Chaturmasya jnAnArjane saraNi - Madhwa Vijaya (a Gist in English) by Eminent scholars - Sarga 15 Part 3 of 3

October 26, 2009

|| Sri Rama Krishna VedavyAsAya namaha ||

|| Sri Hanuma Bheema Madhwa MunibhyO namaha ||

namaste all,

Please find a brief on sarga #15, 3rd Part today.

You can refer to previous sargas at:

Sarga 15/1 - http://groups. / group/MadhwaYuva Parishat/ message/12350

Sarga 15/2 - http://groups. / group/MadhwaYuva Parishat/ message/12350

|| shrI hari vAyu gurubhyO namaH ||

Madhwa Vijaya (a Gist in English) by sixteen Eminent scholars

Sarga 15, Part 3 by Vidvan Avadhani Vittalacharya

DVAITA & OTHER SYSTEMS: A GENERAL STUDY

Book edited by Srimushnam V Nagaraja Rao

SRI MADHVAâ€™S TATVAVAADA

The subject matter of this shloka has the reference to the Sootra OM kAmAccha nAnumAnApexa OM

BHASKARA : Poorva Paksha: brahma pariNAmakAraNaM: Brahma undergoes transformation. (In other words, the Supreme Principle changes Itself into the form of Jagat, just as the solid gold changes into the form of bangle, necklace etcâ€¦)

Dvaita Siddhantha: It is not so, because it is a Chetana. Whatever is subjected to ParinAma (transformation or changes) is not Chetana. Milk is Achetana; it transforms itself into curd & you cannot cite similar transformation in the case of Chetana. It is the goldsmith who changes the solid gold into bangle, necklace etcâ€¦ He is instrumental for the change. Similarly, the supreme Being is instrumental or Nimitta Kaarana for the creation of this Jagat out of Jada.).

PAASUPATA & OTHER SIX SYSTEM: (verse 15): Lord Sri Rudra Deva is not the ultimate creator of the universe, because the Srutis proclaim His dependent aspects. The same in the case of lesser gods like Sri Ganapathi, Sri Skanda & others.

VAISESHIKA SYSTEM: Because of the reason that Paramatma has no Dukha, we infer that He has no Sukha also. For, we are seeing in daily life, that wherever there is Sukha, Duhkha also co exists. Verse 16

Dvaita Siddhantha: If that be so, it will lead to the conclusion that Paramatma has brAnti = confused knowledge in addition to Gynaana, because we see in daily life, that jeevas have knowledge as well illusion (braanthi). Verse 17

Vaiseshikas: How can you say so when your sacred Vedas proclaim that Paramatma is absolutely untouched by brAnti? Asks the Vaiseshika: - verse 18

Dvaita Siddhantha: The same Vedas proclaim that He is Ananda & untouched by Duhkha; how is it that you do not relish it? à¤¤à¤¸à¥à¤¯à¥ˆà¤µ à¤…à¤®à¤¨à¥à¤¦à¤‚ à¤†à¤¨à¤¨à¥à¤¦à¤‚ à¤µà¤¦à¤¨à¥â€Œ à¤¨à¤¾à¤¶à¥à¤°à¤¾à¤µà¥à¤¯à¤¸à¥Œ à¤•à¤¥à¤‚ || à¥§à¥®

tasyaiva amandaM AnandaM vadan.h nAshrAvyasau kathaM ? verse 18

Vaiseshikas: We say that Paramatma is untouched by Duhkha but do not concede that He has Sukha.

Dvaita Siddhantha: Well, it is admitted by everybody (including you that either Sukha or Dukha is the characteristic of a Chetana. Paramatma being a Chetana, if it is contended that He is devoid of SUkha what remains with Him is Duhkha. And this stand totally contradicts your original stand that Paramatma is free from Duhkha & therefore your inference is fraught with defects.

Verse 20 -23: Samavaay SambandhaH is an important fundamental theory in Vaiseshika system. According to them, a Chetana is a Drvya (the substratum of properties) & it has Gunas such as knowledge, desire, effort (jnAnaM, ichCha, prayatna), Dravya is different from Guna. In addition to Dravya & Guna, they say that there is another third agency which stands as the unifying agency between Dravya & Guna. This third agency, they call â€˜Samavaayaâ€™ & this holds the inseparable existence of one thing in another just as you cannot detach the red or black color from the mud pot. They say that this SamavAya is a â€˜Thingâ€™ (padArthaH) Which is eternal in its existence & universal in its application just like the Sun causing the day or night to every body at the time, universally.

The Dvaitans use the same Samvaaya as the effective weapon to strike with the opponents â€“ dukhAdi rahitatva hetuH). The Vaiseshikas primary theory is that Paramatma has no dukha. But if Samavaaya does anything at all, it just makes Paramatma inseparable from Duhkha. How?

All Chetanas, including Paramatma are Dravyas, Duhkha is a Guna. This â€˜Samavaayaâ€™ which they claim to be universal in its functioning, stands as the unifying agency between Guna & Dravya & it makes the two inseparable.

Therefore, the duHkhAdi rahitatva hetuH of the Vaikseshikas fails to prove their theory. Subjecting it to further scrutiny, it is asked whether the Samavaaya (which they call a â€˜Thingâ€™), is real or imaginary. In either case, it is proved to be defective. It is further pointed out that the said theory gives room for all an endless series of question- a defect called â€˜anavasthA doShaâ€™ (Infinite regress).

BOUDDHA SYSTEM

In verses 24 to 26, Bouddhas do not accept the Vedas. They believe that when everything perishes, the Tatva that remains at the end is Soonya. Seeing the shell from a distance, we mistake it for silver. Hence silver is only an illusion & what is real is the shell. Similarly, what appears as Jagat, is only a mere illusion & Soonya alone is real. The moment you get the â€˜Soonya gnyanaâ€™, the jagat vanishes, just as the silver vanished from the shell.

ADVAITA SYSTEM

According to Advaitic belief, the whole of Jagat is superimposed (Aropita) on Brahma. Brahma alone is real & the Jagat is unreal just as the shell appearing as silver. The moment Brahma Gnyana dawns on us, the jagat vanishes & Brahma remains.

In verses 27 to 31, the arguments & counter arguments between Dvaita & its opponents are dealt with in some details: -

Dvaita: The theory of â€˜Jagat Karanatvaâ€™ to Soonya is quite inconsistent because what you call Soonya is unreal. It is incapable of producing anything (similar to a potter producing a pot) verse 28.

Soonya vAda: We do not admit that the birth of the Jagat is something like a potter producing a pot. We say that it is only the absence of â€˜Soonya Gnyanaâ€™ (for Brahma Gnyana) that brings the jagat. We hold Soonya to be the jagat karana in this way & not as you argue.

Dvaita: What you are explaining about, is (adhiShThana- abode) but the point at issue here is not Adhishthana but kArana. The shell is the Adhishthana for silver. The absence of Shell Gnyana brings the false silver. Thus you are talking about adhishthana.

Even the theory of Adhishthana is totally inconsistent with your system because Soonya is asat.h (unreal) & all the Adhishthanas that we know on earth are sat.h (real) indeed. For example, the shell is real & it is the Adhishthana for silver which is unreal (verse 31).

vivAdasya padaM na syAt.h adhiShThAnaM asacvataH |

vaidharmyeNa eSha dR^iShTAntaH shaktyAdivat.h itIryate || 31 ||

Therefore, even the Adhishthana theory is inconsistent to Soonya Vaadins because the Soonya is not real (sat.h) but unreal (asat.h). [The subject matter of the above shloka has the reference to the Sootra: - (OM nAsato.adR^iShTAtvAt.h OM || (2-2-26)

Verses 32 to 42 points out, as to how absurd it is to argue that Vedas preach about the false objects.

If the Para Brahma is totally inexpressible (anirvachanIya) what is the use of the Upanishads? Verse 33.

If it is held that the Upanishads speak about the Para Braham in an indirect way (by means of laxaNA), Para Brahma becomes an object of Lakshana & this would disprove the stand that Brahma is nirvisheShaM & nirviShayaM (verse 34).

The Upanishadic declaration of satyaM, j~nAnaM, anantaM brahma cannot preach about nirvisheSha brahma. If the term satyam.h is constructed in the negative sense as asatyaM na & thereby attributing abhAvarUpa dharmaH even then it is irrelevant because, Brahma is Bhaava Roopa according to Advaita system & there cannot be such a thing as abhAvarUpa bhAva (verse 35-36).

If it is argued that a section of the Vedas speak about thing that are falso, it would amount to condemning the Vedas (verse 37-38).

Whether Brahma is satya or asatya is the question put to the other systems. The four verses (39-42) discuss as to how the reply in either way would lead to the inconsistency of the original stand of the respective systems. (verses 39-42).

CHAARVAAKA SYSTEM

Verses 43- 45, Brihaspati is said to be the founder of this system. The Chaarvaakas (Atheists or Materialists) believe neither in the Vedas nor in inference (anumaana). Whatever that comes within the purview of the eye sight, that alone is true. i.e. Pratyaksha alone is Pramana. The body itself is the soul for them. They are described as the crest gem of the Nastika schools of thought. They say : -

â€˜While life is yours, live joyously; None can escape Deathâ€™s searching eye; When once this body of ours, they burn, How shall it ever come again? Therefore, drink ghee by all means, even if it meant incurring debts.â€™

bhasmI bhUtasya dehasya punarAgamanaM kutaH |

tasmAt.h sarvayatnena R^iNaM kR^itvA ghR^itaM piba ||

(This verse is quoted from elsewhere)

They hate the yaga yagnyas, ceremony for deceased parents & the other religious rituals. The dangers inherent in this system are discussed in shlokas 43- 45.

Shlokas 46 & 47, why should at all there be any specific mode in respect of Upasana of the Lord? What harm is there in doing Upasana according to oneâ€™s own liking?

The consequences of the Upasana must be clearly understood. If the Lord is medicated upon as Sukha Swaroopi, the consequential result is the Supreme sukha to the Upasaka. If He is meditated upon as a Soonya or a cipher, naturally, the result cannot be the same Supreme Sukha. The Lordâ€™s response always reflects exactly what is meditated upon (yaM bhAvaM tat.h bhavati).

It is only to save one from missing the path of Bliss, one is exhorted to be careful in the mode of Upasana.

duHkhIkaroti yaddaivaM duHshAstreShu ugra AgrahaH |

duHkhAkaro.atighoraH syAt.h loko.atastadvatAM dhruvaH || 46 ||

THE CONCEPTION OF MOKSHA

Verses 48 to 51, the conception of Moksha according to Dvaita & other schools are discussed in these four verses. The Dvaita System, on the strength of the Vedic & Puranic declarations, says that Paramatma is full of Gunas such as Gnyana, Ananda Sukha, Ichcha etc.. etc.. & He is untouched by Duhkha. He has the inexplicable power to bestow Ananda on His Upasaka by granting him sAroopya (sArUpyaM a body, similar to that of God Himself) & enables the Jeeva to enjoy the swaroopa Ananda Anubhava. In other words, taking blissful refuge in Lord Sri Narayana, the liberated Jeeva rejoices in His presence, & enjoys painless bliss for ever.

viShNuM sarvaguNaiH pUrNaM j~nAtvA saMsAra varjitaH |

nirduHkhAnanda bhuk.h nityaM tatsamIpe sa modate|| ------- (mahopaniShat.h)

The other schools differ from this view & the differences are discussed in some details from verses 48-51).

Verses 52 to 61. Again, according to Dvaita system, the body of the Paramatma is nothing but Ananda in its glorious form & shape. It is His swaroopa Deha & it is aprAkR^ita sharIra (not constituted by the five elements). Such a body of the Lord has all the Indriyas such as eyes, nose etc.. These Indriyas of the Lord are not subjected to any limitations or conditions. In other words, the Lordâ€™s eyes, in addition to seeing, can function even as a nose, ear, mouth & so on vice versa, in any manner He pleases.

As already stated, the Jeevas have their bodies even in Moksha & it is their Swaroopa Deha or Suddha Deha, the characteristic of which is pure Ananda because it is not constituted by the five elements.

Verses 62 to 63, Sri Acharya wonders, that while both the Vedas & logical reasoning are proof enough that Moksha is nothing but Swaroopa Ananda Anubhava (svarUpa Ananda anubhava), it is strange that the disputants show a preference to a different conception of Moksha which is opposed to Vedic declarations (verses 62).

Therefore, he concludes that all those who are able to assimilate the truth that Moksha etcâ€¦ is bestowed by Lord Narayana who is known through the Vedas, get the happiness & it is auspicious to them (verse 63).

tataH svataH pramANena devo vedena veditaH |

viShNur moxAdi dAteti vishvaM bhavatI shobhanam.h || 63 ||