[Advaita-l] Nyayasudha Objections 1

[Venkatesh Murthy]

Namaste

Have you understood 'Knowability of Brahman' by Dvaitis at least? Have
you understood Advaitis Avedyatva of Brahman?

Kindly read this by B.N.K. Sharma

http://tinyurl.com/h6dsbmk

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 1:27 AM, Srinath Vedagarbha via Advaita-l
<advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 1:45 PM, V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 11:38 PM, Srinath Vedagarbha via Advaita-l <
>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Shruti is very explicit on this point when it said nArayaNaM mahAjnEyam.
>>>
>>
>> Even the BG 13.12` says: jneyam yat tat pravakṣyāmi... and says it is
>> stated as neither sat nor asat. na sat tat na asat uchyate.  Only that
>> which is an object will come either under asat or sat. Brahman, though
>> jneyam, is explicitly stated as 'neither sat nor asat.'  That definition
>> removes its objectifiability.  What it implies is: this jneya Brahman is
>> aprameyam.
>>
>> The kind of jneyatvam of Narayana or in the BG 13th ch. is not of the
>> 'knowable' type.  On the contrary it is that which is to be known in the
>> sense, not knowing Brahman is the cause of samsara and knowing it is
>> release from bondage. That is why brahma jijnāsā itself is prescribed:
>> jnātum icchā.  This jnātum is not as an object because the shruti itself is
>> teaching: 'you are that', denying its objectifiablity.
>>
>> Sayana explains the narayana suktam word as: among many things that are to
>> be known, this tattvam is the Supreme: mahā jneyam.  In fact, the
>> Taittiriya itself says: tat vijijnāsasva, tat brahma: seek to know
>> Brahman.  That does not mean that Brahman is an object for pramanas.
>>
>>
>>
>
> 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.
>
> What you are saying now is you are accepting jnEyatvam in Brahman, and that
> is enough for the case.
>
> /sv
> _______________________________________________
> 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



-- 
Regards

-Venkatesh