Cont...
5.What is the exact difference between Shaktadvaita and Shivadvaita ? I was recently reading an article by MM Gopinath Kaviraj who claims these two are different, but the difference between them seems to me rather based on terminology(at least reading the article it seemed)
answer:both shakta and shivadavaita are very similar. the idea for shakta philosphy is derived by bhaskaracharya from kasmir shaivism only. all said, if you want to see differrence 1 and 2 are differrent, but they are both numerals. here shiva is accepted as great and shakti on the other side, there it is a HUGE difference
6.I was grappling with Advaita Siddhi, the first part starts with a discussion on Vipratipatti. I you have time can you elucidiate the basic positions of the purvapakshi and Siddhatin here.What I am trying to say what is the exact relation of this discussion with the objective of the Acharya i.e. proving the world is Mithya Instead of starting the discussion ith Mithatya why does He start with this discussion?
answer:The purvapakshi does not want to accept the doubt which arises due to the viprapatti vakya in accepting the pakshata (sandigdasadhyadharmavan - where there is a doubt about the sadhya,and that type of dharma exists in whichever place, that is called).this is what he refers to with - yadyapi viprapattijanyasamsayasya na
pakshatasampadakatayopayoga.
1. Therefore this viprapatti statement which is declared by somebody
cannot be accepted as a part of the vicara.
2. And also, those who are in dialogue are sure about their own
statements, therefore, even if somebody pronounces this vipratipatti,
still, both are not going to listen to it.
3. And that somebody can easily declare that, you are going to prove
this, and you are going to condemn this. for this reason also there
can be no viprapatti and in effect no doubt.
But, for us though it may not be diretly accepted through doubt, asfor the negation of doubt it becomes a part of the vicara.
answer:both shakta and shivadavaita are very similar. the idea for shakta philosphy is derived by bhaskaracharya from kasmir shaivism only. all said, if you want to see differrence 1 and 2 are differrent, but they are both numerals. here shiva is accepted as great and shakti on the other side, there it is a HUGE difference
6.I was grappling with Advaita Siddhi, the first part starts with a discussion on Vipratipatti. I you have time can you elucidiate the basic positions of the purvapakshi and Siddhatin here.What I am trying to say what is the exact relation of this discussion with the objective of the Acharya i.e. proving the world is Mithya Instead of starting the discussion ith Mithatya why does He start with this discussion?
answer:The purvapakshi does not want to accept the doubt which arises due to the viprapatti vakya in accepting the pakshata (sandigdasadhyadharmavan - where there is a doubt about the sadhya,and that type of dharma exists in whichever place, that is called).this is what he refers to with - yadyapi viprapattijanyasamsayasya na
pakshatasampadakatayopayoga.
1. Therefore this viprapatti statement which is declared by somebody
cannot be accepted as a part of the vicara.
2. And also, those who are in dialogue are sure about their own
statements, therefore, even if somebody pronounces this vipratipatti,
still, both are not going to listen to it.
3. And that somebody can easily declare that, you are going to prove
this, and you are going to condemn this. for this reason also there
can be no viprapatti and in effect no doubt.
But, for us though it may not be diretly accepted through doubt, asfor the negation of doubt it becomes a part of the vicara.
No comments:
Post a Comment