Sri Madhwa Vijaya- Chapter 15, 51-75, Part 3

[Guest guest]

shrI hari vAyu gurubhyo namaH

 

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

 

 

duHkhavyAptaM sukhaM baddhe dR^iShTvA mukternirasyatA |

svarUpaM cha nirasyeta shUnyavAdI tadA bhavet.h || 51 ||

 

Having seen the happiness pervaded by unhappiness in the human being bound in samsara, the form of the soul in the liberated person is also rejected by the disputant who denies happiness in the liberated person. He then would become an exponent of sunya. (DRV)

(To the disputant, swarupa (form) exists along with joy & grief in terrestrial existence. Hence he deprives freed souls of form also, being apprehensive that he will have to admit pleasure & pain along with form.) (GVN) AnuvyAkhyana 4, 2

 

 

nanu vipratipannaH syAdUrmimAn.h dehavatvataH |

chaitro yathetyupAdhiH syAdatra chAshuddhadehitA || 52 ||

 

The liberated person under dispute will be one having the (six) infirmities (such as existence, birth, growth, decay, decrease & loss or hunger, thirst, passion, hatred, sorrow & delusion) like Caitra of account of having a body. If it is doubted thus, the state of of impure body (Prakriti body) will be an upAdhi even there (in the state of having the six infirmities).

(N.B. The Vaisesikas's argument is countered thus: The liberated person under dispute will not have the six infirmities becuse he has pure body like Ishvara. (DRV)

 

 

anaikAntikatA hetordehavatvAdadhIshituH |

so.adehashchedanichChAdirbhavechChashaviShANavat.h || 53 |

 

There would be the fallacy of inconclusiveness to the reason on account of the God having a body. That God, if He has no body, would be without things beginning with desires & others like the horn of the hare.

(N. B. In a good inference the reason (hetu) must be in the sAdhya. Otherwise, there will be the fallacy of inconclusiveness (aniakAntika). Here the body (hetu) is also found in Isvara (who has no infirmities) who is not the sAdhya). (DRV)

 

 

GYAtrAdirUpamasya syAdvailaxaNyAya chet.h tataH |

tadeva dehashabdoktaM na hrasau prAkR^itAkR^itiH || 54 ||

 

If for the differentiation from the horn of a hare it is agreed that Isvara has the form of a knower, that is only what is said by the body. Iswara is embodied & that his body is supernal of the form of knowledge & bliss (not a earthly one full of dross like that of chaitra) indeed one not having a material body. (DRV, GVN)

 

 

evaM svarUpadehatvaM muktasyApyurarIkR^itam.h |

nAniShTabhogastena syAt.h prAkR^itaxetrasambhavaH || 55 ||

 

So one has to accept a natural form, a body constituted of knowledge & bliss like Ishwara, to those who have attained salvation & hence free from agony that is ingrained in the muddy vesture of decay (mortal body). (Hence the liberated enjoy unalloyed, abundant pleasure). (GVN) AnuvyAkhyana 4,2

 

 

vimato nAvayavavAn.h vinAshitvaprasa~NgataH |

paTavacchedavayavA nirasyante.atra kIdR^ishAH || 56 ||

 

The liberated person who is the subject of controversy (whether he has limbs or not) has no limbs because he will be destroyed like a cloth. If the limbs are rejected in this liberated soul, what kind of limbs are they? (Are the limbs different from or identical with, the liberated person?)

 

 

siddhasAdhanatA hetoste bhinnAshchedachinmayAH |

Atmano bhedarahitA eShTavyA eva vAdibhiH || 57 ||

 

If those limbs which are different from the liberated soul & which are not of the form of knowledge are rejected (by the vaisesikas), there will be the defect (to the hetu 'form of destruction') of the proving of anything already proved (because the dvaitis have also rejected this kind of limbs). The limbs not different from the liberated soul will have to be accepted by the disputants (Vaisesikas). (DRV) AnuvyAkhyana 2,1,27

 

 

paramANvAdidesheShu vyAptyai vyAmAdikeShvapi |

yathA.a.atmanaH pradeshAH syusteShAM no.avayavAstathA || 58 ||

 

Just as there will be space in places beginning with a vyAma & others & in places beginning with atom, dyad, triad & others for the sake of proving the pervasion of ParamAtma or jivothma in their (Vaisesika) doctrine, so also in our doctrine there can be limbs not different from the body. (DRV) AnuvyAkhyana 2,1,27, 2,2,11

 

 

makto rUpAdivit.h satvAjjaDAnyatve satIshavat.h

dR^iShTAnto.asAdhyavikalastasya sarvaGYatAgrahAt.h || 59 ||

 

The liberated soul (like Ishwara) being different from the insentient is a knower of objects beginning with form & others on account of being sentient. Owing to the acceptance of omniscience in respect of that Isvara the example has not the absence of the thing to be proved (sadhyAbhava) (DRV) AnuvyAkhyana 4,2,1

 

 

Ishvaro na sukhI tena rUpAdyanubhavannapi |

duHkhaprasa~NgAditi mA vAdi tavdyAptidUShaNAt.h || 60 ||

 

It should not be said that though He enjoys objects beginning with form & others (such as taste), He is not happy by means of the knowledge of those things because of the allegation that He may have suffering. For the pervasion that he who has happiness has suffering (also) is (already) refuted by us. AnuvyAkhyana 2, 2, 11

 

 

dR^iShTAnto yasya neShTo.ayaM tasya syAvdyatirekavAn.h |

shilAvadityataH shuddhachiddehendriyabhogyasau || 61 ||

 

To those contestent (like Bhattas) reluctant to receive this example (Ishwara), the Dwaitin extends the example of logical discontinuance (Vyatireki Anumana): " The beings void of knowledge of Form & the like are as stones different from the sentient & thereby he (Dwaitin) asserts that the released souls possess a pure natural body & sense organs too, to enjoy delights divine. (GVN) AnuvyAkhyana 4,2,1

 

 

svAnandaviShaye moxe vedokte yuktisAdhite |

dveSho.ayaM vAdinAM kasmAt.h tadviruddhe.athavA.a.agrahaH || 62 ||

 

Why do the disputants hate that moksha which is of the form of innate bliss, which is propounded by the vedas & proved by the (aforesaid) reasonings? If not, why is there persistence in moksha which is contrary (to that kind of moksha). (DRV)

 

 

tataH svataH pramANena devo vedena veditaH |

viShNurmoxAdidAteti vishvaM bhavati shobhanam.h || 63 ||

 

Once we all realize that Lord Vishnu, full of auspicious attributes, so propagated by the self evident Vedas is the dispenser or salvation, 'all will be well with the world'. (GVN) AnuvyAkhyana 3,3,1

 

 

ityAdIn.h darshayantyarthAn.h vyAkhyopanyAsasaMyutA |

trivikramAryeNa tadA vishvAbhiGYasya shushruve || 64 ||

 

Trivikramacharya listened attentively to the learned discourses of the Acharya vigorously advocating such solid statements. (GVN)

 

 

atha prAyu~Nkta vividhAn.h bodhachApaguNeritAn.h |

vipaxayuktAn.h vIryeNa tIxNAMstarkasharAnasau || 65 ||

 

After Sri Madhwa's discourse, this Trivikrama Panditacharya employed by the force of his own intelligence the sharp arrows of many kinds of reasoning which contain the opposing doctrines & which are prompted by the bow string of knowledge (like a brave soldier discharging sharp arrows made of bird's wings by twanging the bow). (DRV)

 

 

chichChedAtuchChadhiShaNastAMstadA tarkasAyakaiH |

prayuktamAtrAn.h prahasan.h lIlayA.atishayAlubhiH || 66 ||

 

Sri Purnaprajna who was greatly smiling cut off (=refuted) easily & at once after their discharge those reasonings (of Trivikrama Pandita) with the arrows of counter reasoning excelling them (like a soldier cutting off the arrows discharged by his foes). (DRV)

 

 

adhAryANItarajanairanivartyAni pUruShaiH |

vijigIShurdvijashreShTho vedAstrANi prayuktavAn.h || 67 ||

 

When logic failed him, Trivikramacharya the elite of the Brahmins, hoping to vanquish the Great Acharya, in a desperate attempt hurled the baffling vedic misiles in the form of intractable vedic sentences hard to confront & onerous to be borne by the ineligibles. (GVN)

 

 

vAkyairatibalIyobhiH pratyastrairiva vaidikaiH |

arthAntaraM prakaTayaMstAnyasau sannyavartayat.h || 68 ||

 

Sarvajnacharya reacted squarely & rendered Trivikramacharya's missiles sterile directing them to a different aim (by interpretting the vedic sentences in a different way & substantiating them) by his counter missiles (in the form of ) distinct copious vedic sentences more virile, to defeat the disputant on his own ground. (GVN)

 

 

saptAShTAni dinAnyevaM vAdaM kR^itvA sahAmunA |

niruttaraM taM nishchodyaM chakre chakrAyudhapriyaH || 69 ||

 

After an engaging intellectual skirmish that prolonged for a fortnight, Madhwacharya dearest to Lord Narayana totally disarmed the stalwart Trivikramacharya so much so, that he could neither dare reply nor shoot further questions. (GVN)

 

 

praNamyAchaShTa shiShTo.asau xamyatAM nAtha chApalam.h |

padapadmarajodAsyaM dhruvaM me dIyatAmiti || 70 ||

 

Having saluted Sri Madhwa, this Trivikrama Pandita who is a superior soul said thus: 'O, Master, may my inconsiderate act be pardoned. May the permanent service of the dust of your lotus like feet be given to me'. (DRV)

 

 

vyAkhyAM bhAShyasya bhUyodhIH shravaNaM sUrinandanaH |

santaH prItimasanto.anyAM samamArebhire tataH || 71 ||

 

Afterwards Sri Purnaprajna began the exposition of the Brahmasutra bhAshya. Trivikrama Pandita began the hearing of it, the good people began to have the joy & the wicket people began to have the hatred at the same time. (DRV)

 

 

gurvAGYAgauravATTIkAM kurvAn.h bhAShyasya duShkarAm.h |

ShaDardhavikramAryo.asau mahAchAryamavochata || 72 ||

 

Owing to the respect for Sri Madhwa's order, Trivikrama Pandita wrote a gloss on the Brahmasutra bhAshya (called the Tattva pradeepa) which cannot be done without the order of Sri Madhva & told Sri Madhva (the chief interpreter of the vedic mantras) thus:

 

 

kavIndrairna samApyante saMgR^ihyApi yato.anisham.h |

nyAyaratnAni bhAShyAbdherasya gAmbhIryamadbhutam.h || 73 ||

 

Even the wisest Pundits ceaselessly gleaning the gem like amazing (reasonings) embedded in the sea of your Bhashya, have not succeeded to drain it completely; so astonishing is its depth & solemnity. (GVN)

 

dashopaniShado devIrdevA iva samIpsitAH |

yuktAH prasAdayantyarthA eShu bhAShyAlayeShvalam.h || 74 ||

 

Unlike other upanishad bhAsya where words are divorced from their meanings (to our dire distress), in the mansion of the upanishabhasya of Madhwacharya, the imposing words, (the Gods) & the lofty meanings, (the goddesses) move in close unison & jostle with jubilation bringing out precisely the beauty of their weighty thoughts like the ladies being pleased by their lords in their lovely lodgings. (GVN)

 

gItAtAptaryabhAShyAbhyAmAbhyAM vishvaM prakAshyate |

gogaNaiMrapratIkArairarkedubhyAmivAdhikam.h || 75 ||

 

All the tenets (of dvaita siddhantha) are greatly rendered clear by these GitAbhashya & Gita Tatpartrya by means of the group of irrefutable words like the world being brightened by the Sun & the Moon by means of the groups of rays. (DRV)

 

 

 

bhAratIramaNamukhyaprANA.ntargata shrii 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.