[Advaita-l] VedaprAmANya in Advaita

[V Subrahmanian]

On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 11:03 PM, Murali Karamchedu <murali_m_k at msn.com>wrote:

>
> Here, the 'adi' after anubhava must mean other pramanas. If one were to
> read this
> as merely indicating the complementary nature of anubhava etc, then isn't
> that
> a superfluous position to state; particularly considering how he contrasts
> this with
> dharmajijnasa, where too these other pramanas act in complementary roles?
>
> Thanks,
> -Murali Manohar
>
> Dear Murali,

I realized that I had not answered this particular question of yours.  The
Ratnaprabha commentary on the Bhashya observes:

Dharma is nitya-parokSha; ever-mediate and is something to be produced.
Hence there is no requirement of 'sAkShAtkAra', and it is impossible too.
The mere determining the meaning/methodology from Shruti is all that is
required to engage in the action (to produce the stated fruit).  The
commentary also states: धर्मस्य अनुभवायोग्यत्वम् - dharma is incapable of
being experienced.  (Here we should remember: at the time of engaging in
action.  Of course, the fruit of dharma in the form of sukha, etc. is
experienceable, only at a future time/place.)

This is what distinguishes Brahmajijnaasaa from Dharmajijnaasaa. The
requirement of Shruti is common to both; the requirement of anubhava is the
additional requirement in BrahmajijnAsa.

One can look into the Ratnaprabha for a little more detail regarding shruti,
linga, vaakya, etc.

Om Tat Sat

>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>