Sri Madhwa Vijaya- Chapter 15- 1 to 25, Part 1

[Guest guest]

shrI hari vAyu gurubhyo namaha

 

On the occasion of Sri Madhwa navami, I would like to post Sri Madhwa Vijaya, Chapter 15

 

Source: Sumadhwavijaya of Narayana Pandithacharya, English translation by Sri D R Vasudeva Rao (DRV) Srimadananda theertha publication, Vishakapatnam, & Prof G V Nadgouda, (GVN) Published by Anandtirtha Pratishtana, PPVP, Bangalore.

 

shrImatkavi kulatilaka shrImatatrivikrama paNDitAchAryasuta shrImannArAyaNapANDitAchArya virachite shrImatsumadhvavijaye mAhakAvye AnandA~Nge pa~nchadashaH sargaH

 

bhUyobodhastato bhUyo vyAchakhyau bhAShyamabhdutam.h |

 

grAme grAmINasAmAnye vasaMstatrAmarAlaye || 1 ||

 

After staying at the Vishnumangala temple, Sri Purnaprajna lived in that village of pAdikudel in another temple common to the people of the village & again expounded the wonderful Brahmasutra bhAshya. (DRV)

 

 

 

 

parapaxarathArUDhaM kharatarkamahAyudham.h |

 

trivikramAryaM so.apashyat.h prativIramivAgrataH || 2 ||

 

Madhwacharya saw Trivikramacharya like an enemy soldier who has boarded the chariot of rival tenet & who has the great weapon of hard reasoning. (DRV)

 

 

 

 

tadA tadAnanAmbhojAd.h vR^ittopanyAsabhAratI |

 

senA senAgrahA divyA shibirAdiva niryayau || 3 ||

 

While that Trivikramacharya was carefully listening, the wonderful speech of the form of exposition along with the determination of proving the lordship of the world to Lord Vishnu (who is the cause of the creation of the world) came out of the lotus like face of that Sri Madhwa like the fourfold army coming out of the tent with the determination of bringing victory to the king. (DRV)

 

 

 

 

nAtyatvarA nAtirayA na ssvalantI nirantarA |

 

anAnAvayavetyeva davIyobhiH pratarkitA || 4 ||

 

His superb exposition of the scriptures was neither slow or fast or faltering, which was continuous & which was guessed by the people (sitting) at a distance as not at all having many parts (such as sound, letter & others) came out like an army not having the limbs (such as elephants, chariots & others). (DRV)

 

 

 

 

sUtrasyandanavR^indADhyA durvArashrutivAraNA |

 

sUpapattimahApattirvichitrasmR^itisAptikA || 5 ||

 

The speech rich with the groups of chariots of Brahmasutras, of elephant of irrefutable vedas, of big infantry of good reasonings & of wonderful horses of smritis came out of his mouth (like an army consisting of groups of chariots, irrresitible elephants, big infantry & wonderful horses coming out of the tent. (DRV)

 

 

 

 

vardhitormiharipreShThA supayodharasusvanA |

 

savitAnaprakAshArthA sAgarI shrIrivAparA || 6 ||

 

His unique lectures in the solemn tone of a rumbling cloud expatiating exhaustively on the topic on hand, free from the six blemishes (modifications like increase & decrease), gushing out of his mouth extolling Sri Hari appeared as if another Mahalaxmi, the dear consort of Lord Vishnu, bereft of the six infirmities with imposing breasts & sonorous voice, commanding extensive wealth, emerged from the ocean. (GVN)

 

 

 

 

padmeshapadapadmashritkR^ityA~NgaM padmajanmanaH |

 

lAlitA shiraseshena ga~NgevAsheShapAvanI || 7 ||

 

(In this verse, the discourse of Sri Madhwa is compared to the Ganges which has resorted to the lotus like feet of Lord Vishnu, which is helpful to the lotus born Brahma in washing the feet of Lord Vishnu, which is borne on the head by Siva & which purifies the people of the world who see it, drink its water & bathe in it). The discourse of Sri Madhwa, like the ganges, has resorted to the feet of Lord Narayana, husband of goddess Lakshmi (as it propounds the supremacy of the Lord). It serves as a means to the work of Brahma, the lotus born (as it secures the post of Brahma to the eligible jivas & thereby enables them to do the work of Brahma). It is respected by the head of Siva (who bows to it out of great respect). It purifies the people of the entire world who listen to it. (DRV)

 

 

 

 

nArAyaNo.anantaguNo vrahmAkhyo vedaveditaH |

 

vishvakarteti vishvaGYaH shrutyA yuktyA.apyasIShadhat.h || 8 ||

 

Poornaprajna established once for all on the firm foundation of the Apourasheya Vedas & irrefutable logic that the omniscient Lord Narayana, full to the brim with the treasure of infinite propitious qualities, the author of the eightfold dispensation of the universe, designated as Brahman, is the prime import of the Vedas. nArAyaNaM nikhilapUrNagunaikadehaM nirdoShamApyatamamapyakhilaiH suvAkyaiH | AsyobhdavAdimasheShavisheShato api vaMdyaM sadA priyatamaM mama sannimAmi || AnuvyAkhyana (2,2, 3) (This couplet capsulates the essense of Madhwa Siddhantha). (GVN)

 

 

 

 

pradhAnamaparAdhInaM kAraNaM pariNAmi yat.h |

 

payovaditi chet.h sAdhyavaikalyaM syAnnidarshane || 9 ||

 

If it be put forth that Prakriti (Primordial matter) since it undergoes modification, is the independent cause of the cosmos like milk which turns into curds, then this argument suffers from the fallacy of Sadhyavaikalya (absence of the major term in the cited example where milk is not an independent factor). (These two lines refute the atheistic Samkhya view which upholds the inanimate primordial matter as the independent creative principle to bring the universe into existence, by convincing that an independent animate principle Lord Narayana & not inanimate Prakriti is the creator of the universe & his omni presence is responsible for even transforming insentient milk into curds). (GVN)

 

 

 

 

vivAdAdhyAsitA sR^iShTishchetanechChAnusAriNI |

 

sR^iShTitvAt.h paTasR^iShTarvetyanumA paxasAdhikA || 10 ||

 

The creation of the universe which is the subject matter of controversy (whether it is by the sentient or the non sentient) is according to the will of the sentient, as it is a creation, just like the creation of cloth. This inference proves our doctrine of Lord Vishnu's creation of the universe. (GVN) Source: (AnuvyAkhyana 2, 2, 1)

 

 

 

 

yacchetanAchetanayora~NgA~NgitvAdi manvate |

 

sR^iShTAvIshAnapexAyAM tanna shobhanatAM vrajet.h || 11 ||

 

Even Samkhya view think that in the creation of the universe, the sentient (jivas) are subordinate & the Pradhana (non sentient) is the chief & so on... This will also not sound good if there is no need of God in the work of creation & if God is only an anga or auxillary to Nature. (DRV)

(As milk becomes curds with the help of a sentient, Pradhana also brings the universe into being with the assistance of a sentient. This is the essence of this doctrine. It flatly denies the existence of an All Powerful, independent Ishwara besides the sentient, thus contravening the Vedic affirmation that even Milk turns into curds because of the omnipresence of the supreme Being- Uttama Purusha that activates the Purusha (sentient) & Pradhana (non sentient) alike. (GVN) (AnuvyAkhyana 2, 2, 7, 2, 2, 8, & 2, 2, 10)

 

sarvavinnirmitaM sarvaM kAdAchitkatvahetutaH |

 

na yadevaM no tadevaM yathAtmetIshvarAnumA || 12 ||

 

All things are created by the omnipresent God because they exist at sometime or other. That which is not created by the omniscient God will not exist at sometime or other like the jivas (which are eternal & beginningless). This inference estables God as the creator of the universe. (DRV)

This inference highlights the existence of an independent supreme creator, one Uttama Purusha beside Purusha (Sentient) & Prakriti (non sentient). It is a fitting reply to the frank atheist who treats only Pratyaksha (reality) as the sole Pramana. It pulls down his line of reasoning; " Pratyaksha fails to function since Ishwara, being super sensuous is not visible to the eyes, Anumana (logic) does not operate as there is no example of another powerful Ishwara & Agama (veda) the only strong hold of the vedantin to prove the existence of the Almighty (trans cendental things) is out of our fold: So the All powerful creator is out of court). AnuvyAkhyana 2, 1, 11 & 2, 2, 10 (GVN)

 

 

 

 

balAya sarvAnumAnAM vedAH syuryairapAlitAH |

 

kAmAdetAH pravartante kAminya iva bhartR^ibhiH || 13 ||

 

If Anumana comes into existence with the support of some Agama, it is reckoned as valid reasoning: if not so, then it can cut both ways like unchaste wives uncontrolled by their husbands. (They fail to prove the existence of transcendental things like God which are beyond the range of preceptions). Anuvyakhyana 2, 1, 11, 2, 1, 12, 2, 1, 18) (GVN)

 

 

 

 

kAraNaM pariNAmi syAd.h brahma no chetanatvataH |

 

na yaditthaM to taditthaM yathA xIrapuraHsaram.h || 14 ||

 

Brahman cannot be the cause of undergoing change because He is sentient. That which is the cause of change thus is not sentient like the substances beginning with milk & others. (DRV)

 

 

 

 

na vishvakR^it.h pashupatiH shrUyamANAguNatvataH |

 

chaitravat.h kiM punarvighnabrandhAdyA bAlasha~NkitAH || 15 ||

 

Rudra (the Lord of human beings) is not the creator of all like Chaitra on account of the existence can be said about those beginning with Ganapathi, Surya & others (such as Skanda) who are guessed by few foolish persons as creators? (DRV) Anuvyakhyana 2, 2, 47, 2, 2, 40 (16-19), 2, 2, 11.

 

 

 

 

nanu saukhyAdimAn.h nesho duHkhAdirahitatvataH |

 

yo naivaM syAt.h sa naivaM syAdyathA saMsR^itimAniti || 16 ||

 

According to the Vaisesikas, Lord Narayana (who is regarded by the dvaitis as having unlimited bliss, happiness & others) is not one having happiness & others as He has no sorrow & others (such as ignorance). He who has happiness thus cannot be without suffering like the person subject to the cycle of birth & death (as happiness & suffering are inseparable). (DRV)

 

 

 

 

evaM chedvimato GYAnI na bhrAntirahitatvataH |

 

ya evaM no sa evaM no bhavIvetyanumIyate || 17 ||

 

If it be argued thus (by the Vaisesikas), it can be inferred thus (by the dvaitis): Isvara, who is the subject of controversy is not a posserssor of knowledge on account of the absence of delusion. He who has knowledge thus has delusion like the person subject to the cycle of birth & death. (Inference cuts both ways. If inference enables us to deprive Iswara of His happiness, it also enables another to prove the absence of knowledge in Him. (DRV)

 

 

 

 

sarvaGYasyAGYatAM vedaH shradhdeyo niruNadhdi chet.h |

 

tasyaivAmandamAndaM vadannAshrAvyasau katham.h || 18 ||

 

If it is maintained by the disputant that the trustworthy Vedas disapprove ignorance to the omniscient Ishwara, then the acharya comes out with the disparaging question as to how similar commanding Vedic utterances extolling his (Ishwara's ) abounding bliss have not reached his sensitive ears. (The opponent is beat on his own ground: if he accepts the first, he has to silently bag the second too, as they emerge from the same source. (GVN)

 

 

 

 

duHkhaM parijihIrShan.h yaH sukhaM nAMgIcikIrShati |

 

sa hantApatitaM duHkhamIshasya vyasmarajjaDaH || 19 ||

 

The Great Acharya further adverts: " If the witless Vaishesika denies bliss to the infinitely blissfull in straining to relieve him of distress, he forgets that his own avowal leads him to accept sorrow for Ishwara, the logic being, he who has not happiness must have grief. (A worldly being must have either of the two, pain or pleasure, lest he will cease to be sentient. If Ishwara, a sentient being is bereft of bliss then he courts misery. Is it not then graceful to accept unalloyed bliss for Ishwara)?(GVN)

 

 

 

 

yo dUkhasamavAyo.ayaM chaitretenahyabhedavAn.h |

 

saavAyaH kashchidIshe tadanekatvmanyathA || 20 ||

 

He further pinpoints the weekness & inefficacy of the Vaishesika philosophy because of his acceptance of Samavaya (intimate relation) relation thus: The SamavAya relation of knowledge & desire existing in Ishwara being non different from the famed relation of sorrow present in Chaitra (worldly being), He will never be free from grief. If it be argued that SamavAya relations are different, then the Vaishesikas will have to accept the many ness of Samavaya which goes against their doctrine & face the fallacy called Apasiddhantha (imperfect logical proof) since the Tarkikas designate the relation between Guna & Guni (substance & attributes) as Samavaya relation (relation of inseparables) which according to them is only one & non different from each other. (GVN)

 

 

 

 

aupAdiko.asya bhedashvetsatyo.asatyaH sviducyatAm.h |

 

tat.h dvayaM choktadoShaM hi mAyivanmA vadetparam.h || 21 ||

 

Acharya warns: " If you still content that Samavaya though only one, may be different due to difference in upadhis i.e. the Samavaya of chaitra (worldly being) will differ from the Samavaya of Maitra, then the Samavaya of Iswara will also be different. Further, answer my question is samavaya true or false? In case, it is true, there will be many Samavayas & if it is false, Ishwara will have the samavaya of grief. You cannot argue like the Mayavadins that it is neither real nor unreal but different from both (Sadsadvilakshana which leads to self contradiction). (GVN)

 

 

 

 

brUyuraupAdhikaM bhedaM GYAnAdInAM yadAtmanaH |

 

nItyA.anayA tannirAsAtsyAttasyAnantadharmitA || 22 ||

 

The same reasoning which repudiates the difference in Samavaya due to upadhis also negates your affirmation of difference in Paramatma's various attributes of knowledge & the like due to upadhis & eventually the principle that the Supreme, being an abode of infinite innate perfections, comes to be established. (GVN)

 

 

 

 

guNAdibhede sambandhamapexyApyanavasthiteH |

 

visheShamAtreNAnantyaM guNAnAM shobhate vibhoH || 23 ||

 

If difference between guna (the basic constituent) & the gunin (the object possessing it) is accepted there will be (the defect of) infinite regress (anavastha) even after desiring for the mutual relation. The unlimitedness of the attributes of the pervading Lord Narayana shines by means of visesa (which is a representative of difference). (DRV)

 

 

 

 

manyante shUnyamevAnye tachvamAgamavairiNaH |

 

matA mAdhyamikAste.api vyaktAshChannA iti dvaye || 24 ||

 

Others, the mAdhyamikas (who are different from the Vaisesikas & who follow the Middle way) who hate the veda know only the void (Sunya) as the highest principle. They are also known to be of two kinds-- those who are clear (the mAdhyamikas themselves) & those who are concealed (The mayavaadis). (DRV)

 

 

 

 

shUnyaM brahmAhvayenAhuH svAMshcha vedAnnino.abhyadhuH |

 

atatvAvedakaM vedaM vadantashrcharame khalAH || 25 ||

 

The wicket mAyAvadis, the last of those mentioned above, who say that the vedas (which is of the form of the mantra, brahmana & upanishads) does not inform about the truth of Brahman speak of the void (of the Buddhas) by the name of Brahman. They have also called themselves vedAntis.

 

 

bhAratIramaNamukhyaprANA.ntargata shri kR^iShNArpanamastu

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

--

parameshvara bhaktirnAma niravadhika ananta anavadya kalyANaguNatva

GYAnapUrvakaH

svAtmAtmIya samasta vastubhyo aneka guNAdhiko antarAya sahasrenApya

pratibaddo nirantara premapravAhaH

(jiGYAsAdhikaraNam.h, a verse from Sriman Nyaya Sudha)

(Meaning from Srimad Bhagawad Gita (The song Olympian) by Sri G V Nadgauda.

 

[Devotion to Lord] (bhakthi) is the invariable & continuous flow of ardent

affection to God, undettered by varied frustrations in life, [excelling the

attachment to self, our kindred & other lovable assets] (vairagya),

reinforced by [sound knowledge] (jnAna) & solid conviction of His glory &

greatness, as the sole independent Power, the abode of all auspicious

attributes, free from foibles. As such, it differs from blind belief &

selfish live. It should be founded on an unshakable intellectual &

emotional conviction in the Majesty of the Lord- as the embodiment of all

spiritual excellences.