[Advaita-l] Shruti prAmANya and jnAna
svedagarbha at gmail.com
Wed Oct 5 08:52:37 CDT 2016
On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 8:31 AM, Praveen R. Bhat <bhatpraveen at gmail.com>
> Namaste Srinathji,
> On 5 Oct 2016 5:46 pm, "Srinath Vedagarbha" <svedagarbha at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Knowledge gained by your vision is by default prAmaNya (this prAmANya
> svatstva) unless it is contradicted by other piece of knowledge that "I am
> having jaundice". So, any aprAMANya, if at all it exist, has to supply from
> outside of the initial knowledge. This is the doctrine of aprAmANya parataH.
> Unless contradicted is very much what is talked of. This contradiction can
> be in form of pratibandhakas also.
Yes, such contradiction can come from knowledge which has been comprehended
by any pramANa (pratyaksha,anumANa, aagama etc). But there is one catch
though -- such correcting knowledge itself has to be without any bhAda from
other knowledge. That means to say -- all correcting knowledges themselves
has to be pramA.
When your vision of 'snake' is contradicted by knowledge that 'it is a
rope', that rope knowledge itself must be pramA (yathArtha) by its own
merits. Otherwise it does not have a potency to invalidate snake knowledge.
> > Every time you do not test your vision to confirm the validity of your
> vision. Validity is intrinsic unless known otherwise.
> Why is dream falsified on waking then? The same waking pramANas were
> active then. The subject doesn't have a choice in using the pramANa
> differently, but he can reject it. Even if you rejected the pramANa once,
> the prAmANya has gone w.r.t. that pramA, because it is subjective to that
In dream, it is not same pramAnas at play. Otherwise when I see I am the
king in the dream, why others will not see I am the king? But in waking
state when I see myself a king, others also see I am king. So, the
conclusion is that my "pratyaksha" in the dream is not the same kind of
pratyaksha in waking state.
> > That's fine, that's all comes once aprAmANya for shruti is eliminated
> (and prAmANya is confirmed). But my question was how do you substantiate
> lack of apAmANya when it was said vedAs are also kalpita (by a single
> chaitanya) along with entire jagat advaita system? Isn't it kalpita
> equivalent to authored?
> You can superimpose authorship idea on advaitins for Vedas, when we say
> that kalpita has a beginning. anAdi works great for us.
If authorship is denied based on anAdi argument, so also kalpita doctrine
has to be denied, for after all any kalpana has to have a starting point.
Another problem is that, in anAdi argument for kalpana, at least the time
itself must be kept outside kalpna domain. Otherwise anyOnAShraya.
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list