Guest guest Posted April 10, 2000 Report Share Posted April 10, 2000 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 16, 2000 Report Share Posted April 16, 2000 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 M.S.HARI [mshari] Tuesday, April 11, 2000 3:05 PM nama-singapore (AT) eGroups (DOT) com; bhakti-list 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! http://click./1/2865/2/_/716111/_/955663690/ ------ ----------------------------- - SrImate rAmAnujAya namaH - To Post a message, send it to: bhakti-list (AT) eGroups (DOT) com Visit http://www.ramanuja.org/sv/bhakti/ for more information Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 17, 2000 Report Share Posted April 17, 2000 > > SrI rAmAnujAya namaH > > 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. Could anyone please clarify the "Srivaishnava" position on this issue? I don't think vedas have origin. It is considered "anadi" and "Apaurusheya" Of course it was first instructed to the "non- mukthas" by the LORD to Chaturmukha brahma. > > 4. Sruti - sabda ( based on hearing from disciplic succession - > starting from LORD himself ) > It is furthur argued that though we get correct knowledge from the vedas .. it is we who interpret them.....so again the problem remains as to who is the right person to interpret them !!! I think that is the reason why we have a lot of interpretaions!!! (though from the same disciplic succession) It is important to note that though "ISKCON" have the same disciplic succession from MADHVA they have a different doctrine!!!! ( This is not the forum to discuss this.... Please refrain from posting this into this forum.....however U can send personal mails) Hare Krishna, rajiv > > > > AdiYen dAsan, > Mahesh > > > > M.S.HARI [mshari] > Tuesday, April 11, 2000 3:05 PM > nama-singapore (AT) eGroups (DOT) com; bhakti-list > 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! > > http://click./1/2865/2/_/716111/_/955663690/ > > ------ > > > ----------------------------- > - SrImate rAmAnujAya namaH - > To Post a message, send it to: bhakti-list (AT) eGroups (DOT) com > Visit http://www.ramanuja.org/sv/bhakti/ for more > information > > ------ > Get paid for the stuff you know! > Get answers for the stuff you don’t. And get $10 to spend on the site! > http://click./1/2200/2/_/716111/_/955949575/ > ------ > > ----------------------------- > - SrImate rAmAnujAya namaH - > To Post a message, send it to: bhakti-list (AT) eGroups (DOT) com > Visit http://www.ramanuja.org/sv/bhakti/ for more information > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.