[Advaita-l] Shankara and DrishTi-SrishTi vAda - eka jeeva vaada

[Venkatraghavan S]

Exactly, karma kANDa being larger than jnAna kANDa does not it make it more
valid than jnAna kANDa. It is meant for different adhikAris who have
different purushArthAs.

The point I was trying to make is that any pramANa's usefulness is limited
to revealing the prameya. Once that is done, its purpose is served. The
fact that it's been made redundant afterwards does not mean that there was
no need for it or the jnAnam it produces are invalid.

Regards,
Venkatraghavan
On 12 May 2016 1:22 p.m., "Praveen R. Bhat" <bhatpraveen at gmail.com> wrote:

> Namaste Venkatraghavan ji,
>
> On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 3:23 PM, Venkatraghavan S via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
>> If we are going to decide the validity of a piece of knowledge and / or
>> it's pramANa by what % of the pramANa is set aside after that pramANa
>> reveals that knowledge - after one realises they are Brahman, 100% of the
>> shruti can be set aside - as its purpose is served and is no longer
>> needed.
>> So is mokshA to be denied by that logic? Any pramANa is valid only for the
>> pramAta.
>>
>
> True, but even before one realizes, the %age of topics covered by Shruti,
> etc, have nothing to do with their importance in determining the purpose/
> tAtparya. Else karmakANDa would overshadow Upanishads by a huge multiple!
> Each of the Shruti topics has adhikAribheda, be it karmakANDa or jnAnakANDa
> and for the same reason, there are more works by the tradition following
> Bhagavatpada. They cater to people with questions that others either don't
> face and therefore don't need to, or haven't reached in their manana yet
> and therefore don't need at that stage.
>
> gurupAdukAbhyAm,
> --Praveen R. Bhat
> /* Through what should one know That owing to which all this is known!
> [Br.Up. 4.5.15] */
>