Vietnam or Thailand ? Vote for the TOP Country of the Week !
Updated: May 25, 2025
The Purvapakshin denies this qualification in the case of gods and other beings, on the ground of absence of capability. We have indeed proved above that the Vedanta-texts may intimate accomplished things, and hence are an authoritative means for the cognition of Brahman; but we do not meet with any Vedanta-text, the purport of which is to teach that the devas, and so on, possess bodies.
The two clauses 'to its own substrate' and 'at the present moment' have to be supplied in this second definition also. Consciousness is not eternal. It was further maintained by the purvapakshin that as consciousness is self-established it has no antecedent non-existence and so on, and that this disproves its having an origin.
The conclusion from all this is that, apart from Scripture, the existence of a Lord does not admit of proof. Against all this the Purvapakshin now restates his case as follows: It cannot be gainsaid that the world is something effected, for it is made up of parts. We may state this argument in various technical forms. Not so, we reply.
That this is the meaning of maya in anandamaya we know from Panini IV, 3, 144. But according to Pa. V, 4, 21, maya has also the sense of 'abounding in'; as when we say 'the sacrifice is annamaya, i.e. abounds in food. And this may be its sense in 'anandamaya' also! Not so, the Purvapakshin replies.
They are not, the Purvapakshin holds, for that things auxiliary to knowledge should stand in subordinate relation to a certain state of life would imply the contradiction of permanent and non-permanent obligation.
Beyond the Great there is the Unevolved, beyond the Unevolved there is the Person. Up. The question here arises whether by the 'Unevolved' be or be not meant the Pradhana, as established by Kapila's theory, of which Brahman is not the Self. The Purvapakshin maintains the former alternative.
We deny the conclusion of the Purvapakshin, on the ground of there being abundance of bliss in the highest Brahman, and 'abundance' being one of the possible meanings of -maya. Since bliss such as described in the Taitt.
The Purvapakshin maintains the latter alternative; for, he says, wherever the soul goes it can easily provide itself there with those rudiments. Other reasons supporting this prima facie view will be mentioned and refuted further on.
The individual soul, the Purvapakshin maintains, for that only admits of being exhibited in co-ordination with the word 'all. For the word 'all' denotes the entire world from Brahma down to a blade of grass; and the existence of Brahma and other individual beings is determined by special forms of karman, the root of which is the beginningless Nescience of the individual soul.
Here there arises the doubt whether that person dwelling within the eye and the sun be the individual soul called Aditya, who through accumulation of religious merit possesses lordly power, or the highest Self other than that soul. That individual soul of high merit, the Purvapakshin maintains.
Word Of The Day
Others Looking