You are here: SriPedia - Oppiliappan - Archives - Jul 2006

Oppiliappan List Archive: Message 00174 Jul 2006

 
Jul 2006 Indexes ( Date | Thread | Author )
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]


avidhya cannot be proved positive by inference.

In the argument  to show that ajnana is a positive entity the sAdhya, or
the thing to be proved is given as 'jnAna should be preceded by a
substance which prevents it from appearing and which is removable by
jnAna.' The hethu or reason for such an inference is that the jnAna 
shows what is not seen earlier.The example given is that of light which
removes the darkness and shows the objects which were not seen
before.Now, Ramanuja says that this inference is faulty.The hethu viz.
showing something not previously seen, is sAdhana vikala, absent in  the
example because the light does not show an object without the rise of
knowledge about the object.That is, when a pot , not previously seen due
to darkness is made visible by the light, the knowledge of the pot is
necessary to cognise it as such. Similarly indriyas are also not capable
of showing the objects but only aid the knowledge that does it.For
instance the light only helps the eye that helps the knowledge by
removing the darkness that prevents perception. The removal of that
alone which obscures,does not bring perception but it is only the
showing of the object as such.

Brahman is jnAnamAthra, pure knowledge and cannot be the abode of
avidhya. The ignorance of the shell in the shell-silver illusion does
not reside in the shell but only in the perceiver.For the same reason
the avidhya cannot conceal Brahman. And it cannot be removed by jnAna
because it does not conceal Brahman. Only when the ignorance conceals
the subject of knowledge as in the case of shell-silver, it could be
sublated by that knowledge.

Brahman is not the knower as per advaita and hence it could not be the
abode of avidhya which can exist only in the knower.Avidhya cannot cover
brahman who is of the nature of knowledge as it can cover only an object
that is seen and not the knowledge. Brahman is not the subject of
knowledge either because He is not known and if Brahman can be covered
by avidhya He ceases to be mere knowledge but becomes a known subject.
Since avidhya does not conceals what can be known,  as in shell-silver,
it cannot be removed by knowledge. Lastly knowledge cannot destroy an
existing thing like the positive avidhya.Further avidhya being thus not
positive entity its definition need not exclude its previous
non-existence. Thus positive avidhya is not proved even by inference.























[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing
http://us.click.yahoo.com/zAINmC/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/XUWolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Oppiliappan/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    Oppiliappan-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index ] [Thread Index ] [Author Index ]
Home Page
http://www.ibiblio.org/sripedia
oppiliappan-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
To subscribe to the list