[Advaita-l] A few verses from Sri Vādirāja Tirtha's 'Yuktimallikā'

[V Subrahmanian]

In the Yuktimallikā, the author Sri Vādirāja Tirtha says in the beginning
of the work:


अन्ते सिद्धान्तस्तु सिद्धान्तो मध्वस्यागम एव हि ।

निर्णीतुं शक्यते युक्तायुक्तपक्षविमर्शिभिः ॥ १० ॥

अस्मादुत्तरपक्षोऽन्यो यस्मादद्यापि न दृश्यते ।

तस्मात् स एव सिद्धान्त इति निश्चित्य चेतसा ॥ ११ ॥

अवलम्ब्य मतं सर्वोन्नतं श्रुतिपुरस्कृतम् ।

मयेत्थं युक्तिरुचिना क्रियते युक्तिमल्लिका ॥ १२ ॥


Here Sri Vādirāja says: The Madhva siddhānta alone is the ultimate, anta,
that is established.  There is no school which has come up still today, *after
*Madhva, to refute this school.  Thus, considering that that alone is the
siddhānta, I compose this ‘Yuktimallikā.’


The Advaitin’s response to the above:


The Shruti itself has already refuted dvaita darshana in innumerable
passages and ways.  It is needless to list them here since all those
passages have been given a twisted interpretation by the Madhva
school.  Suffice
it to say that Shankara in the Bṛhadāraṇyaka 5.1.1 bhāṣyam has said:


न उपदेशार्हं द्वैतम्, जातमात्रप्राणिबुद्धिगम्यत्वात् ।  //Dvaita does not
deserve to be taught (by the Scripture).  Why? It is already known to even
the just born living being.//


//यत्तूक्तं वेदैकदेशस्य अप्रामाण्यं कर्मविषये द्वैताभावात्, अद्वैते च
प्रामाण्यमिति
— तन्न, यथाप्राप्तोपदेशार्थत्वात् ; न हि द्वैतम् अद्वैतं वा वस्तु
जातमात्रमेव पुरुषं ज्ञापयित्वा पश्चात्कर्म वा ब्रह्मविद्यां वा उपदिशति
शास्त्रम् ; न च उपदेशार्हं द्वैतम्, जातमात्रप्राणिबुद्धिगम्यत्वात् ; न च
द्वैतस्य अनृतत्वबुद्धिः प्रथममेव कस्यचित् स्यात्, येन द्वैतस्य
सत्यत्वमुपदिश्य पश्चात् आत्मनः प्रामाण्यं प्रतिपादयेत् शास्त्रम् ।//


Translation (Swami Madhavananda):


//You said that one part of the Vedas would be ‘’invalid in the sphere of
ceremonials because of the absence of the world of duality, while another
part would be valid in the realm of unity.’’ This is wrong, for the
scriptures seek to instruct merely according to existing circumstances.
They do not teach a man, as soon as he is born, either the duality or the
unity of existence, and then instruct him about rites or the knowledge of
Brahman. *Nor does duality require to be taught; it is grasped by everyone
as soon as he is born ; and nobody thinks from the very outset that duality
is false, in which case the scriptures would first have to teach the
reality of the dual world and then establish their own validity.* (The
unreality of the universe is no bar to the validity of the scriptures, for)
even the disciples of those who deny the Vedas (and do not believe in an
objective universe) would not hesitate to accept the authority of their
scriptures when they are directed (to do something helpful in accordance
with them) by their teachers. Therefore the scriptures, taking the *dualistic
world as it is  created by ignorance and natural *to everybody - first
advise the performance of rites calculated to achieve the desired ends to
those ….//



So, what the dvaita philosophy has ‘established’ with great effort already
stands refuted even prior to its inception as a ‘siddhānta’.  Thus there is
no need for any other school to come later than the Madhva school to refute
it.



It is only Advaita that is not known that requires to be taught by the
Scripture.  If you say Sri Madhva has established that Dvaita is the final,
Advaitins also can say that Sri Shankara has established that dvaita is
only avichāritasiddha but upon enquiry it is only Advaita that is final.



The Yuktimallikā now ventures to show how disastrous will it be if Advaita
is admitted:


त्वं चंडालः पशुर्म्लेच्छश्चोरो जारः खरः कपिः ।

कुण्डो गोळक इत्याद्या या निन्दा लोकसम्मताः ।

ताः सर्वास्सर्वजीवैक्यवादे स्युर्परमात्मनि ॥ १३ ॥


All censures with name-calling words like ‘you are a chandāla, an animal,
mleccha, thief, womanizer, ass, monkey, a woman’s illegitimate son, …etc.
that are admitted in the world (as words of censure) will apply to the
Paramātman in the doctrine that holds unity (aikya) of all jīvas.


Response:


The scriptures instruct us not to use bad words against anyone.  Why? It is
because such words will be extremely demeaning to the Dweller inside.  It
also teaches us to always pay our respect to everyone, every creature in
creation since it is the Lord that is appearing in the form of the creature:


ईश्वरो जीवकलया प्रविष्टो भगवानिति ।

प्रणमेद्दण्डवद्भूमावाश्वचण्डालगोखरम् ॥ ४॥ (Yājñavalkyopaniṣat 4)


[One should make salutation, even to the dog, the chanḍāla, the cow and the
ass, by prostrating oneself on the ground like a stick, in the belief that
God Almighty inheres in all things as the jīva’.]


The above idea, with a variation, is found in the Srīmadbhāgavatam too:

मनसैतानि भूतानि प्रणमेद्बहुमानयन्।

ईश्वरो जीवकलया प्रविष्टो भगवानिति॥3.29.34॥



[Let one mentally prostrate to every creature with the firm conviction that
it is the Lord who has entered in these beings as the jīva.]

The Vishnupurana too says that everything in creation is Vishnu:



ज्योतींषि विष्णुर्भुवनानि विष्णु: [विष्णु: पु.  २.१२.३८] इत्युपक्रम्य
यदस्ति यन्नास्ति च विप्रवर्य [?] इत्यस्ति ।



In another text/purana too we have the same message:



भूतानि विष्णुर्भुवनानि विष्णुः....



Continues the Yuktimallikā:


ब्रह्मैव हीनयोनीस्ताः प्राप्य स्वेनैव पाप्मना ।

सम्सरेच्चेदियं सर्वा गालीकस्य गले वद ॥ १४ ॥


[‘Brahman alone is the lowly wombs and having reached them by Its own
demerits Brahman is in samsāra’ – if such is the case….]


Response:


’ब्रह्म दाशा ब्रह्म दासा ब्रह्मैवेमे कितवा:’ इति
पिप्पलादसंहिताश्रुतिवाक्यम् ’अंशाधिकरणे’ स्वीकृतं वर्तते । (ब्र.सू.२.३.४३)


In the ‘amśādhikaraṇa’ of the Brahmasūtra 2.3.43 we have a Pippalāda  śruti
passage:  ‘Brahman is the fishermen, Brahman the servants/slaves, Brahman
the gamblers..…


’विषमेष्वपि जीवेषु समो विष्णुः सदैव तु । यत्तृणादिगतस्यापि गुणाः पूर्णा
हरेः सदा ॥ (इति श्रीराघवेन्द्रतीर्थकृततात्पर्यनिर्णये) । for BG 5.18.


Also Sri Raghavendra Tirtha in his explanation of the Gitā bhāṣya 5.18
cites a verse that means:  //In the different jīvas the Lord Viṣṇu is ever
the same.  Even if He is in the blade of grass, etc. still His attributes
are ever full.//



   - श्रीपुरन्दरदासार्यैः ’अल्लि नोडलु राम....’ इत्यादिपद्ये इदमुपलक्षितं
   भवति ಅಲ್ಲಿ ನೋಡಲು ರಾಮ ಇಲ್ಲಿ ನೋಡಲು ರಾಮ ಎಲ್ಲೆಲ್ಲಿ ನೋಡಿದರೂ ಅಲ್ಲಿ ಶ್ರೀರಾಮ||
   ಪಲ್ಲವಿ|| ರಾವಣನ ಮೂಲಬಲ ಕಂಡು ಕಪಿಸೇನೆ ಆವಾಗಲೇ ಬೆದರಿ ಓಡಿದವು ಈವೇಳೆ ನರನಾಗಿ
   ಇರಬಾರದೆಂದೆಣಿಸಿ ದೇವ ರಾಮಚಂದ್ರ ಜಗವೆಲ್ಲ ತಾನಾದ||೧|| ಅವನಿಗೆ ಇವ ರಾಮ ಇವನಿಗೆ ಅವ
   ರಾಮ  न केवलं वानरादयस्तत्र रामरूपमाप्ताः, परन्तु रावणपक्षस्थराक्षसा अपि ।
   - Sri Purandaradasa, composer-saint, in his famous song: ‘alli noḍalu
   rāma….’ Says ‘ ….’Śrīrāma became the entire world’.  Not just the
   vānara-s, etc. appeared as Rāma but even the rākṣasas on the side of Rāvaṇa
   appeared as Rāma to each other.

The Yuktimallikā says further:


अन्धश्च बधिरो मूकः पङ्गुः षण्डो विनासिकः ।

इत्याद्या व्यङ्गताहेतोर्या निन्दा लोकसम्मताः ।

ताः सर्वाश्च निराकारवादे किं न स्युरीशवरे ॥ १५ ॥


[Those devoid of sight, hearing, speech, walking ability, eunuch, devoid of
nose, etc. disabilities are invoked while censuring those persons in the
world. All these censures will apply to the Supreme Lord as per the
doctrine of formless Brahman.  Is it not?]


Response:


श्वेताश्वतरोपनिषदि ’त्वं स्त्री त्वं पुमानसि त्वं कुमार उत वा कुमारी । त्वं
जीर्णो दण्डेन वञ्चसि त्वं जातो भवसि विश्वतोमुखः ॥ ४-३...’ इत्यत्र न
स्त्र्यादयो ब्रह्मणः स्वरूपतां भजन्ते ।

   - In the shvetashvataropanishat 4.3 is the teaching: //You are the
   woman, the man, the youth and the maiden too. *You are the old man who
   totters along, leaning on the staff.* You are born with faces turned in
   all directions. // Here the woman, etc. do not constitute the svarūpa of
   brahman.

Many of the passages cited above and more are available in the following
article which was written in response to similar objections made by a
renowned dvaita scholar Sri Bannanje Govindāchārya:


 <http://tinyurl.com/m7bj7ln>

*http://tinyurl.com/m7bj7ln* <http://tinyurl.com/m7bj7ln>


Om Tat Sat