[Advaita-l] Vaadiraaja Teertha's Yuktimallika - Akhandarthavaada Criticism - Slokas 1-972 to 1-980

[Venkatesh Murthy]

Namaste

You said in February 2016 -
“ganga” in “gangayAm gOShaH”. Similarly, unless object of our knowledge
brahman, in Advaitic assertion “brahman is avAchya” etc, cannot be known at
all if all words denote in secondary meaning only.

Yes you are correct. Brahman cannot be known at all like some object like
Ganga Tira. Why? Because Brahman is always Subject and Never Object. That
is why all words cannot reach it. They can only indirectly describe it but
not directly like a pot in front of me is described by word 'Pot'. Nobody
can point at Brahman and say 'This is Brahman' like they can point at a pot
and say 'This is a pot'.

Brahman cannot come into our Pratyaksha. This may be a disagreement with
Dvaitis because they say a very staunch Bhakta can see God directly. But in
Advaita we say we cannot see Brahman like that. Therefore no word is there
for Brahman. Even 'Brahman' word cannot give Vaacyartha for Brahman.

On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 8:54 PM, Srinath Vedagarbha <svedagarbha at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 4:31 AM, Venkatesh Murthy via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Response - Vaadiraaja has not understood Nirgunatva of Brahman and he has
>> not understood Brahman cannot be Vaacyartha of any word.
>
>
>
> The doctrine of "Brahman cannot be vAchyArtha of any word" is disputed in
> this thread  http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/2016-
> February/040209.html
>
>
>  The Lakshyartha is not like in the Ganga example because there
>> is no bank or part of Brahman. Brahman is Whole and without parts. The
>> Lakshyartha of Brahman cannot mean a part of Brahman like in Ganga's
>> Lakshyartha. Therefore the example is wrong.
>>
>>
> Bank (tIra) is not part of Ganga, but "associated" to Ganga by virtue of
> it being near to it.
>
> Similarly, since Brahman is Eka Eva in AV, such Brahman cannot have any
> relationship/association with non-Brhamn entities and hence usage of
>  lakShyartha is meaning less in AV.
>
> /sv
>
>



-- 
Regards

-Venkatesh