--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajranatha@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Because of this somewhat elitist POV, numerous schools and numerous > > realizers did view Shankara as a fanatic of demon. The dvaita > master > > Madhava called Shankara "a deceitful demon who had perverted the > > teachings of the Brahma-sutra to lead souls astray." > > > > Is it perchance so, that dvaitins perceive "tattvamasi" like > "tattvam asi" and advaitins like "tat tvam asi"? >
No, it ain't. According to Wiki, dvaitins read "tattvamasi" in _chaandogya_ 6.8.7: sa ya eshho.aNimaitadaatmyamida\m+ sarvaM tatsatya\m+ sa aatmaa ***tattvamasi*** shvetaketo iti bhuuya eva maa bhagavaanviGYaapayatviti tathaa somyeti hovaacha || 6\.8\.7|| like "... sa aatmaa + atattvamasi shvetaketo..." Huccome? Well, that seems to require the DN text being written like "aatmaatattvamasi". If it's written like "aatmaa tattvamasi", it's obviously impossible to interpret that to "contain" "atattvamasi". I wonder how them stoopid dvaitins "explain away" the other famous mahaavaakyas, like "ayamaatmaa brahma", "ahaM brahmaasmi", "sarvaM khalvidaM brahma". :o > sa ya eshho.aNimaitadaatmyamida\m+ sarvaM tatsatya\m+ sa > aatmaa ***tattvamasi*** shvetaketo iti bhuuya eva maa > bhagavaanviGYaapayatviti tathaa somyeti hovaacha || 6\.8\.7|| >
