[Advaita-l] Fwd: Vaadiraaja Teertha's Yuktimallika - Advaita Criticism - Slokas 1-10 to 1-13
Praveen R. Bhat
bhatpraveen at gmail.com
Tue Jun 20 21:30:33 EDT 2017
Either Shivprasadji is not on the list or he missed the list. In any case,
I am forwarding the same to the list before responding.
On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 6:34 AM, SHIVPRASAD DINKAR <harivayus at bellsouth.net>
> PB: I'm surprised that he is proud of using such junk words as you quote ahead
> and that it is his best effort in life! :)
> SD: I am not surprised that you are unable to understand a set of words
> and logic behind it in order made to convey a point. Sri Vaadiraja Tirtha
> obviously did not abuse anyone. Yukthimallika is filled with logic.
> Please read it and, understand it if you can understand it, that is.
> PB: Dvaitins do not have a clue of what mithyAtva means as we have seen many times.
> Their ridiculous arguments against AV based on the misunderstanding mithyA
> has been refuted using their own choice of Nyaya tools by Siddhikara.
> Therefore, we do not agree that Madhva, Ramanuja or any other mata is the
> siddhAnta since it came later. AV alone is the siddhAnta. However, within
> AV sampradAya itself, it could be said that uttarottaramunInAM pramANam
> since one takes ones own guru's explanation of the various AV explanations
> as the best interpretation, as long as it doesn't contradict the aikya.
> Now then, the question would be: how is it that AV is the siddhAnta? Its
> because its the only system that passes the test of six li~Ngas for
> tAtparyanirNaya. Every other system fails it. In Chandogya, for example,
> just taking the first लिङ्ग where उपक्रम shows the प्रतिज्ञा done was एकेन
> ज्ञानेन सर्वं विज्ञातं भवति and ended with तत् त्वम् असि in उपसंहार, one
> can see that aikya is the tAtparya of the Shruti. This first लिङ्ग itself
> fails miserably in other philosophies.
> SD: Have you even read any classic works/ polemical debates by Dvaitin? We understand the illogic of Advaitham very well. That is why so many brahmins converted to Vishista Dwaitham and Dwaitham from Adwaitham!!!!
> PB: I love the example given by Swami Dayanandaji in this regard, wherein he
> narrates a story of a Dvaitin who studied for 12 years and countered an
> Advaitin. However, the conclusion is that Dvaitins study for several years
> only to conclude what even an illiterate knows "I am different from
> What is the point of such study to learn what you know from birth that you
> are limited entity different from an limitless Ishvara. There is no logic
> necessary to establish dvaita, it is anubhava-siddha for all and therefore,
> even Shruti is not a pramANa. Advaita has to be logically established and
> Shruti becomes a pramANa for such aikya-jnAna.
> SD: Such examples are puerile and make so sense. Conversely, why study for 12 years? You can get Vipareetha Gyanam - aka Advaitham that propounds Jiva Brahma Ikhyam based on Shruthi quotes that were cherry picked, if you go through Advaitha list for say, 2 months?
> PB: On a related note, if Dvatin's Ishvara is different from all types of
> people and animals, then he is a limited Ishvara, which is itself against
> the Vedas!
> SD: You have revealed that you do not even have rudimentary knowledge of Dwaitham.
> PB: For us, from the pAramarthika sattA, where such expression is used, the
> abusive words is also brahman/ Ishvara, the abuser is Ishvara, the abused
> is Ishvara, abusing is Ishvara, all is Ishvara, where is the abuse then? I
> can understand the Dvaitin's misery though: bhUmA vai sukhaM, na alpe
> sukham asti.
> SD: Again, you have not understood the point that is being made by Sri Vaadiraja Tirtha. He has not abused anyone. However, on a slightly different note, Shankara has actually cursed a whole set of Brahmins. Let me give you some background. Shankara came as promised to his mother, his mother's Anthim Kaaryam. But the Brahmins of that place, and, following the tradition, said there is no Agni Kaaryam for a Sanyasi. So, they refused to give him fire-wood and fire. He cut banana trees and did the last rites. But he was enraged so much that, he cursed them to be Paraya at mid-afternoon, the time when this incident took place. That community of Brahmins are known as Maadyanika Parayas. And, normally no Smarthas will have Vivaha Sambandham with that community, till today. Now, don't enter inter specious and spurious lies like intellectually dishonest Subbu and, say no such incident took place or no such community exists. Many Tamil and Kerala Brahmins would personally know people of that community. So, now tell me, based on his Adwaitham, who was Shankara cursing, when he cursed those Brahmins?
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list