[Advaita-l] Shruti prAmANya and jnAna

[श्रीमल्ललितालालितः]

Your tone is not asking for clarification.
So, I'll prefer to leave you at your condition.

On Wed, 5 Oct 2016 at 01:46 Srinath Vedagarbha <svedagarbha at gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 8:46 AM, श्रीमल्ललितालालितः via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
>
> Another thing to consider, there are two types of prAmANya, tested and
> otherwise.
> Tested one needs all what I said. Untested is svataH and is saved by
> apauruSheyatva.
>
>
> There are no such thing as two types of prAmANya. It is either prAmANya or
> aprAmANya.
>
> If you argue one of the prAmANya is tested one, then there is no
> difference between your position and a bhOudhAs -- for whom prAmANya is
> parataH. Then anavasthA dOSha will be applicable with equal force.
>
> All schools in vEdAnta agrees prAmANya is svataH only, whether it is
> comprehended via channels of pratyaksha or anumAna or shabda (or other type
> for different schools)
>
> Btw, how does advaitins justify apauruSheyatva concept in general? The
> reason I am asking is that when this entire jagat is considered as arOpita
> and a brAnti, and it is partiyOgi for niShEda, then is there any real
> meaning for apauruSheyatva or otherwise? apauruSheyatva make sense only for
> someone who is realists. One cannot argue apauruSheyatva is valid now (in
> vyavahAra) but not later. Let's not forget, this jagat is pratiyOgi for
> negation in all three time frames  (trikAlika-nishEdha) including in this
> vyavahAra. So there is no point in arguing apauruSheyatva is valid now but
> not later. There is no temporal aspect to validity itself. If something is
> found/attested to be valid (via svatastva route) it is valid always. If
> there is no niSchaya in its validity to begin with, it may be rendered
> aprAmANya later, that is ok.  But cannot get invalidated after it has got
> such niSchayatva.
>
> Has this issue been addressed in any classical works?
>
> /sv
>
>
>
>
>
>