-1-

(7TH PROOF)

MY FURTHER TEN RESEARCH

PAPERS

by
Sa stranidhi, Dvaita Veda- nta Rasaja,
-
Madhvamunipriya, Maha- mahopa- dhya- ya
DR. B. N. K. SHARMA, M.A., Ph.D., D.Litt.
(Recipient of President of India, Govt. of Maha-ra- s.tra,
Central Sa- hitya Academy, Vidya-ma- nya, Vya- sapit. ha
& Vya-sa-Madhva Seva- Awards)
Retired HOD & Professor of Sanskrit
and Ardhama-gadhi
Ruparel College, Mumbai - 400 016.

2002
MY FURTHER TEN RESEARCH PAPERS -2- (iii)
by
(7TH PROOF) CONTENTS
DR. B. N. K. SHARMA,
E-mail : bnksharma@usa.net
Preface iv

Abbreviations vii

1. Achievements of Dvaita Veda- nta &

Published by : The Author, Its Relevance to Modern World 1
4/2 Shah Building,
Bhagat Road, Mumbai - 400 016. 2. Maha- va- kyas & Via Negativa Methodology 19

3. Na- sadiya Su-kta of R.gveda & Nirvises.a Brahman 23

4. Philosophical Background of Madhva's Use

Printed at : Navin Printers, of Vis.n.u & Na- ra- yan.a to Denote Veda- ntic Brahman 25
Near Ruparel College,
Matunga Road (West), 5. An Inbuilt Weakness in the Nya-ya View
Mumbai - 400 016. of Paratah. - Pra- ma- n.ya 35

6. Conception & Configuration of Sa- ks.i in Dvaita

& Advaita Schools An Appraisal 37

Pages : vii + 72 7. An Open Letter to Madam Romilla Thapar 41

8. Vijayindra - Vijaya Ka- vya & the Pontifical

Date of Vijayindra Tirtha 43

Price : Rs. 75/- 9. Date of Madhva Re-established 49

10. T. S. Ra- ghavedran's Research Bubble Burst 63

Appendix 67
June 2002
Copyright Reserved by the Author. Index 70
 (iv)
PREFACE
With the publication of this my second batch of (ten) Research
Papers, I lay down my pen on the completion of my 93rd birthday
on June 9th this year.
I wish to take this oppor tunity for expressing my thanks to
the wide circle of readers of my works in different par ts of my
country and in the West who have expressed their appreciation
of them. My thanks are due specially to many eminent Western
scholars who have given their valuable Forewords to some of
them.
There are certain great ideas behind M's writings - ideas
of tremendous philosophical power and potentialities such as
1) His concept of Sa-ks.i as the ultimate intuitive principle of
absolute epistemological certitude, the apperceiver of all knowledge
and its validity as a God - given gift to all thinking selves.
2) His theory of Svaru- pa-Vises.as which sustain the inseparable
relation of identity in difference between a substance and its
intrinsic attributes, be it Brahman (God) and its intrinsic attributes,
the souls and other substances in the world of experience (as
-
established by the appositional use as Satyam, Jna-nam, Anandah
Brahma) - which strikes at the root of Akhan.d.a- rthava-da as applied
to Brahman and its attributes in Advaita. 3) His doctrine of Brahman
as Sarvana-mava- n - bearer of the names of all the gods of the
Vedic Pantheon in their highest and fullest etymological sense
of conno-denotation, which rescuesVedic religion from the charge
of Polytheism, familiarised by Western Savants. 4) His bold stand
on the status of Memory as a valid source of knowledge about
which there has been a wrangling among philosophers, Indian
and Western, 5) And his new theory of Creation in Veda-nta
as Para- dhina Vises.a- pti as applied to eternal substances in finite
reality admitted in the Upanis.adic thought such as time, space
and Jivas. It is surprising that many pioneering writers on Dvaita
thought from within the fold had not highlighted these aspects
-3- (v)
(7TH PROOF) of M's philosophy in their writings which may possibly explain
to some extent the neglect of this system of Veda-nta by most
of our celebrated modern writers on Indian Philosophy till now.
Whatever may be the reasons for this regrettable state of
affairs, the one- sided over emphasis on Advaita Philosophy
and the summary disposal of Dvaita in three - and - a - half
pages in his Critical Survey of Indian Philosophy by Dr. C. D.
Sharma and his characterisation of M as a born foe of S are
inexcusable. Even Dr. Radhakrishnan has not been fair to M
whose philosophy he has disposed of in thirteen pages in his
Indian Philosophy . That apart, he has side-lined it as belonging
to the class of minor religious systems belonging more to the
religious history of India than to its philosophical development.
No wonder others who followed him have also done so, with
the memorable exception of Dr. Dasgupta. Needless to say,
Dr. Jwalaprasad in his History of Indian Philosophy (1956) opines
that "there has been no original contribution to Indian Philosophy
for centuries ".
Such was the vitiated atmosphere in the academic circles
when I came out of the portals of the Presidency College of
Madras University. I have often heard my own Professor proclaim
that M was a "Pugilistic philosopher". It was this gross imbalance
in our study of Indian Philosophy, par ticularly of Veda- nta
Sa- stra, which motivated me to try to restore the balance of
power and attention to the study of Veda- nta of all its major
schools, in our temples of learning .
In my endeavor I was very much inspired by Dr. D. M. Dutta,
author of Six Ways of Knowing , who in a communication to me
wrote to say that he was very much impressed by M's stand
on the epistemological priority of one's Sa- ks.yanubhava about
the reality of human experience when and where it clashes with
the apparent message of scripture about the illusory nature of
all worldly experience, falling within the exclusive domain of the
intuiting self of man. Similarly Dr. S. Bagchi has stated in his
 (vi) -4- (vii)

Inductive Reasoning that students of Indian thought can always (7TH PROOF) ABBREVIATIONS
- -
expect to learn something fresh and new from the writings of A. A Aitareya A ran.yaka
-
the thinkers of Ma dhva School. Such weighty observations of Ait. Up. Aitareya Upanis.ad
these distinguished savants have been the constant sources
AV Anuvya- khya- na of M (Prof. K. T. Pandurangi Edition)
of my inspiration in my chosen field.
B Brahman
Looking back at this distance of time on my own performance, Brh. Up. Brhada- ran.yaka Upanis.ad
I am thankful to Providence for having enabled me to achieve
BS Brahmasu-tras
my goal. And I earnestly hope the like-minded among coming
BSB Brahmasu- tra Bha- s.ya
generations, here and in the West, will carry it to further perfection.
Cha- n. Up. Cha- ndogya Upanis.ad
I am thankful to my son Dr. Sudhindra K. Bhavani, Rtd. Prof.
ET English Translation
of Sanskrit & Principal, K. J. Somaiya College of Arts & Commerce,
GB Gita- Bha- s.ya
Vidyavihar, Mumbai, for all that he has done to get this work
published in record time. My special thanks are due to my niece J Jayatir tha ( )
Kum. Usha CSK Rao, my grand daughter Sau. Madhavi Arun Jai. Br. Jaiminiya Bra- hman.a
and my grand daughter-in-law Sau. Asha Purandar Bhavani for M Madhva- ca- rya ( fl )
preparing the press copy of the manuscripts. They all deserve
Mbh. TN Maha- bha- rata Ta- tparya Nirn.aya
kudos. My thanks also are due to Shri Narayan Shetty and Shri
MGB Madhva's Gita- bha- s.ya
Kiran Shetty and their Staff at Navin Printers for doing a perfect
& nice job at the Press. I conclude with echoing the sentiments M. Vij. Madhva Vijaya
of our national poet : NS Nya- yasudha- (J)
NS Press Nirn.aya Sa- gar Press
U fl fl
NV Nya- yavivaran.a (M)
H c S H Nym. Nya- ya- mr. ta (Vya- sara- ja)
Pa-n.. Pa-n.ini
PBGKK Pu-rn.abodhagurukatha-kalpataru
R Ra-ma- nuja
RV R.gveda
S Sankara
Svet. Sveta-svatara
SBSB Sankara's Brahmasu- trabha- s.ya
Taitt. Br. Taittiriya Bra-hman.a

Mumbai - 400 016 Tg. Tarangin.i (Ra- ma- ca- rya)

9-6-2002 B. N. K. Sharma Up. Upanis.ad
 -5- -
ACHIEVEMENTS OF DVAITA VEDANTA AND
(7TH PROOF) ITS RELEVANCE TO MODERN WORLD

(Note : As the Dvaita and the Advaita Systems of Veda- nta are
diametrically opposed to each other and as the Dvaita
system was developed after the Advaita had attained
its full stature, some four centuries after Sankara, the
achievements of Dvaita Veda- nta have necessarily to be
adjudged in comparison with those of the Advaita. The
readers are therefore requested to keep this historical
and philosophical fact in mind while going through the
following appraisal of the achievements of Dvaita
Veda-nta).

Divergences among systems of speculative thought are mostly

due to ideological predilections, which are largely subjective.
This applies to systems of philosophical thought developed in
the West from the days of the early Greeks like Thales, Parmenides,
Plato and Aristotle and later by Kant, Hegel and the Neo-Realists
and in India, by the Buddhist and the Jain thinkers and the
Sa- nkhyas. In contrast to these, the Veda- nta systems are based
on, and bound by a sworn loyalty to a body of revealed texts
consisting mostly of the Vedas, pr incipal Upanis. ads, the
Brahmasu- tras and the Gita-, their triple canon. This necessity
to philosophise within the four corners of a given textual authority,
naturally limits the scope for free and independent exercise of
reason and unfettered thinking, in establishing well coordinated
s e l f - s u f f i c i e n t s y s t e m s, ex c e p t t h r o c i r c u i t o u s way s o f
interpretation. In the circumstances, the task of developing
a full-fledged consistent system of Veda-nta, doing full justice
to the three primary data of reason and experience, namely
the external world of the senses, the existence of other thinking
selves like our own and the intimations of a Power above them
which impinge on our minds in the deepest moments of reflection,
has not been that easy. Nevertheless, intrepid thinkers have
2 Achievements of Dvaita Vedanta & Its Relevance
grappled with these problems and have produced well-defined
systems ofVeda-nta with a substantial body of critical and expository
material from their respective points of view.
Doctrinally speaking, unlike in the Dvaita system, the theistic
element of Sagun.a-Brahman is not an in-built one in Advaita
but an uncomfortable graft on its Nirvises.a-Brahman, which has
its counterpart in the Tatha- ta- of Buddhistic Idealism. A robust
Theistic realism like Dvaita Veda- nta cannot be at peace with
such an ad hoc version of Upanis.adic philosophy, based on two
irreconcilable positions of different origin. The language of
mysticism in the realisation of Brahman as the ultimate source
of the being, becoming and functioning of all finite reality is
the key to the combined transcendental and immanent conception
of Brahman as the essence of the Upanis.adic thought 1. It is
explained by Jayatirtha, as follows, giving a panoptic vision of
Upanis.adic thought in a nutshell: all Veda- ntic texts without
exception speak of the glory of Brahman which is the abode
of infinite attributes free from all imperfections. Of these, some
represent Brahman as endowed with such auspicious attributes
as omniscience, lordship, inner rulership, beauty, goodness etc.,
Others represent It as free from all imperfections such as sin,
misery, liability to physical embodiment and so on, Yet others
speak of It as beyond the reach of mind and speech to bring
home to us its comparative inaccessibility to human reason and
understanding, Others depict It as the only one that exists or
the one without a second, in order we may all seek It to the
exclusion of all else, and Others represent It as the self of
all that It may be taken as the source of all existence, consciousness
and activity of all else in the Universe. But the undiscerning
miss the basic uniformity of stand-points of the Vedic teaching
in and thro the multiplicity of inter-related approaches to Brahman
and mar it by introducing artificial distinctions of higher and
lower orders of truth in the body of texts and mutilate it.
( Nya- yasudha- I.i.5, Bombay Edn.1895, p. 124).
-6- MY FURTHER TEN RESEARCH PAPERS 3
(7TH PROOF) The selective genitive used in the Ma-nd.u- kya-verse (II.ab) :
Advaitah sarvabha- va- na- m devah turyo vibhuh, distinguishes
Brahman from all other reals (bha- vas). Sankara inherited the
legacy left by Gaud.apa- da whose work, the Ka- rika- s of the
-
Agamasa- stra, was heavily laden with the Buddhistic thought of
Naga-rjuna, Vasubandhu, Asanga and Asvaghos.a and was replete
with Buddhist ter minology, figures of speech, analogies,
epigrammatic diction and negative dialectics. Gaudapada tho
quoting a few Upanisadic texts and basing his work on the
M a- n. d. u- k ya U p a n i s. a d h a s t o t a l l y avo i d e d t h e s u- t ra s o f
Ba- dara- yan.a. It was left to Sankara to align the sutras with
t h e v i ew s o f h i s m a s t e r by a p p l y i n g t h e t e c h n i q u e o f
Adhya-ropa-apava-da. The uncharacterisabl e Tatha-ta- of Buddhism
was the same as the Nirvises.a Cinma- tram or Pratyaga- tman or
Nirvises.a Brahman of Advaita which was made the subject of
-
investigation and realisation in Veda- nta : A tma- ca Brahma.
-
He takes the identity of Atman with Brahman for granted and
-
builds his doctrine on it. This high jump of Sankara from Atman
to Brahman as the jijna-sya (object of investigation) is not justified.
-
This A tman Brahman equation is an unproved assumption.
Dr. Radhakrishnan makes the same facile assumption when he
-
says, In the early Upanis.ads Atman is the principle of individual
consciousness and B. the impersonal ground of cosmic
consciousness. Soon, the distinction diminishes and the two are
identified. ( Principal Upanis.ads p.77).
But a closer investigation fails to support this assumption
and shows that in all higher contexts pertaining to Cosmic evolution
-
a n d L i b e ra t i o n t h e t e r m A tman does not s t a n d fo r t h e
-
pratyaga- tman (except in such cases as A tman too is helpless,
caught in the vortex of pleasure and pain) 2. It may therefore
be stated that the first and foremost significant achievement
of Dvaita Veda- nta is a decisive establishment, textually, of this
-
fundamental distinction between the two Atman and Brahman-
in the Upanis.ads. The following facts from early Upanis.ads
4 Achievements of Dvaita Vedanta & Its Relevance -7-
themselves like Aitareya and Brhada- ran.yaka are worth pondering (7TH PROOF)
over in this connection: The Brh.Up. has an entire Bra- hman.a
called Antarya- mi-Bra- hman.a of twenty two paragraphs star ting
from Prthvi and ending with the Pratyaga- tman saying He, who
- -
taking his position in the A tman controls the Atman from within
- -
(A tma- nam antaro yamayati), He is your A tman too the
Antarya- min (Inner Controller). This refrain is repeated twenty
one times, (iii,7,3-22) in the Ma-dhyandina recension, while the
term Vijna-na is used as its synonym in the Ka- n.va text. This
makes it clear that primarily it is the Antarya- mi Brahman, which
- -
is entitled to be designated by the term A tman in its fullest
etymological sense in the Upanis.ads. Even the Ma-n.d.u- kya Up.
-
describes the Pra-jna-A tman in whose embrace the embodied
self (pratyaga-tman) is locked up (according to the Brh.Up.iv,3,21) 3
a s t h e S a r ve s va r a , S a r vajna and A n t a r y a- min i n n o
uncertain terms 4. In the Maitreyi Bra- hman.a (Brh.Up. ii.4) the
-
Atman to be known, seen and heard about and meditated upon
for immortality is described as the Great Being whose breath
the Vedas are 5. It is obvious that the Pratyaga-tman or the embodied
self is not the source of the Vedas. We have, therefore to guard
against being misled by the ambiguity, which surrounds the use
- -
o f t h e w ord A t m a n i n t h e U p a n i s. a d s s o m e t i m e s . T h e
Pratyaga- tman is only the seeker and not the sought . He is only
the jijna-su and not the jijna-sya. The Aitareya Up. opens with
-
the statement, A tman alone existed in the beginning, nothing
else winked (was active). It thought. Let me create the worlds 6,
- -
Here obviously the term A tman cannot in any way refer to
the embodied self. Similarly in the Cha-n. Up. the Sat (Brahman)
alone is said to have existed in the beginning. It thought (Tadaiks.ata)
and brought into existence the three primal substances of heat,
waters and food and proceeded to triplicate them to evolve name
and form 7 . It is to be noted that Sankara himself affirms that
the acts of trivrtkaran.a and na- marupa-vya- karan.a are the special
and exclusive prerogatives of Paramesvara 8. The Taittiriya Up.
opens with a promise that the knower of Brahman reaches it.
MY FURTHER TEN RESEARCH PAPERS 5
It then goes on to define this Brahman as the essence of reality,
omniscience and bliss. Bringing out the deeper significance
of these terms of the definition, it enters into an elaborate recital
of cosmic evolution, chain by chain, ending with the emergence
of the embodied self from food. Thus the embodied self, whose
nucleus is the Pratyaga- tman, is the last link in the chain of
evolution 9. The point is that immediately after defining Brahman
as satyam, jna-nam, anantam, the text says, From that (aforesaid)
-
this A TMAN (Tasma- d va- etasma- da- tmanah), a- ka- s a was
p r o d u c e d 1 0 . T h e s e d e m o n s t r a t i ve pronouns t a s m a- d
etasma- d (A tmanah) have naturally to be taken to refer to
Brahman at the beginning and not to the Pratyaga- tman who
is the last link in the evolutionary chain. The Mun.d.aka Up. (referring
-
to the A tman to be known by aspirants of moks.a) says Know
-
that ATMAN alone, and cease all other talk. He is the One
in whom heaven and earth and the pra- n.as are woven. He is
the goal of immortality 11 . This text forms the subject-matter of
the Dyubhva- dyadhikaran.a of the Brahmasu- tras (i.3, 1-4) in which
the claims of both Mu- la-prakrti and Pratyaga- tman (pra-n.abhrt)
-
to be denoted by the term A tman have been dismissed by
the Su- traka-ra on the ground that neither of them is primarily
denoted by the term A tman, who is the warp and woof of all
finite reality and the goal of seekers of moks.a (muktopasrpya) 12 .
By bringing these facts into bold relief, Dvaita Veda-nta has done
a great service to students of Upanis.adic philosophy to avoid
any confusion of thought likely to arise by the seeming ambiguity
in the use of the term Atman in the Upanis.ads. This is indeed
one of its major achievements . The other achievement of Dvaita
Veda- nta consists in its determining the proper interpretation of
the Brahmasu- tras by drawing attention to the predominant role
of Brahman as the Author of the eight-fold dispensations of the
world of matter and spirits, by taking deep thought (Tad aiks.ata,
sa iks.ata loka- nnu srja- iti as stated in the Sadvidya- and in the
Aitareya Upanis.ad). These establish that the creative activity
of Brahman is a conscious well-thought out act (buddhipu-rvakam)
6 Achievements of Dvaita Vedanta & Its Relevance -8-
and not the projection of a random illusion. No illusion is entered (7TH PROOF)
into by a subject voluntarily and deliberately (buddhipu-rvakam).
Sankara himself says No independent Being will ever choose
to create a prison for himself and enter into it 13 . Suffice it to
say that illusions are not premeditated. Both Man.d.ana and Sankara
contend that there is no real creation nor is it intended to be
taught as a real happening by the scriptures nor is any
Purus.a- rtha attached to any such belief in the reality of the created
world 14. This gets a fitting answer from Madhva : Bahucitrajagad
bahudha- karan.a- t parasaktir anantagun.ah paramah 15. That the
creative activity of Brahman is a reminder of the vast powers
of the Lord as pointed out by the Sveta- svatara Up. (vi.8)
Para- sya saktir vividhaiva sru- yate, sva- bha- viki jna-nabalakriya- ca
(Vast are His powers of various kinds intrinsic to Him, such
as intelligence, prowess and activity). Jayatirtha rebuts Sankaras
remark pointing out that by reminding us of supreme majesty
of the Lord thro His acts of creating, sustaining and ordering
a real world, the knowledge of the reality of the creation-texts
is shown to be conducive to the realisation of the highest
purus.a- rtha (N.S. I,4,p.200). At the same time, Sankara goes
into rhapsodies when he hails the creative activity of Brahman
under B.S. I.1.2, which points to Its omniscience and all-
powerfulness in bringing into existence a world of such stupendous
variety and orderliness which defies human imagination 16. As
love of God (bhakti) thrives on complete understanding of the
majesty of Brahman (ma-ha-tmyajna-na), the knowledge of the reality
of Gods creation has a leading part to play in Dvaita philosophy.
The Upanis.ads contain both monistically and dualistically worded
texts. Both are regarded as apaurus.eya (not man-made) and
are entitled to the same status. They cannot be taken to speak
with a double voice from a real and an unreal standpoint of
noumenal and provisional angles. Unfor tunately, the term
mithya- in Advaita does not simply mean that the world is
impermanent (anitya). Mithya- tva as finally defined by the
Advaitasiddhi signifies being the counterpositive of a negation
MY FURTHER TEN RESEARCH PAPERS 7
in essence (svaru- pen.a) with reference to all the three periods
of time (svaru- pen.aiva traika- likanis.edhapratiyogitvasya prapance
suktiru- pye ca- ngika- ra- t ) 17. This includes the period of appearance
of the world in its Asadvilaks.an.asvaru- pa, which reduces it to
nis-svaru-patva (essenceless vacuum) in the end. The three degrees
of reality posited by the Advaita have their antecedents in Buddhist
Idealism based on parikalpita, paratantra and parinis.panna satyas.
Dvaita Veda- nta points out that the bhedasrutis and the creation-
t ex t s c a n n o t b e ex p l a i n e d away a s m e r e r e - s t a t e m e n t s
(anuva- da) of what is known already . The difficulty is that the
srutis are the only source of knowledge about the doings of
Brahman and cannot therefore be treated as recapitulations for
purposes of negation by the identity- texts. The seeming conflict
between the bheda and the abheda-srutis has therefore to be
resolved, without downgrading either of them as non-truth-
speaking, on unexceptionable application of exegetical principles,
their upajivya-upajivaka criterion and not on extra-exegetical
considerations of whether Monism or Dualism is the more or
the less philosophical view, upon which opinions are bound to
differ. The solution offered by Dvaita Veda- nta based on
la- ks.an.ika- rtha based on laks.an.a- on only one of the two terms
at a time as the barest minimum to meet the requirements in
keeping with the dharmigra- hakaprama- n.a (the basic proof of
the nature of the given data) should suffice, as has been well-
established by the Mima- msa- -sa- stra in regard to texts like
Yajama-nah prastarah (The sacrificer is the bundle of darbha-
grass). The discussion on the technique of akhan.d.a- rtha proposed
by the Advaita school in the Nyaya- mrta of Vya- satirtha, has
conclusively established that the resort to the barest residual
Cinma- tram as the purport of an identity-proposition by shearing
off all determinations from both the terms Tat and Tvam would
be tautological and no judgement can be established. Without
involving the referents, the akhan.d.a- rtha arrived at, will not be
in a position to eradicate the illusion of difference to which it
must be opposed in purport. As Hobhouse puts it, identity
8 Achievements of Dvaita Vedanta & Its Relevance
propositions are by their very nature impossible, as it sets out
to say something and ends precisely by saying nothing ( Theory
of Knowledge , p.163). The critique of Akhan.d.a- rthava- da in the
Dvaita classics is one of its major achievements.
If Epistemology is to be worthy of its role, credentials and
credibility, it must provide man with an infallible instrument of
verification and ascer tainment of the validity of his internal and
external experiences in the world, especially in regard to his
major undertakings involving heavy risks and stakes. Two prominent
views of the question of the genesis and validity of knowledge
are current in Indian Thought, one sponsored by the Nya-ya
Vaises.ikas which regards them both as traceable to causes
extraneous to knowledge and the other held by the Veda- ntic
schools (and Mima- msa- ) that validity is intrinsic to the total
complement of the casual apparatus which generates and grasps
t h e k n o w l e d g e ( J n a- n a g r a- h a k a - y a- va t s a- m a g r i g r a- hya t va m
svatastvam).
However, conditions of human life on Earth being what they
are and not ideal, erroneous knowledge, miscalculations and
contradictions sometimes upset the assurance of self-validity.
But man is an irrepressible optimist and looks forward to and
is in search of an un-erring means of ascertainment of the validity
of his inmost experiences and facts of knowledge and judgments
about their validity, before acting upon them, unhesitatingly,
especially in matters involving heavy stakes, instead of acting
on the belief that everything will be all right always. The channels
of knowledge thro perception, inference and verbal testimony
being liable to miscarriage at times due to various causes of
defects, mal-adjustment and so on, man is in dire need of a
means of verification and self-satisfaction before launching on
major projects. There is nothing wrong in his cautious approach.
-9- MY FURTHER TEN RESEARCH PAPERS 9
(7TH PROOF) Broadly speaking therefore, Advaita Veda- nta does not seem
to be justified in upholding svatastva of pra- ma- n.ya in empirical
knowledge, the only one with which we are concerned here
and now, in our lives and on this side of release. The other
-
type of knowledge called Sa- ks.a- tka- ra of A tman in the Advaita,
is conceived to be a bare subject-objectless consciousness, which
would have no relevance to the question of validity, which is
one of the content of such knowledge. A contentless knowledge
cannot come within the scope of the question of validity in its
epistemological bearing. But the Advaita theory is that all empirical
knowledge of the joys and sorrows of life and of external reality
are mithya- , subject to sublation (ba-dha). This makes the principle
of svatahpra-ma- n.ya of knowledge entirely uncalled for. For, the
definition of sublation authoritatively given in the Advaita-Siddhi
is inclusive of the sublation of the data of ba- dha in essence
(svaru- pen.a) with reference to all the three periods of time inclusive
of the Asadvilaks.an.asvaru- pa (nature of being other than non-
being) of the object in question, even during the pendency of
its illusory appearance, as we have already seen. This makes
any pre-occupation with the question of svatahpra- ma- n.ya of
the data of knowledge of empirical reality an exercise in futility.
For the essence of ascertainment of validity of knowledge of
things cannot be divorced from the non-contradictedness of the
data of that knowledge: Vis.aya - aba- dham anantarbha-vya na
pra- ma- n.ya grahan.am na- ma. It has already been made clear that
it is concerned with the question of fact and not its duration
in time .
This should set at rest the criticism of Dr. K. Narain on p.128
of his Critique of Ma-dhva Refutation of Sankara School of
Veda- nta (Udayana Publication, Allahabad, 1964) that For
ascertaining the presence of defects, one has to resort to critical
examination and thereby depend on reasoning. It is here the
Ma- dhva contention (of self validity) exhibits its weakness. The
purpose of resor ting to Pariks.a- , according to Madhva is only
10 Achievements of Dvaita Vedanta & Its Relevance
to clear the way of possible obstacles, in cases of doubt, so
that the innate power (Sahaja Sakti) of Jna- na to grasp validity
may express itself. As Vya-satir tha has pointed out, if the removal
of flaws which impede the operation of the general principle
is also to be counted as the cause of validity, there will be
no finality about which is to be the rule and which is to be
the exception : Autsargika Ka- rya- pava- da nira- saru- pasya- pi
dos.a- bha- vasya hetutve, idam autsargikam idam a-pava- dakam iti
vyavasthityayoga-t ( Tarkata-n.d.ava .i.15, Mysore Govt. Oriental Library
Edn.) See also my Advaita Siddhi vs Nya-ya- mrta A Reappraisal
-
(p.107, Anandatirtha Pratis.t.ha- na, Bangalore 1994).
The most formidable objection to the theory of intrinsic validity
of knowledge comes from Udayana that its acceptance would
render the possibility of doubts inexplicable : Pra-ma- n.yam na
svato gra-hyam samsaya-nupapattitah. Dvaita Veda-nta has therefore
added a new dimension to the concept of intrinsic validity of
knowledge and its ascertainment by supplying the missing link,
introducing the agency of Sa- ks.in the Apperceiving Self as the
ultimate principle and instrument grasping the knowledge and
its validity in the last analysis . This Sa- ks.in is the same as
the caitanya-svarupa of the thinking self and its congnitive sense,
as well, non-different from it and linked thro svaru- pavises.as
(savises.a- bhinna). It is the embodiment of immediacy even as
its etymology shows Sa- ks.a- d dras.t.ari samjna- ya- m (Pa- n. ini).
-
The field of sa- ks.in extends to A tmasvaru- pa, its attributes,
Avidya- , mind and its vrttis, knowledge conveyed thro external
sense-organs, experiences of pleasure, pain, fear, compassion
etc., time and space 18 . Sa- ks.in is self-luminous in respect of
its own existence and the content of the knowledge intuited
by itself. Dvaita Veda- nta, accordingly, distinguishes between
Vr tti-jna- na and Sa- ks.ijna- na. The former is liable to flaws due
to the pulls of the mind, likes and dislikes and so on. Sa- ks.in
is immaculate in these respects 19. Unlike the mind and its vrttis
Sa- ks.ijna-na is self-luminous in respect of both the fact of knowledge
-10- MY FURTHER TEN RESEARCH PAPERS 11
(7TH PROOF) and its veracity (niyataya- tha- rthya). It never errs. Its judgement
is final 20 . Having regard to the dual nature of knowledge gathered
by the mind and the senses, in Perception. Inference and Verbal
testimony, the Sa- ks.in institutes tests on the data supplied by
them, in case of doubts and possibility of error and may repeat
the tests where and when necessary and when it reaches complete
self-satisfaction, it desists from further tests and sets the seal
of its approval on the validity of the knowledge and its content.
As the judgments of the sa- ks.in are always veridical, there is
no fear of regression of tests declares Madhva 21 . Advaita
Veda- nta too speaks of a Sa-ks.in, the witness self which intuits
bha- varu- pa ajna-na in sus.upti. This witness is neutral. And it
is the reflection of Caitanya (pure consciousness) in Avidya- vrtti
and is therefore a tainted one. The Sa- ks. in of the Dvaita
Veda- nta is the immaculate Caitanya itself and as such nirdos.a
(untainted) and is therefore fully qualified to deliver final judgment.
The concept of Sa-ks.in and its role in the final establishment
of svatahpra- ma- n.ya of knowledge is thus a long awaited break-
through in the problem of knowledge and its validation in Indian
Philosophy in general and of Veda- nta in particular and as such
it is entitled to be regarded as one of Dvaita Veda- ntas outstanding
achievements . Some uncommitted thinkers and works on Indian
Philosophy and the Upanis.ads have expressed their opinion that
Philosophy in India can never free itself from the crushing burden
of the sruti 22. This is largely true of the way in which the Advaita
has attempted in various ways to denigate the importance of
ver ified perceptual evidence (pariks. itapratyaks. a) and also
consolidated human experience of this external world both on
the basis of sruti and its visvamithya-tva-anuma-na making dr. syatva
(perceivedness) as the ground of inference! 23 It has defined
mithya- tva in five different ways and has allowed itself to be
caught between the two hor ns of a dilemma whether
mithya- tva itself is true or false and claiming the status of a
fifth order of predication (pancamapraka- rata- ) for it as a way
12 Achievements of Dvaita Vedanta & Its Relevance
of escape from the horns of the dilemma 24 . The author of the (7TH PROOF)
Nya-ya- mrta Tarangin.i has a verbal dig at this when he concludes
his Critique of Mithya- tva in all its forms, with grim philosophic
humor : Mithya-tvapaks.a- h pancatvam pra- pita- h pu-rvapaks.ibhih 25.
The point is that when the four th order of predication of
mithya- tva as sadasadvilaks.an.am is itself in dispute, it is chasing
a shadow to pin ones hope on a fifth order of predication to
save the situation. The establishment of this point is one of
the achievements of Dvaita Veda- nta.
In more positive terms, Dvaita Veda- nta has endeavoured to
correct the prevailing impression that Veda- nta philosophy in India
has succumbed to the thraldom of srutis by doing a timely service
to the clarification of the actual position by taking the lead,
in demarcating the respective legitimate boundaries of jurisdiction
of sruti and tested pratyaks.a and anubhava of the Sa-ks.in (the
apperceiving self) which is the ultimate epistemological principle
which grasps not only the fact of knowledge but functions as
its validating principle in the last analysis, without risk of courting
any regressus ad infinitum in the process. The establishment
of sa- ks.in as the jna- na-gra- haka and jna- napra- ma- n.yagra- haka
unerringly, is one of the greatest achievements of Dvaita
Veda-nta, as Jayatirtha concludes: Asma-bhirapi duhkha-dibandhasya
satyata- ya- m sa- ks. i-pratyaks. ameva upanyastam iti hr. dayam
( Nya- yasudha- , I i.1, p.30).
The delimitation of the boundaries of Sa-ks.yanubhava and
sa ks.ipra- ma- n.ya where they seem to clash with the deliverances
- -
of the Sruti and intersect, drawn by the Dvaita School is a great
step forward in ending the tug of war, by not allowing them
to encroach on each others domain :
Pra- balyam a- gamasyaiva ja- tya- tes.u tris.u smrtam
Upajivyavirodhe tu na-sya- h tanma-nata- bhavet
Tat pratyaks.aviruddherthe na-gamasya-pi ma- nata-
Upajivyam aks.ajam yatra, tadanyatra viparyayah.
Laukike vyavaha-retra pratyaks.opajivyata-
-
Avata- ra- didrs.t.au tu sya- d Agamasyopajivyata- .
-11- MY FURTHER TEN RESEARCH PAPERS 13
The words Laukike Vyavaha- retrahave been explained by
J. with special reference to the manner in which certain seemingly
monistically-worded texts likeTattvam asi are to be rightly
c o n s t r u e d : L a u k i ke P r a t ya k s a- d i s i d d h a - J i v a- d i v i s. aye
Brahma- tmakattva- dibodhanavis. aye vyavaha- re Tattvamasya- di
a- gamena kriyama- n.e , atra a- game a- gamam prati Pratyaks.asya
upajivyata- (p.503 NS Press Edn.)
Tho among the three fundamental Prama-n.as, Scripture has
precedence as a rule (ja- tya- ), it is so only in matters which fall
exclusively within its domain, such as the nature and attributes
of B, and its relation to its metaphysical attributes, the doings
of its Avata- ras etc. In matters which fall within the consolidated
experience of selves, their experiences of the joys and sorrows
of life, the existence of the external world and of other thinking
s e l ve s l i ke t h e m s e l ve s, i t i s s o u n d t e s t e d P r a t ya k s. a
(pariks.itapratyaks.a backed by Sa-ks.yanubhava of the Apperceiver)
and Srutis as well, as limited beings, the data relating to them
a s e s t a bl i s h e d by S a- k s ya nu b h ava r e m a i n t h e U p a j i v ya
Prama- n. a in regard to any identity propositions involving
t h e m . T h e s e i d e n t i t y p r o p o s i t i o n s c a n n o t o ve r r i d e t h e
Upajivyaprama- n.a. The identity propositions must come to terms
with the Facts established by their Upajivya data by way of agreeing
to a figurative identity in terms of various criteria. Such is the
stand taken by the Dvaita School.
BHAKTI IN THE SU TRAS
Neither Sankara nor Ra-ma- nuja has been able to find a rightful
place for bhakti or devotion as an important means of God-
realisation in a basically Theistic treatise of Veda- nta such as
the Brahmasu- tras, looked at, even cursorily from the point of
their beginning, middle and end. It is irrelevant that bhakti has
been expounded in the Gita- . So have the routes of devaya- na
and pitrya- na both in Gita- , the Upanis.ads and the Su- tras. The
Theism of Ba- dara- yan.a would be incomplete without a prominent
14 Achievements of Dvaita Vedanta & Its Relevance
place given to bhakti in the body of the Su- tras , especially
immediately following the Vaira- gya-pa- da. Here lies the
achievement of Dvaita Veda- nta , which has devoted an entire
Pa- da (Pa-da 2 of Adhya- ya III), to the nature of Bhakti, showing
how each one of its twenty adhikaran.as as such converges on
the indispensability of bhakti for God-realisation. This can be
seen from the uniform consistency with which the commentator
Jayatirthas refrain at the end of each of the adhikaran.as pinpoints
this fact with such words as Ato-yukta- tatra bhaktiriti siddham,
Ato bhaktir upapanneti siddham, Ato harau bhaktiriti siddham,
Atah phalada- na- dimaha- mahimni Harau bhaktir yukteti siddham,
Ato alaukikagun.e harau kar tavya- bhaktir iti siddham, Ato
s a r va j a g a j j a n m a- d i k a r t a r i b h a k t i h k a- r y e t i s i d d h a m , A t o
niratisayamahimni Paramesvare bhaktih kartavyeti siddham.
Credit must therefore go to Madhva, the founder of the Dvaita
Veda- nta for christening the entire second pa- da of Adhya-ya III
without a single exception as Bhakti-pa- da and demonstrating
it 26. Nimba- rka seems to have been impressed by Madhvas view
here tho he has not been able to align every adhikaran.a here
with the theme of bhakti and its absolute indispensability, as
Madhva has done. The two key-words of the su-tra Ambuvad-
agrahan.a- t (III.ii.9) in this pa- da have been interpreted with a
wealth of deep poetic suggestiveness of the clinging quality of
bhakti like the viscosity of water and stead-fast knowledge
respectively which distinguish the true nature of bhakti : Ambuvat
snehena grahan.am jna- nam, in the briefest possible terms. This
legitimate place of honor given to bhakti in the Sa- dhana
Adhya- ya is thus one of the far-reaching and far-sighted
a c h i eve m e n t s o f D vaita Ve d a- n t a i n t h e h i s t o r y o f
-
Brahmasutra-interpretation.
- and disorder in the interest of the largest public good
RELEVANCE OF DVAITA VEDANTA TO THE MODERN WORLD
Apart from its relevance to the socio-political and religio-
philosophical needs of the times of its emergence and development
in the past, a realistic philosophy like Dvaita Veda- nta cannot
-12- MY FURTHER TEN RESEARCH PAPERS 15
(7TH PROOF) but be relevant to all times for universal human welfare and
progress more so to the modern world when peaceful co-existence
of communities and nations is threatened by the demon of terrorism
which has assumed international proportions. A realistic philosophy
such as Dvaita Veda- nta cannot but be relevant to all times for
universal human welfare and progress. Without faith in the reality
of the world in which we have to live, let live, move and have
our being and its moral, ethical, aesthetic and other values of
life of justice, fairplay, sanctity of human rights among developing
nations, discharging ones obligations to society and the country,
discarding of sloth, indolence and pessimism would all be
impossible. The result would be chaos all round without realism.
A Theistic Realism with God or Brahman as the moral Governor
of the Cosmos-its Sa- svatadharmagopta- provides an in-built check
against anti-social propensities and exploitations of the weak
by the strong, by the taming, sobering influence of religion and
ethics and accountability in a future life also, accepted in
Veda- nta. All this would be impossible in any philosophy which
deprives the human self of its very incentive to act by taking
away from it its power to do (kartrtva) and enjoy the legitimte
fruits of its labor, by dismissing them as the merest superimpositions
of a beginningless ignorance of the true nature of the self, as
akarta- and abhokta- . No wonder our Government is thinking of
making the right to work a fundamental right in our constitution!
CONCLUSION
Dvaita Veda- nta is not merely a theoretical philosophy. As a
realism it has an abiding interest in shaping mans moral behavior
as a member of the world community in forwarding and safe-
guarding the permanent moral values of life by resisting evil
(a- tmaupamyena). It lays great responsibility on enlightened
leaders (jna- nins) to set an example to others by proper leadership
as pratibimbas of the Divine Being who is the
Sa- svatadharmagopta-. The emphasis laid in Dvaita Veda- nta on
16 Achievements of Dvaita Vedanta & Its Relevance -13- MY FURTHER TEN RESEARCH PAPERS 17

Jna- nottara-karma to be carried out whole-heartedly, and not as (7TH PROOF) 9. Brahmavida- pnoti param. Tades.a- bhyukta- . Satyam jna- namanantam
-
a mere reflex action, is typical of its seriousness. The message brahma Tasma-dva- etasma- da- tmana a- ka- sah sambhutah. A ka- sa-
of serving the best interests of all fellowmen as a civic duty dva- yuh. Va- yoragnih. Agnera- pah. Adbhyah prthivi. Pr thivya-
like paying ones taxes to the lawfully constituted Government os.adhayah. Os.adhbhyonnam. Anna- tpurus.ah

: Na-na-janasya susrus.a- karma-khya- kartavya- karavan miteh (Madhva, Taittiriya Upanis.ad, II.1.

Gita- -Ta- tparya , VI.3) is typical of this broad pragmatic outlook. 10. Tacchabdasya pu- rvapara- marsitvaniyama- t (A demonstrative pronoun
has to refer to its antecedent).
H H H
11. Yasmindyauh prthivi ca-ntariks.amotam mana-h saha pra-n.aisca sarvaih
1. It is in this sense according to Madhva that Brahman is the Tamevaikam ja- natha a- tma- namanya- va- co
N i m i t t a k a- r a n. a a l o n e o f t h e U n i ve r s e , w i t h o u t b e i n g i t s vimuncatha- mrtasyais.a setuh
Upa- da- naka- ran.a (material cause) also as in some other systems. Mun.d.aka Upanis.ad, II.ii.5
For details, see my Philosophy of Madhva- ca- rya , Motilal B. Dass,
12. Even Sankara agrees. Read :
Delhi, 1986 (Revised Edn.) p.25.
Yadetadasminva- kye dyauh prthivyantariks.am manah pra- n.a-
2. Atma- pyanisah sukhaduhkhahetoh Sveta- svatara Upanis.ad, V.2. ityevama- tmakam jagadotatvena nirdis.t.am tasya- yatanam param
brahma bhavitumarhati. Kutah, svasabda-t a- tmasabda- dityar thah.
3. Pra- jnena- tmana- samparis.vaktah Brhada- ran.yaka Upanis.ad -
A tmasabdo iha bhavati Tamevaikam ja- natha a- tma- nam iti.
-
4. Es.a sarvesvara es.a sarvajna es.ontarya- myes.a yonih sarvasya A tmasabdasca parama- tmaparigrahe samyagavakalpate.

prabhava- pyayau hi bhu- ta- na- m Ma- n.d.u- kya Upanis.ad, VI. na- r tha- ntaraparigrahe. Itasca parameva brahma
dyubhva- dya- yatanam.
5. Asya mahato bhu- tasya nihsvasitametadyadrgvedo yajur vedah - -
Yasma n muktopasrpyatvasya vyapadisyama no drsyate.
sa- mavedo - tharva- ngirasah Brh. Up. II,iv.10. Brahman.asca muktopasrpyatvam prasiddham sa- stre .
- Brahmasutrabha- s.ya, I.iii.1-2
6. A tma- va- idameka eva- gra a- sinna- nyatkincana mis.at sa iks. ata
loka- nnu srja- iti Aitareya Upanis.ad, I.2. 13. Na hi kascidaparatantro bandhana- ga- rama-tmanah kr tva- nupravisati
Brahmasu- trabha-s.ya, II.i.21.
7. Sadeva somyedamagra a- sidekameva- dvitiyam Tadaiks.ata bahu
sya- m praja- yeyeti tattejosr. jata tatteja aiks.ata bahu sya- m praja- yeyeti 14. Na hyayam srs.t.ya- diprapancah pratipipa- dayis.itah. Na hi
tada- posrjata. Ta- a- pa aiks.anta bahvyah sya- ma prajayemahi ti ta-
- tatpratibaddhah kascit purus.a- rtho drsyate
annamasrjanta. Cha- ndogya Upanis.ad, VI.2.1-4. Sankara, Brahmasu- trabha- s.ya, I.iv.14.
Also Man.d.ana: Brahmasiddhi, p.25, MGOL Edn.1937.
8. S ey a m v y a- k a r av a- n. i
d eva t a i k s a t a i t y u p a k r a m y a
ityuttamapurus. aprayogena parasyaiva brahman.o vya- kar tr tva- 15. Dva- dasa Stotra, IV.3.

mihopadisyate Parame s vara eva ca na- maru- payor vya- kar teti
-
sar vopanis. atsiddha- ntah . A ka- s o ha vai na- maru- payor nir vahita-
(Cha- n. viii.14.1) itya- disrutibhyah. Tasma- t Paramesvarasyaiva
trivr tkurvatah karma na- maru- payorvya- karan.am
Brahmasu- trabha- s.ya, III.iv.20.
16. A s ya j a g a t o n a- m a r u- p a- b hy a- m v y a- k r t a s y a- n e k a k a r t r b h o k t r s a -
my u k t a s ya p r a t i n i y a t a d e s a k a- l a n i m i t t a k r i y a p h a l a- s r aya s y a
M a n a s a- pya c i n t ya ra c a n a- r u- p a s ya j a n m a s t h i t i b h a n g a m ya t a h
sarvajna- t sarvasakteh ka- ran.a- d bhavati tad Brahma.
Brahmasu- trabha- s.ya, I.i.2.
18 Achievements of Dvaita Vedanta & Its Relevance
17. Nya- ya- mrtam (with Advaitasiddhi) Vol.I Ed. Prof. K. T. Pandurangi,
Dvaita Veda- nta Studies and Research Foundation, Bangalore 1994,
p.71.
18. Tasya vis.ayah a- tmasvarupam taddharma- avidya- manah tadvr ttayo
ba- hyendriya-jna- nasukha- dya- h, ka- lovya- kr ta- ka- sa- sca itya- dayah.
Jayatirtha, Prama- n.apaddhati.
19. Ma- nase darsane dos.a- h syurna vai sa- ks.idarsane
Madhva, Anuvya- khya- na, III.iv.41.
20. Sudrd.ho nirn.ayo yatra jneyam tat sa- ks.idarsanam Ibid.
21. Na pariks.ana- vastha- sya- t sa- ks.isiddhe tvasamsaya- t. Ibid.
22. A.M. Ghosh, Modern Indian Philosophy, reviewed in the Times
of India, Mumbai, 20th December, 1959.
23. Vimatam mithya- drsyatva- t, jad.atva- t paricchinnatva- t suktiru- pyavaditi
Madhusu- danasarasvati, Advaitasiddhi, op.cit. P.25.
24. Which reminds us of the definition of Truth :
Catus.kot.ivinirmuktam tattvam ma- dhyamika- viduh.
25. Nya- ya- mrta, op. cit. p.108.
26. Bhaktirasmin pada ucyate Madhva, Brahmasu-trabha- s.ya, III.ii.1.
Etatpa- dapratipa- dyam darsayati. Bhaktiriti. Yadda- rd. hya- r tham
vaira- gyam niru-pitam pu- rvapa- de ya- copa- sanasya- ngam sa- bhaktir
avasarapra- pta- smin pa- de niru- pyata ityar thah.
Jayatirthas Commentar y Tattvapraka- sika- .
-14- - -
MAHAVAKYAS AND VIA NEGATIVA
(7TH PROOF) METHODOLOGY
In one of my earlier works on Maha- va- kyas and Advaita Srutis
published in 1999. I had raised the question of the credentials
of the use of the term "Maha-va- kya" in the Principal of Upanis.ads
and in Sankara's cc on them , as well as in his two other authentic
works - his Brahma Su- trabha- s.ya and his G. B. which are
unanimously acepted as his authentic works by all.
My appeal to the world of research scholars, here and abroad
to throw light on this moot question has had no response.
I am not to be blamed, if I conclude from this masterly silence
of not only traditional custodians of Advaita thought but of modern
scholars of advanced research in S's philosophy whose admiration
for S's Advaita would not allow any new questions to be raised
on any aspect of his system or its ways of presentation - least
of all of the question of the provenance of the use of term
Maha- va- kya for some select texts of the upanis.ads held s.acrosanct
and eligible only for a special type of exegesis called Akhan.d.a-
rtha . The language used by S. in explaining the identity texts
of Jiva and B. such as U r S and fl in his bha-
s.ya on the Brh. Up. and Cha- ndogya steers clear of the rhetoric
of Akhan.d.a- rtha. This makes it doubtful if he was committed to
it. We are not concerned here with other works attributed to
him such as the Vivekacu- d.a- man.i which are apocryphal. In dealing
with the definitive texts of B such as fl r ,
S has not adverted to the round about way of construing them
in the light of Atad-vya- vrtti exclusion of the opposites which
is part of Akhan.d.a- rtha. This can be seen from his C on the
Su- tra S (III. 3. 11) wherein he speaks of
-
A nanda and others like Vijna- naghanatva, Vibhutva, and
Sarva- tmakatva as intrinsic attributes r SflL U fit
for Upasamha- ra. He renders the word in the Su- tra as
( S) r of which A-nanda is the foremost according
20 Mahavakyas & Via Negativa Methodology -15- MY FURTHER TEN RESEARCH PAPERS 21

to the wording of the Su-tra. This makes it difficult to see how (7TH PROOF) Jna- nam a- nandah Brahma by Advaitic dialecticians like Suresvara
such a B. could be Nirvises.a at all. And the attributes named and placed his finger on its vulnerable point which should interest
in BS III 3.11 as explained by Bha-mati are vastudharmas of Dr. Pande. Trivikrama argues -
B. lasting as long as the Vastu itself lasts. All this shows there
is room for doubt if the Bha- s.yaka- ra S. was enamoured of Akhan.d.a-
fl U fl S fl U fl
rtha at all. There is no harm in concluding therefore that it was flflfl fl m U flMfl fl flm U
of a post - Sankara origin. This would make us clear it is open U fl fl fl ,
to other Veda- ntins like Ra-ma- nuja or M to construe texts like
Tattvam asi on the basis of Jahallaks.a.na- applied only to one
C U fl r U ? p , fl
of the terms or fl at a time. There has been a lively discussion flflC U fl r fl fl p fl fl fl,
-
on the question of Sankara and Ananda in the Journal of Philosophy r fl fl S flfl fl r fl , r fl h
East and West, Honolulu (Hawaii) in which I participated with U fl lfl - U SflMfl flflC U
Prof. Michael Myers of the Washington State University and Prof.
fl - U flfl fl ? (P. 10)
Pande. A summary of this discussion has been published by
Prof. Myers in his latest work Brahman , (Pp 150 - 153). To explain -
In this discussion Prof. Pande who has chosen to follow the If you mean, you do not accept any trait in B other than
Akhan.d.a- rtha technique has sought the support of the Via Negetiva being isolated from the attributes of falsity, ignorane and misery,
methodology of western thought to substantiate S's position as
finitude and that absence of these negative attributes will not
presented by the subsequent dialecticians of his system like
Sarvajna- tman (Anrte jad.a-virodhiru- pam etc.) and the method of make B qualified ( flC U ) and thereby pose a danger to the
Atadvya-vrtti (exclusion of absence of the opposites of). Prof. Monistic view of there being only one reality - viz. B. we would
Pande seems to believe that the Via negativa methodology was like to know if these negative features ( fl s ) of absence
most probably unknown to Advaitins and definitely unknown to
of unreality, absence of ignorance etc. will not affect B's unity
the Dvaita philosophers and is best fitted to deliver the goods
of being. In this case we would like to know if these negative
and claims credit for introducing it as a solution of the problem
attributes such as absence of unreality etc referred to are in
of B. and its multiplicity of non synonymous attributes of , your view different from B or are identical with its being. If they
, etc. are different and being of the nature of differentiating factors,
Prof. Pande should know that the Via Negativa methodology they would necessarily make B qualified by them. That would
is as old as Suresvara who writes : make B Savises.a instead of Nirvises.a. On the other hand, if
the isolated attributes are to be regarded as utterly non existent
mU (flM) that would terminate in Su-nyava-da (of B). If however,
Trivikrama Pan.d.ita one of the direct disciples of M who wrote the isolated attributes are absolutely one with B. and the same
h i s C. Ta t t va p r adipa o n M ' s B S B h a s d i s c u s s e d t h e as B. where is the need to use three different terms Satyam,
Akhan.d.a- r tha way of interpreting the definitive text Satyam Jna- nam, etc? If all that is meant to be conveyed is that B's
22 Mahavakyas & Via Negativa Methodology
nature is not defined but is only suggested by remote control
of implication , that it is completely isolated from absence of
finitude, absence of ignorance, we would like to ask, how will
you get rid of the trait in B. of being even indicated obliquely
as being isolated from the opposites of the terms actually used
in the terms of the definition in question. For, no non-existent
trait in any given object (in this case B) can either be expressed
by words or even " indicated obliquely " by a process of negation,
as Prof. Pande claims (p. 152). This is precisely what Trivikrama
Pan.d.ita wishes to emphasise by his parting shot. U fl fl
? This question is equally applicable to the so called
1) metaphorical charaterisation of B and 2) Charaterisation
by the negativa way of Via negetiva as so loftily claimed by
Prof. Pande.
The above critique of Trivikrama Pan.d.ita is applicable to both
the methods of Atadvya-vrtti and Via negetiva. Trivikrama's stand
breaks new ground by drawing further attention to the in-built
deficiency in the operation of both the methods - the traditional
and the foreign. Both are in the same boat. Let us hope the
academic fraternity will apply its mind to this unsolved difficlulty.
H H H
-16- - -
NASADIYA SUKTA OF RGVEDA AND
(7TH PROOF) NIRVISES. A BRAHMAN
In the opinion of early western scholars of Indian thought
like Macdonell, this Su-kta has "All the defects of the Indian
mind such as its indefiniteness and the tendency to make reasoning
depend on mere words." ( History of Sanskrit Literature P. 101).
According to Dr. Radhakrishnan, "the hymn brings out the
inadequacies of our thought categories to unravel the mysteries
of the universe and establishes the Absolute as its ground."
( Indian Philosophy , Vol. I, p. 101). Professor Ranade says that
in the description of how things stood before creation, we get
perhaps the earliest description of the germs of what later developed
into the Parin.a- mava- da. (Ranade, Creative period in the history
of Indian Philosophy ).
In any case, it would not be correct to interpret the Su-kta
as "establishing an absolute reality which is not characterisable
as either Sat (being) or Asat (non-being), is at the back of the
world."
It has now become an established practice in the writings
of all subsequent modern Indian Scholars of the History of Advaita
thought, to take it for granted that the Na- sadiya Su-kta of the
Rgveda (X. 129) represents the earliest dawn of S's Nirvises.a
Brahmava- da - apart from the passages from the upanisads proper
such as flm and U S
This facile assumption is totally unsustainable as 'Sankara
himself, the founder - father of Nirvises.a Brahmava-da, has nowhere
in his BSB referred to the Na- sadiya Su- kta as the locus classicus
of his Nirvises.a Brahmava- da. Others after Sankara like Sa- yan.a
may have done so. That is a different matter.
A close analysis and study of the wording of the text of the
Su- kta fails to support the claims of modern scholars of Advaita.
Just see
24 Nasadiya Sukta of RgVeda and Nirvisesa Brahman
If the opening words of the Su- kta Sat and Asat are understood
in the sense of whatever is real or existent and unreal or non
- existent respectively, their negation therefore will have to be
taken to stand for their being neither real or existent nor unreal
and non-existent that is to say Sadasat Vilaks.an.a (Mithya- ). Thus
the sole surviving That one (Tadekam) namely the absolute or
Brahman would have to share the same fate of being Anirvacaniya
or Mithya- . But the Nirvises.a Brahman of Advaita is obviously
not Anirvacaniya. Secondly, the Su-kta tells us that the one Being
( Ta d e k a m ) w a s b r e a t h i n g w i n d l e s s by i t s o w n p ow e r
-
(A nidava- tam Svadhaya- Tadekam x, 129, 2c) i.e. to say it was
active (Ufl) to use one of S's own words in explaining
. ( Ait. Up. I). S's Nirvises.a Brahman is by
hypothesis inactive (Nis.kriyam). On the top of it all, the text
goes on to say That one desired to create (S fl
U ) and the gods came into being as a result fl
fl S fl (x, 129, 6c)
An Advaitic Brahman of such a description can, by no stretch
of the imagination, be deemed to be Nirvises.a .
The only way out of all these pitfalls would be to construe
the words Sat and Asat used in the Su- kta, on the authority
of the Upanis.ads themselves as Mu-rta and Amu-rta reals according
to Brh. Up (II. 3. 2-3) and S's own rendering of the words Sat
and Asat (Prasna Up. II, 5) as such.
A shrewd Logician like S, knowing the pitfalls of adhering
to the literal and commonly accepted meanings of the words
Sat and Asat in this case would surely have avoided, utilising
this Su-kta to establish the germs of his concept of Brahman
as Nirvises.a - whatever else may be his other reasons and
arguments for holding such a view.
I hope modern Advaitic Scholars would take serious notice
of these facts and desist from talking of the Na- sadiya Su-kta
as containing the germs of Nirvises.a Brahman.
H H H
-17- PHILOSOPHICAL BACKGROUND
(7TH PROOF) OF MADHVA'S
- -
USE OF 'VIS. N. U' AND 'NARAYAN. A
-
TO DENOTE VEDANTIC BRAHMAN
Sankara and other early Veda- ntins before Madhva had down-
graded the entire Pre-upanis.adic heritage as Lower Vidya- and
up-graded the Upanis.ads alone as Higher Vidya-, in commenting
on the passage of the Mun.d.aka Up. (I.5.) which speaks of the
Apara- and Para- Vidya- s, for the first time. The Apara- Vidya- is
enumerated as the four Vedas and their Angas. The members
of the Para- Vidya- are not similarly specified as the Upanis.ads.
It is not therefore possible to jump to the conclusion that in
the opinion of the Mun.d.aka, the Upanis.ads are the Para- -
Vidya- . The definitions of Para- Vidya- as given in the Mun.d.aka
that it is the body of the Texts which operates as a means
or instrument of knowledge leading to the knowledge of the
Imperishable Aks.ara (Brahman). The words used Yaya- tad aks.ram
adhigamyate refer to a Master Key to unlocking the hidden
treasurers of Apara- Vidya- . The instrumental case of the pronoun
Yaya- and the passive voice of the verb adhigamyate taken together
refer to the role of Para- Vidya- as an Adhigati - Karan.a . Even
the Upanis.ads, as they stand worded, are badly in need of an
adhigati - Karan.a . Sankara himself admits as much when he
says - Veda-nta Va-kya-ni hi Su-trair Uda-hrtya Vica-ryante and elsewhere
a s Tatra avica-rya yat kim cit pratipadyama-nah anarthamiya-t. Thus
the Su-tras are acknowledgedly the Vica-rasa-stras and the Upanis.ads
the Vica- rya - Sa- stras - in other words the su- tras are the
Nirn.a- yaka Sa- stras and the Upanis.ads the Nirn.eya Sa- stras as
Madhva would put it. Upanis.ad texts like Asya lokasya Ka- gatih,
-
Aka- sa iti hovaca left to themselves would not deliver the goods
This comes out from Sankara's own statement fl
fl flS U U c Where is the
need for a Sa- riraka Mima- msa- if the Upanis.ads need no help
of an adhigati - karan.a of their contents? It is most ungrateful
on S ankara's par t to draw so heavily on the Su- tras of
26 Philosophical Background of Madhva's Use of Visnu & Narayana
Ba- dara- yan.a and still refuse to give them the unique role of being
the Adhigati Karan.a of the Upanis.ads as Para-vidya-. Yet he compares
the Su- tras to a garland of sweet smelling flowers but does not
choose to garland his Aupanis.adam Brahma with it! The trouble
is that S is not noted for his consistency of thought. He refuses
-
to accept the Anandamaya as B and dismisses it as a kosa,
in spite of the clear statement of the su- traka-ra that the suffix
-
Maya in Anandamaya is not to be understood in the sense of
a modification (Vika- ra) but of superabundance ( ) of bliss.
He sets aside the Su- tras saying flU fl - fl
( flU - Bha-mati ).
He would not concede that his B is endowed with the
metaphysical attributes of Satyam. Jna- nam and a- nanda as its
essential ones. But at the same time under the Su- tra :
S (III, 3.11) he admits a- nanda, Vibhutva, nityatva
and sar va- tmakatva as Vastudhar mas of B or Ya- vadvastu
Vyavatis.t.hanti (as clarified by the Bha- mati ).
Taking all these facts into consideration, it seems that Madhva
is on the right track in opting for the Brahmasu- tras as the Key
Vidya- of Adhigatikaran.a in interpreting the upanis.ads as well,
as Para- Vidya- . He has also exploded the myth of the polytheism
of the Vedas given currency to by early Western Scholars tacitly
approved by many of our traditional Schools of Veda- nta.
-
Among Veda- ntins Aca- rya M. is the first to rescue the concept
of the one Supreme Being of the Ve d a s a s t h e
Sarvana- mava- n, bearer of the names of all other deities of the
Vedic pantheon in the highest and fullest primary sense of their
connotation and denotation and others entitled to them only in
a conventional primary sense (Mukhya-rtha) other than the Parama
Mukhya- rtha which is applicable only for the Supreme Brahman.
The words of the Rg Veda. : fl fl (X, 82.3)
and flMA U xxxxxx fl U fl indivisible and well - integrated Revelation and illumination in
(I. 164.46) speak for themselves. Not only has the fundamental
-18- MY FURTHER TEN RESEARCH PAPERS 27
(7TH PROOF) idea of the above texts been suppressed by so called modern
Scholars but the true contextual meaning of RV I.164.46 diver ted
to mean reality is one, called by different names in support
of a nebulous Advaita Va-da . The late Dr. C. Kunhan Ra- ja- in
his monograph on the Asya Va-masya Hymn (Ganesh & Co. Chennai)
has exposed this fallacy and contextual impropriety of this loose
interpretation. Even conceding the theory of Western Scholars
that Man.d.alas II to VII of the Rg Veda are earlier and Man.d.alas
I, VIII, IX and X are later redactions, it will stand to reason
that the ealier polytheism of the hymns came to be completely
superseded by an uncompromising Monotheism of the one
Sarvana- mava- n (of Madhva). The text of the Taitt. Br. S fl,
(III, 7.94) confirms its finality of the concept of the
fl
-
one Sarvana- mava- n as A ca- rya M so unerringly points out -
fl fl (BSB)
The Su- tra Sfl (I.1.3) has been interpreted by
S in two ways, one of them is fl U
S r fl SflLfl This establishes that Rg
Veda and others produce the true knowledge of B. How then
can they be dismissed as Apara- Vidya- (except superficially
speaking)? It is therefore evident that neither the Hymns of the
Rg Veda and others nor the Bra-hman.as can be curtly dismissed
as Apara- Vidya- s and the Upanis.ads alone be accepted as
Para- Vidya- .
The wisest thing would be to admit that without the help
of the principles of exegesis evolved by the Brahma Su- tras neither
the Samhita-s nor Bra-hman.as and the Upanis.ads by themselves
will be competent to penetrate the Para- Vidya- embedded in them.
We are therefore indebted to Madhva for opening our eyes to
the decisive role of the Brahma Su- tras as the Para- Vidya- of
the entire Vedic legacy and heritage as one single, undivided,
his thoughtful commentary on the Su- tra. fl fl ( r )
28 Philosophical Background of Madhva's Use of Visnu & Narayana -19- MY FURTHER TEN RESEARCH PAPERS 29

III.3.1 in terms of Sarvavedanirn.aya - avagamyajna- nam Brahma.
Prof. Ghate has drawn the wrong conclusion from this that to
Madhva the Vedas are more important to his system than the
Upanis.ads!
Another great contribution of M to our understanding of the
- -
Vedic lore is the significance of the Ars.a tradition of the Aran.yakas
and its bearings on the attunement of the Vedic Karma Ka- n.d.a
of the Mantras and Bra- hman.as as Brahma Vidya- .
-
Thus Ars.a tradition bears eloquent testimony of the fact that
it is one and the same Brahman (of the upanis.ads) which is
meditated upon by the seers of the Rg Veda in the rituals of
the Mahad Uktha, by the Ya- jus.as in Fire and by the Sa- ma Vedins
- and reduces A nandamaya even in the sense of Pu- rn.a - a- nanda
in the Maha- vrata rites (A A. III, 2,3, III. 2.6). These texts add
that the one and the same Supreme Brahman present in all
(7TH PROOF) well, which will exalt the so called Apara- Vidya- to the status
of Brahmavidya- ideologically. Therefore he is not justified in rejecting
the pre-Upanis.adic revelation as Apara- Vidya- outright.
But then, Sankara is not always consistent with himself. He
is ready to shift his stand whenever it suits him. How else can
-
o n e a c c e p t h i s c o n c l u s i o n i n t h e A n a n d a M aya a d h i .
(B.S. i -1-12-19) under which he dismisses the claims of
-
Anandamaya to be B. notwithstanding the Su- traka- ra's clarification
that the suffix maya here stands for superabundance of a- nanda
( ) rather than of modification (flU ) ? Rejecting the Su-
traka- ra's view, he says flU fl fl
-
(infinite bliss) and dismisses it as a Kos a. But the same Sankara

the elements also is hailed as Brahman fl fl r . under the Su- tra S (III, 3.11) holds that
And for a wonder it is the very same text cited by M has also constitutes the of B along with Vibhutva, nityatva and
flS
been quoted by S in his BSB on when he writes Sarvagatatva for purposes of upasamha- ra of gun.as on B. And
- fl fl fl fl l fl fl fl the term Vastu dharma has been explained by Va-caspati as

- fl u U U fl fl attributes lasting as long as the subject itself lasts (flmS

U fl U (S BSB , III, 3.4). This shows that M is on the right track in holding
flDU ).
- that the Rg Veda and others can claim the status of Para- Vidya-
The Ars.a tradiion shows how the so-called Karmaka-n.d.a rituals -
when properly adjudged in the light of the A rs.a Tradition.
are to be sublimated into Brahma Vidya- . It is in line with this
ideology that M. in his G.B. (II. 47) has shown how from a Western Scholars and their modern followers in our country
higher point of view even the ritualistic texts like fl fl have not changed their stance about Vedic Polytheism. It is
, flfl are to be performed without expectation regretable that such a view is tacitly prevelant among some
traditional Schools of Veda- nta which have not applied their minds
of fruits - in other words they are not " Visis.t.a Vidhis" : -
to this important question. A ca- rya M. has done a great service
fl s ( Bha-gavata ). Says M fl by establishing long ago that the Vedic Seers were fully aware
fl in keeping with the ideal of of and committed to the existence of one Supreme Being at
c defined as c fl Z , fl U the head of the Vedic Pantheon who is the ultimate bearer of
- all their names in their highest and fullest primary senses of
The quotation given by S. himself from the AA - in his BSB .
- connotation and denotation : fl fl ( RV. X,
leaves no room for doubt that he was well aware of the Ars.a
Tradition applicable to the Karma Ka-n.d.a Texts of the Vedas as 82.3 ), fl U fl (RV I.164.46).
30 Philosophical Background of Madhva's Use of Visnu & Narayana
The second text above is explicitly preceded by the names
of Indra, Mitra, Varun.a, Agni etc. which leaves no room for
misunderstanding or misinterpretation of the context, outside
the realm of deities and their names, as has now become the
fashion in some quarters in support of the Slogan "Reality is
one, Names are many".
- -
THE NAMES "VIS.N.U AND NARA YAN.A"
The genius of the Sanskrit Language as a synthetic one based
on etymological foundations of roots and terminations rests on
Yoga-Vrtti which determines the appellative basis ( fl ) the counterpart of Spinoza's Res Completa, complete in itself,
of the names (U fl )
"Vis.n.u" is derived from the root vis to pervade. It refers to
one who is all pervasive in Time, Space and metaphysical attributes
of reality, omnipresence and infinite blissfulness. It corresponds
to the Advaita view of Aparicchinnatva of B (Brh-Brhi Vrddhau)
with this difference that in Advaita the third limitation is in regard
to the existence of any other entity besides : vastu paricchinnatva.
But then, Time and Space are also Vastus. They are equally
pervaded by B- Vya- ptam tvayaikena disasca Sarva- h (Gita- , XI,
20), An.or an.iya- n (Svet.Up.), Antar bahisca sar vam Vya- pya
Na- ra- yan.ah Sthitah (Purus.a Su- kta).
These texts bear out that B pervades every other existent
both inside and outside without becoming limited by their presence.
The concept of Aparicchinnatva will be meaningful only when
B remains unaffected and unlimited despite their presence and
not in their absence . The dictum that no two bodies can occupy
the same space applies to physical bodies only and B is not
a "body". The very concept and definition of B as Antarya- mi
in the Upanis.ads would have no meaning if there was no other
Tattva in existence. Sarva and Sarva- ntarya- mi go together as
Antarya-mi needs a Niya- mya .
However it would be doing a great injustice to look upon
M's advocacy of the claims of the names of Vis. n. u and
Na- ra- yan.a to denote the one Supreme Sarvana- mava- n of the Vedic
-20- MY FURTHER TEN RESEARCH PAPERS 31
(7TH PROOF) Seers in their highest, fullest primary sense of Connodenotation.
All the gods of the Vedic pantheon are not Sarvana-mava- ns.
The Sarvana- mava- n can only be one fl fl
fl fl (M).
You cannot dispute the logic of this. This is the Crux of the
problem of fixing the identity of the Sarvana- mava- n who must
ipso facto be the one and only Svatantra Tattva metaphysically
within the meaning of one who is fl fl U
determined by itself and capable of being explained entirely by
itself. Such a Being can only be one . Thus according to M.
tho' all the individual names and epithets of all other gods of
the Vedic Pantheon apply to such a one in their fullest and
highest connodenotation of the Sanskrit Language in which the
Vedas have come down in a synthetic language based on roots
and terminations Yoga Vrtti (U fl ). The two names
Vis.n.u and Na- ra- yan.a among all the others are capable of hitting
the target by their Yaugika Vyutpatti of Vis. - to be all pervasive
-
- flfl U U (Taitt. A). This 'Vya-pti' is therefore in
terms of Space, Time and metaphysical attributes. Brahman is
defined as Pu- rn.am all over. This Pu- rn.atva is threefold
and No wonder the Sruti says of Vis.n.u - Vivesa
-
bhu ta ni cara- cara- n.i (Taitt. A X. 1.1)
- -
As regards the other name Na- ra- yan.a which means one who
is resting in the waters of Maha-pralaya (the great Deluge) described
in such a awesome terms as Na- sad a- sit no sad asid tada-nim
in the Creation Hymn of the Rgveda (X.129), the concluding
part of the Sruti says - that one lay breathing windless by its
own power and there was none else besides it equal or superior
to it. Tasma- d dha- anyan na parah kimcana a- sa. (X, 129). The
etymology of Na-ra- yan.a is given by the Manu Smrti also.
32 Philosophical Background of Madhva's Use of Visnu & Narayana
The Cha-n. Up. flZ fl r echoes (7TH PROOF)
the same idea of the Being in the waters of Maha- pralaya by
saying Sarvam Khalu Idam Brahma Tat Jala-an ityupa- sita B.
is infinite (Pu-rn.am), self complete. Meditate on it as Jala-an .
T h e r e c a n b e n o d o u b t t h a t Ja l a m e a n s " Wa t e r s " a n d
-
an to breathe. Cf : Ani d ava- tam. And "Sarvam" in the old Vedic
usage meant "self complete" pu- rn.am, fully developed as in Sarvam
a- yuh ( U. 4.15). Sarvo va- mama patih ( Jai. Br. II.2.35 Cyavana
Katha- ) and in such usages as sarva- aham asmi (RV I, 126.7c ).
Madhva's interpretation of Jala- n is a straightforward one. The
other explanation of Tajjala- n as an undivided single compound
as given by S and R is devious and far-fetched. As the statement
Sarvam Khalvidam Brahma is complete in itself the injunction
to meditate on it should naturally begin with Tat as a separate
text referring to B as the object of meditation. The terms of
meditation in terms of Tajjam Tallam and Tadanam as proposed
by S & R are flawed by an illogical transposition of the origination,
continued existence and final absorption as
(--) is absolutely needless and contrary to the establised
logical order accepted by S himself under BS I.1.2 S
S Thibaut in his Translation
of Sri Bha- s.ya (SBE Series Vol. 34.p.31) has expressed that "The
only sectarian feature of R's Sri Bha- s.ya is that he identifies
Brahman with Vis.n.u or Na- ra- yan.a. But this in no way affects
his inter pretation put on the su- tras and the Upanis. ads.
Na- ra- yan.a is in fact nothing more but another name for B."
As Thibaut had not dealt in M's Bha- s.ya, chances are he would
not have been so well disposed towards him. Many modern
scholars have dismissed him as a "Sectarian" including even
Appayya Diks.ita who writes :
fl fl flc fl SS fl The Being in the waters is a favourite description of the Supreme
flU flS U fl B. in the
-21- MY FURTHER TEN RESEARCH PAPERS 33
As a matter of fact R has been as ardent or even more so
than M in his Veda- rtha Sangraha, on the subject of Vis.n.u -
Pa- ramya which had exposed him to persecution by the Col.a
King and obliged him to migrate to Karna-t.aka. He must have
therefore cooled down to steer clear of questions for identity
of the Vedantic B in his Sribha- s.ya. Vya- sa T. has made it clear
that the concept of Aparicchinnatva of B in terms of space,
time and other entities requires modification as applied to B.
The word B derived from Br. h Br. hi Vr. ddhau stands for fl #.
And Veda- ntic B pervades all other entities both inside and out
as texts U (Svet. Up) # fl fl
(Gita- , XI, 20) establish. Being aparicchinna (Unlimited) so far
as Brahman is concerned will be meaningful when it stands
unlimited by the existence of other entities and in spite of them
and not necessarily in the utter absence or non- existence of
any other thing or being. Time and space are as much Vastus
as any other and B is described as Ka- la - Ka- la (Svet. Up).
A King - Emperor is described as having unlimited powers over
the vassals who have their own limited powers. The dictum that
no two bodies can occupy the same space is not applicable
for B which is not a 'body'. So much for "Vis.n.u".
As for the name Na- ra- yan.a it refers to the one Supreme Being
of the Na- sadiya Su- kta, the Creation Hymn in the Rg Veda (X.129)
which is said to be the sole Surviver in Maha-pralaya breathing
windless by its own inherent power - fl Sfl
and there was none other besides equal to or superior to it
Sh U (X, 129)
Thus the two names Vis.n.u and Na- ra- yan.a primarily refer to
the one Supreme in all their etymological fulness. They answer
to its status as fl m as the one and only Sfl fl
Ve d i c t ex t s a l s o. fl fl
34 Philosophical Background of Madhva's Use of Visnu & Narayana
- -
(Taitt. A. X, 3.1), fl fl ( RV X.1 ), (7TH PROOF)
Sfl ( RV. X.125.7) It is a Vedic concept and cannot
therefore be dismissed as "Sectarian" off hand. No level-headed
Vedic Scholar could possibly object to this finding of M and
get away with sidelining it into Sectarian Channels. The introductary
verse of Veda- nta Desika's Rahasyatraya Sa-ra and his reference
to the two closing Su-tras to the Daiva Mima- msa- Su- tra preceding
the opening Su-tra r of the B.S. from the point
of view of the tri-unity of three Mima- msa- Su- tras referred to
by Desika in his Satadu- s.ani confirms this finding.
CONCLUSION
Considering the steady diminishing returns of equipment in
original Sanskrit studies among our modern generations and
intellectuals of all schools of Veda- nta, it seems to me desirable
for writers on Madhva philosophy in English to join the main
stream and opt for increased use of the innocuous term Brahman
in place of the traditional Vis.n.u or Na- ra- yan.a in the exposition
of Madhva thought to put through its salient features, for a good
cause. I have tried to set the pace of thinking for doing so
in my writings in English so far. In my opinion it would go a
long way to remove the ignorant misconception about its being
a sectarian philosophy to which it has been exposed in some
quarters. I commend this to coming generations of Madhva Scholars
in the interest of an unprejudiced evaluation of the great Theistic
system of Veda- nta of Madhva in the years to come as a distinctive
and far-reaching system of Veda-nta capable of making its own
contribution to the sum total of a Global Theistic Philosophy
to come.
H H H
-22- AN INBUILT WEAKNESS IN THE
- -
NYAYA VIEW OF PARATAH - PRAMAN. YA
The enthronement of Suddha Caitanya of Jiva- tman as the
Sa ks. i and as the ultimate Jna- na gna- haka and Jna- na -
-
Pra-ma-n.ya Gra-haka in Dvaita Philosophy is the greatest contribution
of Madhva not only to Indian Epistemology but to Epistemology,
as a whole (Eastern or Western) as it makes validity of knowledge
a question of fact and not one of duration. This is done by
redefining Prama-n.ya (Validity) as Ya- tha- rthyam, being free to its
data with reference to their par ticular space time setting :
Yatha- - avasthita Jneya vis.ayika- ritvam. This applies to memory
with equal force and knocks off in bottom of so called
Vya- vaha- rika Pra- ma- n.yam :
S U fl
U ? ( AV )
U fl U (Jayatirtha)
The Nya- ya School has objected to self - Validity of knowledge
on the ground of incompatibility of doubts arising :
Sfl s (Udayana)
But this does not apply to M's definition of Pra-ma- n.ya as
Ya- tha- rthyam as defined above.
Even the Naiya- yika view of Paratah Pra- ma- n.ya has had metted
the role of Anuvyavasa- ya in endorsing the finality of pra-ma- n.ya,
when it comes to anuvyavasa- ya of right knowledge - say of
a pot as U flflm c U fl U in terms of U fl
U S as guarantor of its infallibility. Thus Anuvyavasa-ya raises
the data of knowledge to the level of a judgment of a percipient-
self leading to unimpeded and unhesitating responsive activity
( c fl ) .
36 An Inbuilt Weakness in the Nyaya View of Paratah - Pramanya
Thus Anuvyavasa-ya sits in judgment over Vyavasa- ya, what
stands for definitive knowledge. Thus by definition it is a reflective
cognition, aware of awareness subject get revealed . In other
words the Anuvyavasa-ya of Naiya- yikas is indubitable and self-
validated . It is the same as the sa-ks.i of Madhva Philosophy
as has been unerringly brought out by Vya- sa Tir tha in his Tarka
Ta- n.d.ava - Ta- rkika- bhimata anuvyavasa- ya eva asma- kam Sa- ks.ih..
Suffice it to say then that the Naiya- yika's obsession with
Paratah Pra-ma-n.ya of Jna-na is totally inconsistent and incompatible
w i t h h i s a c c e p t a n c e o f A n u v yava s a- ya o ve r a n d a b ove
Vyavasa- ya- tmakam Jna- nam. Madhva's statement that there is
no possibility of further doubts at the Sa- ks.i level of experience
holds good for Anuvyavasa-ya also. The Naiya-yika has to choose
between Anuvyavasa- ya as the acid test of svatahpra- ma- n.ya and
his penchant for Paratah Pra- ma- n.ya .
H H H
-23- CONCEPTION AND CONFIGURATION OF
-
(7TH PROOF) SAKS. I IN DVAITA AND ADVAITA
SCHOOLS AN APPRAISAL
The Dvaita and Advaita Schools of Veda- nta have both accepted
the existence of a beginningless positive ignorance (flM )
which obscures the true nature of Jiva- tmas in Samsa- ra whose
liquidation is Moks.a. It appears from a statement of M in his
AV : fl hU Sfl U - that originally
there was an agreement on the point that ( flM ) was intuited
by the Suddha Cit of the Jiva ( ) : cf: fl flfl
fl U fl fl (Sanks.epa Sa-riraka)
As Bha-varupa Ajna- na is a Prameya, its Prama-n.a too will have
to be accepted as a reality of the same order as its perceiver
in its own right. This will however clash with the Advaita dogma
that there is really one reality in all existence which is Nirvi s e s.a
Brahman. From the Advita point of view, then even the thesis
that - B can only be known by the evidence of Sruti ( Sfl )
can only be treated as no more than a Vya- vaha- rika Truth -
Is.yate Ca Vedasya- pi abha- vah prabodhe (S BSB , IV.1.4)
In this shifting of stances, Sankara - Advaita finds itself in
a tight corner - as the very bifurcation of Truth and reality into
Vya- vaha- rika and "Pa- rama- rthika" (Phenomenal and noumenal)
r e s t s o n s h a k y fo u n d a t i o n s . Fo r t h e ex p l a n a t i o n t h a t
Vya-vaha-rika real is Mithya- and is sublated by the dawn of knowledge
of the Pa-rama- rthika is itself vitiated by an inextricable logical
fallacy of mutual interdependence (anyonya - a- sraya) as pointed
out by Vya- sa T. in his Nym :-
Aba- dhyatvaru- pa - Pa- rama- rthikasya
Ba- dhyatvaru- pa - mithya- tva - niru- pyatvena Anyonya- srayah.
In reply to this criticism the author of the Advaita Siddhi quietly
admits and confesses that in the last analysis, the sublation
of the Vya- vaha- rika world of experience as well as the illusory
38 Conception & Configuration of Saksi in Dvaita & Advaita
appearance of silver in shell or snake in the rope are all equally
and utterl y sublated in terms of their essential natures (of Sadasad
Vilaks.an.atva) with reference to all the three periods of time,
including the period of their appearance , otherwise.
Maivam Svaru- pen.aiva Traika-lika nis.edhasya
prapance Suktiru- pya- dauca angika- ra- t (A.Siddhi)
This clearly shows that the distinction sought to be made
between the Asat (absolute non - existence) and "Mithya- " by
the Advaita philosopher is a distinction without a difference, as
between Tweedledum and Tweedledee :
Mithya- bhu- tasya-pi Svarupen.aiva Traika-lika nis.edhah
iti paks.e Nihsvaru-patvasya Durva- ratva- t (Nym)
There is clear evidence in the earlier Advaita tradition of
the acceptance of Sata eva (Prama- n.asya) Sa- dhakatvam , as
contended by M. This comes out clearly from a citation given
by Vya- sa T. himself in his Nym from an old Advaita Source
- Tvaya- pi
Caitrara- gah Svavis.aya anityajna-na vyatirekina-
Tad Adhyaks.en.a samvedyah, Pratyaks.atva- t xxxxxx.
The above verse establishes that iccha- sukha duhkha
ajna- na etc. of Caitra (Devadatta) are all intuited by a cognition,
which par takes of the nature of a Nityajna-na . which is other
than that which comprehends his anitya - Jna-nas such as of
a pot through his external perceptions. This other knowledge
is the voice of Devadatta's caitanya itself and is as such nitya .
As the intuitive perceptions of the internal experiences of
Sukha, duhkha, Bha- va-rupa ajna- na etc. are all spontaneous
( Jna- taika - sat ) there is no possibility of their open to error
at any time :
Iccha- Jna-nam Sukham duhkham
Bhaya- bhaya Krpa- dayah.
-24- MY FURTHER TEN RESEARCH PAPERS 39
(7TH PROOF) Sa- ks.isiddha- na kascid dhi
Tatra samsayava- n kvacid (AV. III.3.1560)
The preceding quote from an earlier Advaita source given
by the Nym on the status of Saks.i-jna- na whose impact on
svatah - Pra- ma- n.ya of the intuiting self as the Sa- ks.i has not
been rebutted either by the Advaita siddhi or by Dr. K. Narain
in his Critique of Ma- dhva Refutation of Sankara School of
Veda- nta.
The Nym-Tarangin.i has actually discussed the status of
Madhusu- dana Sarasvati's theory of Sa-ks.i as being only a reflected
image of caitanya in Avidya- - Vrtti and hence susceptible to
both Prama- and Bhrama (valid knowledge in Vyavaha- ra and
illusions). It has incisively brought out its drawbacks :-
Atrocyate -
Av i d ya- p ra t i b i m b i t a c a i t a nya s ya i va S a- k s. i p a d a- r t h a t ve,
Pratibimbanopa- dher avidya- vr tteh Sa- ks.i - vis.ayatva- r tham
tasya- evopa-da-nam na yuktam. Pratibimbanopa-dhibhu-ta-ya- Vrtteh
V i s. ayi - Ko t. i P r ave s ena, v i s. ya t va a n u p a p a t t e h .
N a- pya n ya s ya- h . T s ya- api V i s. ya t va- r t h a m a nya s ya- i t i
-
anavastha- na- t caitanyam eva sa- ks.i iti angika- ryam. Tacca
Nirdos.am eva ( Tg. )
-
To explain : In the reflection theory of Sa- ks.i , Avidya-vrtti has
first of all to act as the reflecting medium or reflector and as
such it has to be placed on the category of the agent in the
transaction i.e. to say in the Vis.ayi- Kot.i . Again, the same Vr tti
has to be placed in the 'Vis.aya kot.i" as the object in which
the reflection takes place. As one and the same Avidya-vrtti cannot
be credited with two such opposite roles, yet another vritti will
have to be summoned to overcome this difficulty, and that again
for the same reasons, another and so on indefinitely. There will
be no such progressive anavastha- if the pure Caitanya of the
self (Jiva Svaru- pa) is accepted as the Sa- ks.i, directlly and
immediately as intuiting its only svaru- pasukha, Bha- varu- pa
-
ajna- na etc. in Sus.upti .
40 Conception & Configuration of Saksi in Dvaita & Advaita
Elsewhere, in his Nym (II.7) Vya- sa T. adver ts to the Advaita
position of the Sa-ks.i as applied to Brahman itself, as being
a Dras.tr (perceiver) in the active sense as defined in Pa- n.ini's
Su- tra - Sa- ks.a- d dras.t.ari Samjna- ya- m. Vya- sa T. points out that
B cannot be conceived in Advaita as Dras.t.r thro' association
with Buddhi as its Upa-dhi, as there can be no association with
-
Upadhis in sus.upti where the Atman is said to intuit his own
self and bliss - Eta- vantam Ka- lam Sukham aham asva- psam .
It stands to reason that Avidya- vrtti can only be established
to begin with by agency which is other than the Vrtti in which
it has come to be reflected subsequently fll fl
S fl fl (Nym.) And such an agency has to
be untainted, - unlike that of its reflected image called
"Sa-ks.i".
As Avidya- -Vrtti cannot be perceived by Suddha Caitanya (which
is asanga ) and can only be perceived as established on the
evidence of its own reflected image (called Sa- ks.i). There is bound
to be an interdependence hence ( anyonya- sraya) fllfl U
hfl (Nym) but resembles the concept of the holy ghost in Christianity
As this concept of Sa-ks.i as only a reflected image of caitanya
in Avidya- Vr tti has been anticipated and reflected by Vya- sa T.
himself as we have seen and as Madhusu- dana Sarasvati has
made no attempt to answer his criticism or substantiate the
theory in his turn, it is clear that he cannot be regarded as
the founder - father of the Reflection theory in Neo-Advaita as
he is generally supposed to have been and given credit for.
H H H
-25- AN OPEN LETTER TO
(7TH PROOF) MADAM ROMILLA THAPAR
Dear Madam,
In keeping with your reputation as an authority on ancient
Indian religious history, you are expected to be well equipped
with first hand knowledge on the subjects you deal with. Your
estimation of the Veda- nta school of Madhva is highly prejudiced
and disappointing. Prof. Humayun Kabir (former Union Education
Minister) had spoken of Sankaras concept of Nira-ka- ra Brahman
as influenced by Islam in Malabar in his days. You must know
that our Veda- nta Schools are of indigenous origin derived entirely
from Vedic, Upanis.adic and Pura- nic sources and that Christianity
and Islam are centuries later than the Upanis. ads according to
modern European scholars too. Pa- n.ini of the 4th Century B.C.
was familiar with the Upanis.ads (I.4.79). The Missionaries on
the west coast spread the myths of Christian influences and
the dogmas on our traditional schools to facilitate proselytation
based on imaginary data. I have dealt with this question in my
enclosed paper k for your study and reflection. Your theory that
the idea in Madhvas system that Vis.n.u bestows His grace on
a devotee thro Va- yu is quite alien to orthodox Hindu theology,
( A History of India , Vol. I, p. 218, Penguins), only betrays your
ignorance of our texts and traditions. Please note that the terms
Vis.n.u and Na- ra- yan.a used by Madhva in his works denote the
one Supreme Being which alone survives in Maha-pralaya as
the one Tad Ekam of the Na- sadiya su- kta of Rg Veda
(X, 129) breathing windless by its own power with no equal
or superior. The same Being according to Cha- ndogya Upanis.ad
is called Jala-a- n(III.14).
Similarly the Rg Veda text Yo deva-na- m na- madha- eka eva
preceded by Indram, Mitram, Varun.am, Agnim a-huh. etc. conveys
the truth that names of the various gods in their highest primary
sense refer to one Supreme Being and only secondarily to the
other gods in their respective spheres of jurisdiction of cosmic
government.
42 An Open Letter to Madam Romilla Thapar
Credit goes to Madhva for restoring Vedic Monotheism in this
light which corrects the distorted notions of the Polytheism of
-
the A ryan invaders set afloat by early western scholars.
'Ekam sat vipra- bahudha- vadanti' in Rg Veda is strictly limited
to this topic and does not convey what it is paraded to do by
every Tom, Dic and Harry as meaning all differences are illusory.
-
The I sa, Brhada- ran.yaka and the Cha-ndogya Upanis.ads and
the Sa- ntimantra in Vedic recitation have given the highest place
to Va- yu as the mediator, the best base for meditation of the
Supreme, free from a-suric influences and who leads the enlightened
souls to Brahman who resides in Va- yu as the aham and asmi
I am that I am.
Read the text in the Annexure k and be benefited and kindly
acknowledge receipt.
Mumbai - 400 016 Yours truly,
9-6-2002 B. N. K. Sharma
k Please refer to my "History of Dvaita School of Veda-nta & Its Literature",
Appendix X (Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi, 2000)
-26- -
VIJAYINDRA - VIJAYA KAVYA AND THE
(7TH PROOF) PONTIFICAL DATE OF VIJAYINDRA TIRTHA
Vijayindra Tir tha is one of the celebrated Saints of the
Ma- dhva Calendar. He was brought up from his boyhood by
Vya- sa Tirtha. in his own Matha in Vijayanagar. He was given
the name of Vitthala and after Upanayana trained in all branches
of Sanskrit literature and S a- stras and inducted into the
Sannya- sa a- srama as Vis.n.u Tirtha. He was by all accounts the
foremost among the numerous ascetic disciples of Vya- satirtha
such as Govinda Tapasa, Narayana Yati and Kesava and groomed
to succeed Vya- satirtha on his Pitha- . But fate decided otherwise
and he wa s gifted to the Math of Surendra Tirtha of the Vibudhendra
Mat.h, at the earnest request of Surendra in the spiritual interest
o f h i s mu t t . T h i s i s a t t e s t e d by a S u la- d i o f P u ra n d a ra
Da- sa :
U fl U
fl L U fl U U
and affirmed by Madhva Kavi also (IV, 32). Thus Vis.n.u Tir tha
became Vijayindra Tir tha and succeeded Surendra Tirtha to his
Mutt. The date of Surendra's demise has been given by Madhva
Kavi himself as Vika- ri (1539) :
Sfl # U u
flU fl U c m (V, 36)
This establishes clearly that Vijayindra T. became the Pontiff
of Surendra's Mat.ha in the Cyclic year of Vika- ri (1539 A.D.).
Read with the Pan.d.it tradition of Vijayindra Mat.ha at Kumbakon.am,
where he migrated and built a spacious Mat.ha for himself on
the Northern bank of the Ka- veri river and lived there for the
major part of his many sided active life with authorship of nearly
104 works including philosophical polemics as Defender of the
Faith of Madhva- ca- rya against the attacks of Appayya Diks.ita,
-
Kumbakon.am Ta- ta- ca- rya and the Vi ra Saiva Gurus, and travelled
44 Vijayindra - Vijaya Kavya & the Pontifical Date of V. Tirtha
for proagation of Dvaita philosophy. He passed away in (7TH PROOF)
Kumbakon.am at the Summit of his glory, fame and name, loved,
honored and respected by the Na- yaka Ruler of the Tanja-vur
Kingdom (Sevappa Na- yak), in the cyclic year of Manmatha
(1595 A. D.) in the month of Jyes.t.ha according to the Pan.d.it
tradition of Kumbakon.am, handed down over generations for the
-
last four hundred years, His annual A ra- dhana- (Pun.yatithi) is
celebrated annually at Kumbakon.am to this day with great
enthusiasm, love and veneration.
The famous Aruvilimangalam grant of Sevappa Na-yaka, dated
1577 A. D. lauds his resounding polemical victories over his
adversaries :
fl U U U U Q Sva-mi Mutt published by Vadavi Bhima-ca-r in 1930 asnot authorised
The Mysore Archaeological Report for 1917 mentions how
in about 1580 the three Veterans of the Dvaita, Advaita and
Visis.ta- dvaita Schools viz, Vijayindra, Appayya Diks. ita and
Ku m b a ko n. am Ta- ta- ca- r ya u s e d t o g a t h e r a t t h e c o u r t o f
Tanja- vur and hold forth on the merits of their respective systems.
For details see my History of Dvaita School 3rd edition p. 399
(Motilal B. Dass, Delhi - 7, 2000). Sri H. K. Vedavya- sa- ca- r in
his Guru Carite (P. 61) says Vijayindra adorned his Pontificiate
for a period of over half a century . This shows there should
be no objection or disagreement on the age old Pan.d.it tradition
in Kumbakon.am already referred to. The date ofVijayindra's entering
Brinda- vana (Sama- dhi) as the cyclic year of Manmatha (1595)
and the date of Surendra Tir tha's demise in the cyclic year of
Vika-ri (1539 A.D.) clinches the issue of the Pontifical period
of Vijayindra as 1539-1595 A.D. once for all.
Yet, for some inscrutable reasons, Ra- ja- Gurura- ja- ca- r and
H. K. Vedavya- sa- ca- r in their Kannad.a works Ajayya Vijayindraru
and Gurucarite (1949) have persisted in maintaining that Surendra
T. was alive in 1575 A. D. and received the grants of the villages
-27- MY FURTHER TEN RESEARCH PAPERS 45
of Pudukkud.i and Navalu- r and that Vijayindra lived upto 1614
A.D. But the epigraphic Dept. has rejected the Navalur grant
as untrustworthy as an Exhibit produced by the Math in favor
of Surendra. As we now have it on the authority of Vijayindra
- Vijaya Ka- vya itself that Surendra T. had already passed away
in Vika- ri 1539, it is out of the question to suppose that he was
alive in 1575 to receive the Grant - some thirty-six years after
his own demise! The only natural way in which this grant could
be explained would be that it was issued at Vijayindra's wishes
and suggestion in the name of his departed predecessor - if
it is not to be totally rejected as untrustworthy. No other explanation
is possible. For both Ra- ja- Gurura- ja- ca- rya and Vedavya- sa- ca- rya
have rejected the Genealogical Tables of the Ra- ghavendra
by the Mutt or published with the approval of the then Pontiff
(Op. Cit. p. 31-32) They have declared instead that "we have
accepted Vijayindra - Vijaya (of Madhva Kavi) as one of the
trustwor thy sources ( Prama- n.a Granthagal.u ) for the history of
Vijayindra T. and his predecessors (Op. Cit. p. 33).
It follows from the above that they both had access to it .
One wonders why then neither of them had taken the trouble
of getting it published - to put an end to all doubts and other
speculations on the date of demise of Surendra and the Pontifical
period of Vijayindra to establish once for all the unreliability
of the Kumbakon.am - tradition - Pontificial rule of Vijayindra
or the date of demise of Surendra in their own view. Why should
they have suppressed material evidence , which goes against
them, as it has now turned out? Or short of publishing this
entire work of Madhva Kavi, they could at least have quoted
relevant evidence to enable others to verify the facts if they
choose to do so, without let or hindrance?
Anyway, the Providential publication of the long awaited and
long delayed original text of the Vijayindra - Vijaya Ka- vya of
Madhva Kavi, by me in 1994 from a Xerox Copy of it sent to
46 Vijayindra - Vijaya Kavya & the Pontifical Date of V. Tirtha -28- MY FURTHER TEN RESEARCH PAPERS 47
-
me by a Scholar friend of mine in 1993 (Prabha- Printing Press, (7TH PROOF) (IV : 33) refers to the A ca- r ya in spite of his being an
Basavangud.i, Bangalore - 4) has now totally disproved the Avata- r of Va- yu, paying respects to his human Guru Acyuta Praja
contentions of Gurura- ja- ca- rya and Vedavya-sa-ca-rya on the question and his senior disciples. And Va- dira- ja himself must have paid
of both dates of demise of Surendra T. and the Pontifical period his respects to Va-gisa T. and his first disciple Vidya- nidhi under
of Vijayindra. whom he studied for sometime, The adage is Nares.u ja- tasya
naravat pravr. ttih..
It has also sprung many surprises on us, Firstly, it has confirmed
the statement of Purandara Da- sa in one of his Sula-dis that Vijayindra is known to have maintained close historical
both Vijayindra and Va- dira- ja were Vidya- Sis.yas of Vya- sara- ja. connections with the Ka- si and Gokarn.a - Par taga-li Mat.has of
the Gaud.a Sa- rasvata Ma- dhvas spread over South and North
U U fl flU Kanara, Kerala and Goa. The Konka n.a- bhyudaya composed in
U cU U U L 1700 A.D. refers to his installing the Vigraha of Narasimha in
the temple of Mulki, on the way to Ud.upi, from Mangalore.
This is confirmed by Madhva Kavi who says
The Mulki temple is under the mangement of the Ka- si Mat.ha.
flU flp c EU
There is a tradition in the Ka- si Mat.ha that Ya- davendra of the
U U fl Ka- si Mat.ha was trained and educated at the Kumbakon.am Mat.ha
U U S U U fl fl U (VII, 4) of Vijayindra. The names of many Sva- mis of the Ka- simat.ha
subsequent toVijayindra are modelled on those of the Ra-ghavendra
The Ud.upi tradition however gives a different reason for
Sva- mi Mutt.
Va dira- ja's name found amongst those of pupils of Vya- sara- ja.
-
Though undoubtedly influenced by the great philosphical works A record of the Jivottama Partaga- li Mat.ha refers to Ya-davendra
of Vya- sara- ja such as the Nya- ya- mr. ta and Candrika- , the leading T. disciple of the Jivottama Mat.ha, having changed his allegiance
works of Va- dira- ja such as the Yuktimallika- as now extant contain to that of Vijayindra by resorting to Dan.d.a Parivrtti (Change
no reference by name to Vya- sara-ja or his works. This has remained of the Ascetic Staff) at the hands of Vijayindra : (S U
an unsolved and a puzzling riddle till now. Be that as it may,
U fl m U )
the existence of an old Vya-sara- ja Mat.ha building in the South
Car Street of the Kr. s.n.a temple Square not far from the Sode This record is dated 1590 A.D. Further a stone Inscription
Mat.ha of Va- dira- ja in the same street not to speak of the famous in Sanskrit at the entrance to the Tirumala Devastha-na at Cocci;
Pada of Vya- sara- ja c U make it very probable that belonging to the Ka- si Mat.ha records that the presiding deity
Vya- sara- ja T, stayed in his Mat.ha at Ud.upi for some years. of the temple was installed in Vika-ri (1599 A.D.) by Sudhindra
- T. disciple and successor of Vijayindra T.
The tradition of Va- dira- ja's being a Rju and Bha- visami ra need
n o t m i l i t a t e a g a i n s t h i s h aving been a V i d ya- S i s. ya o f This establishes conclusively that Vijayindra the Guru and
Vya- sara- ja, at least when he stayed at Ud.upi and having paid predecessor of Sudhindra must have passed away in the interval
respects to him by way of Sis.ta- ca- ra. The Madhva Vijaya between 1590 and 1599 A.D.
48 Vijayindra - Vijaya Kavya & the Pontifical Date of V. Tirtha
This is quite in keeping with the centuries old Pan.d.it tradition
of Kumbakon.am, that Vijayindra's Pontifical period came to a
close in Manmatha 1595 A.D. at the summit of his glory, fame
and name.
The Mutt people in far off Nanjangu- d. and Mantra-laya are
proverbially and practically concerned only with the Paks.a,
-
Ma- sa and Tithi of the annual A ra- dhana- of some eminent
Sva- mis of their Mutt for purposes of celebrating their Punyatithi
and are in no way concerned with precise cyclic year in which
they (the Sva- mis) passed away.
The above facts should suffice to put an end to all frivolous
objections of Doubting Thomases, against accepting the well
established Pan.d.it tradition of Kumbakon.am regarding Pontifical
period of Vijayindra T. and particularly of his passing away in
the cyclic year of Manmatha (1595). The objections voiced against
the date of his accession to the Pit.ha and his demise in Manmatha
1595 have no more than a nuisance value from whichever quarters
they may emerge.
H H H
-29- DATE OF MADHVA RE-ESTABLISHED
(7TH PROOF) (A Rejoinder to Dr. V. Prabhanjana's Contention)
In his latest Kannad.a booklet, Dr. V. Prabhanjana has thrashed
out the problem on the basis of up to date details relating to
not only Madhva and his immediate disciples and successors
both in the Ud.upi and the Up-ghat Mutts, but on the Kaifiats
of the Ud.upi Mutts which have now come to light and have
been published in 1994 by the Kannad.a Visvavidya- laya, Hampi.
He has settled for 1199-1278 A.D. as the proper date by
interpreting the words of Madhva's Mbh. T. N. (XXXII, 120) four
thousand three hundred years after Kali literally instead of as
a broad statement in terms of after 43 centuries , as some others
have done, in agreement with the statement in the An. u-
Madhvacarita ascribed to Hrs.ikesa T., one of the successors
of the Ud.upi Mutts and the first Pontiff of Palima-r Mutt and
the best beloved among the disciples of Madhva in the Madhva
Vijaya (XIII, 40) itself. This work gives us the Paks.a, Ma- sa and
Tithi and cyclic year of Ms final exit in the cyclic year of
Pingala saying he lived for 79 years in all, which corresponds
to 1238-1317.
With the discovery and publication of the famous Sriku- rmam
Inscription (1281 A.D.) and others of Narahari T. one of the
direct disciples of M. and second successor of M. to his
Up-ghat Mutts, in the early years of the last century, almost
all the dates proposed by earlier generations of both Western
and Indian Scholars, with the solitary exception of P. S. Ses.agiri
-
Aca- r of Mysore who however stops short at 1270 and does
not go beyond - all these older dates have now lost any practical
interest for us, as the discussion has now to turn on the basis
of the Kaifiats , the new entrant into the fray.
As M's Nijasis.yapravara (M. Vij XIII, 40) Hrs.ikesa Tirtha has
left us his brief life sketch of Madhva. The Tul.u Mss. of this
work have been reported to have been found amidst the original
50 Date of Madhva Re-established
Tul.u Mss. in Palm leaf of the entire works of Madhva called
Sarvamu-la written by Hrs.ikesaX Tirtha in his own hand and
preserved in the Palima- r Mutt in a silver box for worship. These
were published in the last century by Vidya-ma- nya Tirtha of the
Palima- r Mutt and edited by Bannanje Govinda- ca- rya.
The Tul.u Mss. of the An. umadhvacarita were published
subsequently in 1924 from Ud.upi. The editor and publisher of
this work have remarked that though the authorship of this work
is not definitely known , yet as the Mss. of the work had been
fo u n d a m i d s t t h o s e o f t h e S a r va mu- l a p r e s e r ve d i n t h e
Palima- r Mutt, they have been presumed and inferred to have
been written by Hrs.ikesa Tir tha himself.
M U fl U c NU
S U NU U fl flU Coimbatore participated in the deliber tions. For the first time
S he drew the attention of the scholars assembled to the discovery
No wonder Dr. Prabhanjana has taken advantage of this remark
to reject the genuineness of the work outright (while accepting
its span of life of Madhva given by it). But the Editor and Publisher
of the work An.umadhvacarita should have cleared the doubt
by having the handwriting of the Mss. of the Anumadhvacarita
scrutinised and tallied with the handwriting of the original Mss.
of Sarvamu-la, by an authorised professionally qualified Hand-
writing Expert. This necessary precaution does not seem to have
been taken before their publication. Hence there is no convincing
reason to question the authenticity of the work at this distance
of time as Dr. Prabhanjana has sought to do.
QUESTION OF ABSOLUTE RELIABILITY OF THE KAIFIATS
The Kaifiats are in the nature of Ad Hoc reports about the
history of the As.t.amat.has of Ud.upi. They deal with their floating
traditions about events and personages and observances of the
-30- MY FURTHER TEN RESEARCH PAPERS 51
(7TH PROOF) Mat.h gathered from various sources available in their times,
culled from knowledgeable sources available then, collected by
the Staff of the Mutts under the direction of the Pontiffs. They
cover a period between 1806-1907, to be submitted to the British
Govt. As Ad hoc repor ts, they contain a liberal admixture of
fa c t s a n d f i c t i o n s, a s a d m i t t e d by t h e i r e d i t o r s a t t h e
V i s va v i d ya- l aya . T h ey c a n n o t t h e r e fo r e b e a c c e p t e d
as absolute Gospel truths.
In this connection, it would be pertinent to draw attention
to the fact that a conference of reputable Scholars was held
in Ud.upi in 1908 under the presidency of the most enlightened
and scholarly Pontiff of the Adma-r Mutt, Sri Vibudhapriya Tir tha
to discuss and determine the date of Madhva. The celebrated
Ma- dhva scholar and legal luminary C. M. Padmana-bha- ca- r of
and publication of the famous Sriku- rmam Inscription (1281 A.D.)
and others of Narahari Tirtha and their implications and bearings
on the question of the date of Madhva. He argued a strong
case for the necessity and advisability of giving a liberal rather
than a literal interpretation to the wording of the text from M's
statement in his Mbh.TN U d .
His arguments were accepted as convincing and conclusive
by the conference and its President. This shows the Kaifiats
of the Mutts were not accepted as absolutely infallible evidence,
on the subject.
DUBIOUS NATURE OF THE DATES OF THE KAIFIATS IN
REGARD TO MAJOR EVENTS I N THE EARLY LIFE OF MADHVA
A close scrutiny of the dates given in the Kaifiats for some
of the most important events in the early life of Madhva, such
as his Upanayana at the age of 7 followed barely two years
52 Date of Madhva Re-established
after by his Sannya- sa in 1208 (A.D.) without providing a sufficient
inter val even for his period of Gurukulava- sa prescribed by
the Sa- stras (C fl Z r ) . to the parents. The would-be Sannya- si himself went home to
Elaborate details have been given in the M. Vij. not only
about M's course of Vedic studies but about a lot of details
about Extra Curricular activities on the sports field with fellow
students both seniors and juniors. These cover a wide range
of activities and items such as swimming competitions, weight
lifting, long and high jumps, running races etc. which the participants
enjoyed to their heart's content in their off peiods of study. These
call for at least a few years gap between Upanayana and
Sannya- sa (in this case). The break neck speed with which the
young Vat.u (Madhva) has been pushed into Sannya-sa without
a period of Gurukulava-sa is so incredible and unnatural . After
all, the Gurukulava- sa as in the case of modern middle school
and secondary school life of youngsters is the happiest period
of one's early life. To pass it over and push the Vat.u right into
Sannya- sa after Upanayana, as has been done in the Kaifiats,
is to say the least, most cruel, inhuman, unnatural and amazing .
This is not all . Even more impor tant after the Vat.u's return
home from the Gurukula, is his resolve to renounce the world
and become a Sannya- si at this age of nine according to the
Kaifiats and the stout opposition of his parents for very valid
reasons. He was their only son and they had no one to take
care of them in their old age, The distracted father had to make
several trips to the Ka- reyur Mat.ha across the Netra-vati river,
where the Guru Acyutaprajna was camping at the time to dissuade
his son and probably also to persuade the Guru not to encourage
the boy. At one stage the enraged father threatened suicide.
Finally the son himself put up a compromise proposal that he
would defer his resolve till his parents had another son born
-31- MY FURTHER TEN RESEARCH PAPERS 53
(7TH PROOF) to them to take care of them in their old age. Tempers cooled
and a truce was called. In course of time another son was born
see his little brother and get formal consent of his parents for
his reununciation, But the way in which a mere nine year old
boy is made to suggest such a compromise to his own father
and mother . (as the kaifiats would have it) is hardly to be expected
to come from the lips of a son so young as a nine year old
and addressed to his own parents - whatever Dr. Prabhanjana
may feel about its indelicacy.
All this is enough to discredit the unseemly haste with which
the kaifiats have handled these events in the early life of the
-
Aca- rya and yet Prof. Prabhanjana says ditto to them and wants
us all to do likewise!
Take again the early accounts of the debates of visiting
Va dis like Va- sudeva Pan.d.ita and others to challenge a mere
-
nine year old boy - ascetic to a debate. This first disputation
according to the M, Vij. (IV, 43) takes place just 40 days after
the boy's Sannya- sa. No self-respecting grown-up Pan.d.it would
have agreed to such an unequal contest, unless his adversary
was an adult sannya- si.
The next Va- di, according to M. Vij. (V, 8) who came seeking
a Prativa-di wor thy of his steel was no less a person than the
T i t a n i c L o g i c i a n o f a l l - I n d i a s t a t u s B h a t. t. a Va- d i n d r a
of Maha- vidya- -anuma- na fame. His name has been shortened to
Va- disimha for metrical reasons in the M. Vij. text, This debate
too according to M. Vij. took place not long after the one with
Va- sudeva Pandita according to Canto V. It is worth noting that
the M. Vij. devotes as many as eight verses to this encounter
with Va- dindra (V, 8-15) while the one with Va-sudeva Pan.d.ita
and others has been disposed of in a single verse (IV, 48).
54 Date of Madhva Re-established
It is absolutely out of the question to suppose that such a far
famed logician as Bhat.t.a Va- dindra would have come seeking
a debate with a mere nine year old boy ascetic! - unless we
suppose the kaifiats have no knowledge of these debates mentioned
in the M. Vij. which is centuries earlier than the Kaifiats as
source materials for the life of Madhva.
- -
THE BELU R SA SANA
In Belu-r Sa- sana of 1277 A. D. mentioning Kamalana- bha T.
(Padmana- bha Tirtha) is not at all inconsistent. with 1238-1317
as the proper date for Madhva as Padmana- bha T. could have
very well been admitted to Sannya-sa soon after he joined the
fold of Madhva as his Sis.ya after the debates in which the Pan.d.its
of the Varis.t.ha Samsad at Pait.han on the Goda- vari region engaged
Madhva on his way back from Badari, as we shall be seeing
in due course. He had sat at the feet of Madhva and studied
his new Bha- s.ya on the B.S. and was overwhelmed with his
admiration for the new faith and decided for th - with for
p r o p o g a t i o n o f t h e n ew s i d d h a- n t a , h e a r t a n d s o u l .
(M. Vij. IX, 18-26)
- farsightedness of judgment if he had delayed the drafting of
PADMANA BHA TIRTHA'S ORDINATION
The fact remains that none of the immediate disciples of
Madhva from the Ud.upi Mutts has written any commentaries
on the works of Madhva. In the circumsances it could not have
escaped the attention of Madhva that the Veteran Scholar from
the Goda- vari region would be the ideal choice for all follow -
up action in this direction of publicising the Merits of the new
Bha-s.ya on the BS. as his accredited representative and successor
- designate. Scholarship alone does not qualify for ordination,
but total Vaira- gya . The new sis.ya was a paragon of Vaira- gya
as one steeped in the teachings of the Vedas, Pura- n.as and
Bha- rata (M. Vij. IX, 8).
-32- MY FURTHER TEN RESEARCH PAPERS 55
(7TH PROOF) U U U U (Mbh.)
Sobhana Bhat.t.a was already an Uttama- dhika- ri according to
Madhva's definition given in his BSB. This is borne out by his
steadfast Guruseva- and Virakti . (M. Vij. XV, 121). Jayatirtha in
his Nya-ya Sudha- calls him an embodiment of Vaira-gya . (fl U ).
No wonder the heart of Madhva melted towards the new found
God-given disciple and he bestowed on him the highest reward
leading to Bra- hmic realisation (MGB). This is signified by the
words of the M. Vij. (XV, 121) S l fll
by reading between the lines for their profound meaning, brought
out by Visvapati's Commentary by naming him the recipient as
Padmana-bha Tir tha . The following verses (XV, 123 - 126) confirm
that Padmana-bha T. lived upto his Guru's expectations right on
In seeking Sannya-sa at the hands of his Guru, Padmana- bha
T. was aspiring not only for his own personal Salvation but for
the Upliftment of all good and eligible souls for divine grace
as was, intoned in the Lord's par ting mandate to Madhva
(M. Vij. VIII, 50). It would be a poor compliment to Madhva's
Padmana-bha T. as his Lieutenant in his campaign in carrying
forward the philosophy of Veda- nta Theism against all forces of
what stood in its way.
The magnetic attraction between the ideal Guru and his ideal
Vedapravacana- ca- rya Sis.ya (M. Vij. XV, 126) could culminate in
the only way of placing this relation on an enduring basis by
giving him the status of successor - Designate of his Up - Ghat
Pit.ha which he so rightly deserved and had proved his eligibility
for it ere long . It would be a poor compliment to Madhva's sound
judgment and far - sightedness to make him delay the happy
culmination until his own last days till the Kan.vatirtha Meet.
56 Date of Madhva Re-established -33- MY FURTHER TEN RESEARCH PAPERS 57

We shall soon be seeing that this Kan.vatirtha function had
nothing to do either with the ordination of the As.t.amat.ha Yatis
or that of Padmana- bha T. as such, as the Kaifiats would have
it as Dr. Prabhanjana would have us believe.
IDENTIFICATION OF ISVARA DEVA
Dr. Prabhanjana dismisses my identification of Isvara Deva
mentioned in Madhva Vijaya X, 4-5 with Maha-deva, ruler of the
Ya- dava dynasty of Maha- ra- s.tra whose date is 1260-1271. This
ruler is said to have compelled Madhva and his ascetic disciples
who were on their way to Badari, to do some digging work with
-
spades for some construction work going on. The A ca- rya
mesmerised the haughty ruler to demonstrate how it should be
done as they were new to the job. The mesmerised Ruler took
-
the spade and went on digging and the A ca- rya and party left
him, digging, with a smile.
Dr. Prabanjana is adamant, this ruler must have been some
chieftain or ruler of some part of Tul.una- d.u or Karna- t.aka even
-
as Ses.agiri A ca- r would have it. But considering the spiritual
status and eminence of Madhva as the greatest son of
Tul.una- d.u and Kannad.a Na- d.u of the times it is difficult to
believe that any chieftain or Potentale there would have behaved
so churlishly and disrespectfully towards an anointed Saint of
his own native Soil. It is possible a ruler of a foreign state
who had no knowledge of the status of the person whom he
was ordering about, may have done so.
(7TH PROOF) the requirements of the metre to avoid Chandobhanga . The
M. Vij. itself as a metr ical Ka- vya has many parallels to
offer - such as
U < U (VIII, 6) , U fl U < fl (XIII, 69)
fl U < fl ( V, 8 ) fl < fl
not to speak of S > r (U s. a- h a ra n. a ) ,
<U in Ka- lida-sa's Kuma- rasambhava.
There is no valid reason to deny that Madhva and party after
leaving Parasura- ma Ks.etra (X, 1) passed through Maha- ra- s.tra
on the northern highway to the Ganga- en route to Badari. We
have in Maha- ra- s.tra famous temples of Maha- laks.mi at Kolha-pur
and of Vit.t.hala at Pandharpur. Dr. Prabhanjana should be knowing
that Vit.t.hala is the Samstha- na Pratima- of three of the Ud.upi
-
Mat.has bequeathed to them by the A ca- rya for daily worship.
-
Our A ca- rya had the greatest respect for our temples and Ks.etras,
be they Saiva, Vais.n.ava, Skanda or Durga- , as M. Vij. tells us
clearly (V, 48), though it does not mention all the temples and
Ks.etras covered by him on his Southern or Northern travels
- such as Kumbakon.am, Srimus.n.am, Tirupati, Palani, Tirukoilur,
Ka- ncipuram, etc. or Mathura- or Brinda-van, though it mentions
Hastina- pura, Va- ra- n.asi, Hris.ikesa and even a Kris.n.a temple on
t h e G o m a t i i n t h e H i m a- laya n a r e a ( i n G . B. ) . M o r e ove r
Maha- ra- s.tra held a double attraction for Madhva in this that it
was where the famous Amala- nanda author of Kalpataru lived
-
as Astha- na Vidva- n of the Ya-dava Kings Maha- deva and Krs.n.a.

Dr. Prabanjana's objection to my identification is that the name IMPLICATIONS OF THE WORDING OF
-
Isvara Deva given in the text of the M. Vij. does not exactly THE SRIKU RMAM INSCRIPTION
tally with Maha- deva. This is to say the least a trival objection .
The wording of Narahari Tirtha's Sriku- rmam Inscription. S
Any well - read student of Sanskrit - Padya Ka- vyas should know
that it is usual and permitted in metrical ka- vyas to substitute referring to
# ( ) fl fl
- -
for an original word, another of less or more syllables to suit Madhva does imply that the A ca rya was alive in1281 A. D. at
58 Date of Madhva Re-established -34-
the time of Narahari Tirtha's assumption of office as Prime Minister (7TH PROOF)
of Kalinga during a period of emergency created by the insurrection
of the Sabaras to restore the law and order situation in the
state. The very words # ( ) fl as wider and the narrower gaps between the recorded years of
in the grammatical usage Ffl Q (He eats after taking his
bath) speak for themselves. As this assumption of office was
expected of him as a hereditary right, there was no need to
-
solicit the presence of the Aca- rya on the occasion. Moreover
-
for aught we know the A ca- rya himself might not have been free
to attend owing to previous engagements elsewhere. This question
-
o f i nviting the A c a- r ya does not a t a l l a r ise fo r e i t h e r
-
Ses.agiri Aca- r or for Dr. Prabhanjana as according to the former,
Madhva would have left for Badari at least eleven years
before (1270) and three years before in 1278 according to
Dr. Prabhanjana.
I am unable to see how I have erred in saying that at the
time (a- ga) of Narahari Tirtha's Sriku- rmam Inscription (1281) in
which he has been described as killing many of the Sabara
hordes with his drawn sword, he must have been at least 40
years old and about 22 yrs old at the time of receving
Sannya- sa at the hands of Madhva in 1264 (according to his
own inscription). These two statements are perfectly consistent
with each other and I have stuck to them in the latest edition
of my HDSV. The "Tappu" ( error ) of which Dr. Prabhanjana accuses
me is his own making and he should correct himself after reading
my words again coolly and calmly in their proper contextual
sequence of thought.
ALLEGED CHRONOLOGICAL INCONSISTENCIES
IN THE PEDIGREE OF UD.UPI MUTTS
M. Vij. (XV, 129) says that both before and after Vis.n.u Tirtha
and Padmana-bha Tir tha there were other ascetic disciples of
Madhva .
MY FURTHER TEN RESEARCH PAPERS 59
U c U flU
All these could not have been of the same age group. The
their existence on their Pit.has, as they have now come to be
known to us through inscriptions or other sources relating to
them, in some cases , as in the pedigree of the Krs.n.a- pur, Puttige
and Palima- r Mat.has emphasised by Dr. Prabhanjana are subject
to these limitations. For example there is a very wide gap of
121 years between the fifth and the tenth head of the Palima-
r Mat.ha (Ra-macandra Tirtha) who founded the first Gaud.a Sa-
rasvata Ma- dhva Mat.ha at Bhat.kal (N. Kanara) in 1478. There
is a narrower gap between the second and the seventh head
of Krs.n.a- pur Mutt of some 40 years and much less gap between
the second and the fourth head of the Puttige Mat.ha.
It is possible that some of these Pontiffs were longer - lived
than those in some other Mutts. So, until we have on our hands
the exact dates of succession and demise of all these Pontiffs,
we cannot make use of these gaps to upset the cyclic years
-
of the birth and departure of the Aca- rya as Vilambi and Pingala
given by the An.u Madhva Carita. I have already shown that
Dr. Prabhanjana's objections against the genuineness of the work
are untenable.
The Narahari Yati stotra and others are unanimous that he
-
delivered the idol of Mu-lara-ma and Sita- to Aca-rya after relinguishing
his office in Kalinga which was in 1293 according to his own
-
Inscriptions and that the A ca- rya worshipped them for 80 days
before leaving finally for Badari. How could that be possible,
-
if according to Dr. Prabhanjana the Aca- rya had left for Badari
in 1278 AD?
60 Date of Madhva Re-established
-
PONTIFICAL PERIOD OF PADMANA BHA TIRTHA
In insisting on 1278 A. D. as the date of Madhva's final departure,
Dr. Prabhanjana has been hard put to it to explain the acknowledged
fact accepted by the Up-Ghat Mutts that Padmana- bha Tirtha
as successor of Madhva on the Pit.ha ruled only for seven years
(till 1324) according to the primary sources of the Uttara- di Mutt
such as the Gurucarya, PGVKK and the Satkatha- which has
gone into three editions including one in 1931 at the time of
Sri Satyadhya- na Tirtha.
He is however ready with his solution that Padmana- bha T.
lived for 103 years in all and remained on his Pitha for 46 years
till 1324 AD and seeks support in the tradition of the Advaita
and Visis.t.a- dvaita schools that Vidya-ran.ya and Veda- nta Desika
are believed to have lived over 100 years. But Dr. Prabhanjana
conventiently forgets this that while there may be such a living
tradition about this in their respective schools, there is no such
tradition in our school about Padmana-bha Tirtha. And you cannot
create or invent a new tradition now, to suit your needs!
WHO ORDAINED NARAHARI TIRTHA?
On p. 29 of his Booklet Dr. Prabhanjana has committed himself
that Narahari Tirtha was ordained by Madhva in 1264 AD as
borne out by one of his inscriptions. But on p. 39 he comes
out with a quote from Raghu- ttama Tirtha's NV - Bha- vabodha
purporting to say that Narahari, Ma- dhava and Aks.obhya Tirtha
a l l t h r e e o f t h e m h a d b e e n g i ve n S a n nya- s a- s r a m a by
Padmana- bha Tir tha himself, (and not by Madhva). Similar
statements have been quoted from Va- dindra Tir tha and
Satyanidhi - Vila- sa Ka- vya.
These sources are centuries later than Narahari Tir tha's own
inscriptions now available to us. These authors named by
-35- MY FURTHER TEN RESEARCH PAPERS 61
(7TH PROOF) Dr. Prabhanjana flourished at a time when Narahari Tirtha's
Inscriptions had not at all been discovered and were brought
to light only in the early years of the 19th century and we cannot
blame those early Pontiffs and others if they had no knowledge
of these inscriptions at all and had to rely solely on the so
called primary sources and the accounts prepared in the times
of Raghuna-tha Tirtha (Predecessor of Raghu-ttma T.) in consultation
with Vibudhendra Tirtha, when they are said to have met at
Kopre.
They honestly and sincerely believed in the tales relating
to Narahari being picked up and garlanded by the Kalinga's
state elephant sent out to fetch a suitable sucessor to the throne
during a regency!
These estimable Pontiffs absorbing interests were confined
to Pa- t.ha, Pravacana, Tapas, Japa, Puja- , teaching of Madhva
Sa- stras, writing commentaries and T.ippan.is on the works of
Madhva's commentators and administering their Mutts and touring
the country. Historical, Epigraphical and chronological studies
were not their hobbies or forte. We cannot therefore expect them
to have been interested in the problem of the dates of Madhva
as an absorbing subject of interest and attention.
Quite apar t from all this, the quote from Raghu- ttama's NV
- Bh a- vabodha speaks only of Padmana-bha T, as the seniormost
among Up ghat disciples of Madhva extending his best wishes
and grace ( ) to his successors attaining Bhagavad Aparoks.a
while on their Pit.has. The words used U l do not and
cannot mean the same as "Sannyasya" or admitting to the ascetic
order of any of them. Obviously Dr. Prabhanjana is trying to
read too much into the words of the NV commentar y of
Raghu- ttama or others to suit his own view.
62 Date of Madhva Re-established
The wrong way in which the intended sense of Raghu-ttama
T's verse in his NV - Bha- vabodha has been understood to convey
that it was Padmana- bha T. himself and not Madhva who was
-
the A srama Guru of Narahari, Ma- dhava and Aks.obhya by
Dr. Prabhanjana, could have been nipped in the bud if only
he had cared to look into the wording of Jayatir tha's opening
Mangala-caran.a verse in his GB - Prameya Dipika- :
U U flfl
M U L fl
This verse names Pu- rn.abodha Guru (Madhva- ca- rya) as J's
"Parama Guru" which means one's Guru's direct Guru among
Ascetics. This would be impossible if Padmana-bha (who was
-
himself a direct A srama Sis.ya of Pu- rn.abodha) was also the
a- srama Guru of Narahari, Ma- dhava and Aks.obhya. Hence the
tragi - comedy of errors in Dr. Prabhanjana's hasty research!
H H H
-36- -
T. S. RAGHAVENDRAN'S RESEARCH
(7TH PROOF) BUBBLE BURST
The Joint Secretar y of the SMSO Sabha, Tirupati,
Sri T. S. Ra- ghavendran has published an English translation
of Va- dira- ja's Tirthaprabandha (Part III) in June 2001, with his
Introduction in which he has stated inter alia,
- -
DEDICATED TO SRI 1008 SATYAPU RN.A TIRTHA MAHA N
(1706 - 1726 A.D.)
--
"During the period of Sri Satyapu-rn.a Tirtha Swa-mi ji , Aurangazeb
started to capture the temple of Lord Kr. s.n.a at Ud.upi. The army
also took over the processional Deity of Sri Kr. s.n.a. All the eight
Ud.upi Mutt pontiffs ran away out of fear and stayed near Mysore
--
and took refuge there. Sri Swa- mi ji came to know about this
unfortunate happening and immediately, he proceeded to Ud.upi
and succeeded in persuading the Moghal invaders from the attack
--
of the temple. Sri Swa- mi ji also successfully brought back the
processional deity and again installed the same at Ud.upi.
--
Sri Swa- mi ji profusely blessed and did Anugraha to all the eight
Mutts' Pontiffs and gave lot of courage and confidence to them
and saw that pu- ja- was carried on to Lord Sri Krr. s.n.a as usual."
The Introduction bristles with many concoctions. First of all,
there was no need for Sri TSR to have made an excursion into
Moghal history, which is not only uncalled for but is also highly
damaging to the reputation and prestige of the Sva-mis of As.t.amat.has
of Ud.upi. What makes his caricature of the Sva-mis all the more
reprehensible is that his work should have been published by
the SMSO Sabha officially, thus embittering the friendly relations
among Ma- dhva Mat.has, which deserves to be condemned by
all right thinking persons of the Ma- dhva community.
Authentic history and chronology are not evidently the strong
points of Sri TSR. Sri Satyapu-rn.a T. is not known for any outstanding
literary contributions to Madhva philosophy on a par with those
64 T. S. Raghavendran's Research Bubble Burst
of some of the veterans in the field. It is doubtful if the incident
narrated by TSR was known to the noted Kannad.a hagiological
work of the Uttara-di Mutt, the Satkatha- which has gone thro
three editions since 1931. As for the "article on Satyapu-rn.a which
appeared in the Souvenir of 2001 from Hyderabad" on which
TSR says has based his account, its version is equally unauthentic
so far as it relates to Aurangazeb, as will soon be clear.
Sri TSR should have gone into the credentials of the ar ticle
from the Hyderabad Souvenir before accepting it as Gospel Truth,
especially when it maligns the Ud.upi Sva- mis as cowards running
away deserting the Mu- la Vigraha of the Kr. s.n.a temple when
Aurangazeb (was supposed to have) invaded Ud.upi. TSR cannot
shirk his responsibility so lightly as an author.
All this apart, the authentic date of Aurangazeb's reign is
1658-1707 and according to TSR, Sri Satyapu- rn.a became the
Pontiff of his Mutt in 1706 - just one year before Aurangazeb
breathed his last !
According to TSR the sole object of Aurangazeb's invasion
of Ud.upi was "to capture the Ud.upi temple and all the Sva- mis
had run away in fear". The coast was entirely free and there
was no resistance or opposition even from the people. What
did Aurangazeb and his army do? They merely carried away
portable Utsavamurti of the Mat.ha! When Ghazni Mohammad
invaded Somana- th he destroyed the Mu-lastha- na and demolished
the whole temple. History records that Aurangazeb also destroyed
the temples of Kesava and Visvana- tha at Mathura- and Ka-si and
built Mosques on their sites. But he did not touch or destroy
the Mu- la Vigraha of Kr. s.n.a or of Hanuma- n there. Is this at all
likely or credible ?
If Aurangazeb had really invaded Ud.upi during the Pontifical
period of Satyapu- rn.a it must be between in or after 1706 and
before 1707. It cannot be placed before Satyapu- rn.a's becoming
-37- MY FURTHER TEN RESEARCH PAPERS 65
(7TH PROOF) the Sva- mi of his Mutt. Aurangazeb's state of health on the evidence
of authentic history was precarious from 1705 onwards. The
last few years of Aurangazeb were not peaceful. He was worried
by the prospect of his sons fighting among themselves for the
throne. He was in no mood to undertake an invasion of Ud.upi
temple or any other temple for the life of him. Authentic history
records: "In or about 1705, the health of Aurangazeb broke down.
He was seized by fits which rendered him temporarily unconscious.
After the capture of the for t of Wakinkera, atlast he slowly and
with difficulty marched back to Ahmednagar. Now when he nerved
himself to sit in the hall of audience, he was very weak and
death was clearly stamped on his face. The fever increased.
On the morning of Friday 21st February 1707 his weary spirit
was released. His embalmed body was carried to the village
of Daulatabad and there laid to rest." Vincent Smith, Oxford
History of India, p. 424 (corrected Reprint Edn. 1970).
In the face of these facts it would be out of the question
to suppose that an invalid Aurangazeb, ailing and already one
foot is the grave would ever have bothered to march on Ud.upi
with an army "to capture the temple" but not to destroy the
Mu- lavigraha but only to take away the processional deity! Does
TSR take us all for children being put to sleep by their mothers
with cock and bull stories? From Va- dira- ja's description of the
spiritual powers of the heads of the eight mat.has ( Tirthaprabandha
1.8) it would appear that the spiritual powers of all the eight
Sva- mis put together would at least be equal to if not more than
of one single outsider. TSR must be knowing that except the
Parya- ya Sva- mi no other sva-mi is authorised to perform daily
Maha- pu- ja- and Naivedya to Kr. s.n.a at Ud.upi. Thus during the the
entire period of absence of the As.t.amat.ha Yatis Sri Kr. s.n.a would
have been without Maha- pu-ja- and Naivedya till all theYatis returned
to Ud.upi after their flight, which may have taken quite a long
time.
66 T. S. Raghavendran's Research Bubble Burst -38- APPENDIX
LIST OF DVAITA PHILOSOPHY BOOKS AUTHORED BY
There is a limit even to concoctions. It only remains for me (7TH PROOF)
DR. B. N. K. SHARMA
to remind Sri TSR of the Tamil Proverb - Poi sonna- lum porundac
collavend.um : Even when you lie, make sure it is credible. It
k
1) "History of Dvaita School of Veda- nta
& Its Literature" Rs. 0895/-
is still a mystery what prevented Sri TSR to refer to the present
(2nd Reprint Edn. 2000)
Sva- mis of the Peja- var and Palima-r Mat.has and inquire whether
M/s. Motilal Banarsidass,
such an incident took place at Ud.upi to make sure, before rushing
8, Mahalaxmi Chambers, Warden Road,
to print and then express " regret for the error " belatedly k after Mumbai - 400 026.
the mischief and damage had been done!
k
2) "Philosophy of Sri Madhva- ca- rya" Rs. 0400/-
H H H (2nd Reprint Edn. 1991)
M/s. Motilal Banarsidass,
k [He has issued a regret statement in the January 2002 issue of 8, Mahalaxmi Chambers, Warden Road,
the SMSO Sabha Journal which saw the light of day only in June Mumbai - 400 026.
2002 after the present rejoinder of mine has been printed.]
k
3) "Brahmasu- tras & Their Principal
Commentaries of Sankara, Ra- ma- nuja &
Madhva Schools" Rs. 1200/-
In 3 Volumes (Reprint Edn. 1986)
M/s. Munshiram Manoharlal,
Oriental Publishers,
Post Box No. 5715, 54, Rani Jhansi Road,
New Delhi - 110 055.
k
4) "Madhva's Aupanis.dam Darsanam" Rs. 0020/-
Dvaita Vedanta Studies & Research Foundation,
No. 33/163, 10th B Main Road, Block I,
Jayanagar, Bangalore - 560 011.
k
5) "Brhada-ran.yaka Upanis.ad"
- as expounded by Madhva Rs. 0070/-
Dvaita Vedanta Studies & Research Foundation,
No. 33/163, 10th B Main Road, Block I,
Jayanagar, Bangalore - 560 011.
k
6) "Madhva's Bhagavad Gita- Bha- s.ya" Rs. 0040/-
Ananda Tirtha Pratishthana, Akhila Bharata
Madhva Mahamandala, Purnaprajna Vidyapitha,
Katriguppa Main Road, Bangalore - 560 028.
68 Appendix -39- MY FURTHER TEN RESEARCH PAPERS 69

k
7) "Advaitasiddhi Vs. Nya- ya- mrta" - Vol. I Rs. 0070/- (7TH PROOF) 14) "Lectures on Dvaita Philosophy" Rs. 0022/-
Aroor Srinivasa Rao Endowment
k
8) "Maha- ta- tparya of Maha- va- kyas"
Lectures (1989-90)
- Vol. II of No. 7 Rs. 0120/-
Ananda Tirtha Pratishthana, Philosophy Dept., University of Madras,
Akhila Bharata Madhva Mahamandala, Chennai - 600 005.
Purnaprajna Vidyapitha, Katriguppa Main Road, k
15) "Lectures on Veda- nta" (1973) Rs. 0025/-
Bangalore - 560 028. Special Lectures, Sanskrit Dept.,
k
9) "Madhva's Teachings in His Own Words" Rs. 0150/- Karnatak University,
(Book University Series No. 90) (4th Edition) Dharwad - 580 003.
Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, k
16) "My Four Latest Research Papers" Rs. 0050/-
K. M. Munshi Marg, Chowpatty,
Published by the Author, 4/2, Shah Bldg.,
Mumbai - 400 007.
Bhagat Road, Mumbai - 400 016.
k
10) "Nya- yasudha-" of Jayatirtha Vol. I Rs. 0150/- k
17) "My Further Ten Research Papers" Rs. 0075/-
(Panca-dhikaran.i)
Published by the Author, 4/2 Shah Bldg.,
Raghavendra Ashram,
Bhagat Road, Mumbai - 400 016.
56/10, 8th Main, 17th Cross,
Mallesvaram, Bangalore - 560 055. k
18) "Bhagavadgita- & Classical
k
11) "Nya- yasudha-" of Jayatirtha Vol. II Rs. 0150/- Commentaries" Rs. 0100/-
(First Adhya- ya Complete) Authored by Dr. S. K. Bhavani
Vishva Madhva Mahaparishat, (Dr. Sharma's son)
Uttaradi Mutt, 5th Cross, Shankarapuram, Dvaita Vedanta Studies & Research Foundation,
Basavanagudi, Bangalore - 560 004. No. 33/163, 10th B Main Road,
Block I, Jayanagar, Bangalore - 560 011.
k
12) "Nya- yasudha-" of Jayatirtha - Vol. III Rs. 0120/-
(Second, Third & Fourth Adhya- yas) 19) Satyam Eva Jayate Rs. 0025/-
Vishva Madhva Mahaparishat, (Equal status of all Ma- dhva Mutts)
Uttaradi Mutt, 5th Cross, Shankarapuram, Available with the Author
Basavanagudi, Bangalore - 560 004.
k Nos. 7, 8, 10, 11 & 12 are available with the Author also.
k
13) "" Z V O # # in 2 Vols. Rs. 0135/-
(Kannada Translation of No. 1)
Tr. by M. K. Bharatiramanachar
Dvaita Vedanta Studies & Research Foundation
No. 33/163, 10th B Main Road, Block I,
Jayanagar, Bangalore - 560 011.
 INDEX -40- MY FURTHER TEN RESEARCH PAPERS 71

- A - - I - (7TH PROOF)
- N - Ra- ghavendran T. S. 63
Adhigatikaran.a 25 Intrinsic Attributes of B 19 Narahari T. 58, 60 Raghu-ttama T. 61
Advaita Siddhi 6, 37 Isvaradeva 56 Narahari Yati Stotra 59 Ra-ma- nuja 13, 32
Akhan.d.a- rtha 7 Narain K. (Dr.) 9, 39 Ra-nad.e 23
- J -
Anavastha- 39 Na- sadiya Su- kta 23 Romilla Thapar 41
An.umadhvacarita 50 Jahallaks.ana- 20
Nirvises.a B. 24
- S -
Anuvyavasa- ya 35, 36 Jna- taika Sat 38 - germs of 24
Sa-ks.i 10, 11
Apara- & Para- Vidya- s 25, 29 Jayatirtha 13, 14 Nya- ya- mrta 7, 40
Sankara
Aparicchinnatva 30 Nya- ya School 35 6, 13, 19, 23, 25, 28, 32
- K -
Appayya Diks.ita 32
Sanks.epa Sa- riraka 37
- Kaifiats - P -
Ars.a Tradition 28
- of Ud.upi Mutts 49, 50 Sarvana-mava-n 31
- Padmana- bha- ca- r C. M. 51
Atman 5
Konkan.a- bhyudaya 47 Sa- svatadharmagopta- 15
- ambiguity of use 5 Padmana-bha Tir tha
- Sa-ks.a- tka- ra in Advaita 9 54, 55, 60 Satyapu- rn.a T. 63, 64
- M -
Aurangazeb 64, 65
Pande (Prof.) 22 Sevappa Na-yaka 44
Macdonell 23
Sobhana Bhat.t.a 55
- B - Pa-n.ini 10, 40
Madhusu- dana Sarasvati 40 Spinoza 31
Bannanje Govinda- ca- r 50 Paratah Pra-ma- n.ya 35
Madhvakavi 43 Sriku- rmam Inscription 57, 59
Bifurcation of Truth & Pariks.ita Pratyaks.a 11
Reality 37 Madhvavijaya 53 Svatahpra-ma- n.ya 9
Prabhanjana V. (Dr.)
Bhat.t.a Va- dindra 53, 54 Maha- pralaya 33 50, 56-58, 60-62
- T -
Bhakti-pa-da 14 Maha- va- kya 19 Prameya Dipika- 62
Tadekam 24
Bha- varu- pa Ajna-na 37
Man.d.ana 6 Pu-rn.atva 31 Tajjala-n 32

- H - Ma- n.d.u- kya Up. 4 - R - Tamil Proverb 66

Hobhouse 7 Mithya- 6 Radhakrishnan (Dr.) 3, 23 Tarangin.i 39

Hr. s.ikesa Tirtha 49 Myers Michael W. 20 Ra- ja- Gurura-ja- ca- r 44 Tarkata- n.d.ava 10, 36
72 Index -41-

Tattvapradipa 20, 22 Via Negativa 20 (7TH PROOF)

Thibaut 32 Vibudhapriya T. 51

Trivikrama Pan.d.ita 20 Vica- ra Sa- stra 25

Vincent Smith 65
- U -
Visvapati T. 55
Udayana 10
Ud.upi Tradition 46 Vis.n.u & Na- ra- yan.a
30, 31, 33, 41
- Etymology of 30
- V -
Vya- sa Tirtha 10, 38, 40
Vastudharma 20
Vya- vaha- rika Prama-n.a 35
Va- sudeva Pan.d.ita 53

Veda- nta Desika 34 - W -

Vedavya- sa- ca- r H. K. 45 Western Scholars 29

ERRATA
Page Line Read For

11 last Avidya-nivrtti it

20 20 Antra Antre

29 24 regrettable regretable

30 6 (many) All plurality is ___

only imaginary.

35 20 admitted had metted

-
36 7 Sa-ks.i Sa- ks.ih

40 10 by an agency by agency

Index - A - Avidya- nivrtti 11 ___

last