Bhaghavath Gita lectures by Sri Sathyadhyana Theertha, Chapter 6, Part 2

[Guest guest]

hari sarvottamma, vaayu jiivottamma

 

shrii gurubhyo namaha

 

shrii kR^iShNa parabrahmane namaha

 

Ramanujacharya, author of Sree bhasya on Brahma Suthras, has condemned

samkaras theory that the beginning less avidhya (Maya-ignorance-illusion)has

covered Brahma chaithanya (ananda-jnana) with the following objections:

 

1. Asrayanapapaththi, where from this avidhya has come & bound (illusion of

samsara)? It could not have come from jeeva, because jeeva himself is a

produce of avidhya, then we have to say that avidhya was in Brahma & caused

illusion. It is improbable. Brahma & caused illusion. It is improbable.

Brahma by nature svaprakasa sujnana cannot become an abode for avidhya.

Therefore the theory of avidhya is false.

 

2. Thirodhananupapaththi: Avidhya cannot cover up Brahma in any way. It

cannot cover Brahma or his ananda, or his svaprakasa Brahma is not liable

for coverage. Therefore the theory of avidhya is false.

 

3. Svarupanupapathihi: If avidhya is sathya (real) since adhvaitha

maintains only Brahma is sathya. Everything else is Mithya. This theory

will be disproved. If avidhya is Mithya, then it cannot cover anything. If

avidhya is not different from Brahma, then it will be permanent as brahma &

the question of Mukthi will not arise. Therefore, the theory of avidhya is

false.

 

4.Anirvachaniyanpapaththi: Advaithies say that avidhya is neither sathya

(real) nor mithya (unreal). This is wrong. Since it is not known that such

a thing as neither real, nor non real exists, it is false like the son of a

barren woman.

 

5. Pramananupapaththi since there is nothing to prove such a thing as one

that can cover brahma exists the theory of maya is false.

 

6. Nivartha ka nupapaththi: Advaithies say by the knowledge of nirguna

Brahma, avidhya will be removed. Since existence of Nirguna brahma himself

is unknown jnana of such a nirguna brahma is still unknown. Hence maya vada

is false.

 

7. Nivruthanupapaththi: It is false that by mere removal of avidhya, one

will have Mukthi. It does not run way by mere obtaining jnana. Avidhya can

be removed only by the grace of God. Therefore, the theory that avidhya is

in samsara & its removal is Mukthi is false.

 

Many authors & western scholars like the bought, urque hart, otto etc...

have said that Ramanuja repudiation is reasonable, good, & very effective,

in rejecting Sankaracharya's Mayavada.

 

The following is the description given by otto: " And now begins the

struggle of proposition against proposition, assert-ion. against assertion,

a struggle in the truest sense, breast to breast knee to knee the struggle

of the utmost intensity without pause to make breath, until limb by limb the

opponent is over come & crushed to the earth. " Siddhanta of Ramanuja by

otto.

 

Question: Swamiji, you have pointed out all these defects taking for

granted that there is only brahma chaithanya, why we should not say " I "

which is known to us as our jeeva it is for that jeeva, the bondage of

avidhya; removal of bondage is for jeeva & Mukthi which is Ikya with brahma

is also for us?

 

Answer: Just as it is not possible to swim, carrying a big stone along

within so also, when you have accepted advaitha system that only Brahma

chaithanya is sathya, every thing other than brahma chaithanya is mithya you

cannot establish nature of Mukthi. Saying that both bandha & Mukthi are for

the thing called " I " which is very much agree able to dhvaithies. But

according to advaitha, it is incorrect. Because according to advaitha, the

thing called " I " ahankaravisista chaithanya i.e. Jada ahankara Brahma

chaithanya. Whent hese two join together, they form jeeva " I " which becomes

perceptible to jnana (knowledge).. In this combination to whom Bandhana &

for whom Mukthi? if it is said that it is for chaithanya Mukthi should

happen (i.e. the removal of avidhya from chaithanya). We have already

proved that to vyapitha Brahma chaithanya neither bandha nor mukthi can

happen. If you say, mukthi is for Ahankara or Anthah Karana, then a stone

also should have bandha & mukthi, but if you say the relationship of brahma

is for anthahkarna which is a product of ahankara, but stone has no

relationship with brahma chaithanya svaprakasa Asanga Brahma chaithanya,

svaprakasa Asanga, has the same kind of relationship with both stone &

anthakarana & other jadadhra vyas. 2. Nirvishesha Brahma by any means

cannot become one that experiences pleasure & pain i.e. a jeeva called " I " .

Therefore if you accept that " I " Jeeva is not brahma but we ordinary beings,

then samsara & avidhya can happen to us & Mukthi (freedom from samsara &

avidhya) also can happen to us, you said that for the thing called " I "

Brahmaikya & Mukthi. What exactly you mean?

 

Question: Giving up the jeevabhava of " I " to attain Ikya with brahma who is

chinmathra.

 

 

TO BE

CONTINUED.................................................................

 

Lectures on Bhaghavath Geetha (Dhwaitha Siddhantha Vaijayanthi) by H. H.

Sri Sathya Dhyana Thirtha Sri Padhangalavaru, Uttradhi Mutt

Translated into English by Sri Krishnamurthy

 

Published by Sri M. R. Krishnamurthy & Sri M. N. Gururaja Rao of Mumbai

 

Printed at:

Parishree Printers

100/3 Nagappa Street

Palace Guttahalli

Bangalore 5600 04

Telephone # (80)36828

 

All rights remain with Uttradhi Mutt, Basavangudi, Bangalore 560004

Permission was given to post it in this list by the Uttradhi Mutt

authorities & by Sri SathyAthma Thirtha Swamiji of Uttradhi Mutt.

 

bhAratIramaNamukhyaprANA.ntargata shri kR^iShNArpanamasthu

.............................................................................