[Advaita-l] ***UNCHECKED*** Re: Debunking Drishti-Srishti Vada and Eka Jiva Vada - part 1

[Venkatesh Murthy]

Namaste

You are not logical at all. If Vidyaranya Swami has agreed to  EJV DSV any
where it must and should mean dream and waking are same. There cannot be
DSV EJV with dream and waking different. As a matter of fact the Anumaana
used is Jaagradavasthaa Drushti-Srushti-vatee Avasthaatvaat Svapnavat. The
Waking State has Drushti-Srushti because it is also Avasthaa like Dream.
All three states have Drushti-Srushti only. Therefore it must and should
mean Satta Dvaividhya only. There cannot be Satta Traividhya if dream and
waking are same. You are not correct to assume he said Satta Traividhya for
DSV. He cannot make such mistake any where.

On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 7:36 PM, H S Chandramouli via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> >
> > Namaste Venkatraghavan Ji and Praveen Ji,
> >
> >
> >
> > My conclusion is based on the details of the prakriya given in
> > Anubhutuprakasha. Verses 41-51. The details correspond to that in
> > Panchadashi. Sri SVBS on book page 209 topic 329-330, first three lines
> > refers. Notes on page 208 also may be referred. Three levels of satta are
> > recognized in SDV while only two levels are recognized in DSV. Both in
> the
> > prakriya referred to in Anubhutiprakasha and in Panchadashi, three levels
> > of satta are recognized. Hence my conclusion.
> >
> >
> >
> > I agree Sri SVBS has not used the terms SDV/DSV by name in respect of
> > Anubhutiprakasha. As explained above it is my conclusion.
> >
> >
> >
> > The context is explanation of DSV and SDV. DSV considers satta dvaya
> only.
> > You are also saying the same thing
> >
> >
> >
> > << The first line of the topic clarifies further - In comparison to sattA
> > traividhyam (three-fold sattA) which has been taught for weaker students,
> > now, in order to establish that sattA is only one, we will talk about the
> > lack of any difference between the dream and the waking states. >>.
> >
> >
> >
> > Dream and waking together is one satta, Paramarthika is the second.
> >
> >
> >
> > Reg  << This conclusion is not justified on the evidence presented. A
> > comment by one AchArya on the position taken by another AchArya in one
> work
> > does not invalidate the other AchArya's position in another work. >>,
> >
> >
> >
> > Again I don’t understand. I am talking of the same Acharya, Swami
> > Vidyaranya, presenting the same prakriyA in two different works, as
> > clarified above.
> >
> >
> >
> > Reg  << I am a little lost on how does it mean that Sw. Vidyaranya never
> > endorsed DSV? >>,
> >
> >
> >
> > No. I did not mean it that way. This was the only one presented so far as
> > evidence that Swami Vidyaranya has endorsed DSV.  I agree I cannot say
> that
> > he has not endorsed it elsewhere. I am not aware of all his works. Nor
> for
> > that matter any other portion of Anubhutiprakasha either.
> >
> >
> >
> > Regards
> >
> >
> >
> >
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_
> source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
> Virus-free.
> www.avast.com
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_
> source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>



-- 
Regards

-Venkatesh