[Advaita-l] THESE ARE MY QUESTIONS TO DVAITA PHILOSOPHY OF MADHVACHARYA..
vathsa108 at gmail.com
Fri Feb 13 06:06:00 CST 2015
As KK Chakravarthy Sir Requested I am sending his comments For this Post
Along with my Answers.....
I have seen a message on Sri Anandatirtha's dvaita philosophy in the
advaita list and want to share a few thoughts. I am forwarding this to Shri
Jaldhar Vyas also, since he is one of the moderators of the list. He is
free to post this on advaita list, if he wants to.
Pardon me if you do not want personal e-mails from me in your mailbox.
Please mention if this is the case and I will not send any personal mails
to you again.
I am not arguing here from a dvaita viewpoint, but I am arguing here from a
purely common-sensical view point.
1) I have a question about madwa philosophy 1) for madwas there are 5 bedas
> *)jada-jada *)jiva -jiva *)jiva-iswara *)jiswara-jada and jiva-jada
These 5 bhedas are based on sound commonsense. And all these 5 bhedas are
accepted by advaita at the vyavaharika level. Please ask learned advaitins
in your list if you are looking for confirmation.
… BUT TODAYS SCIENCE HAVE PROVED THAT THERE IS NO JADA-JADA BEDA…..i:e
> according to madhvaacharya ,gold can never become silver….but todays
> science have proved that by changing electronics configuration we can
> change gold to silver….WHICH ACCORDING TO MADHVAACHARYA IMPOSSIBLE
> !!!!!!!…because nothing,or jada loose their prakruthika guna according to
If there is no jaDa-jaDa bheda, then instead of having rice or wheat, why
don't we start eating pens and pencils? There is jaDa-jaDa bheda and that
is why we are not eating pens and pencils. Sorry, I do not mean any
If there is no difference between gold and silver, then people should start
exchanging their gold for silver, or even iron. No sensible person would do
this for gold is highly priced compared to silver or iron.
Even if you look at elementary particles, a proton is not the same as an
electron and both are different from a photon. This kind of bheda exists
even at elementary level. I am talking about this since you have spoken of
Science. From a chemistry perspective, sodium has very different properties
compared to Neon and water has different properties compared to Hydrogen,
even though Hydrogen is one of the constituents of water. When we see these
differences, why not accept them?
> 2)jiva-jiva beda: accoring to dvaita each jiva is suguna and his
> prakrutika gunas are his own gunas. BUT ACCORDING TO ME PRAKRUTHIKA GUNAS
> ARE NOT OF ATHMAS AND IS SUPER IMPOSED ON ATHMA,BY READING MY FOLLOWING
> COMMENTS U PEOPLE COME TO KNOW…….. 1)me myself, i am human i see another
> human in kama,but if i become dog in next janma,i see dog with kama…..so
> prakruthika guna kama is not atmans guna 2) bhudhi: now when we are human
> we have high level of bhudhi,but if i become dog in next janma we have
> bhudhi of the level of dog,so budhi is not atmas guna if u go on thinking
> like that u will come to know that ,these gunas atman got from MAYA of
> jagath..and is not atmans guna ….so atman is nirgua and jagath is
> maya…………so madwaacharya’s jath is truth and 5 bedas are false……. CAN YOU
> PEOPLE PLEASE ANSWER MY QUESTION?
I have answered your question about jIva-jIva bheda at a different place
below, where it is more appropriate. I will focus on the reality of jagat
If jagat is not real, how come we are experiencing something instead of
nothing? Our experience cannot be denied, even if you want to deny the
existence of the objective world. If you consider the rope and snake
example, somebody mistakes the rope for a snake. The snake is unreal, but
this mistake that somebody makes is real.
And why do we see so many differences in the world? A pen is not same as a
pencil and both are different from a book. Therefore, commonsense suggests
that there is an external world that we are perceiving and this external
world is full of differences. Sri Anandatirtha's pancha bhedas and
jagat-satya vAda are based on sound commonsense.
> 2)ultimate knowledge is sacchidaanada. sacchidaananda is the
> personality(swarupa) of brahman….which means ….. sat(always
> present)….chit(consiousness)……anadnda(bliss) …..when you experience…..this
> ananda(bliss)…….that means your personality have become equal to
> sacchidaanada….in that state you have become sacchidaanada swarupi…..or in
> other words…..you have become sacchidaanada rupi brahman …..which is the
> ultimate knowledge….as vedas says….. so….you yourself…..have become
> sacchidaanada….or YOU HAVE BECOME BRAHMAN ,which is ultimate
> knowledge….thats why vedas say…..prajgnam brahm….or brahman is
> knowledge…..and you are brahman…….(aham brahmamaasmi)……this is in
> breaf……the essence of jgnana yoga…. WHAT YOU SAY FOR THIS?
For argument sake, let us say that brahman is sat-chit-Ananda in essence
and even a jIva is sat-chit-Ananda in essence. But jIva does not become
brahman even if they are same in terms of essence. Both ocean and a small
drop of water, are water in essence, but a small drop of water does not
become the ocean.
> 3) Athman is nirvikaara or nirvikaari….in dvaita If you accept this athman
> as nirvikaari ,then you should accept athman is not atomic and it is
> infinite or brahman…why because ,now one soul which is human,in this
> janma,if he become elephant in next janma,will his soul stretches to the
> size of elephant? similarly if that soul become ant in next janma,will its
> soul will compress to the size of ant?….. Similarly,in same janma baby will
> grow from the small size baby to big man,if size changes…then soul cannot
> be called as nirvikaari or avikaari….. for that purpose,advaita adviceses
> that athman is infinite in size,or covers whole world or athman is
> brahman…only because of ignorance…it thinks that it is limited in
> size……….what you say for this sir?
Maya or no Maya, avidya or no avidya, how can the infinite, which is of the
nature of Ananda, ever think that it is the finite? It is a common
experience for most of us that we undergo states like happiness and misery.
How can the infinite, which is of the nature of Ananda, ever undergo
misery? It goes against the very idea of Ananda, if an entity which is
blissful by nature can undergo misery. Again, I am talking only from
> 4) Sir, In dvaita’s trividha jeevas…like rajasa,tamasa,and sathvika jeevas
> are like tv serials….where there will be a good person…who will always
> think good and do good , there will be a bad person…who always think evil
> and do evil….this is just the ladys watching tv serial story….hence not
> practical….. 2)In reality there is atleast a good guna in a bad person and
> a bad guna in a very good person….a evil person can become good one day and
> good person can become bad one day…..So, we cannot say evil nature or good
> nature are nature of his own soul…..So,there cannot be rajasa,sathvika
> ,tamasa jeevas….. WHAT YOU SAY FOR THIS?
Let us think about this from a commonsense perspective again. Experience
shows that some people are good, some are bad, and many have both qualities
in them. People like Hitler and Stalin are pure evil. People like Mahatma
Gandhi and Martin Luther King are just too good. Most people are somewhere
in the middle. Sri Anandatirtha extends these commonsensical concepts to
the jIvas themselves. This has scriptural basis in the Bhagavad Gita, but
even if you leave aside scripture, this is a very commonsensical position
to take and it is based on experience.
> 5) First of all ,In advaita we say shivoham,not as “Parvathi pathi”….we
> say shiva shivoham here shiva means supreme knowledge or supreme
> consciousnesses….that is it……..that means we are supreme consioussness…not
> parvathi’s husband In dvaita hari means “lakshmi ‘s husband,shiva means
> “parvathi’s husband”…..this is childish…..and bakwas If you ask a
> donkey…how is god…it says god is beautiful donkey …similarly madhvacharya
> says hari as a beautiful sarvothama lakshmi ‘s husband hari…… Dvaita is
> full of childish stories.. Please answer for this…..
I do not know whether animals have the capacity to think about concepts
like god. And as far as "childish stories" are concerned, advaita accepts
all these stories at the vyavaharika level. Vishnu is accepted as
Lakshmipati and Shiva is accepted as Parvatipati. Your own Sringeri
Acharyas perform worship in temples. There are so many Shankar mutts out
there, where rituals are performed for installed deities. So why are you
attacking dvaita for this, when advaitins and smartas believe in the same
scriptures that dvaita does?
With Warm Regards
My reply for this :
kk chakravarthy Sir,
1)I accept you advaita says beda is there in vyvaharika level......
But my question is beda in dvaita is absolute.....there is beda between
gold and silver by absolute according to dvaita.....
beda is absolute means gold by any chance should never become silver or any
other thing...which is false I am saying...as gold can be converted to
2)In jiva-jiva beda and jada-jada beda what ,I was going to tell is
In dvaita jiva-jiva beda and jada-jada beda are absolute....so jiva or jada
will never change their prakruthika guna.....even advaita accepts these
jiva-jiva and jada -jada beda ,but as temperory as they changes with
As time passes as jada or jiva changes its prakruthika guna...So,dvaita has
to add nanu-nanu beda or "I" -"I" beda as our prakruthika gunas changes
with time,"I" changes from time to time.....
3)Advaita says jiva-jiva beda or jada-jada beda as vyvaharika or temperary
as prakruthika guna changes with time...so prakruthika gunas are not
athman's guna as it changes with time and athman is nirguna....
4)I said in dvaita ,hari means lakshmi's husbend...,personal god with four
that is why they say hari SARVOTTAMA....
SIMILARLY IN DVAITA SHIVA IS A HUMAN ,PARVATHI'S HUSBEND THAT IS WHY THERE
IS MELU-KILU IN DVAITA...and shivas position is 5 in melu -kilu....
but in advaita shiva means supreme consciousnesses ,PURUSHA,ALL DRIVING
IF YOU CONSIDER GOD AS ALL DRIVING POWER....THEN THERE CANNOT BE MELU-KILU
AS A POWER CANNOT BE TERMED AS HEIGHER OR LOWER....
BUT FOR MADHVAS HARI IS LAKSHMI'S HUSBEND,SIVA IS PARVATHI'S HUSBEND...A
WHICH IS CHILDISH ....
THAT IS WHY THERE IS MELU-KILU IN DVAITA...
THIS IS MY OPINION.....
5) LAST BUT NOT THE LEAST.......DVAITHA IS FIT TO SAY ONLY THAT THERE IS
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ,BOOK AND PENCIL,MALE AND FEMALE ETC....WHICH EVEN A
CHILD CAN UNDERSTAND,WHICH I SAY AS ABSOLUTE TRUTH....BUT ADVAITA SAYS IT
AS VYAVAHARIKA SATHYA,IT TALK ABOUT SAT-CHIT-ANANDA WHICH IS TOTALLY OUT
OF DVAITA'S SCOPE....THAT IS WHY I CALL DVAITA CHILDISH.....
PLEASE ANSWER FOR THIS ALSO....
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list