By : Shri Kesava Rao Tadipatri
Shriman Madhwacharya |
Introduction:
At the very outset, I would like
to point out that have great admiration for Sri Ramanuja that when the ever
confusing points of Advaita were ruling, he made tremendous progress in
pointing out the many flaws in there, by founding VishishtAdvaita. However
due to the will of the Lord some of the newer concepts introduced themselves
are not aligned with shashtras.
Sri Madhvacarya, in aligning his philosophy with the shashtras, pointed out the many shortcomings of previous philosophies and reintroduced earlier known concepts and solidified Tattvavada and set it on a firm foundation later built upon by the luminaries of his tradition. More importantly, he also foresaw the advent of people with future philosophies such as that of the Gaudiya sampradaya for example and preempted them by giving their statements as Purvapaksha (Objections) and refuting them with statements of Siddhanta (Resolution) well in advance.
Even an insignificant being like me can see and point out some of the deficiencies in other philosophies, but that is based on the wonderful works of Sri Madhvacarya and his glorious parampara. So, an effective rebuttal of Sri ParakAla yati was accomplished by Acharya Madhva and the Guru parampara and I am only pointing out those points.
Sri Madhvacarya, in aligning his philosophy with the shashtras, pointed out the many shortcomings of previous philosophies and reintroduced earlier known concepts and solidified Tattvavada and set it on a firm foundation later built upon by the luminaries of his tradition. More importantly, he also foresaw the advent of people with future philosophies such as that of the Gaudiya sampradaya for example and preempted them by giving their statements as Purvapaksha (Objections) and refuting them with statements of Siddhanta (Resolution) well in advance.
Even an insignificant being like me can see and point out some of the deficiencies in other philosophies, but that is based on the wonderful works of Sri Madhvacarya and his glorious parampara. So, an effective rebuttal of Sri ParakAla yati was accomplished by Acharya Madhva and the Guru parampara and I am only pointing out those points.
Perhaps most ironical to see is
that based on the purvapaksha statements on the following write up, VishishtAdvaita
does not believe in Visesha, while having that in the name itself! Visi..a
advaita or qualified Monism is perhaps true to its name. Visesha is
bheda vyavahara when abheda is there - that is speaking of difference when
there is no difference.VishishtAdvaita opposes Advaita, but what Advaita
accomplishes by vyAvahArikatva and UpAdhi and MAyAvAda, all that is
accomplished by one entity called “dharma-bhuta-jñana”..
1. Advaita says that the jiva and Brahman are same or nondifferent in the sense that they are identified as one.
VishishtAdvaita says that the jiva
and Brahman are same or non-different in the sense that they are equal.
2. Advaita says that they appear to be different because of vyAvahArika satya of jagat - that is before liberation.
VishishtAdvaita says that they
appear to be unequal because of DBJ not expanding to infinity - that is before
liberation.
3. Advaita says that when vyAvahArikatva melts away and when ajñana goes away and when jñana dawns, the jiva is identified as one same as Brahman. This happens in moksha or paramArtha.
3. Advaita says that when vyAvahArikatva melts away and when ajñana goes away and when jñana dawns, the jiva is identified as one same as Brahman. This happens in moksha or paramArtha.
VishishtAdvaita says that when
dharma bhuta jnana expands to infinity, the jiva becomes equal to Brahman. This
happens in moksha.
4. Advaita says that the jiva needs the grace of the Lord in vyAvahArikatva, but in moksha, the jiva is the God.
VishishtAdvaita says that the jiva
needs the grace of the Lord for making its dharma bhuta jnana expand infinitely
in moksha, where the jiva has six qualities like jñana and Ananda equal to
God.
The purpose of this write-up is to
call a spade a spade and respond to the purvapaxins point by point.
The whole document can be seen in this link
VishishtAdvaita vishleShana vivechanam
Other rebuttals by Shri Kesava Rao Tadipatri :
Krishnastu Bhagavan swayam
Link to Jaina Rebuttal
Avidya in Advaita & Gumma of Purandaradasa
Did Vidyamanyaru & BNK err
Krishnastu Bhagavan swayam
Link to Jaina Rebuttal
Avidya in Advaita & Gumma of Purandaradasa
Did Vidyamanyaru & BNK err
I'm not able to open the link given above. Can you please help me out in this . Thanks for the wonderful upload
ReplyDeleteHare Srinivasa
Namaskara, We have sent you email with the link again. Please let us know if you have further problem.. Thank you for visiting..
ReplyDeleteSir, wonderful write-up and nice presentation of differences between the two schools of thought; I have one doubt: This pertains to point no. 9 under ‘Final conclusion’. Coining of term ‘Aveshavatara’ is wrong (as pointed out in the write-up). Leaving aside the coinage of the term, their ‘Aveshavatara’ seems to be similar to Dvaita’s concept of ‘Avesha’, although Avataras (like Parashurama and Veda Vyasa) have been brought under the umbrella of Aveshas. The Dvaita objection ‘Om Poornamadah…’ may be applicable when Avatara is treated as Amsha/Apurna; it may not be applicable, however, if Avatara is treated as Jiva with Vishnu’s Avesha. The objection offered can be the quote from Garuda Purana, which identifies Parashurama with Vishnu (as Avatara).
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteBecause two entities have same type of experience doesn't necessarily make them 'equal' Me & Bhagavan experiencing the same Ananda doesn't necessarily make me equal to them. Just as Jiva is Anadi, like Paramatma it would be extremely ignorant to conclude that both are equal.
ReplyDelete