Post 3d) Classification of relas

[Guest guest]

Dear bhagavatas,

 

In the next post adiyen will continue the discussion

on the classification of reals. In order to refresh the

memory of bhagavatas adiyen will commence with

a summary of the previous posts. Adiyen is trying

to be thorough and technical in presenting the

material in order to explicate:

1.how thorough and rational this most perfect

explaination of the nature of reality Vis'istAdvaita is

2. the absurdity of equating Vis'istAdvaita with

dogma based theology or irrational idealistic or

atheistic philosophies.

3.Vedanta Desika is a nitya suri who had

an extraordinary extraneous set of knowledge

(or mundane knowledge) and was blessed with an

extremely sound body and

mind (by Isvara.) Using his extremely sound body

and mind, he firmly established Vis'istAdvaita

Vedanta and caused irreparable damage to the

nihilistic and sudo-nihilistic philosophies.

 

Summary of Earlier Posts:

 

Some Preliminaries:

 

Distinction Between Definition and Axiom:

 

The difference between definitions and axioms is

important to note. I am not sure if the original Sanskrit

texts explicate this distinction, but it is definitely implicit

in the English commentaries.

 

A definition outlines certain properties and specifies

a label to be assigned to the reals (substances and

non substances) that satisfy these properties.

 

An axiom is a declaration of a statement of fact that

must be accepted as such without proof. The

statement of fact is based on support from one or

more of the sources of valid information outlined

earlier. If an axiom is based solely on perception,

it cannot be disputed without a valid counter example!

 

In post 1, a real was defined as that which is not

negated by any of the three valid means of acquiring

knowledge.

 

Axiom1. All reals are composed only of substrate and

attributes

 

The reals (tattvas) have been classified into two broad

categories:

 

1. Substance (dravya)

2. Non-Substance (adravya)

 

Definition 1: A real that under the influence of an external

real is subject to a change which is inseparably related to

the real (avastha), as recognised by the valid means of acquiring

knowledge, is denoted a substance.

 

Axiom 2 a) A substance is composed of a substratum

(foundational layer to which the name refers) and

attribute (s). The attribute (attributes) is within (are within)

the substratum. Although distinct from the substratum,

an attribute is inseparably related to it (an attribute can

only exist within some substratum.)

 

Axiom 2 b) A substance is always cognized as a substratum

qualified by an attribute.

 

Definition 2: A modification (avasthA) in the substratum,

which is influenced by an external substance

(that is by a substance not within the substance under

consideration), is an attribute of the substance.

 

Axiom 3: Every substrate is subject to avastha.

 

Definition 3: Non-substance (adravya) is that which is not

substance.

 

Axiom 4: A non-substance cannot exist independent of a

substance.

 

***Combining definition 1 and axiom 4, we can conclude

that a catalyst (the real that brings about the change)

must also be a substance.

 

 

Special cases:

 

1. A substance can be within another substance as an

attribute. For example, Jnana (Knowledge) is a substance,

but it is within another substance Jiva (roughly individual

soul) as an attribute.

 

2. A modification (avastha) is an attribute, but an attribute

may not be a modification. For instance, cowness

(the consolidated attribute) is an attribute that is inseparable

from cow, but this attribute is not effected by external

substances; thus, it is not a modification.

 

Examples:

 

1. Clay is a substance (name clay refers to the substratum)

that is subject to change [relates to definition 1.] When it is

shaped as a pot or a vase, we see a clay pot or a clay vase;

substratum as qualified by the attribute within.

[relates to definition 2 and the axioms.]

 

2. A monitor Screen is a substance (dravya.)

-Just like clay, the monitor screen is subject to change;

these changes are perceived by our sense of sight.

[i am making use of definition 1 here to classify a real

as a substance.]

-When we see the screen, we always see it as either a

off-screen, or a screen-saver screen and so on.

Thus, we cognise the substratum (remember the

name screen applies to the substratum) as qualified

by an attribute (the state the screen is in; off, screen-saver

, and so on.)

[Axioms like 2a) and 2b), draw support from pratyaksa

PramAna (Perception as a valid means of acquiring knowledge)]

 

3. A Light bulb is a substance (dravya.) Just like the monitor

screen, the light bulb is also subject to change; the

change is inseparably related to the light bulb and is

initiated by the power button (the power button is a real

not within the light bulb.) [i am making use of the refined

statement of definition 1 to classify a real as a substance.]

 

4. [ An example where a real undergoes a modification, but

the modification is not considered an attribute, since it

is not inseparably related to the real.]

 

A pencil is a real. Treat it as an unclassified item, for now.

Placing the pencil on a sheet of paper initiates a change,

but this modification is not an attribute of the pencil, as it is not

inseparably related to it.

 

Summary Ends

********

Adiyen,

Venkat

krishNArpaNam

 

Note: The source for following is *Fundamentals of Vis*istAdvaita

VedAnata: A study based on Vedanta Des*ika*s:

Tattva-MuktA-KalApa*, by Sri. S.M.S. Chari. The material

above is not verbatim, but is in accordance with the material

presented in the book. Copies are available, please

e-mail if interested. It is our duty to each buy a copy,

for Sri. S.M.S.Chari produced this excellent work, out

of great compassion. (He is sharing his tremendous

knowledge with us, the less fortunate, who do not have

the capacity to read and understand the original Sanskrit

texts. )

[Guest guest]

Sri Venkat wrote:

> 2. the absurdity of equating Vis'istAdvaita with

> dogma based theology or irrational idealistic or

> atheistic philosophies.

 

I look forward to reading what Sri Venkat has to say,

but I must point out that even Visishtadvaita is based

on dogma, at least in part. It is axiomatic, for example,

that the Veda is a preterpersonal (apaurusheya), flawless

statement of reality. Visishtadvaitins will declare this

in no uncertain terms. Since no Vedantin of any stripe

tries to prove this in its entireity, nor can they, the

belief in the Veda has to be accepted as a dogma.

 

Having accepted this axiom, along with certain exegetical

principles (mImAmsA), however, the rest of the philosophy

can be said to be logically provable.

 

Second, in many ways Visishtadvaita is as idealistic as

Advaita. Certainly Visishtadvaita does not propound cosmic

illusionism; but Ramanuja's description of the nature of

the self and religious knowledge very much tends toward

the idealistic.

 

Mani