[Advaita-l] Vaadiraaja Teertha's Yuktimallika - Akhandarthavaada Criticism - Slokas 1-972 to 1-980
vmurthy36 at gmail.com
Thu Jul 6 04:31:05 EDT 2017
The Anumaana Rule for Akhandartha is -
सत्यज्ञानादिवाक्यं ब्रह्मस्वरूपमात्रपरं तन्मात्रप्रश्नोत्तरत्त्वात्
प्रकृष्टप्रकाशचन्द्र इति वाक्यवत्
The Upanishad Vaakya 'Satyam Jnanam Anantam Brahma' is saying Satyam,
Jnanam and Anantam are Svarupa of Brahman only but not qualities of
Brahman. Because of the question -
किं ब्रह्म? 'Who is Brahma?' and the answer - सत्यं ज्ञानम् अनन्तं ब्रह्म.
Brahman is Truth, Knowledge and Infinity. This is like question asked by a
person looking at Night Sky - 'What is the Moon?' and answer is 'The
Magnificently Shining is the Moon'. Out of all shining objects at night the
moon is most brilliant. In this answer the Moon's quality is not given but
Moon's Svarupa definition is given. He is the Magnificently shining Object
in the Night Sky. We don't have to give his qualities like round shape,
having a rabbit shape inside and so on. Similarly the Satyam, Jnanam and
Anantam give definition of Brahman but not His qualities. Brahman is
Satyam, Brahman is Jnanam and Brahman is Anantam. He does not have Satyam
as a Guna and so on.
Before arguing with Vaadiraaja on this difficult subject a small prayer to
Lord Hayagreeva the Horse Faced Vishnu by Vedanta Desika. Our poet
Vaadiraaja also was a devotee of Hayagreeva. Like Saraswati and
Dakshinamurthi this Hayagree also is a God of Knowledge and Learning.
ज्ञानानन्दमयं देवं निर्मलस्फटिकाकृतिम् ।
आधारं सर्वविद्यानां हयग्रीवमुपास्महे ॥ १॥
We meditate upon that Supreme One who has the neck and face of a horse and
who is the embodiment of Jn~AnA (divine Knowledge) and Ananda (Bliss). He
has a body like a radiant, blemishless Sphatikam (Crystal) and is the abode
of all Vidyas (branches of Learning).
Advaitis also pray to Dakshinamurthi for Knowledge
निधये सर्वविद्यानां भिषजे भवरोगिणाम् ।
गुरवे सर्वलोकानां दक्षिणामूर्तये नमः ॥४॥
Vaadiraaja is now trying to show Advaiti's Akhandarthavada has faults.
ज्योतिष्ट्वेन हि चन्द्रस्य स्वरूपज्ञानवान् पुनः ।
चन्द्रत्वेनैव तं ज्ञातुं कश्चन्द्र इति पृच्छति ॥ १-९७२
A person knowing Chandra's Svarupa as Brightness will again ask 'Who is
Chandra?' to know his special qualities from other bright objects in the
sky. He wants to know how Chandra is different from other shining bodies in
the sky. He knows Chandra's Svarupa as Brightness but he wants to know how
to differentiate him.
अतः कश्चन्द्र इत्येष प्रश्नः प्रश्नविदां मते ।
किंलक्षणक इत्येव स्वार्थमर्थातुरो भजेत् ॥ १-९७३
Therefore 'Who is Chandra?' question means in the opinion of Knowers of
question analysis 'What are the qualities of Chandra?'. This is its meaning
because there is no other meaning. The question 'Who is Chandra?' is asking
to know the Sajaateeya and Vijaateeya Bhedas of Chandra from other objects.
चन्द्रत्ववान् क इत्येव वाक्यस्यार्थो यतः स्फुटः ।
स्वरूपमात्रप्रश्नत्वं स्वरूपासिद्धमेव ते ॥ १-९७४
The clear meaning of the question is 'Who has Chandratva?'. Therefore your
Rule will have the defect of Svarupa Asiddhi. The Advaiti's Rule to show
Brahman's Svarupa is Satyam, Jnanam and Anantam is using the Chandra
example. But that example is not giving Svarupa of Chandra at all.
Therefore the Rule has a defect.
एवं लक्षणवाक्यं च लक्षणं वक्ति नापरम् ।
अपृष्टोत्तरमेव स्याद् रूपमात्रनिरूपणे ॥१-९७५
The answer to the question has to give the qualities of Moon and not some
other thing. If the answer gives Svarupa only it is answering an unasked
question and it will not be answering the actual question.
सत्यज्ञानादिवाक्यं तद् विशिष्टब्रह्मतत्परम् ।
लक्षणप्रश्नवाक्यत्वाच्चन्द्रलक्षणवाक्यवत् ॥ १-९७७
The Satyam, Jnanam, Anantam Brahma is describing Satyatva, Jnanatva and
Anantatva qualities of Brahman because it is answer to question asking for
qualities. This is like the question for Chandra's qualities. Vaadiraaja
is giving a counter Anumaana Vaakya to Advaitis. Advaitis gave the Anumaana
- सत्यज्ञानादिवाक्यं ब्रह्मस्वरूपमात्रपरं तन्मात्रप्रश्नोत्तरत्त्वात्
प्रकृष्टप्रकाशचन्द्र इति वाक्यवत् but Vaadiraaja is giving the counter
लक्षणप्रश्नोत्तरवाक्यत्वात् चन्द्रलक्षणवाक्यवत् In this Anumaana
the Satyatvaadi Guna Visishtabrahmaparam is Saadhya and Hetu is Lakshana
Prashnottara Vaakyatvaat and the example is Candralakshana Vaakya.
Then he is showing one more defect in the Advaiti's logic.
स्वरूपमात्रज्ञानस्य पदेनैकेन संभवात् ।
व्यर्थं पदान्तरं च स्याज्ज्ञातस्य ज्ञापनेन किम् ॥ १-९७८
If Svarupa Jnana is required it can be done with one word only. If there
are other words they become useless. They are giving knowledge of a Known
object. Why do you say Satyam Jnanam Anantam gives Svarupa of Brahma. First
word Satya itself is sufficient to give Svarupa of Brahman. Then the next
two words Jnanam and Anantam become useless because they are giving Svarupa
again of Brahman we already know from Satyam.
यदि सत्यादिपदतो लक्ष्ये ब्रह्मणि केवलम् ।
व्यावृत्तिः स्यादसत्यादेस्तेन सार्थक्यमिष्यते ॥ १-९७९
If you say the use of Satya, Jnana and Ananta words is to show absence of
Asatya, Ajnana, and Paricchinna even though Satya, Jnana and Ananta words
also give Svarupa of Brahman - what happens?
तर्हि गङ्गापदाल्लक्ष्ये तीरेऽपि न्यायसाम्यतः ।
व्यावृत्तिः स्यादगङ्गायास्तीरे स्यान्मज्जनं सदा ॥१-९८०
Then using same logic there will be absence of Aganga on the shore of Ganga
because the bank of Ganga is the Lakshyartha of Ganga. This will
mean immersion of a pilgrim has to be done not in Ganga river but on the
Ganga banks. Vaadiraaja is saying nonsense will come out as a result of
using Advaiti's logic. There is a rule to immerse yourself in Ganga river.
But if we use Advaiti logic for Satyam, Jnanam, Anantam Brahma here we get
nonsense result. If you say immerse in Ganga it means where there is
absence of Aganga. But Lakshyartha of Ganga like in the example Gangaayaam
Ghoshah is the bank of Ganga but not Ganga river itself because village
cannot be in the river. It must be on the bank. Now also if you say immerse
in Ganga we can use Lakshyartha and say immerse on the bank because there
is also absence of Aganga. This is the nonsense result. Nobody can immerse
himself on the bank because it is land.
Response - Vaadiraaja has not understood Nirgunatva of Brahman and he has
not understood Brahman cannot be Vaacyartha of any word. In Satyam, Jnanam,
Anantam Brahma the three words have no relationship in them and there is no
Visheshana Visheshya relationship also with Brahman. They cannot be
qualities of Brahman. Therefore they are only describing Svarupa of Brahman
as absence of Asatya, absence of Ajnana and absence of Parichinna or
limitedness. The Lakshyartha is not like in the Ganga example because there
is no bank or part of Brahman. Brahman is Whole and without parts. The
Lakshyartha of Brahman cannot mean a part of Brahman like in Ganga's
Lakshyartha. Therefore the example is wrong.
Requesting scholars to give more details and finer points. This is a
difficult topic for me.
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list