[Advaita-l] Fwd: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} Vakyartha vichara - 6.8.2017 Bengaluru

V Subrahmanian v.subrahmanian at gmail.com
Sat Aug 19 08:37:37 EDT 2017

Dear Venkat ji,

Many thanks for the fine summary of the discussion. I remember hearing from
the Siddhi talks that Bhāmatīkāra accepts the vākyajanya jñānam to be of
the 'upahita brahman' (and not shuddha brahman) and that that is sufficient
for avidyānivṛtti. Siddhikāra cites this.   I have not located so far the
Bhāmatī or Siddhi portion where this occurs. In any case, does this have
any bearing on the Advaitin's reply to the question on hand?


On Sat, Aug 19, 2017 at 4:19 PM, Venkatraghavan S <agnimile at gmail.com>

> Namaste,
> Following Subbuji's request to me, please find below a summary of the
> vAkyArtha sadas.
> *The topic*
> aham pratyaye shuddho na bhAti.
> The topic of discussion at the vidvat sadas was vyAsa rAja tIrtha's
> objections in the tAtparya chandrikA to vAcaspati miSra's statement in the
> bhAmati "aham pratyaye shuddho na bhAti" - shuddha Brahman is not known by
> the I thought.
> The chandrikAchArya asks: What does the bhAmatikAra's statement "shuddha
> brahman is *not known* in the I thought" mean?
> He suggests a few possibilities :
> 1) There is some aspect of Atma svarUpa that is known, and something else
> that is not known?
> 2) Atma svarUpa itself is not known.
> 3) Atma svarUpa is known and so is anAtma. Thus shuddha brahman is not
> known?

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list