Soul is not ATma Sir. Why use categories from christianity that have different import. And then to call Darshana as religion takes the taste out of learning.
What according to you soul is ?? Its definition varies from school to school. Sankhya says Soul is Pure consciousness which is Atma,Adaivata Vedanta says everything part of Brahman and so on. Kindly en light with your wisdom.
Soul is christian category and it is crested and can be destroyed by God. And that is not what Atma is. Shankara Advaita certainly does not say that everything is part of Brahman. Only Atma is Brahman itself. Ayam Atma Brahma. You should be careful in making claims. Rest of is teh MAya's creation. And when Brahman gets inflicted by Maya, as its own, that is SaguNA Brahman.
I have taught Aristotelian and symbolic logic and there us no inductive logic in the. West Aristotelian logic is basic vent diagrams but no rel decision on induction Aristotle believed in doxsa or option as th basic source of knowledge Indian logic does not permit that experience and empirical proof is required
Many of the meanings are altered from the real meanings. For example, Pratyaksha at 11:51 is described as perception which is not true, pratyaksha actually means self evident. Likewise, Anumaan 11:29 (wrongly pronounced as anumana) is a guess not inference. Turk(wrongly pronounced as tarka) at 09:07. I don't know what sources this man is using for this video or who wrote the script, but it sure is wrong and misleading.
dude he is correct, these are the right meaning according to nyaya philosophy. You can't just expect language didn't evolve in more than 2500 years. Now they mean what you say but in nyaya philosphy they mean he says.
Many of casual errors being made by the Acharya 😮 Thanks to the Government in enabling ePG.
Great explanation, no other reference required now at least from an English author 🙏🏼
Indian Philosophy, very well explained. Thanks 🙏🏼
Soul is not ATma Sir. Why use categories from christianity that have different import. And then to call Darshana as religion takes the taste out of learning.
What according to you soul is ?? Its definition varies from school to school. Sankhya says Soul is Pure consciousness which is Atma,Adaivata Vedanta says everything part of Brahman and so on. Kindly en light with your wisdom.
Soul is christian category and it is crested and can be destroyed by God. And that is not what Atma is. Shankara Advaita certainly does not say that everything is part of Brahman. Only Atma is Brahman itself. Ayam Atma Brahma. You should be careful in making claims. Rest of is teh MAya's creation. And when Brahman gets inflicted by Maya, as its own, that is SaguNA Brahman.
Thank you Sir..!!!
Can we get the slideshow of the video which can help in revision
Great explanation sir ...
plz make video on western philosophy...
Read darsanas from Arya samaj they are very good
Very good content and explanation!
V nicely explanation
Is the pdf available of the slides ?
Well presented.
Sir, you said 7 vashishaka categories + 4 Pramanas + 9 Ptameya i20. But you said Naya has 1 categories?
Plz read Dharsanas from Arya samaj
Excellent.
Thank you...we want more knowledge in philosophy in western philosophy if you could upload some video it will be helpful
Thanks Sir...
Good
I have taught Aristotelian and symbolic logic and there us no inductive logic in the. West
Aristotelian logic is basic vent diagrams but no rel decision on induction
Aristotle believed in doxsa or option as th basic source of knowledge
Indian logic does not permit that experience and empirical proof is required
Shared great knowledge
plz make a video on Vedanta
thanks sir
Many of the meanings are altered from the real meanings. For example, Pratyaksha at 11:51 is described as perception which is not true, pratyaksha actually means self evident. Likewise, Anumaan 11:29 (wrongly pronounced as anumana) is a guess not inference. Turk(wrongly pronounced as tarka) at 09:07. I don't know what sources this man is using for this video or who wrote the script, but it sure is wrong and misleading.
dude he is correct, these are the right meaning according to nyaya philosophy. You can't just expect language didn't evolve in more than 2500 years. Now they mean what you say but in nyaya philosphy they mean he says.
Thanks sir