[Advaita-l] Nyayasudha Objections 1

[V Subrahmanian]

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 1:27 AM, Srinath Vedagarbha <svedagarbha at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
>
> Even Dvaitins are not saying in a sense Brahman is object. All they are
> saying Brahman is jnEya and has IkShaNeattvaM and hence sUtrakAra's used it
> as a hEtu in that sUtra Om IkShattEH  na aShabdaM Om. Other member was
> denying that hEtu does not fit in Brahman.
>

From the beginning of this discussion when the word 'IkShattEH' was used, I
have been unable to understand exactly what that word means according to
the Dvaita interpretation of that sutra. From what you have said so far:
'that Brahman is known, or knowable, seen, etc.'  it is not clear how that
word in that sutra fits this meaning.  For, in my understanding, if the
sutra should mean: 'because Brahman is seen/known', then the word should be
'īkṣyate' 'ईक्ष्यते’ , in the karmaṇi prayoga, (indirect speech), which
will mean: (Brahman) is seen, or known. But the word in the sutra is
'ईक्षतेः’ The meaning the Advaita bhashya gives to that word is:
ईक्षतिकर्तृत्वं ब्रह्मणः एव श्रवणात् (’तदैक्षत, बहु स्याम्, प्रजायेय इति’
(तैत्तिरीय), वेदबाह्यस्य जडस्य प्रधानस्य तदसम्भवात्, न प्रधानं जगत्कारणम्,
अपि तु चेतनं ब्रह्म वैदिकम्.  [कथमशब्दत्वम् ? ईक्षतेः =
ईक्षितृत्वश्रवणात्कारणस्य । bhashyam for 1.1.5]

How will that word ''ईक्षतेः’ of the sutra give the meaning: 'because
Brahman is seen/known' in the passive voice?


> What you are saying now is you are accepting jnEyatvam in Brahman, and
> that is enough for the case.
>

The jneyatvam is not the way that Brahman is an object but as that which
has to be known.  It is in the sense of ज्ञातव्यम्.

vs

>
> /sv
>
>
>
>