Book Title: Studies in Indian Philosophy
Author(s): Dalsukh Malvania, Nagin J Shah
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

View full book text
Previous | Next

Page 114
________________ On reasoning from apvaya... 87 where ayas is understood to refer indirectly to fire in iron, since iron cannot burn of itself.23 Alternatively, aham may be considered to refer indirectly to the inner self because of properties (guna) said to be shared by this and the primary meaning of the term. Compared to other things, ones egoconsciousness is interior and subtle, thus being like the inner self. Moreover, the awareness which is the inner self is reflected in ego-consciousness. 24 In sum, reasoning from anvaya and vyatireka serves to discriminate between what is and is not the self as well as to show what meanings may be attributed to given terms. In addition, terms like aham, tvam cannot reter directly to the self. Instead, they refer first to beings with ego-consciousness and only secondarily to the pure inner self. In light of the above, let us consider now how Sureśvara interprets a mahāvākya such as (7). He says a person who has reasoned from anvaya and vyatireka with respect to the terms of such a sentence and the meanings of these terms can understand from the sentence that he is the ultimate being Brahman. Once he has eliminated the distinction of. I and mine,' and understood that he is Brahman, he has attained a state beyond the scope of speech and thought.25 That is, (7) teaches that there is no distinction between oneself and the ultimate Self, a teaching which can be understood properly only by one who has reasoned from anvaya and vyatireka. For (7) to be understood in the manner shown, tad and tvam respectively should here refer to the ultimate Self spoken of earlier in the same text and to the inner self. Linked in (7), the two terms serve to preclude possible referents of each other : for tvam, and individual susceptible of suffering; for tad, one that is not identical with the inner self. In this respect, (7) is like (10b), where nilam linked with utpalm cannot refer to just any blue thing, and utpalm linked with nilam cannot refer to just any lotus.Both these sentences are of the type ‘X is Y,' in which one term may be a quality-word. According to an analysis known already from Jain Education International For Private & Personal Use Only www.jainelibrary.org

Loading...

Page Navigation
1 ... 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352