browser icon
You are using an insecure version of your web browser. Please update your browser!
Using an outdated browser makes your computer unsafe. For a safer, faster, more enjoyable user experience, please update your browser today or try a newer browser.

Decoding a Statement.

Posted by on January 25, 2013

The difference between abhitananvyavada and anvitabhidanvada.Which one is accepted in advaita?

Abhihit-anvaya and anvita-abhidana both are different form of understanding. I don’t think we can fix one or the other for advaita.  Though, anvita-abhidana will be more apt.  People use one as the situation demands.

In abhita-anvaya first we understand the statement and then later understand the meaning, which is not understood earlier individually, is understood this way.

 

Anvita-abhidana on the other hand one has to understand the meaning of each word and do anvaya (co-relating) before coming to an understanding of the statement. Like in the statement “he got a shot in the arm”, if we try to understand the word shot without reference to the whole context, we will miss the positive note. and in the statements like “you are that” if we don’t know the implied meaning of each word, we will definetly not be able to understand the proper meaning.

Probably, this is what Bhagavan Bhashyakara wanted to show us, in the kena upanishad bhashya by writing a pada and vakya bhashya.

There is another way of putting this, when dealing with the tatparya (inherent / implied meaning) of a statement we say, padaika-vakyata and vakyaika-padata. where, in padaika-vakyata the meaning of the whole sentence is understood with reference to the words and the other way in the vakyaika-padata.

Comments are closed.