MadhvAcharyar's Theory of Difference Between JivAtmans

[Guest guest]

Re: MadhvAcharyar's Theory of Difference Between JivAtmans

 

Dear Bhagavatas,

 

The Dvaitan's questioning of the Visistadvaitic view is illogical.

There is no need to explain the difference in Karmas, as it is

merely an axiom of Vedanta . The Visistadvaitic view as

propounded by Sri Ramanuja and Sri Vedanta Desika is Amalatva

(incorruptible and pure.) The rebuttal is based on logic, but it can

also be thought of as inference by analogy, which is an authorized

pramAna. Note, I made a conscious effort in the previous sentence to

not to use the word my (as my ahamkaara would like to); I am sure that

such rebuttals were already put forth by our great Acharyas. I

am merely restating what they have already said in a slightly different

way.

 

The Rebuttal:

 

1. The process of Srsti (manifestation) and pralaya (dissolution) is anadi

(beginning less.) Mathematically, we can represent this process by the

interval (-infinity, infinity).

2. Given an interval of this form, at any point x in (-Infinity, Infinity)

neither

past nor the future is bounded.

3. Given this, it is illogical for the Dvaitan to ask the question, when and

why did the differences between JivAtmans originate? Such questions,

by default, imply a beginning.

4. The karma associated with Baddhas has no origin. Even if we

suppose at some point y in

(-Infinity, Infinity) the karmas of JivAtmans were identical. Then, given

free will, since the past is unbounded, it is possible that there was some

point z in (-Infinity, y) at which point the Karma of JivAtmans were not

identical. Such a question results in an infinite loop; hence the questions

such as why and when, as posed by the Dvaitan must imply a beginning

by default.

5. The concept of a beginning contradicts the basic axiom of Vedanta,

that the process is beginning less. Thus, the Vasitadvatic view is

Amalatva.

 

Adiyen,

Venkataramanan (Venkat)

KrishNArpaNam