[Advaita-l] anumAna-pramANa

[Raghav Kumar Dwivedula]

Thank you for the clear and patient explanation, Sudhanshu ji

To restate -
viShayatvenA-avacchinna-jnAna1 is termed kAraNa for the arising of the
anuvyavasAya jnAna, "I know jnAna1".

Now, regarding a case of jnAnatvena-avacchinna-jnAnaM being a cause -

can we take the example of, "knowledge of mathematics is a cause for
knowledge of quantum physics" so math-jnAnatvena-avacchinna-math-jnAnam
serves as kAraNa for the quantum-physics-jnAnaM.


Om
Raghav


On Mon, 21 Oct, 2024, 1:10 pm Sudhanshu Shekhar, <sudhanshu.iitk at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Namaste Raghav ji.
>
> vyApti-jnAna-tva-avachchhinna-vyApti-jnAna is not clear. What does it mean
>> in simpler elaborate language?
>>
>
> Let us revise the concept of avachchhedaka. Let us say that there is a
> pot. This pot is a cause in several actions, namely:
>
> 1. You can bring water in the pot. So, pot is the cause of
> water-Anayana-kriyA.
> 2. You can break the pot. So, pot is the cause of pot-dhvamsa.
> 3. You can know pot. So, pot is the cause of pot-jnAna.
>
> In 1, pot is the cause in jala-Anayana-kriyA on account of being a pot.
> In 2, pot is the cause in pot-dhvamsa on account of being pratiyogI.
> In 3, pot is the cause in pot-jnAna on account of being vishaya.
>
> So, in 1, the kAraNatA of pot is avachchhinna by pot-ness. In 2, the
> kAraNatA iof pot is avachchhinna by pratiyogitA. In 3, the kAraNatA of pot
> is avachchhinna by vishayatva.
>
> Now, there is something called anuvyavasAya. For e.g. suppose I know a
> pot. So, first there is a jnAna-1 named ghaTa-jnAna. Subsequent thereto, I
> get a jnAna-2 "I have ghaTa-jnAna". Now, this jnAna-2 has jnAna-1 as
> vishaya. This jnAna-2 is called anuvyavasAya.
>
> Now, please see that jnAna-1 is the cause of jnAna-2 but not on account of
> being a jnAna but on account of being a vishaya. So, the kAraNatA of
> jnAna-1 vis-a-vis jnAna-2 is avachchhinna by vishayatva and not by jnAnatva.
>
> When we say vyApti-jnAna-tvena-vyApti-jnAna-janyA (अनुमितिश्च
> व्याप्तिज्ञानत्वेन व्याप्तिज्ञानजन्या), we basically mean that the kAraNatA
> of vyApti-jnAna vis-a-vis anumiti-pramA is avachchhinna by
> vyApti-jnAna-tva. That is "on account of being vyApti-jnAna" and not on
> account of being anything else.
>
> Hope, I could convey.
>
>
>> Also, X-avacchinna-Y implies there are also Z-avacchinna-Y and
>> W-avacchinna-Y. Here what are the avacchedakas possible?
>>
>
> Like vishayatva and pratiyogitva. So, the vyApti-jnAna is
> vishaytvena-janaka of vyApti-jnAna-anuvyvasAya. vyApti-jnAna is
> pratiyogitvena-janaka of vyApti-jnAna-dhvamsa. However, vyApti-jnAna is
> vyApti-jnAnatvena-janaka in case of anumiti-pramA.
>
>
>> For example, would a word/idea like
>> "ghaTa-jnAnatva-avacchinna-ghaTa-jnAnaM " make semantic sense?
>>
>
> Yes. It is a very much sensible statement, as discussed above.
>
> Regards.
> Sudhanshu Shekhar.
>