BONDAGE AND LIBERATION – LOGICAL OR ILLOGICAL?

The following is sourced from
http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/SUMADHWASEVA/message/23121

// See the beauty of how Mahan Sri Vijayeendra Tirtha (Paramaguru of Sri
Raghavendra Tirtha)
explains the illogic of Adwaitham through a simple analogy or Upamaanam. Mahan
Sri Vijayeendra Tirthar jestingly asks: “Will a mother willingly and knowingly
give poison to her child and, then also give an anti-dote for the poison? The
answer is NO. Similarly, would anyone knowingly enter/ jump into dirt and then
clean oneselves up from dirt? The answer is NO. So, why would the Lord create
Jivatmas and knowingly put Avidya, Agyanam into them that then makes them think
that they are different from the Paramatma which supposedly they are not, as
alluded by the Adwaitins? Then why would the Lord also give them ways and means
as prescribed by Adwaitins (i.e., study of scriptures, atma vichaara etc. etc.)
by sending a messenger who propounds Adwaita, as an anti-dote to overcome this
Avidya? Similarly, why would the Jivaatmas enter into dirt knowingly if they
were originally unsullied that makes them deluded and, then later study
scriptures to realise that they are the same as Brahman???Just does not make any
logical sense, isn’t it? Same with Adwaitham – just doesn’t make any logical
sense. People hear these Adwaitham from some Swami —nanda (there are so many
of these Adwaitham propounding Swami —nanda) or read their books and, then
repeat what they have said like a parrot or copy and paste from their sites
without thinking. //

A Response to the purported criticism by Sri Vijayeendra Tirtha

[ Sri Vijayeendra Tirtha (1539 – 1595 AD) a revered Acharya of the Dvaita school
is said to have been a contemporary of Sri Appayya Dikshitar. According to the
Madhwas both have had a number of debates and Appayya lost every time. I have
heard from a research scholar that both schools record about a particular debate
between the two and both schools have written in their books that their side
won and the other, upon the humiliation, made a secret exit from the location.]

Sri Madhwacharya in his bhashya for the Mandukya passage

//anAdi mAyayA supto yadA jIvaH prabuddhyate
ajam anidram asvapnam advaitam budhyate tadA // [This is a kArikA (1.16) as per
Advaitins and a shruti passage for Dvaitins]

[16 When the jiva, asleep under the influence of beginningless mAyA, is
awakened, it then realizes the birthless, sleepless and dreamless Non-duality.]

The Mandukya bhashya of Madhwa is available in this pdf:

http://www.dvaita.net/pdf/shruti/manduka/mbtcomm.pdf

Here the mantra of this Upanishad is numbered 2.8 in Sanskrit numerals on page
11 of the pdf:

Sri Madhwacharya comments by citing a ‘prakAshikA’ verse:

This verse that comes as the commentary for the above mantra can be found a few
lines below the above mantra on page 12 of the pdf:

anAdimAyayA viShNorichchayA svApito yadA

tayA prabodhamAyAti tadA viShNum prapashyati.

[Due to anAdimAyA which means ViShNu’s Will, the jIva has been made to/put into
the slumber of samsara. When the jIva, owing to ViShNu’s Will wakes up, then he
gets the vision/realization of ViShNu.]

From the above it is clear that according to Madhwa the jiva is in samsara
because Vishnu has willed so. And the jiva’s waking up to the asamsAric truth is
also due to the Lord’s will. Sri Vijayendra Tirtha’s analogy of: //a mother
willingly and knowingly giving poison to her child and, then also giving an
antidote for the poison // accurately fits the commentarial statement of Madhwa.
For, samsAra is something to be got rid of even for the Dvaitins. And The Lord
(mother) has caused the jiva to be in samsara (poison) by willing so. And by
providing the jiva ways and means (antidote) as prescribed by dwaitins (i.e.,
study of scriptures, bhakti, atma vichaara etc. etc.) by sending a messenger who
propounds dwaita which is the antidote for the poison of samsara the Lord
(mother) wills that the jiva comes out of samsara.

• Madhvas accept that the one who gives ajnAna to the jiva is also Hari alone

(A verse from the nyAyasudhA-parimaLa 1-1-2 has been cited by Dr.A.V.Nagasampige
in his Kannada book ‘mata traya sameekShA p.154: ‘tvam muktido bandhado ato mato
naH. tvam jnAnado ajnAnadashchAsi viShNo. [O lord, we know You as the one who
gives (us) liberation and who gives bondage. You are the One that gives Jnana
and ajnAna.]

 

• According to Madhwa siddhAnta

http://www.sumadhwaseva.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/MADHWA-SIDDANTA-ENGLISH.p\df

• 12. What is the swaroopa of jeeva? – There are three swaroopaas // 1) Muktiyogya – jnaanananda swaroopa,// those who are truly jnAnAndasvarUpa have beenput into samsara by the Lord by His willing so. According to the above citedKannada book, jivas are of chidAnanda svarUpa. That book does not differentiatebetween jiva-s on this ground.

• Why does the Lord do so? 9. What paramathma will get by srushti? Paramathma will not get anything by srusti. He does not need anything. Hedoes it as if it is his leela.

• All the attributes of the Lord remain in Him inseparably.

• 15. How does the jeeva get moksha from janmantara kleshaas? – by the mercyof Srihari only.

• 16. How does it happen?- by Shravana, manana, hariguru bhakti, and shama damaadi.

• The prospect of the jiva in Advaita ‘knowingly’ coming to samsara is alsofarfetched since the shAnkara bhAShya for the said kArikA is clear that it isdue to its own avidyA that the jiva is in samsara.

• The answer to the question // would anyone knowingly enter/ jump into dirtand then clean oneself up from dirt?// is also available in the MadhvasiddhAnta: Hari gives the jivas ajnAna in order that they remain in samsara. And later gives them jnAna. And jivas are paratantra-s and have to depend on Hari for being in bandha andgetting mokSha.

• Neither Dvaita nor Advaita lends to the theory of ‘the Lord creatingjivAtma-s’. They are anAdi in both schools. Only that in Advaita jIvatvam is abhrama, again not caused by Ishwara.

In conclusion, I would like to point out that whether in Dvaita or in Advaita,
bondage is due to ajnAna and moksha is due to jnAna. While Dvaita stresses
Hari’s instrumentality explicitly, Advaita acknowledges IshvarAnugraha for
AdvaitavAsanA but does not admit that Ishwara is responsible for bondage. I
have observed that during the nyAyAmRta-Advaitasiddhi deliberations that I have attended in Bangalore at the pUrNaprajnA samshodhana mandiram, no difference of opinion came about on the question on ‘how samsara comes about’.

When the various points mentioned in the foregoing are kept in mind there will
hardly be any room for the kind of criticism purportedly made by Sri Vijayendra
Tirtha. And most importantly, anAdimAyA and samsara are not within the gamut
of logic. However much one might try, one cannot explain them logically. That
is why Advaita holds all this ‘anirvachanIya’.

Om Tat Sat