[Advaita-l] Shruti prAmANya and jnAna

Srinath Vedagarbha svedagarbha at gmail.com
Tue Oct 4 15:16:52 CDT 2016

On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 8:46 AM, श्रीमल्ललितालालितः via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> Another thing to consider, there are two types of prAmANya, tested and
> otherwise.
> Tested one needs all what I said. Untested is svataH and is saved by
> apauruSheyatva.
There are no such thing as two types of prAmANya. It is either prAmANya or

If you argue one of the prAmANya is tested one, then there is no difference
between your position and a bhOudhAs -- for whom prAmANya is parataH. Then
anavasthA dOSha will be applicable with equal force.

All schools in vEdAnta agrees prAmANya is svataH only, whether it is
comprehended via channels of pratyaksha or anumAna or shabda (or other type
for different schools)

Btw, how does advaitins justify apauruSheyatva concept in general? The
reason I am asking is that when this entire jagat is considered as arOpita
and a brAnti, and it is partiyOgi for niShEda, then is there any real
meaning for apauruSheyatva or otherwise? apauruSheyatva make sense only for
someone who is realists. One cannot argue apauruSheyatva is valid now (in
vyavahAra) but not later. Let's not forget, this jagat is pratiyOgi for
negation in all three time frames  (trikAlika-nishEdha) including in this
vyavahAra. So there is no point in arguing apauruSheyatva is valid now but
not later. There is no temporal aspect to validity itself. If something is
found/attested to be valid (via svatastva route) it is valid always. If
there is no niSchaya in its validity to begin with, it may be rendered
aprAmANya later, that is ok.  But cannot get invalidated after it has got
such niSchayatva.

Has this issue been addressed in any classical works?


More information about the Advaita-l mailing list