On the nature of Maya and existence

[Guest guest]

Namaste,

 

Most of the discussions on the nature of maya subsumes a discussion on

the nature of the samsara. How do the orthodox schools define

'existence', what are its lakshanas; or rather, are there different

definitions and different lakshanas? When the argument comes up if

'maya' exists, what does 'exist' mean, and does it contradict with what

one means by saying the samsara 'exists'?

 

I understand some of the premises of vishistadvaitha and advaitha on

this, however I am unsure if what is ontologically meant by existence

the same.

 

An example from the Nyaya Sutras:

"There is no reality in a web seperated from its threads."

However, while the web 'exists', isnt its 'existence' different from

the 'existence' of the thread?

 

Pranams,

Venu

_______

 

Get your free @ address at

[Guest guest]

Dear Sri. Venu

NamO nArAyaNA.

I am not sure if I am interpreting your questions clearly,

but I think you

are asking the following

1. what is existence ?

2. In what sense does karma exist?

 

Glad you asked the question, trying to answer

your question helps me as well as others

augment our understanding.

 

Answer 1. That which is not negated by any of the valid

means of acquiring knowledge exists (i.e., it is a real.)

 

Details:

 

What is Vis'istadvaita Vedanta?

 

It is a detailed explanation of the nature of reality(i.e., nature of

all things that exist), based on three independent, valid means

of acquiring knowledge (PramAnas.) The independent,

pramAnas are perception (pratyaksa), inference (anumAna)

and S'abda (verbal testimony.) Now we can define a real

as that which is not negated by any of the valid means of

acquiring knowledge.

 

The classification of reals is very important to understand,

for it is the foundational layer of Vis'istAdvaita Vednata.

The starting point of Vis'istAdvaita Vedanta is reals.

Reals are composed only of substrate and attributes.

Reals can be classified into two broad categories

substance and non-substance. Substance is composed

of substrate and attributes and is always cognized as

a substrate qualified by some attribute. Non-substance is a

real that does not meet the criteria outlined in the

definition of substance. Further, a non-substance

is an attribute, but an attribute need not be a

non-substance (as a substance can exist within another

substance as an attribute. ) A non-substance cannot

exist independent of substance.

 

Answer 2. Karma is a real (it satisfies the requirements of

the definition) I think it can be classified as substance.

 

Reasoning:

Karma satisfies the following definition:

 

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.

 

I haven't seen karma being explicitly classified in

Fundamentals of Vis'istAdvaita (I will scan thoroughly

and report back.)

 

For More detailed discussion on classification of reals

look at archives

for June (should be up soon)

1.Re: Post 3d) Classification of relas

2.Re: Post 3e) Classification of reals

 

Source for information:

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, if interested

please e-mail me.

 

adiyEn ramanuja dasan,

Venkat

krishNArpaNam,