[Advaita-l] Debunking Drishti-Srishti Vada and Eka Jiva Vada - part 1

[H S Chandramouli]

>
> On Sat, Jul 22, 2017 at 8:57 PM, Venkatesh Murthy via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
> > Clearly, Swami Vidyaranya does not consider   << तत्वमसि (tatvamasi) >>
> as
> > the appropriate mahAvAkya for his version of DSP.
> >
> >
> >
> >This is not correct. Because Tat Tvam Asi is always Upadesha >Maha Vakya
> >from Guru to Sishya. It cannot be some other Vakya. It must be >Tat Tvam
> Asi
> >only in SDV and DSV and for all Sishyas it is Tat Tvam Asi. >From one
> Sloka
> >you cannot conclude any thing.
>
>
>
> Namaste.
>
>
>
> Not so.
>
>
>
> ओंकार (oMkAra) is one which is widely used for upadEsha. It does not make
> use of tatvamasi. The mahAvAkya in this regard अयमात्मा ब्रह्म (ayamAtmA
> brahma) taken together with the preceding words in the mantra सर्वं
> ह्येतद्ब्रह्म (sarvaM hyetadbrahma) translates to सर्वं ह्येतद् आत्मा
> (sarvaM hyetad AtmA) which is the same as the Br. Up. Mantra cited by me. I
> could have as well cited this also.
>
>
>
> In Tai. Up. Varuna’s teaching to Bhrugu does not involve tatvamasi.
>
>
>
> In Kenopanishad, the teaching does not involve tatvamasi though the Guru
> claims that the teaching follows parampara
>
>
>
> << अन्यदेव तद्विदितादथो अविदितादधि ।
> इति शुश्रुम पूर्वेषां ये नस्तद्व्याचचक्षिरे ॥ ४ ॥ >>
>
>
>
> << anyadeva tadviditAdatho aviditAdadhi |
>
> iti shushruma pUrveShAM ye nastadvyAchachakShire || 4 || >>.
>
>
>
> Many more can be cited.
>
>
>
> Regards
>
>
>
>
>