[Advaita-l] Nyayasudha Objections 1

[Srinath Vedagarbha]

On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 1:30 PM, V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 9:35 PM, Srinath Vedagarbha via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 2:07 PM, Venkatraghavan S <agnimile at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > The advaita position is that bheda vAkyas in the shruti are not to be
>> > taken as pramANa for bhedatvam.
>> >
>> > 1) For any means of knowledge to be a pramANa, it has to reveal things
>> > that are not previously known. That there is bhedA is well known through
>> > everyday experience. One does not need the vedA to tell us that fire is
>> > hot, it is knowable via pratyaksha. Similarly we experience bhedA
>> everyday,
>> > and therefore we don't need the vedA to tell us that bhedA is satyam.
>> >
>>
>> Well, they are not talking about bhEda between vastu-s known from
>> pratyaksha neither. They are talking about atIndriya padArtha/tatvas and
>> difference between them. For example, when difference between Brahman
>> and Jiva is said to exist, neither Brahman nor jIva is known from
>> pratyaksha. Otherwise we would not any atheism at all!
>>
>
> Dvaita admits bheda is known by pratyaksha:
>
> https://sites.google.com/site/harshalarajesh/prakarana-granthas
>
> //The satyavada of bheda is not only cognised by pratyaksa and anumana but
> it is affirmed by Sruti more than once. Satyam bhida sathyam bhida satyam
> bhida is the emphatic statement of Sruti. This bheda is five-fold.
>
> 1. Between Jiva and Iswara
> 2. Between Jada and Iswara
> 3. Between Jiva and Jiva
> 4. Between Jada and Jiva
> 5. Between Jada and Jada
>
> The difference between Jiva and Isvara continues even after liberation.
> This is made clear in the sruti passages.//
>
> //To know Jivesvarabheda, one has to know both Jiva and Isvara. Though
> the jiva is known by Pratyaksa, Isvara is not known either by Pratyaksa
> or by Anumana. //
>
> //Bheda that is established by Pratyaksa and Anumana, when also stated in
> bhedasrutis establishes its validity more firmly.//
>
> //The role of Pratyaksa Pramana in comprehending the reality is examined
> and its priority over other Pramanas is pointed out. //
>
> So, the above says that pratyaksha is pramana for knowing reality!!
>
>
>>
The source of above is not quite clear on the analysis. Aham pratIti as "I"
notion is pratyaksha siddha, no doubt, but that pratIti ends there. Other
details such as, whether it is other than this BMI or not, whether it
persists when this body dies, whether it has any guNa or not, etc etc...
are not known from pratyaksha. What to compare this with Ishwara?

Madhva says in Vishnu-tattva-vinirNaya --

na cha jIveshvarabhedaH siddhaH ityanuvAdakatvaM bhedavAkyAnAm.h  |
AgamaM vinA IshvarasyaivAsiddheH  |

"It cannot be said that the bhedavAkyas are repetitive (of the
obvious) on the ground that the jIva-Ishvara-bheda is already well
established (from pratyaksha or anumAna, says TIkA). That is because
Ishvara is not established without the aid of Agama".

The TIkA there explicitly mentions that the cognition of this bheda
requires 'IshvarapratIti'.


I would suggest one should go to classical works instead of relaying on
website to better understand the pUrvapakshi.

/sv