dvaita-visistadvaita

[Guest guest]

Dear friends,

 

There is a good amount of discussion in this forum regarding the two

philosophies dvaita and visistadvaita. It is doubted if Srimadacharya has

considered Visistadvaita as purva paksha. as I wrote earlier Ramanuja's

interpretation of Brahmasutras is one of the philosophies that were refuted by

Srimadacharya.

 

In the 'Anuvyakhyana' Sri Madhvacharya has dealt with Visistadvaita as

purvapaksha in the following slokas:

 

1)the interpretation of the upanishadic stt 'vacharambhanam...' as given in

Visistadvaita is stated to be incorrect in the sloka 'vacharambhdam tu sanketyam

nAma syat vikritam bahu' while dealing with 'prakrityadhikaranam'-

(2)The Pancharatra is considered to be a complete authority by Srimadacharya

while it is stated in Sribhashya in one place as not conforming to vedas . It

is to be taken that only part of Panchratra is accepted in visistadvita as

authoritative. This contention of Ramanuja is refuted and the authoritativeness

of it is established in the stanzas starting with

'srutismriteetihasanAmsamastyemna virodhsatah...' and ending with 'pancharatram

cha vEdascha vidyayaiva dvidhEyatE....'.

srimadacharya states that Pancharatra is a complete authority in the slokas

starting withtItihasanAm samastyEna virodhata;h ...' and ending with '

pancharAtram cha vEdAscha vidyayaivadvidhEyatE...' while dealing with the sutra

'vipratishEdhAccha'(2-2-46)

(3)In 'kAmachArAdhikaranam' the TaittarIyopanishd statement 'tE ye shatam

mAnushyagandharvanAmanandA:h....srOtriyasya chAkamahatasya...' is dealt with in

detail in the 'anuvyakhyana' taking those who consider 'ananda' of all jivas

in mukti as the same as that of the Lord as 'purvapaksha' in the sloka '

taratamyam phalE nO chEdbrahmAdInAm katham sruti:h...' and the sutra 'upamardam

cha' (3-4-16) is explained to prove that there is 'Anandatarartmya' in Moksha .

The chapter ends with the sloka 'srutiyuktibalAdEva tAratamyam vibhavyatE

muktAvapi tata:h kE(s)tra virodham kartumIshatE'. Thisportion is thus a reply to

Visistadvaitin's theory of eqality of Jivas in mukti.

(4)The theory that Sisupala and others entered Mukti by constant 'dvesha' of

Sri Hari is also refuted by Srimadacharya in the sloka 'srutivirOdhEna sva

virodhena chAnjasA bahvAgamavirOdhat cha na dveshanmuktivAchakam(sutra

3-4-34,41) .

(I have just given these for information of those who like to know where

Srimadacharya has taken Visisatadvaita as purvapaksha. The explanation of these

portions may be studied in Srimannyayasudha and the notes in Parimala.

..

As stated Sri Keshava Rao it is desirable not to get into discussions on

these subjects .If our rs can note that there are variations of such

major issues between the two systems and follow without keeping any doubts Sri

Madhvacharya's 'Tattvavada' I consider my efforts as fruitful.

 

If members of Visistadvaita or Advaita back ground desire to know about dvaita

they should be welcome. But this forum should not be a base for comparative

analysis of the ssystems as quite a few members may not follow it and their

faith in Dvaita should not be shaken.

 

'AchArya Srimadacharya santu mE janmajanmani'

 

Bannur.R

 

 

 

 

Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place.

Shopping.

[Guest guest]

Dear friends,

 

As suggested by Sri Ramachandra rao, I guess we should move our

inter-scholastic issues to a personal group of emails. Hence from now on

please delete the while answering

inter-scholastic issues.

 

thanks

 

Krishna Kalale

 

 

RAMACHANDRA RAO [sMTP:bkrrao]

Friday, December 03, 1999 7:13 PM

 

dvaita-visistadvaita

 

 

Dear friends,

 

There is a good amount of discussion in this forum regarding the two

philosophies dvaita and visistadvaita. It is doubted if Srimadacharya has

considered Visistadvaita as purva paksha. as I wrote earlier Ramanuja's

interpretation of Brahmasutras is one of the philosophies that were

refuted by Srimadacharya.

 

In the 'Anuvyakhyana' Sri Madhvacharya has dealt with Visistadvaita as

purvapaksha in the following slokas:

 

1)the interpretation of the upanishadic stt 'vacharambhanam...' as given in

Visistadvaita is stated to be incorrect in the sloka 'vacharambhdam tu

sanketyam nAma syat vikritam bahu' while dealing with

'prakrityadhikaranam'-

(2)The Pancharatra is considered to be a complete authority by

Srimadacharya while it is stated in Sribhashya in one place as not

conforming to vedas . It is to be taken that only part of Panchratra is

accepted in visistadvita as authoritative. This contention of Ramanuja is

refuted and the authoritativeness of it is established in the stanzas

starting with 'srutismriteetihasanAmsamastyemna virodhsatah...' and ending

with 'pancharatram cha vEdascha vidyayaiva dvidhEyatE....'.

srimadacharya states that Pancharatra is a complete authority in the

slokas starting withtItihasanAm samastyEna virodhata;h ...' and ending with

' pancharAtram cha vEdAscha vidyayaivadvidhEyatE...' while dealing with the

sutra 'vipratishEdhAccha'(2-2-46)

(3)In 'kAmachArAdhikaranam' the TaittarIyopanishd statement 'tE ye shatam

mAnushyagandharvanAmanandA:h....srOtriyasya chAkamahatasya...' is dealt

with in detail in the 'anuvyakhyana' taking those who consider 'ananda'

of all jivas in mukti as the same as that of the Lord as 'purvapaksha' in

the sloka ' taratamyam phalE nO chEdbrahmAdInAm katham sruti:h...' and the

sutra 'upamardam cha' (3-4-16) is explained to prove that there is

'Anandatarartmya' in Moksha . The chapter ends with the sloka

'srutiyuktibalAdEva tAratamyam vibhavyatE muktAvapi tata:h kE(s)tra

virodham kartumIshatE'. Thisportion is thus a reply to Visistadvaitin's

theory of eqality of Jivas in mukti.

(4)The theory that Sisupala and others entered Mukti by constant 'dvesha'

of Sri Hari is also refuted by Srimadacharya in the sloka 'srutivirOdhEna

sva virodhena chAnjasA bahvAgamavirOdhat cha na dveshanmuktivAchakam(sutra

3-4-34,41) .

(I have just given these for information of those who like to know

where Srimadacharya has taken Visisatadvaita as purvapaksha. The

explanation of these portions may be studied in Srimannyayasudha and the

notes in Parimala.

..

As stated Sri Keshava Rao it is desirable not to get into discussions on

these subjects .If our rs can note that there are variations of

such major issues between the two systems and follow without keeping any

doubts Sri Madhvacharya's 'Tattvavada' I consider my efforts as fruitful.

 

If members of Visistadvaita or Advaita back ground desire to know about

dvaita they should be welcome. But this forum should not be a base for

comparative analysis of the ssystems as quite a few members may not follow

it and their faith in Dvaita should not be shaken.

 

'AchArya Srimadacharya santu mE janmajanmani'

 

Bannur.R

 

 

 

 

Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place.

Shopping.

<< File: ATT00000.html >>