[Advaita-l] Shabda-ajanya-vritti-vishayatva of tuchch

[Sudhanshu Shekhar]

Or should we say -

This anumAna is invalid.

Because hetu and sAdhya (अकारणत्व and अक्षणिकत्व) are mithyA and they
cannot belong to tuchcha, because tuchcha is asat.

However, if you insist on the validity of this anumAna through some
imaginary and incorrect definition of tuchcha, then take this another
definition of drishyatva.

Regards.


On Mon, 27 Dec, 2021, 1:13 pm Venkatraghavan S, <agnimile at gmail.com> wrote:

> If it is tucCha, then we would have accepted that tucCha is also anumiti
> viShaya. Hence I said it is only the pada which is the viShaya of such a
> vRtti not an akhaNDa padArtha denoted by the tucCha pada.
>
>
>
> On Mon, 27 Dec 2021, 12:51 Sudhanshu Shekhar, <sudhanshu.iitk at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Venkataraghavan ji,
>>
>> तुच्छं न क्षणिकम्, अकारणत्वात्, ब्रह्मवत्।
>>
>> Here paksha is tuchcha, अक्षणिकत्व is sAdhya.
>>
>> How can we hold that paksha is tuchcha shabda?
>>
>> Regards
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 27 Dec, 2021, 11:43 am Venkatraghavan S, <agnimile at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Namaste Sudhanshu ji,
>>> The paksha of any anumAna is a viShaya of the anumiti.
>>>
>>> We hold that the paksha here is the shabda tucCha. They hold that the
>>> paksha is the tucCha itself. So for them, the tucCha itself is
>>> anumiti-viShaya.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Venkatraghavan
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, 27 Dec 2021, 11:30 Sudhanshu Shekhar, <sudhanshu.iitk at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Venkataraghavan ji,
>>>>
>>>> तुच्छं न क्षणिकम्, अकारणत्वात्, ब्रह्मवत्।
>>>>
>>>> Is shasha-vishANa an object of vritti janya by this anumAna?
>>>>
>>>> Laghuchandrika makes that statement for
>>>> sat-tAdAtmya-asat-tAdAtmya-anyataravatva (a little later). In this context
>>>> of anumAna-vritti-janya-vishayatva, it does not make that statement. That's
>>>> why I got confused.
>>>>
>>>> Regards.
>>>>
>>>