Guest guest Posted August 31, 2004 Report Share Posted August 31, 2004 Dear Bhagavatas, An interesting email from my father i wanted to share with all. Adiyen Ramanuja dasan Aravindan ****************************************** In the latest issues of Kumudam Bhakti, we are translating Brahma sutras which deal with Buddhism. As you may know the second chapter of BS is called Avirodha Adhyaya and the sutras therein argue how other philosophies like Lokayata, Jaina, Sankya, Yoga Nyaya,,Vaishshika, Pasupatha are not supported by the Vedas .I thought you will like the arguments of BS against Buddhism as I found them a delight to my rational mind and hence this letter. First I will give the English translation of what we have written as introduction to the Adhikaranam dealing with Buddhism and then I will try to give you a translation of Sri Bhashya to give you a sample of the great intellect of Sri Ramanuja. Let us understand the essentials of Buddhism as an introduction to the Sutras that follow. Buddhism is divided into two main branches, Mahayana(great Path) and Hinayana(lower path) Hinayana has again two branches called Vaibhashika and Southrandhika. Mahayana is divided into Yogachara or Vignanavada and Madhyamika. Two thousand five hundred years ago(circa BC 563-483)lived Gautama Buddha one of the outstanding thinkers of mankind. His life history is fairly known to all of us. What he realised as the fundamental truth is this. In the universe every thing is changing every moment. Even the rocks and mountains change, slowly but surely. There in nothing that does not change. So, anything that changes cannot be true, meaning permanent What is true is change and not objects of change. So nothing exists.(if you slice every moment into infinite parts and say that in every one of those parts things change, you will realise this) This Sunya philosophy (nihilism) based on Khana Bhanga Nyayam, can be translated in English as under. Everything is changing and nothing is constantly existing. Since nothing has constant existence, it follows that nothing is real, or, only Nothing is real. Thus, nothing in fact exists. On the basis of the above principle of transience, Buddhists are called Sunyavadhis or Kshanikas. Let us now see the differences among the four branches. The external world of objects, thro our senses, becomes our internal world How can we say that our internal world is the exact replica of the external world?. Our senses may alter the external world and present to us an internal world, which may be totally different from the external world. Also we have said that every thing changes every moment . So both the external and internal worlds are changing, moment to moment. The Vaibhashikas say that though the external and internal worlds are changing every moment, for the duration of that one moment they are real, and they exist. The Southrandhikas say that the external world can only be guessed by us, since we only perceive the internal world and we can only deduct that the external world is a replica of the internal world. Since both say that the world is real, even though for a moment only, the Hinayanis are called Realists. Yogacharas say that by the logic of transience external world does not exist. Only the internal world or our thoughts are real. Madhyamikas go one step further and say by the same logic of transience, the internal world or our thoughts are also unreal ,since thoughts are also changing every moment.. Theirs is the ultimate nihilism. Now I will give a sample of Sri Bhashya. BS 2-2-30 Sarvada Anupapades cha. Sarvada- In every way. Anupapades cha-(Sunyavada) Is not tenable or appropriate.. The Buddhists say thus. Gnana, or thought and external world does not exist This non-existence is the’ ‘reality’ If an object exists, there must be a cause. For the pot to exist clay is the cause. The problem is, we cannot deduct the cause for anything. Because we are not able to see anything created from another thing. Even clay has to be kneaded etc for becoming the pot and hence how can we say for sure, that the pot is created by clay. So we say that if there is an object we cannot say for sure that it has been created from another existing object >From non existence no existing thing can be created. Out of nothing can anything come?( like in a Sai baba trick!) Clay gets completely destroyed when pot is made. When clay gets destroyed there is nothing left . or only nothing is left. So pot cannot be created out of nothing. So we say the pot does not exist. There is a third possibility. From pot itself pot can come. But this is no creation. We have proved that an existing thing cannot be created from another existing thing or a non existing thing In other words nothing can exist!( Do you follow this logic? Buddha must have had a very sharp mind indeed) Ramanuja says in reply thus What do you say? Do you say things exist? Or Doyou say things don’t exist ? or do you say they exist and don’t exist ? None of the three assumptions will lead to Sunyavada. If you say things exist.. We have already proved that existence and non existence is the knowledge or gnanam of status change. We see a pot and after someone removes the pot or it gets destroyed to become pieces, we don’t see the pot - this is a mere status change. So how can you say that nothing exists? Sunyavada fails. If by means of some logic or Pramana, you want to prove that everything is Sunyam, then since that logic or Pramana is also included in the statement that every thing is Sunya, you can never prove your theory of Sunyavada. Are you confused to such a degree that you wish I stop? I stop here. Affly, Appa. >arvind <rwind_raj >rwind_raj >"rajagop_s" <rajagop_s >punyajanam pics >14 Aug 2004 22:21:09 -0700 > >punyajanam pics >If you did not see the full album please click here >http://f2.pg.photos./ph/rwind_raj/album?.tok=phrmZlBB46hp4Qsm&.dir=/48\ 99&.src=ph New and Improved Mail - Send 10MB messages! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 1, 2004 Report Share Posted September 1, 2004 Dear Sriman, Indeed it is very interesting. Just out of curiosity.... Can you also tell what is the reply of Sankara and Madhwa to the Sunyavada of Buddhists. Thanks & Regards Mohan Ramanujadasan. On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 Arvind Rajagopalan wrote : > >Dear Bhagavatas, > >An interesting email from my father i wanted to share >with all. > >Adiyen Ramanuja dasan > >Aravindan >****************************************** >In the latest issues of Kumudam Bhakti, we are >translating Brahma sutras which deal with Buddhism. As >you may know the second chapter of BS is called >Avirodha Adhyaya and the sutras therein argue how >other philosophies like Lokayata, Jaina, Sankya, Yoga >Nyaya,,Vaishshika, Pasupatha are not supported by the >Vedas .I thought you will like the arguments of BS >against Buddhism as I found them a delight to my >rational mind and hence this letter. > >First I will give the English translation of what we >have written as introduction to the Adhikaranam >dealing with Buddhism and then I will try to give you >a translation of Sri Bhashya to give you a sample of >the great intellect of Sri Ramanuja. > > > >Let us understand the essentials of Buddhism as an >introduction to the Sutras that follow. > >Buddhism is divided into two main branches, >Mahayana(great Path) and Hinayana(lower path) Hinayana >has again two branches called Vaibhashika and >Southrandhika. Mahayana is divided into Yogachara or >Vignanavada and Madhyamika. > > > >Two thousand five hundred years ago(circa BC >563-483)lived Gautama Buddha one of the outstanding >thinkers of mankind. His life history is fairly known >to all of us. > > > >What he realised as the fundamental truth is this. In >the universe every thing is changing every moment. >Even the rocks and mountains change, slowly but >surely. There in nothing that does not change. > >So, anything that changes cannot be true, meaning >permanent What is true is change and not objects of >change. So nothing exists.(if you slice every moment >into infinite parts and say that in every one of those >parts things change, you will realise this) > > > >This Sunya philosophy (nihilism) based on Khana >Bhanga Nyayam, can be translated in English as under. > > > >Everything is changing and nothing is constantly >existing. Since nothing has constant existence, it >follows that nothing is real, or, only Nothing is >real. Thus, nothing in fact exists. > > > >On the basis of the above principle of transience, >Buddhists are called Sunyavadhis or Kshanikas. > >Let us now see the differences among the four >branches. > > > >The external world of objects, thro our senses, >becomes our internal world How can we say that our >internal world is the exact replica of the external >world?. > >Our senses may alter the external world and present to >us an internal world, which may be totally different > from the external world. Also we have said that every >thing changes every moment . So both the external and >internal worlds are changing, moment to moment. > > > >The Vaibhashikas say that though the external and >internal worlds are changing every moment, for the >duration of that one moment they are real, and they >exist. > >The Southrandhikas say that the external world can >only be guessed by us, since we only perceive the >internal world and we can only deduct that the >external world is a replica of the internal world. > >Since both say that the world is real, even though for >a moment only, the Hinayanis are called Realists. > >Yogacharas say that by the logic of transience >external world does not exist. Only the internal world >or our thoughts are real. > >Madhyamikas go one step further and say by the same >logic of transience, the internal world or our >thoughts are also unreal ,since thoughts are also >changing every moment.. Theirs is the ultimate >nihilism. > > > > > >Now I will give a sample of Sri Bhashya. > > > >BS 2-2-30 Sarvada Anupapades cha. > >Sarvada- In every way. > >Anupapades cha-(Sunyavada) Is not tenable or >appropriate.. > > > >The Buddhists say thus. > > > >Gnana, or thought and external world does not exist >This non-existence is the’ ‘reality’ > >If an object exists, there must be a cause. For the >pot to exist clay is the cause. > >The problem is, we cannot deduct the cause for >anything. Because we are not able to see anything >created from another thing. Even clay has to be >kneaded etc for becoming the pot and hence how can we >say for sure, that the pot is created by clay. So we >say that if there is an object we cannot say for sure >that it has been created from another existing object > > > > From non existence no existing thing can be created. >Out of nothing can anything come?( like in a Sai baba >trick!) Clay gets completely destroyed when pot is >made. When clay gets destroyed there is nothing left . >or only nothing is left. So pot cannot be created out >of nothing. So we say the pot does not exist. > > > >There is a third possibility. From pot itself pot can >come. But this is no creation. > > > > We have proved that an existing thing cannot be >created from another existing thing or a non existing >thing In other words nothing can exist!( Do you >follow this logic? Buddha must have had a very sharp >mind indeed) > > > >Ramanuja says in reply thus > > > >What do you say? Do you say things exist? Or Doyou say >things don’t exist ? or do you say they exist and >don’t exist ? None of the three assumptions will lead >to Sunyavada. > > > >If you say things exist.. We have already proved that >existence and non existence is the knowledge or >gnanam of status change. We see a pot and after >someone removes the pot or it gets destroyed to become >pieces, we don’t see the pot - this is a mere status >change. So how can you say that nothing exists? >Sunyavada fails. > > > >If by means of some logic or Pramana, you want to >prove that everything is Sunyam, then since that logic >or Pramana is also included in the statement that >every thing is Sunya, you can never prove your theory >of Sunyavada. > > > >Are you confused to such a degree that you wish I >stop? I stop here. > >Affly, > >Appa. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >arvind <rwind_raj > >rwind_raj > >"rajagop_s" <rajagop_s > >punyajanam pics > >14 Aug 2004 22:21:09 -0700 > > > >punyajanam pics > >If you did not see the full album please click here > >http://f2.pg.photos./ph/rwind_raj/album?.tok=phrmZlBB46hp4Qsm&.dir=/48\ 99&.src=ph > > > > > > > > > >New and Improved Mail - Send 10MB messages! > > > > > >azhwAr emberumAnAr jeeyAr thiruvadigalE saranam > > Links > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 2, 2004 Report Share Posted September 2, 2004 Dear Sri Mohan, Please find my father' email providing Shankara's view towards Buddhism Adiyen Ramanuja Dasan Aravindan *********************************************** I will give Shankaras view as it is for the Sutra 2 2 30 To be brief, from every point of view that this Buddhist doctrine may be examined for finding out some justification, it will break down like a well sunk in sand;and we d onot find any least logic here.Hence also all behaviour based on the Buddhist scriptures is unjustfiable.Moreover Buddha exposed his own incoherence in talk when he instructed the three mutually contradictory theories of the existence of external objects,existence of consciousness and absolute nihilism;or he showed his malevolence towards all creatures,acting under the delusion that these creatures would get confused by imbibing contradictory viewsThe idea is that the Buddhist view should be abjured in every way by all, who desire the highest good In the previous sutra Shankara is logic personified. The Sutra is 'Kshnikathwa cha' meaning 'The ego -conciousness cannot be the abode , for it is momentary.' If you assume ego-conciousness to be the abode of all that you feel( not the soul)that too has no stability since it is also momentary.For, unless there be some principle running thro every thing and abiding thro all three periods of time(past, present and future) or some unchanging witness of all,there can be no human dealing involving remembrance, recognition etc,which are contingent on past impressions that are stored up in conformity with environment,time and causation If ego- consciousness be assumed tobe unchanging by nature,your doctrine of momentariness will be set at nought. It strange that in Sri Bhashya this sutra is not there. Ramanuja says that the Buddhist view,namely though the pot does not exist its mental impression exists is not tenable since in practice we dont find a situation when knowledge alone is existing with out its object, In other words knowledge requires an object. Later I will tell about Madhva's To understand fully you should spend some time with me-The Kalaksheba mode is the best way to unravel these coplex logics. ************************************** --- Mohan Ramanujan <mohan_ramanujan wrote: > Dear Sriman, > > Indeed it is very interesting. Just out of > curiosity.... Can you also tell what is the reply of > Sankara and Madhwa to the Sunyavada of Buddhists. > > Thanks & Regards > Mohan Ramanujadasan. > > > > > On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 Arvind Rajagopalan wrote : > > > >Dear Bhagavatas, > > > >An interesting email from my father i wanted to > share > >with all. > > > >Adiyen Ramanuja dasan > > > >Aravindan > >****************************************** > >In the latest issues of Kumudam Bhakti, we are > >translating Brahma sutras which deal with Buddhism. > As > >you may know the second chapter of BS is called > >Avirodha Adhyaya and the sutras therein argue how > >other philosophies like Lokayata, Jaina, Sankya, > Yoga > >Nyaya,,Vaishshika, Pasupatha are not supported by > the > >Vedas .I thought you will like the arguments of BS > >against Buddhism as I found them a delight to my > >rational mind and hence this letter. > > > >First I will give the English translation of what > we > >have written as introduction to the Adhikaranam > >dealing with Buddhism and then I will try to give > you > >a translation of Sri Bhashya to give you a sample > of > >the great intellect of Sri Ramanuja. > > > > > > > >Let us understand the essentials of Buddhism as an > >introduction to the Sutras that follow. > > > >Buddhism is divided into two main branches, > >Mahayana(great Path) and Hinayana(lower path) > Hinayana > >has again two branches called Vaibhashika and > >Southrandhika. Mahayana is divided into Yogachara > or > >Vignanavada and Madhyamika. > > > > > > > >Two thousand five hundred years ago(circa BC > >563-483)lived Gautama Buddha one of the outstanding > >thinkers of mankind. His life history is fairly > known > >to all of us. > > > > > > > >What he realised as the fundamental truth is this. > In > >the universe every thing is changing every moment. > >Even the rocks and mountains change, slowly but > >surely. There in nothing that does not change. > > > >So, anything that changes cannot be true, meaning > >permanent What is true is change and not objects of > >change. So nothing exists.(if you slice every > moment > >into infinite parts and say that in every one of > those > >parts things change, you will realise this) > > > > > > > >This Sunya philosophy (nihilism) based on Khana > >Bhanga Nyayam, can be translated in English as > under. > > > > > > > >Everything is changing and nothing is constantly > >existing. Since nothing has constant existence, it > >follows that nothing is real, or, only Nothing is > >real. Thus, nothing in fact exists. > > > > > > > >On the basis of the above principle of transience, > >Buddhists are called Sunyavadhis or Kshanikas. > > > >Let us now see the differences among the four > >branches. > > > > > > > >The external world of objects, thro our senses, > >becomes our internal world How can we say that our > >internal world is the exact replica of the external > >world?. > > > >Our senses may alter the external world and present > to > >us an internal world, which may be totally > different > > from the external world. Also we have said that > every > >thing changes every moment . So both the external > and > >internal worlds are changing, moment to moment. > > > > > > > >The Vaibhashikas say that though the external and > >internal worlds are changing every moment, for the > >duration of that one moment they are real, and they > >exist. > > > >The Southrandhikas say that the external world can > >only be guessed by us, since we only perceive the > >internal world and we can only deduct that the > >external world is a replica of the internal world. > > > >Since both say that the world is real, even though > for > >a moment only, the Hinayanis are called Realists. > > > >Yogacharas say that by the logic of transience > >external world does not exist. Only the internal > world > >or our thoughts are real. > > > >Madhyamikas go one step further and say by the same > >logic of transience, the internal world or our > >thoughts are also unreal ,since thoughts are also > >changing every moment.. Theirs is the ultimate > >nihilism. > > > > > > > > > > > >Now I will give a sample of Sri Bhashya. > > > > > > > >BS 2-2-30 Sarvada Anupapades cha. > > > >Sarvada- In every way. > > > >Anupapades cha-(Sunyavada) Is not tenable or > >appropriate.. > > > > > > > >The Buddhists say thus. > > > > > > > >Gnana, or thought and external world does not exist > >This non-existence is the’ ‘reality’ > > > >If an object exists, there must be a cause. For the > >pot to exist clay is the cause. > > > >The problem is, we cannot deduct the cause for > >anything. Because we are not able to see anything > >created from another thing. Even clay has to be > >kneaded etc for becoming the pot and hence how can > we > >say for sure, that the pot is created by clay. So > we > >say that if there is an object we cannot say for > sure > >that it has been created from another existing > object > > > > > > > > From non existence no existing thing can be > created. > >Out of nothing can anything come?( like in a Sai > baba > >trick!) Clay gets completely destroyed when pot is > >made. When clay gets destroyed there is nothing > left . > >or only nothing is left. So pot cannot be created > out > >of nothing. So we say the pot does not exist. > > > > > === message truncated === Y! Messenger - Communicate in real time. Download now. http://messenger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.