Posted by: adbhutam | January 6, 2022

The meaning of the term ‘Dvaita vaada’

The meaning of the term ‘Dvaita vaada’

About 150 years ago a Madhva scholar Sri Bhimacharya composed a mighty book ‘Nyaya Kosha’, a compendium of hundreds of terms used in the various disciplines such as Vyakarana, Nyaya, Mimamsa, etc.

https://archive.org/details/nyayakoshabhimacharyajhalakikarbssbori1928_303_G

In this book under the term ‘Dvaita vaada’ the author first gives the etymology for the word ‘Dvaita’ and says ‘the system that teaches the difference between the jiva and Ishwara and other aspects’. He cites the Brahma sutras, the Mundaka passage ‘dvaa suparnaa’, the Sankhya Sutras and Karikas, etc.

He lists the Dvaita doctrines as Sankhya, Yoga, Nyaya, Tarka (vaisheshika), Purva Mimamsa and Uttara Mimamsa. He says the Madhva system is what is meant by Uttara Mimamsa and hastens to list Shankara Advaita, Ramanuja Vishishtadvaita and Vallabha Dvaitadvaita outside Uttara mimamsa.

The doctrinal aspects of the above Dvaita systems are: World is real, difference between Jiva and Ishwara, etc. (pancha bheda), that Paramatma is Supreme (sarvottama) and Independent, Svatantra, multiplicity of jivas, saayujya, etc. mukti-s.

He also names the proponents of the Shad Darshanas listed above. What is significant is that the author, a Madhva, has listed the Madhva system along with the Sankhya, etc. schools and the doctrinal aspects as common to all these systems.

One can see the images in the Advaitin google groups post.

One recalls the observation in the ‘History of Indian Philosophy’, Vol.2, of Das Gupta on p.192 that the realist schools such as that of Madhva have been influenced by the Vaisheshika doctrine.

Given below are a few passages from the Bhashyas of Shankaracharya where the terms Dvaita and Dvaitin are used in the context of Sankhya, Yoga, Nyaya, Bauddha and Jaina.

द्वैतिनो हि ते सांख्या योगाश्च नात्मैकत्वदर्शिनः । (ब्रह्मसूत्रभाष्यम्द्वितीयोऽध्यायःप्रथमः पादः सूत्रम् ३ – भाष्यम्)
कपिलकणादबुद्धार्हतादिदृष्ट्यनुसारिणो द्वैतिनो …..शास्त्रोपपत्तिभ्यामवधारितत्वादद्वयात्मदर्शनं सम्यग्दर्शनम् , तद्बाह्यत्वान्मिथ्यादर्शनमन्यत् । इतश्च मिथ्यादर्शनं द्वैतिनां रागद्वेषादिदोषास्पदत्वात् । (माण्डूक्योपनिषद्भाष्यम्कारिका – भाष्यम्)
तस्यैतस्यागमार्थस्य अद्वैतदर्शनस्य प्रतिपक्षभूता द्वैतिनो वैनाशिकाश्च (ಬೌದ್ಧರು) । (माण्डूक्योपनिषद्भाष्यम्कारिका – भाष्यम्)
यथा द्वैतिनां सर्वेषां बन्धावस्थायामेव शास्त्राद्यर्थवत्त्वम् , न मुक्तावस्थायाम् , एवम् ॥ …..ननु आत्मनः बन्धमुक्तावस्थे परमार्थत एव वस्तुभूते द्वैतिनां सर्वेषाम् । (श्रीमद्भगवद्गीताभाष्यम्त्रयोदशोऽध्यायःश्लोक २ – भाष्यम्)

In the Nyaya Kosha the author mentions Advaita along with the etymology given by Sureshwaracharya in the Brihadaranyaka Bhashya Vartika and a passage from Madhusudana Saraswati’s Siddhanta Bindu.

See the images in this location: https://groups.google.com/g/advaitin/c/6J_7oPtvzV4

Om Tat Sat

Posted by: adbhutam | December 3, 2021

What are the marks of a true Vaishnava?

What are the true marks of a Vaishnava?

In the Kapila Upapurana 21st chapter, there is a short discourse on Jnana Yoga. Nandikeshwara asks Mahaveda ‘What are the marks ‘signs’ of a Vaishnava, the branding of the image of Shankha, Chakra, etc. on the body?’
Mahadeva replies:

Giving up desire and anger, those with a loin cloth, with sweet words, always their heart filled with ananda – these are the marks of a Vaishnava.

Singing the glories of Govinda shedding tears of joy, endowed with compassion, truth, free of the idea of ‘I’ and ‘mine’, worshiping the gods, brahmanas and making noble persons happy – these noble traits are the marks of a vaishnava.  

Others, without these traits, but with just the external marks of Shankha, Chakra, etc. are only vainglorious, making a show of the marks.  

From this we come to know that the physical marks of the conch, etc. is only secondary; unessential. The true Vaishnava traits are following and internalizing the ones enumerated above. Whether one is a bhasma dhaari or without any external marks, but possesses these noble traits, he is the true Vaishnava in the primary sense. In this very chapter the Hari Hara abheda is brought out in several ways along with the censure of perception of difference between the Two. Also, since the context is about the knowledge needed for Mukti, the traits listed here are the means to attain such knowledge. Someone without these qualities, even though dons the external marks, does not qualify to be a true Bhagavata. Only those who indulge in critiquing  and insulting others actually destroy the Bhagavata Dharmas.    

मूर्खो वदति विष्णाय विद्वान् वदति विष्णवे। उभयोः सदृशं पुण्यं भावग्राही जनार्दनः ||

An unlettered one says ‘Vishnaaya’ while a learned man says ‘Vishnave’. Both of them get the same punya since the Lord Janardana is pleased only with the true devotion.
We are reminded of the famous song ‘Vaishnava Janato..’. https://allpoetry.com/Vaishnava-janatho-(With-English-Translation)
अहिंसा प्रथमं पुष्पं पुष्पमिन्द्रियनिग्रहः
सर्वभूतदयापुष्पं क्षमापुष्पं विशेषतः ।
ज्ञानपुष्पं तपःपुष्पं शान्तिपुष्पं तथैव च
सत्यमष्टविधं पुष्पं विष्णोः प्रीतिकरं भवेत् ॥


Read here the selected verses of the Kapila Upa purana: page 83 in this link  https://vedicreserve.miu.edu/upapurana/kapila_purana.pdf

Om Tat Sat

Posted by: adbhutam | November 5, 2021

Short rendering of Shankara’s life in three languages

Vidwan Sri Ramana Sharma (Nerur) has rendered the short account of Shankaracharya’s life in these three languages:


https://youtu.be/6b0DFpGUT1I     Tamil

https://youtu.be/9FlklooM9RM    Sanskrit

https://youtu.be/VcJROCkUTYw   English

Here is another one:

Rendered in musical Harikatha style… 

Om Tat Sat

Posted by: adbhutam | October 29, 2021

Glimpses of Vedanta in the Purva Mimamsa doctrine

In the Jaimini doctrine one can see many Upanishadic passages cited. In the two seminal texts of this system, Kumarila Bhatta’s ‘Tantra Vartika’ and ‘Shloka Vartika’ too one encounters passages from the Vedanta. 

Commentary to Tantra Vartika, ‘Nyaya Sudah’ of Bhatta Someshwara, too has discussed the Vedantic concepts of Saguna and Nirguna Brahman and their application in the Mimamsa doctrine.  
So also the ‘Mimamsa shastra kutuhala’ of Kamalakara Bhatta too cites Kumarila Bhatta so conclude that the moksha of this doctrine is non-different from that of the Vedanta.


Also, Sri Ayyanna Dikshita in his ‘Vyasa Tatparya Nirnaya’ has cited the Shloka Vartika and Parthasarathy Misra’s ‘Shastra Dipika’ to emphasise that the Mimamsa doctrine has considered Advaita alone as their Vedantic opponent and rejected it.  

Images from all the above texts are appended here: 


https://groups.google.com/g/advaitin/c/vTliXKmJ-0c

Om Tat Sat

Posted by: adbhutam | October 23, 2021

Yet another Mahavakya in the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad

In the Brahmasutra Bhashya 1.3.43 there is a discussion about the status of the entity that experiences sleep/transmigrates (exits the body upon death). As part of this discussion, Shankara cites the following passage Br.Up.4.4.22/

Brihadaranyaka Upanishad mantra 4.4.22:
स वा एष महानज आत्मा योऽयं विज्ञानमयः प्राणेषु य एषोऽन्तर्हृदय आकाशस्तस्मिञ्छेते सर्वस्य वशी सर्वस्येशानः सर्वस्याधिपतिः स न साधुना कर्मणा भूयान्नो एवासाधुना कनीयानेष सर्वेश्वर एष भूताधिपतिरेष भूतपाल एष (only a part of this very lengthy mantra is cited here.  One could read the entire mantra, translation, the bhashya translation (by Swami Madhavananda, Advaita Ashrama.)  

22. That great, birthless Self which is identified  with the intellect and is in the midst of the organs, lies in the ether that is within the heart.

Bhashya of the above passage: स इति उक्तपरामर्शार्थः ; कोऽसौ उक्तः परामृश्यते ? तं प्रतिनिर्दिशति — य एष विज्ञानमय इति — अतीतानन्तरवाक्योक्तसंप्रत्ययो मा भूदिति, यः एषः ; कतमः एषः इत्युच्यते — विज्ञानमयः प्राणेष्विति ; उक्तवाक्योल्लिङ्गनं संशयनिवृत्त्यर्थम् ; उक्तं हि पूर्वं जनकप्रश्नारम्भे ‘कतम आत्मेति योऽयं विज्ञानमयः प्राणेषु’ (बृ. उ. ४ । ३ । ७) इत्यादि । एतदुक्तं भवति — योऽयम् ‘विज्ञानमयः प्राणेषु’ इत्यादिना वाक्येन प्रतिपादितः स्वयं ज्योतिरात्मा, स एषः कामकर्माविद्यानामनात्मधर्मत्वप्रतिपादनद्वारेण मोक्षितः परमात्मभावमापादितः — पर एवायं नान्य इति ; एष सः साक्षान्महानज आत्मेत्युक्तः । योऽयं विज्ञानमयः प्राणेष्विति यथाव्याख्यातार्थ एव । य एषः अन्तर्हृदये हृदयपुण्डरीकमध्ये य एष आकाशो बुद्धिविज्ञानसंश्रयः, तस्मिन्नाकाशे बुद्धिविज्ञानसहिते शेते तिष्ठति ; अथवा सम्प्रसादकाले अन्तर्हृदये य एष आकाशः पर एव आत्मा निरुपाधिकः विज्ञानमयस्य स्वस्वभावः, तस्मिन् स्वस्वभावे परमात्मनि आकाशाख्ये शेते ; 
// Hence the words, ‘That great,’ etc., recapitulating what has been stated. That refers to something already mentioned.What is it? It is pointed out by the words, ‘Which is identified with the intellect,’ etc., which are intended to preclude any reference to the Self just mentioned (verse 20). Which one is meant then? The answer is: Which is identified with the intellect and is in the midst of the organs. The passage is quoted for settling the doubt, for at the beginning of Janaka’s questions it has been stated, ‘Which is the self?-This (infinite entity) that is identified with the intellect and is in the midst of the organs,’ etc. (IV. iii. 7). The idea is this: By the demonstration of desire, work and ignorance as attributes of the, non-Self, the self-effulgent Atman that has been set forth in the passage in question is here freed from them and transformed into the Supreme Self, and it is emphatically stated, ‘It is the Supreme Self, and nothing else’; it is directly spoken·Of as the great, birthless Self. The words, ‘Which is identified with the intellect and is in the midst of the ·organs,’ have been already explained and have the same meaning here. Lies in the ether that is within the lotus of the heart, the ether (Akasa) that is the seat of the intellect. The Atman lives i.n that ether conltaining the intellect. Or the meaning may be that theBy the demonstration of desire, work and ignorance…as attributes of the, non-Self, the self-effulgent Atman that has been set forth in the passage in question is here freed from them and transformed into the Supreme Self, and it is emphatically stated, ‘It is the Supreme Self, and nothing else’; it is directly spoken·Of as the great, birthless Self. The words, ‘Which is identified with the intellect and is in the midst of the ·organs,’ have been already explained and have the same meaning here.//


To put the Mahavakya in a crisp manner: योऽयं विज्ञानमयः प्राणेषु …स वा एष महानज आत्मा [That consciousness, jiva, that is situated amidst the organs…he alone is the Great unborn Self.]


Sri Mani Dravid Sastrigal said that this mantra Br.Up.4.4.22 is a mahavakya while explaining the Brahma Sutra Bhashya.
From the mantra too we can appreciate that it is with a view to realize this self that one renounces all. The Neti Neti is also part of this mantra. 


Thus, we have an unambiguous mahavakya here. ‘Aham Brahmasmi’ of 1.4.10 of this very Upanishad is quite a popular one indeed. 

Om Tat Sat

Posted by: adbhutam | October 14, 2021

‘Dvaita accepts body-adhyasa’ 

Here is an updated article on the above topic.  New evidences are added including a short video clip of the late Pejawar Swamiji on taking the body as the self is bhrama, mithyaajnana:

regards

Posted by: adbhutam | October 13, 2021

The whole of the Vedantic essence in just one mantra

The heart of Vedanta ‘Brahma Satyam jagat mithya, jivo brahmaiva na aparah’ (Brahman alone is the transcendental Real and the apparent world is not real and the individual jiva is none other than Brahman)  is encapsulated in the mahavakya mantra of the Chandogya Upanishad:

स य एषोऽणिमैतदात्म्यमिदं सर्वं तत्सत्यं स आत्मा तत्त्वमसि श्वेतकेतो
Sage Uddalaka addresses his son Shvetaketu: The subtle Sat, Brahman, is the fundamental cause of this creation. This is the Atma. You are That.’This part of the above passage //The subtle Sat, Brahman, is the fundamental cause of this creation.This is the Atma//  teaches, based on another passage of this very Upanishad –  स य एषोऽणिमैतदात्म्यमिदं सर्वं तत्सत्यं स आत्मा which means ‘Have you known that one whose knowledge amounts to knowing everything?’ and replies giving the analogies of clay – clay products, gold – gold products and iron – iron products.  The transformations are mere names and insubstantial as names and forms but the substance in them is their material cause, clay, etc.

Based on this analogy, the mantra part स य एषोऽणिमैतदात्म्यमिदं सर्वं तत्सत्यं स आत्मा  (The subtle Sat, Brahman, is the fundamental cause of this creation. This is the Atma’) teaches: Brahman alone is real and the world is unreal. 
The other part of the mantra तत्त्वमसि श्वेतकेतो means ‘the jiva is none other than Brahman’
In this manner, the Chandogya Upanishad, one among the principal ten, teaches, just in one sentence, the seminal purport of the entire Vedanta.  
The statement ‘Brhama Satyam……….’ is established in the Niralambopanishat:
https://sanskritdocuments.org/doc_upanishhat/niralamba.html

Om Tat Sat

Posted by: adbhutam | October 1, 2021

How indeed can Brahma jnanam eradicate jiva’s samsara?

The very fact that Badarayana wants Brahma jijnasa to be undertaken implies that ‘Only on the condition that the jiva is in truth Brahman, the knowledge of Brahman can be said to dispel samsara.’ How is this? All schools accept that the idea of oneself being the body-mind complex is an adhyasa. Therefore samsara is due to this fundamental adhyasa: taking the body to be the Atman. This is due to one’s not knowing one’s true svarupam. Now, if this situation is to be remedied, one logically has to get to know who one is. But the Brahmasutra says ‘enquiry into Brahman is to be undertaken.’ How can Brahma jnanam eradicate samsara? If I am ignorant of a pot, I should get to know the pot and not the cloth. Cloth knowledge will not remedy pot-ignorance. Brahma jnana cannot dispel Atma vishayaka ajnanam. Thus, the undeniable implication of Badarayana is: the Jiva is in truth Brahman. Only on this condition and on no other condition can Brahma jnanam dispel Atma ajnana engendered samsara. Therefore it is only the Advaita Bhashya that is the true commentary of the Brahma sutras. The tenets of Brahma satyam jagat mithya jivo brahmaiva na aparah is eminently established in the sutras.


 ‘शास्त्रदृष्ट्या तूपदेशो वामदेववत्’ (ब्र. सू. १ । १ । ३०)  Here the sutra teaches the identity of jiva is Brahman.
‘तदनन्यत्वमारम्भणशब्दादिभ्यः’ (ब्र. सू. २ । १ । १४)  This sutra teaches that the world has no existence apart from its cause Brahman.


These are only indicative; many other sutras too establish the Advaitic tenet of: brahma satyam, jagat mithya, jiva brahmaiva..

image.png


Om Tat Sat

Posted by: adbhutam | September 18, 2021

Samsara due to Anadi avidya – Srimadbhagavata

English:

Passages from Shankara’s Bhashya with translation are provided. 

Download the article here: (Translated to English by Sri Ajay Majumdar)
https://adbhutam.files.wordpress.com/2021/09/anadi-avidya-samsara-bhagavatam-eng.pdf

A Kannada version of this article is also available:
https://adbhutam.files.wordpress.com/2021/09/anadi-avidya-samsara-bhagavatam-kan.pdf

Om

In the 13th chapter of the Bh.Gita, which is easily the core Vedanta chapter, verily a miniature of the Adhyasa bhashya, we discern a systematic evolution of the Advaitic thought spread over a few verses.
The chapter begins by declaring that the objectified body, kshetram, is the known and the knower thereof, the kshetrajna, is the subject.  Here the known-knower idea is taught.
श्री भगवानुवाच
इदं शरीरं कौन्तेय क्षेत्रमित्यभिधीयते।
एतद्यो वेत्ति तं प्राहुः क्षेत्रज्ञ इति तद्विदः।।13.1।।
The Blessed Lord said O son of Kunti, this body is referred to as the ‘field’. Those who are versed in this call him who is conscious of it as the ‘knower of the field’.

In the very next verse the knower-consciousness in every body is taught as non-different from Brahman.
क्षेत्रज्ञं चापि मां विद्धि सर्वक्षेत्रेषु भारत।
क्षेत्रक्षेत्रज्ञयोर्ज्ञानं यत्तज्ज्ञानं मतं मम।।13.2।।

And, O scion of the Bharata dynasty, understand Me to be the ‘Knower of the field’ in all the fields. In My opinion, that is Knowledge which is the knowlege of th field and the knower of the field.

Further down, the chapter specifies the entire world of the body-mind complex and the outside world of objects as the kshetram – a shift from the first verse where only the body was stated to be the kshetram. This shift is to make the definition of the kshetram all-inclusive.
महाभूतान्यहङ्कारो बुद्धिरव्यक्तमेव च।
इन्द्रियाणि दशैकं च पञ्च चेन्द्रियगोचराः।।13.5।।
The great elements, egoism, intellect and the Unmanifest itself; the ten organs and the one, and the five objects of the senses;

इच्छा द्वेषः सुखं दुःखं सङ्घातश्चेतनाधृतिः।
एतत्क्षेत्रं समासेन सविकारमुदाहृतम्।।13.6।।
Desire, repulsion, happiness, sorrow, the aggregate (of body and organs), sentience, fortitude – this field, together with its modifications, has been spoken of briefly.

Then the means to know the Knower, kshetrajna are specified. Later the Kshetrajna, Brahman-Consciousness, is explained.  The cause of bondage, ignorance, is stated. 
Towards the end, the ‘knowing’ taught in the first verse, undergoes a phenomenal shift: it is actually illuminating that is knowing:
यथा प्रकाशयत्येकः कृत्स्नं लोकमिमं रविः।
क्षेत्रं क्षेत्री तथा कृत्स्नं प्रकाशयति भारत।।13.333।।
As the single sun illumines this whole world, similarly, O descendant of the Bharata dynasty, the Knower of the field illumines the whole field.

This is by no means an ordinary shift; it changes the very perspective of one’s conception of the Atman: it is not knowing the objective world but it is actually illuminating the entire knower-knowing-known triad that is actually what the Kshetrjna is for. This shift is necessitated by the fact that even the knowing process, which includes the knowing instruments and the knowing act and the object known and the knowledge arising thereof – all this duality is to be further encapsulated as just a known – kshetram, the illumined, and the illuminer-consciousness, the kshetrajna.
Even this duality needs to be transcended to get at the Advaitic Tattva. This is accomplished in the very last verse of the chapter:क्षेत्रक्षेत्रज्ञयोरेवमन्तरं ज्ञानचक्षुषा।
भूतप्रकृतिमोक्षं च ये विदुर्यान्ति ते परम्।।13.34।।
Those who know thus through the eye of wisdom the distinction between the field and the Knower of the field, and the annihilation of the Matrix of beings – they reach the Supreme.
The grand climax is this culmination of the evolution of the Advaitic thought: There is just the Consciousness and nothing that It is conscious of: the whole of kshetram is ‘annihilated’, annulled, as mithya.  Now the Kshetrajna-Cosnciousness remains as the non-dual Truth.  
Thus the evolution is well articulated: From knowing > illuminating>just being. The kshetram too undergoes this evolutionary process: From the ‘known’ object > the illumined object > the annihilated, non-existent, object. 

Ekam eva advitiyam satyam.  This idea is demonstrated in the Upadeshasahasri by Bhagavatpada in the following three verses.  The commentary of Sri Rama Tirtha is also appended:

image.png
image.png
image.png

Swami Jagadananda’s English translation:

image.png
image.png

Om Tat Sat

Older Posts »

Categories