Post-Shankaran Vedantins

[Jaldhar H. Vyas]

On Wed, 16 Dec 1998, Jay Lakhani wrote:

> The most interesting aspect of Advaita is that by definition it is
> unknowable.

NO!!!  Sorry but this is a 100% wrong.  Vedanta may be somewhat
skeptical of everyday means of knowledge but it insists that ultimate
truth is knowable.  (This is what seperates it from nastika schools like
Buddhism)

> Hence the only logic chopping is to confirm this aspect - full
stop.

Not true.  if Truth is knowable, then there must be a way to know it.
This way is through the analysis of the Vedanta shastras.  This is why
Vedanta is a type of Mimamsa or exegetical analysis.

> The same answer also covers the points raised about the value of language,
> truth and history.
>

But as we have seen, that answer is based on faulty premises.

> The grand thing about Advaita is that it cannot be a statement of affairs.
> It can only be a state - Here there is no subject - no object and no
> relationship is possible. Just a state - a state of first hand realisation
> full stop.

Ah the well known problem of confusing the vyavaharik and paramarthik
states.  We have seen this mistake repeated on the list many times.  See
the list archives for details.

>
> So we come back to: - Who do we know in the contemporary times who is
> established in this state? Without this link we have no handle on this
> 'Advaita'
>
> What do you say :-}
>

I say you have a lot of history, language and logic to work on. :-)

--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at braincells.com>

================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
List archives : http://listserv.tamu.edu/archives/advaita-l.html
================================================================