Satha DhUshaNi : Part IV

[Guest guest]

Sri:

Dear Swamy Desika BhakthAs:

We will now study the 68 Desika Sahasra NaamAs composed by Thirukkudanthai Desikan to summarize the essence of Swamy's Satha dhUshaNi. One of the dear sishyAs of Swamy Desikan was PeraruLALa arayar. He recorded for posterity the arguments advanced by Swamy Desikan to defeat the adhvaithis , who had asked for a debate to prove the superiority of adhvaitham over VisishtAdhvaitham . This debate took place over seven days. The vaadhams advanced by Swamy Desikan were 100 but only 66 have survived. Some say the "satha" sabdham means many and not one hundred. Whatever the case may be, we have 66 Vaadhams only with us Vaadham is a philosophical discussion (contest) to arrive at the truth through the opponent (Poorva Pakshi) stating his case and the respondent uses destructive criticism of the views presented (Para Matha nirasanam) and to silence the opponent (Vitanda Vaadham). No effort is made here to advance one's own position (svamatha sthApanam). There is another category of Vaadham known as Jalpa Vaadam, which is mainly to show off one's debating skills as in Oxford debating Society. The richest vaadham is the one in which the destructive criticism of the opponents' view is backed up by the constructive advancement of one's own position. For accomplishing this, one should be well versed not only in the doctrines advanced by the opponent (adhvaithin here) but also thoroughly in command of the doctrines of one's own matham ( sva paksham). Swamy Desikan was such a towering scholar that he conducted one of the richest vadham known for its dialectical excellence and defeated the opponents. This type of victory has been accomplished by Swamy Desikan once before with the opponents from Jaina Matham in front of Lord DevanAthan. Those debates led to the creation of the massive and brilliant Sri Sookthi revered as Para Matha bhangam. Satha DhUshaNi confines itself to adhvaitham. Here, Swamy Desikan followed the path laid out by Swamy AlavanthAr aka Yaamuna Muni ( 916-1036 C.E) and AchArya RaamAnuja ( 1017-1137 C.E). Swamy Alavanthar used dialectical method to show the hollowness of adhvitha doctrines in Aathma Siddhi and Ishta Siddhi, two of his Sri Sookthis . AchArya RaamAnuja followed up on that in his magnum opus (JijnA~sAdhikaraNam) and critically evaluated the adhvaitha doctrines . Swamy Desikan elaborated on this (Maayaa Vaadahm of adhvaithins) further on a systematic way. Between AchArya RaamAnuja and Swamy Desikan's times, AchAryAs of Maadhva sampradhAyam crticized heavily the adhvaithin's doctrines of illusoriness of the world (Jagan miTyaa) and their theory of Maaya. MadhusUdhana Saraswathy, a great Adhvitha scholar criticized both AchArya RaamAnuja's (VisishtAdhvaitham's) and MaadhvAchArya's Dhvaitham's) positions in his classic work known as "Adhvaitha Siddhi". These debates continue even today. The genius of Swamy Desikan inspired by his poorvAchAryA's teachings shines through all these fog. The list of topics (philosophical issues) dealt with in SathadhUshaNi are many. They go beyond the arguments advanced by AchArya Ramanuja in Sri BhAshya and covers much wider ground and counters the criticisms of VisishtAdhvaitham by the adhvaithins during the post-Ramanuja period. During this process, Swamy Desikan helped the layman to become familiar with the soundness of VisishtAdhvaithic doctrines as opposed to the hollowness of adhvaithic core doctrines. Among the 66 Vaadhams of Satha dhUshaNi, there has been no particular logical sequence in the ordering of the topics covered. Each one of the Vaadhams focus on a particular controversial issue. Dr.S.M.S Chari groups these scattered Vaadhams under 8 broad categories: (1) PramANAs, (2) Perception and difference, (3) The nature of consciousness (anubhUthi), (4) the individual Self and the Absolute, (5) NirguNa Brahman (attributeless Brahman), (6) Universe (Jagath), (7) the doctrine of avidhyaa, and (8) Saadhana and Mukthi. Thirukkudanthai Desikan, who was born 300 plus years ago lived as a SanyAsi at Thirukudanathai AarAvamudhan Sannidhi in his later days. He is considered as an avathAram of Swamy Desikan and hence it is no wonder he could create a sahasra Naamam for Swamy Desikan covering all aspects of the Vaibhavam and Sri Sookthis of Swamy Desikan in such a precise and terse manner. For instance, a complex and important polemical Sri Sookthi like SathadhUshaNi has been covered in just 68 shasra nAmaas. Srimath Rahasya Thraya Saaram, magnum opus of Swamy Desikan with 32 chapters has been covered by Thirukkudanthai Desikan in 214 sahasra nAmaas; Another complex PrakaraNa grantham, Tatthva Muktha Kalaapam has been covered with 235 Sahasra NaamAs. It is a great feat.

 

Before covering the individual Swamy Desika Sahasra Naamams on SathadhUshaNi ,

let us list the 66 topics covered by Swamy Desikan in His SathadhUshaNi grantham.

 

Dr.S.M.S. Chari has listed these 66 topics in his scholarly monograph entitled

"Advaita and VisishtAdvaita " published by Motilal Banarsidass Publishers , Delhi (1999) .

We will now focus on the 68 Sahasra NaamAs composed by

Thirukkudanthai Desikan relating to Satha DhUshaNi(101-168) . (All NaamAs are to be preceded by PraNavm )(101) satadUshaNypakrAntamAyidurvAdi garvakaya nama:

(Meaning): Salutations to the AchAryan who quelled the arrogance of Maayaa Vaadhis (adhvathis) through the Sri Sookthi of Satha dhUshaNi.(Comments): Adhvathins challenged Awamy Desikan for a debate to establish the superiority of their darsanam. The debate went on for seven days. At the end, the adhvaithis were trounced. The sumamry of that debate was recorded by one of the dear sishyAs of Swamy Desikan (PeraruLALa arayar) and has been preserved for us. Adhvaithis central dictum is that the world is unreal and they hold the view that even Iswaran has ajn~Anam. Their arguments were inconsistent with Vedams (Veda Viruttham). Swamy Desikan criticized these inconsistencies and defeated them soundly. (102) nivsEsha brahma sabda mukyA mukyArtha bhangakrute nama:(Meaning): Salutations to that AchAryan, who defeated the adhvaithic view that (1) Brahman is a nirvisEsha vasthu and (2) Brahma sabdham is related to an entity without dharmam (attributes). Swamy Desikan established that an attributeless Brahman, the ultimate Reality consisting of the sentient and insentient entities of the world cannot be defined as illusion. It is very real. He proved that the nirvisEsha Vasthu described by Adhvaithis can never become the meaning of Brahma sabdham along the lines established by His PoorvAchAryAs. (Comments): Attributeless Brahman is recognized by AchArya Ramanuja and Swamy Desikan as an impossibility.The argument is that anything without attributes is the same as a nonexistent entity.Mukhya artham has to go with amukhya artham. When one focuses on the amukhyArtham without reference to the MukhyArtham, it is a pointless pursuit. One cannot say in this context that this NirvEsha Vasthu ( Brahman ) has only amukhyArtham is absurd. Only the sambhnadham of an amukhyam with Mukhyam can make sense. If there is no mukhyArtham, then there can not be anything with relation to it as amukhyArtham. If there is a MukhyArtham without anupapatthi (logical untenability), there is no need to project an amukhya artham for Brahma sabdham. There are those who split Brahman into two, saguNa and nirguNa Brahmam, and identify SaguNa Brahmam with mukhyArtham and nirguNa brahmam with amukhyArtham. This view is not based on any PramANam and is a flight of fancy. VedAs, Smruthis and niruktham indicating the correct meanings of Veda BhAgams say with one voice that the loftiest and the most elevating Tatthvam that protects all is Brahman and its name is Sriman NarayaNan with all asuspicoius attributes. Hence one cannot identify with a nirvisEsha vasthu as Brahman as postulated by Advaithins. (103) nivsEsha brahma jijn~asyatva bhanjana dakshiNaya nama: (Meaning): Salutations to that AchAryan (Swamy Desikan), who soundly defeated the advaithic view that nirvisEsha Brahman alone is the object of inquiry by the SaasthrAs. (Commentary): The First VedAntha Soothram recommends us Brahma VichAram (aTAthO Brahma jign~AsA). The Meaning for this Sootthram is given as: " Then (after a knowledge of the work- portion of the VedAs and the ephemeral nature of the results of mere work has been gained by the study of Poorva-Meemsaa) therefore (as the results obtained by mere work, i.e., sacrifices etc., are ephemeral and limited, whereas the results of the knowledge of Brahman is eternal and infinite) the inquiry (into the real nature) of Brahman (should be taken up). This kind of Brahma VichAram is totally irrelevant and inappropriate for the NirvisEsha Brahman postulated as their central plank by the adhvaithins. That kind of Brahman with no attributes is not amenable for inquiry .In the matters that are well known, there is no need for inquiry (vichAram). Only when there is doubt about this or that dharmam of a vishayam, vichAram makes sense. When there is a vishayam like NirvisEsha Brahman with no dharmams what so ever (absolutely attributeless ), it does not lend itself for inquiry or looking into. There is no yOgyathi for vichAram. How can we look io something, which has nothing to look into? Therefore, the very first Brahma soothram is irrelevant for Adhvaithis. There is no prasakthi (cause) for vichAram. (104) karmabrahma vicArAthma mImAmsaikya vidayakaya nama:(Meaning): Salutations to Swamy Desikan, who established the unity (the seamless nature) of the two branches of MeemAmsam: Poorva MeemAmsa Roopa Karma VichAram and the Utthara MeemAmsa roopa Brahma VichAram. He established that both of them come under a unitary division of Saasthram (yEka Saasthram) from a VichAram point of view. (Commentary): The first part of Vedam is Karma bhAgam. The Saasthram that examines it is Poorva Meemsa darsanam commented on by Sage Jaimini. The second part ofthe Vedam is Brahma bhAgam. The Saasthram that inquires into it is VedAntha Saasthram commented on by Sage VyAsa, the AchAryan of Sage Jaimini. Both bhAgams (divisions) inquire about the meanings of the VedAs and can be considered as an unitary Saasthram. One who undertakes Veda adhyayanam studies both. Sage BhOdhAyana has pointed this out too. The arguments of adhvaithins that Poorva MeemAmsa and Utthara MeemAmsa are two seperate Saasthram is not accepted by us. Adhvithis reason that (1) Poorava BhAgam of Vedam deals with Karma vishayam and the Utthara bhAgam deals with Brahma vishayam and hence they have to be treated as two Saasthrams due to vishaya bhEdahm (differences), (2) adhikAri bhEdham: Poorva MeemAmsa student wants to know about KarmAs and the Utthara MeemAmsa student wants to inquire about Brahman. Hence there is adhikhAri bhEdham, which does not permit the yEkaSaasthram view, (3) The authors of the two MeemAmsams (Jaimini and VyAsar) are different (Kartha BhEdahm) and therefore there is a need to treat the two as seperate Saasthrams. (4) There are differences of opinion about the intrepretation of the VedAntha nyAyams in the two MeemAmsAs by the two KarthAs and hence this viruttham (clash) necessitate the classification of the two Saasthrams as seperate ones and not as yEka Saasthram. VisishtAdhvaithin's Response: Both the MeemAmsais are about the inquiry of VedArthams. Hence, there is no vishaya bhEdham. In Utthara MeemAmsai, the first two chapters deal with Siddha vishayam (The KaaraNathvam of Brahman) and the remaining two chapters deal with Saadhya Vishayam (UpAyam/means and Phalan of such vichAram). On tis basis, following the line of Adhvaithin, we can not state that Utthara MeemAmsai itself is made up of two Saasthrams because of Vishaya bhEdham among its 4 chapters. Adhvaithins admit that Utthara MeemAmsai is one Saasthram. How can we reconcile this divergent ruling of the adhvaithin. We have to reject this view and recognize that both Poorva and Utthara MeemAmsais constitute one Saasthram based on their common pursuit of the meanings of the Veda BhAgams. (2) In both the MeemAmsAs, the adhikAri, who wants to know the meanings of the Vedams has shared identity Pursuit of the same goal); hence adhikAri bhEdham does not arise. (3) KarthA BhEdham: A book can be started by one author and completed by another for valid reasons. The book will still be the same although it has two authors (4) arTa virOdhams in the two MeemAmsais: strictly speaking, there is no arTa virOdham among the two; the latter day commentators added vipareetha arTams to Jaimini Soothrams as interpolations. We can only go by the source text of Sage Jaimini and not the latter day commentators of Poorva MeemAmsai. We will elaborate on these points later. (To be continued)Daasan V. Sadagopan