ajahat lakshaNa. MukhyArtha of nirguNa brahman
>> is
>> not possible (there being no guNa, jAti, sambandhA, kriyA mediums in
>> nirguNa Brahman for the mukhya vritti to connote the brahma pada with the
>> brahma padArtha). Therefore let us take brahma pada to connote saguNa
>> Brahman instead. Ishvara mukhyArtha can be known - even the dvaitin will
>> accept that.
>>
>> Then by jahat ajahat lakshaNa, the guNas of saguNa Brahman can be dropped
>> to arrive at the lakshyArtha, nirguNa Brahman. So it is possible to have
>> lakshyArtha of nirguNa Brahman as long as the vAcyArtha of saguNa Brahman
>> is known.
>>
>>
> Ok, but how do you address the objection of opponent about doing samanvya
> of shruti? Or do you say samanvaya is possible only with mukhyArtha of
> Ishvara?
>
> /sv
>
>