[Advaita-l] slesha

[Jaldhar H. Vyas]

[was Re: [Advaita-l] Paul Hacker's erroneous view]


On Sat, 3 Sep 2016, D Gayatri via Advaita-l wrote:

> Padmapada's invocation is not upamAna. It is double entendre. I don't know
> what this is called in Sanskrit, but it is a brilliant device employed to
> differentiate Shankara from Shiva.

The double entendre in general is called slesha in kavyashastra.  (And it 
is a type of upamana btw.) However the precise alankara which is being 
exhibited here is called pratIpa in which one thing is compared to another 
by means of its opposite.  This also has various types here is the 
kuvalayanandas example for the third type:

miththyAvAdo hi mugdhAkShi tvanmukhAbhaM kilAMbujam ..

"It is a false assertion, beautiful-eyed lady, that the the lotus is equal 
to your face."

The point is not that the comparison of the ladies face to the lotus is 
wrong because she is less beautiful but on the contrary they are not equal 
because her face is _more_ beautiful.

So too in Padmapadacharyas shloka he is saying that Shankara Acharya 
does not have the conventional appearence of Shankara Bhagavan even the 
opposite yet despite that He _is_ Shankara Bhagavan.  And it is 
actually a triple-entendre because there is a adhyatmic meaning too.  The 
concept "Shankara" encompasses both the man-Shankara and God-Shankara just 
as the one Brahman encompasses all the dvandvas (pairs of oppposites.)

On Sat, 3 Sep 2016, D Gayatri via Advaita-l wrote:

> This also shows that neither was Shankara considered an incarnation of
> Shiva, nor did he smear himself with ashes.


This is just silly.  Surely you are aware that Shiva Bhagavans body is 
completely covered in ashes (which is what bhasmabhuta means.) whereas we 
humans wear tripundra in certain specific locations on the body. 
Elementary logic tells you that ~∀(p) !-> ~p or in other words not bhasma 
everywhere does not imply bhasma nowhere.

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