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

[Venkatraghavan S]

<<But here only the उपपत्ति लिङ्ग (upapatti linga)  among the षड्लिङs
(SaDlinGa)  is used for the तात्पर्यनिर्णय (tAtparyanirNaya ) of the
Shruti.>>

There is no rule that all six lingas must be used in the interpretation of
every shruti vAkya. What arthavAda linga can be used in the bhAshya of aham
brahmAsmi, pray? Only what is relevant to interpret the meaning of that
particular shruti vAkya need be employed.

Secondly, shruti itself is used to justify eka jiva vAda in several places
in siddhAnta muktAvali.

Thirdly, it just happens to be a polemical work - for example, advaita
siddhi or khanDana khanDa khAdya are also all highly polemical texts. That
in itself doesn't expose those texts to the criticism that they are tarka
based, with no shruti backing.

Regards,
Venkatraghavan

On 25 May 2016 7:01 a.m., "V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l" <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
> Any work that teaches Brahman Atman moksha etc is essentially bases on
> Shruti only.  With this as basis alone it  delves on yukti etc.
> On May 25, 2016 11:21 AM, "Praveen R. Bhat via Advaita-l" <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
> > Namaste Chandramouliji,
> >
> >
> > On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 7:28 PM, H S Chandramouli <
> > hschandramouli at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Reg  << Shruti-based logic, that is, based on उपपत्ति लिङ्ग among the
> > > षड्लिङs used for the तात्पर्यनिर्णय of the Shruti.>>,
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > That is just my query.  All the षड्लिङs (SaDlinGa)  must be used for
> > > तात्पर्यनिर्णय (tAtparyanirNaya ) of the Shruti. But here only the
> > उपपत्ति
> > > लिङ्ग (upapatti linga)  among the षड्लिङs (SaDlinGa)  is used for the
> > > तात्पर्यनिर्णय (tAtparyanirNaya ) of the Shruti. That leads to my
query.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > My reply was in the context of the point of contention made by you
earlier,
> > which was that the logic is used here is like other darShanas, that is
> > without Shruti-basis, whereas I said that it is Shruti-based logic since
> > Shruti uses this लिङ्ग among the six. It is a different matter whether
the
> > author of the work chose to use only one or few of the Shruti- लिङ्गs to
> > explain a प्रक्रिया. And that by itself need not take away the fact
that it
> > is based on Shruti.
> >
> > praNAm,
> > --Praveen R. Bhat
> > /* Through what should one know That owing to which all this is known!
> > [Br.Up. 4.5.15] */
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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