You are here: Sri Vaishnava Home Page : Bhakti List : Archives : April 2000

RE: An Advaita Point and its refutation

From: kmahesh (kmahesh_at_inf.com)
Date: Sun Apr 16 2000 - 22:31:05 PDT

SrI:

SrI rAmAnujAya namaH

Dear Sri M.S.Hari, 

Please accept my Namaskarams. 

I would like to make some comments, with my limited knowledge. 

Your argument is indeed correct, we should accept vedAs in totality, not
partially. 
In this context, I would like to add some more argument for your friend. 

Your friend says 
	" he can get to know this using his sense organs itself "

But, ones senses are imperfect. They can't see the world as it is. They will
put you under the illusion. We can even know this from science, You cant see
and hear beyond some frequency range etc.,., . So my point is senses are
limited and the knowledge obtained thru senses will also be limited and
imperfect. 
That's why vedAs, originated from Supreme Lord itself has been given to us ,
for following, there fore we should simply follow the vedAs for getting
perfect knowledge. 

There are four ways one can get knowledge, 
1.	Direct  perception ( as I mentioned above, senses are limited so
this process is false)
2.	Logical deduction ( this is also based on #1, so again this is also
false)
3.	Historical evidence ( this is based on both #1 & #2 )
4.	Sruti - sabda ( based on hearing from disciplic succession -
starting from LORD himself ) 




AdiYen dAsan,
Mahesh


		-----Original Message-----
		From:	M.S.HARI [mailto:mshari@usa.net]
		Sent:	Tuesday, April 11, 2000 3:05 PM
		To:	nama-singapore@eGroups.com; bhakti-list@egroups.com
		Subject:	An Advaita Point and its refutation 

		Dear Bhaagavatas,

		Namaskaram. While I was talking with one of my friend who is
a follower
		of Advaita school of philosophical thought, raised an
objection against
		Visistaadvaita and I refuted it. I thought I could share it
with you all
		and that is why I am posting this mail. It is as follows: 

		My friend said "See this Hari! An authority (Pramaana) has
value only
		when it imparts knowledge about a thing which cannot be
known by any
		other authority. Veda says "Agnihi Himasya Bheshajam"
meaning "Fire
		is the destroyer of ice". Though it is in the Veda, even a
common
		man who has not read the Veda, knows it by Pratyaksha
Pramaana itself -
		that he can get to know this using his sense organs itself.
Therefore
		"Agnihi Himasya Bheshjam" is least important authority as a
Vedic verse
		as other pramaanas are exisiting in this case. Similarly,
the "Bheda"
		(differences between individuals)is percieved by pratyaksha
pramaana 
		itself. It is therefore not necessary for you
Visistaadvaitins to
		ascertain "Bheda" from the Veda. "Abheda" is not percieved
by 
		pratyaksha. It is told only by Veda. Therefore Abheda sruthi
is 
		more of authority and importance and Bheda sruthi is of
least
		importance and can be ignored - Thus Advaita is proclimed in
the Veda".

		On hearing this argument, I refuted it like this. "See my
friend!
		We Visistaadvitins do not classify the vedic verses as
important and
		least important and we take the entire veda as authority. We
synchornize
		the abheda and bheda sruthis using the gataka sruthi and say
that
		the Brahman qualified by chit and achit entities as its body
is without
		a second entity - Brahman has infinite divine qualities and
is untouched
		by all impurities of chit and achit as Brahman is the soul.
We therefore
		neither say that bheda sruthi is important nor abheda sruthi
is 
		important. All the Veda convey only one meaning without
contradiction.
		Let me accept your argument also for your satisfaction.
According to you
		the authority must say something which is not known by any
other
		authority so that it is called authority (source of
knowledge). Even then
		this body-soul relationship between the chit/achit and the
Brahman is
		not known by any pramaana other than the Veda. Therefore it
can be
		argued from your point itself that the Veda proclaims
Visistaadvaita.
		You cannot say that it proclaims only Advaita because it
also talks
		more about Dvaita. Your usage of Apacheda nyaaya is
incorrect also."
		My friend accepted my point and told that he will get back
to me
		for more clarifications on Visistaadvaita.

		Readers, I thank you for reading this. Please send your
comments.

		Thanks & Regards
		M.S.HARI Raamaanuja Daasan.

	
____________________________________________________________________
		Get free email and a permanent address at
http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1

	
------------------------------------------------------------------------
		You can win $1000!
		Just one of 1000 great reasons to visit eGroups!
		Click here:
		http://click.egroups.com/1/2865/2/_/716111/_/955663690/
	
------------------------------------------------------------------------

	
--------------------------------------------------------------
		           - SrImate rAmAnujAya namaH -
		To Post a message, send it to:   bhakti-list@eGroups.com
		Visit http://www.ramanuja.org/sv/bhakti/ for more
information

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Get paid for the stuff you know!
Get answers for the stuff you donít. And get $10 to spend on the site!
http://click.egroups.com/1/2200/2/_/716111/_/955949575/
------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------
           - SrImate rAmAnujAya namaH -
To Post a message, send it to:   bhakti-list@eGroups.com
Visit http://www.ramanuja.org/sv/bhakti/ for more information