[Advaita-l] Is difference known by perception?

[Raghav Kumar Dwivedula]

Namaste Srinath ji
You are making a mistake in assuming that the knowledge revealed by one
pramANa cannot later on be contradicted by another pramANa.

When two pramANa-s clash there is no rule that one will always overrule the
other.

In case Shruti talks of agni as sheetaH , there pratyaxa is accepted and
arthAntara is looked for in interpreting Shruti.

When the modern scientific nihilists deny that consciousness exists etc .,
there Shruti overruled anumAna etc by showing the latter to be fallacious.
(This needs efforts of course.)

No knowledge is final . It can always be overruled by subsequent pramANas.
This is true for all pramANas upto the Vedic karma kANDam.

The only exception is Advaita GYAnam which is uncobtradictabke once it
arises, since it shows the very framework of pramAtravam and the
pramAtr-pramANa-prameya tripuTi to be mithyA. Therefore no subsequent
pramANa vyApAram can sublate or contradict advitIya brahmAtma GYANam.

Om
Raghav

On Tue 7 May, 2019, 11:37 AM Srinath Vedagarbha via Advaita-l, <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 1:13 PM Praveen R. Bhat <bhatpraveen at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 9:20 PM Srinath Vedagarbha <svedagarbha at gmail.com
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Well, you seems to be not informed on davita darshana and their bAshya
> on
> >> dashOpanishats.
> >>
> > For once, you are right! Informed through study overview, yes;
> > well-informed through detailed study, no. I get more by studying advaita-
> > than by refuting dvaita-darshana beyond those done in bhAShya and TIkAs.
> >
>
> That's fine.
>
>
> >
> >
> >> Pratyakska is upajIva for shruti. Unless you cognize the *difference*
> >> between shruti and non-shruti texts, you cannot even arrive at
> non-duality
> >> let alone anything else in the name of "vedAnta".
> >>
> > So by that you would be saying that one who has studied only Shruti and
> > not any non-Shruti text cannot arrive at anything! That doesn't even seem
> > close to right. All that one needs is his indriyas working to study
> shruti
> > under an Acharya and I am sure one can get vedAnta, vedAnAM antaH
> nirNayaH
> > and thereby, mokSha. OTOH, those who study non-shruti texts and call that
> > as Vedanta find themselves answering the question as to why is their
> > darshana called Vedanta at all!
> >
> >
>
> Missed the point. The reason I brought the difference between shruti and
> non-shruti is that unless you know (and convince) shruti is a valid pramANa
> for our final purushArtha, you cannot even venture to study vedAnta. Why
> would anyone? Having said this, there is this fundamental difference you
> need to recognize between shruti as pramANa and non-shruti (other
> scriptures or texts) as apramANa. Otherwise why do you reject Kuran or
> Bible or Toraha etc.? So, the pratyaksha is indeed the adhistAna on which
> the entire topic of vEda-pramANya is established. Do not forget the
> 'shruti' aspect of Veda is indeed a pratyaksha aspect of "shravaNatvaM"
> (hearing). You cannot negate pratyaksha in the name of vedanta.
>
>
>
> > Given this fact, a given pramANa (shruti) cannot override another
> pramANa,
> >> that too the later is upajIva for the former.
> >>
> > Thanks for confirming the dvaita-stance, which is why I think that your
> > main pramANa is not Shruti and hence I wondered why it is called as
> > Vedanta.
> >
>
> Did I say main pramANa (what is the "main" means anyway?)  is pratyaksha
> and not shruti?
>
>
>
> > Please enlighten me, if possible, as to why is dvaita-darshana called
> > Vedanta as each time a dvaitin says something I find myself more and more
> > curious.
> >
>
> No problem, read advaita siddhi to begin with.
>
>
>
> >
> >
> >> What one can say is a pramANa can extend the knowledge provided from
> >> another pramANa and never contradict it.
> >>
> > I don't agree. shukti-rajata has multiple pramANas working and
> > contradicting all the same. If you insist there is rajata, I will have to
> > remind you that you are still to provide me with silver from last time's
> > discussion!
> >
> >
>
> rajata darshana is not yathArtha jnAna hence not pramANa. Dvaita defines
> pramANa is 'yathArtham pramANaM'. So, the rajata you think you see is in
> fact a brAnti and hence the final perception of shukti is contradicting
> your brAnti and not another pratyaksha per se.
>
> Davita is not saying all perceptions are valid.
>
>
>
> > Interpreting shruti in terms of absolute non-duality is upajIva-virodha
> >> flaw.
> >>
> > Perhaps so for a non-Vedantin. Still, better that than shruti-virodha for
> > a Vedantin.
> >
>
>  Even for you to say this, you need to see the difference between Vedantin
> and non-Vedantin. Then the question is -- where are you seeing this from?
> from Pratyaksha or Shruti? If former, you are indeed non-vedantin as per
> your own rule. If later, there is no difference between you and other
> "non-vedantins" as your position id absolute non-difference!
>
> /sv
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>