ADVAITA-L Digest - 15 Jun 1999 to 16 Jun 1999 (#1999-54)

[Anand V. Hudli]

Ashish Chandra <achandra at WNMAIL.WNDEV.ATT.COM> wrote:

>I remember reading somewhere that if the Shruti says two different things,
>then both are to be accepted as true. Only when the Smriti conflicts with
>Shruti should the Shruti be taken as being valid.


 According to mImAmsA, if there are two or more rules that say different
 things about the same topic, this becomes what is technically called
 "vikalpa-prasakti", association with alternative(s). This means there
 is scope for alternatives. But alternatives, "vikalpa"s are definitely
 frowned upon by mImAmsakas, because as KumArila BhaTTa points out in
 the tantra-vArtika, there are eight kinds of defects associated with
 a "vikalpa." So the mImAmsaka would very much prefer to avoid admitting
 a "vikalpa". In case there is a threat of "vikalpa" he would first try
 to re-interpret the rules in question as an exclusion, called "paryudAsa",
 instead of a "vikalpa." An example of paryudAsa is the "nAnuyAjeshhu
 ye-yajAmahaM karoti" statement, that I wrote about a week or so ago, in
 connection with gItA 2.20. But the mImAmsaka also recognizes that
 sometimes it is impossible to avoid (the much feared!) vikalpa, so he
 admits it. If there is an injunction of a specific act in one place
 and prohibition of the same specific act in another place, not necess-
 arily in the Veda but also in other sources such as the Shrauta-sUtras,
 the mImAmsaka accepts vikalpa.

 Of course, if smR^iti conflicts with shruti, the latter prevails.

 Anand