Post 3d) Classification of relas -Reply

[Guest guest]

Dear bhagavatas,

 

As a rationale and most perfect exposition on the nature of reality

Vis'istAdvaita is composed of premises, definitions, and axioms;

these are used to make draw rational conclusions. Although,

this structure is implicit, the keen student, who has a

strong conviction, can easily make it out.

 

Further, it is the most perfect explanation in the following

sense:

 

Because that which is infinite cannot be described in

perfection in the finite realm, no exposition on the nature

of reality can be perfect. However, Vis'istAdvaita

gives a thorough and meaningful explanation of the nature

of reality based on rationale set of axioms and premises.

Several mutually exclusive axiomatic explanations of the

nature of reality can coexist, but only one can be truth !

Given this, the choice will ultimately be based on faith.

However, the validity of Vis'istAdvaita has ben confirmed

by the Alvars and our great Acharyas who are nitya-muktas

(who are not subject to the delusion from avidya-karma)

 

Notes:

 

1. The statement that Vedas are beginningless (i.e., without author)

is a premise and not a dogmatic statement! Premise is a key

component of every sound theory. This premise is rational, given

Vis'istAdvaita is an unbounded philosophy (i.e., individual souls,

matter and the process of creation and dissolution are also

beginningless.)

 

A Dogma on the other hand does not have a rational basis.

I have already discussed examples of dogma in the post

titled "Mutually Exclusive things cannot be equated", please

refer to it.

 

2. Advaita uses logic not known to man!.

This is not a dogmatic statement! Since there are

staunch advaitans that are members of this group

I do not want to state the reasoning in public;

an outright dismissal of Advaita may not the best

way to enlighten them of its short comings.

 

I will deal with the comment relating to idealism

in the next post.

 

Adiyen,

Venkat

krishNArpaNam

>>> Mani Varadarajan <mani 06/16/99 05:13pm >>>

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

[Guest guest]

Venkat Nagarajan <NAGARAVE wrote:

> A Dogma on the other hand does not have a rational basis.

> I have already discussed examples of dogma in the post

> titled "Mutually Exclusive things cannot be equated", please

> refer to it.

>

> 2. Advaita uses logic not known to man!.

 

If it is not known to man, how would advaitins use it? :-). The fact

that they use it means that the logic is known, isn't it? Perhaps you

meant to say that they use _faulty_ logic. That is certainly possible.

> This is not a dogmatic statement! Since there are

> staunch advaitans that are members of this group

> I do not want to state the reasoning in public;

 

Why not? I am a staunch advaitin myself, but would like to know what

vishishhTAdvaitins perceive to be the shortcomings in the

ontology, epistemology or soteriology of advaita, and how

vishishhTAdvaita makes up the short comings. If your arguments are

convincing enough, that would help change my mind.

 

My 2 cents worth: I have been spending some time reading the system of

vishishhTAdvaita. The different conclusions that the two schools reach

are due some fundamental differences in the methodology they adopt. I

am currently in the process of researching/writing an article on the

differences between the two systems. No prizes for guessing which I

find more acceptable :-). I would be posting that in the advaita list,

but I'll mail you a copy.

 

Rama