[Advaita-l] Vaadiraaja Teertha's Yuktimallika - Advaita Criticism - Slokas 1-10 to 1-13

[Srinath Vedagarbha]

On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 11:06 AM, Praveen R. Bhat <bhatpraveen at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>>
>> What is anubhava siddha is you as a physical body (upaadi) is limited.
>>
> ​Physical body is seen, but wrongly taking oneself to be the physical body
> is naisargika. The physical body not being conscious is also known. One's
> being conscious is also known by anubhava.
>


One being conscious of himself does not establishes existence of a tatva
which perists after death. You need gIta/shruti for that.

 All your anubhava of being self-conscious could be very well function of
your physical body/brain. All we have in anubhava is self-conscious and
existence of this body/brain. Assuming this self-conscious anubhava is same
as jIva tatva is not anubhava-siddha. Hence jIvEsha bEdha is not anubhava
siddha.




>
>> Without shruti you are not even aware there is such thing as atma/jiva
>> which is persist after death of your physical body.
>>
> ​No, Atma is anubhavasiddha, but the wrong understanding is corrected by
> Shruti. A meditator or a vivekin anywhere around the world can get this
> experience of being totally separate from the body, etc, without being told
> by Shruti so.
>

As explained above, 'Atman' is not anubhava siddha. You have wrongly
labeling self-awareness as you are expedience is same as 'Atman' as
explained in shruti.

Br.U  as this question quite explicitly `katama aatma iti' ?

The same Upanishad is answering in the same breath that ;

 `yOayAm vijnAna maya prANEshu hridyAnta jyOtirtiH | purushaH sa samAnaH
san ubhoU lOkoU anusaMcharati | dhyAtIva |
lElAyativa | sa hi swapnO bhUtvEmaM lOkamati kramati mrutyO rUpANi ||

Whomever is pUrNa-jnAna-svarUpa and residing in heart and instigate from
within, is Atma.

In another place, same Br. Up (II.5-15) says;

 "sa vA ayamAtmA sarvEshAm bhootAnAm rAjA tadyathA rathanAbhou cha
rathanEbhou
cha arAha sarvE samarpitAha EvamEvAtmani sarvANi bhootAni sarvE dEvAha
sarvE lOkAha sarva Eta AtmAnaha samarpitAha"

This is how Upanishads define AtmA as Controller and Owner. Parabrahman and
all beings, are compared to a King and all his subjects This is why AtmA of
the Upanishads is indeed Controller Brahman and not jIva.

You think Atma is this self-awareness as we experince. That is not correct.
Acharya Madhva refutes such position as "jIva pakshE prasiddhAtvat katama
aatmEti prashnE na yukta " ( If one thinks `aatma' is this jIva, then
Upanishadic question `katama aatmEti' is meaningless, because jIva in the
form of `I' is already in awareness and known to everyone. More over, this
jIva does undergo change (vIkara) in waking, dream and suShupti states by
virtue of experiencing sukha and dukkaha. This vIkArtva is in opposition of
Upanishad's assertion of avikari nature of aatma. Thus `aatma' means
Brahman only.


/sv