[Advaita-l] Relation between the object and its attributes

[Kuntimaddi Sadananda]

Venkatraghavan and Subbiji - PraNAms
taadaatmyam - seem to mean identity - 
Or does it mean just inseparable? Red flower -  Redness is different from flower-ness since flowers can be red or blue. 
In the sense, Red is a property that needs a locus. Besides Redness, the flower has many other properties that are different from redness. 
Another problem for me is to distinguish between swaabhaavika vs taadaatmya. 
Take the example of brown sugar. Sugar can be white or brown but both have to be sweet. 
There seems to be a difference in the attributes of brown and white vs sweetness. 
Another aspect that I am also concerned about is Swarupa lakshnaam. 
Sugar is sweet but the converse does not apply - as in sweet need not be sugar. It can be equal or Splenda, etc.
For an attribute to be swaruupa, it has to be necessary and sufficient qualification as in Consciousness is Brahman. Brahman is consciousness is a direct statement - Scripture defines using a converse statement as prajnaanam brahma, which implies it is necessary and sufficient - hence forms swaruupa (from my perspective). Shankara calls it swaruupa because of -anantatvaat. 
For sugar, the swaruupa lakshana may be some C6H12O6 or something like that as in H2O is water and water is H2O. 
In a sense, all qualities or attributes are not taadatmya sambandha. 
I hope I am not confusing the issues here.
Hari Om!Sadananda







 

    On Thursday, 21 May, 2020, 12:22:20 am IST, Venkatraghavan S <agnimile at gmail.com> wrote:  
 
 Thanks Subbuji, our emails must have crossed - I sent Sadaji an email today saying exactly what you have said below. 
This was the email:
https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/2020-May/054524.html

Kind regards,Venkatraghavan
On Wed, 20 May 2020, 19:26 V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l, <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

While in a conversation with Sri Mani Dravid Sastrigal, I asked about this
topic and he said this:  In Advaita the relationship between guNa and guNi
is tAdAtmya:

We thank Sri Sada ji for raising this question.

This is from the Brahma Sutra Bhashya 2.2.17:

Objection: Even the smoke that is distinct from fire is seen to be
dependent on fire. Siddhantin: True it is so, but owing to the perception
of difference between the two, we conclude their mutual difference. However
in the case of - white blanket, red cow, blue lotus - the objects (blanket,
cow, lotus, etc.), since the object itself is perceived 'as endowed with'
those attributes, there is never a perception of distinction as in the case
of fire and smoke. Thus, the attribute is of the 'nature' ('sameness') of
the object.

Apte

तादात्म्यम् [tādātmyam], Sameness of nature, identity, unity;
नयनयोस्तादात्म्यमम्भोरुहाम् Bv.२.८१; भगवत्यात्मनस्तादात्म्यम् &c.

नन्वग्नेरन्यस्यापि सतो धूमस्याग्न्यधीनत्वं दृश्यते ; सत्यं दृश्यते ;
भेदप्रतीतेस्तु तत्राग्निधूमयोरन्यत्वं निश्चीयते ; इह तु — शुक्लः कम्बलः,
रोहिणी धेनुः, नीलमुत्पलम् — इति द्रव्यस्यैव तस्य तस्य तेन तेन विशेषणेन
प्रतीयमानत्वात् नैव द्रव्यगुणयोरग्निधूमयोरिव भेदप्रतीतिरस्ति ; *तस्माद्*
*द्रव्यात्मकता** गुणस्य *।

warm regards
subbu


>
>
_______________________________________________
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