Consciousness in visishtadvaita

[john grimes]

Martin,
   Your suspicion about DBJ and Svarupa jnana reminds me of comments Prof.
R Balasubramanian used to make about it in Madras years ago. If you can get
a copy, see R. Balasubramanian's "Some Problems in the Epistemology and
Metaphysics of Ramanuja" (Prof. L. Venkataratnam Endowment Lectures
1975-76) reprinted in Journal of Madras University volume L, no 2, July
1978.) Without choosing sides, Advaitins see certain logical consequences
of this 2-pronged jnana and Visistadvaitins do not.
John Grimes

>Dear Mani,
>
>Thanks for your reply. However, I wished to know specifically if the two
>kinds of knowledge (svarupa- and dharmabhuta-) are mentioned explicitly in
>any of Ramanuja's writings. Do you know?
>
>>In Visishtadvaita, there are two kinds of consciosness,
>>attributive and substantive.  [...]
>>Fundamentally, the individual self is a "knower", not mere
>>knowledge as held in schools of Advaita.  The substantive
>>consciousness is how the self knows itself [...]
>>The attributive consciousness is how the self knows things
>>other than itself.  [...]
>>So van Buitenen's statement is correct.
>
>But it seems to me that what you just said above contradicts van Buitenen's
>statement. You say (like Desika et al.) that there is a substantive
>consciousness, different from the attributive consciousness. Surely this
>means that the *substance* of the jiva is consciousness? Else what is the
>meaning of "substantive"?
>
>Advaita and visishtadvaita would then disagree only in as much as the latter
>accepts a second form of consciousness (the attributive), the possession of
>which makes the jiva a knower (jnatr) and not mere knowledge (jnanamatra).
>But they would agree on the substance or essence of the jiva being jnana,
>whereas van Buitenen in his commentary denies this and seems to say that
>Ramanuja accepted *only* dharmabhutajnana. Or am I missing something?
>
>Best regards,
>Martin Gansten