[Advaita-l] vedAnta mahAvAkya - A query

[Praveen R. Bhat]

Namaste Venkatji,

On Thu, Jul 28, 2022 at 11:36 PM Venkatraghavan S via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> What is the issue with some sentences being vyAvahArika tattvAvedaka and
> others being pAramArthika tattvAvedaka?
>
The issue appears to be vitaNDa that it is wrong because Advaitins say so!
:-)


> We don't say that there is tAratamyatA in the sentences or their prAmANya.
> However, there is taratamyatA in the satyatva of their viShaya.
>

True. Bhagavan Bhashyakara says this under Mundaka mantra 1.1.5
differentiating parA and aparA vidyA:
(pUrvapakShI) ननु ऋग्वेदादिबाह्या तर्हि सा कथं परा विद्या स्यात् मोक्षसाधनं
च । ‘या वेदबाह्याः स्मृतयो याश्च काश्च कुदृष्टयः. . . ’ (मनु. १२ । ९५) इति
हि स्मरन्ति । कुदृष्टित्वान्निष्फलत्वादनादेया स्यात् ; उपनिषदां च
ऋग्वेदादिबाह्यत्वं स्यात् । ऋग्वेदादित्वे तु पृथक्करणमनर्थकम् अथ परेति ।
(siddhAntI) न, वेद्यविषयविज्ञानस्य विवक्षितत्वात् । उपनिषद्वेद्याक्षरविषयं
हि विज्ञानमिह परा विद्येति प्राधान्येन विवक्षितम् , नोपनिषच्छब्दराशिः ।
वेदशब्देन तु सर्वत्र शब्दराशिर्विवक्षितः ।

...The sentence
> does not set out to prove that such a sambandha is traikAlika abAdhya, for
> anyone to argue that because the advaitin does not confer it with
> pAramArthikatva, the vAkya loses its prAmANya.
>
In the end, anyway, we will say that even mahAvAkyas, just like
avAntaravAkyas, entire karmopAsanakANDa, nAmarUpAtmakaprapancha, are mithyA!

gurupAdukAbhyAm,
--Praveen R. Bhat
/* येनेदं सर्वं विजानाति, तं केन विजानीयात्। Through what should one know
That, owing to which all this is known! [Br.Up. 4.5.15] */