[Advaita-l] THESE ARE MY QUESTIONS TO DVAITA PHILOSOPHY OF MADHVACHARYA..

[Srivathsa Rao]

KK CHAKRAVARTHY SIR,
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 DVAITHIS  SAY IT AS ABSOLUTE TRUTH....BUT
ADVAITA SAYS IT AS VYAVAHARIKA SATHYA,IT TALK  ABOUT
SAT-CHIT-ANANDA,PRAKRUTHI AND PURUSHA , WHICH IS TOTALLY OUT OF DVAITA'S
SCOPE....THAT IS WHY I CALL DVAITA CHILDISH.....

On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 5:37 PM, Srivathsa Rao <vathsa108 at gmail.com> wrote:

> KK CHAKRAVARTHY SIR,
>  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.....
>
> On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 5:36 PM, Srivathsa Rao <vathsa108 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> As KK Chakravarthy Sir Requested I am sending his comments For this Post
>> Along with my Answers.....
>>
>> Sir's Reply.........
>> Respected Sirs,
>>
>> 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
>>> madhvacharya,….
>>>
>>
>> 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
>> disrespect here.
>>
>> 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
>> here.
>>
>> 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
>> commonsensical perspective.
>>
>>
>>> 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
>> silver....
>>
>> 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
>> time.....
>>
>> 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 hands...
>>
>> 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
>> POWER....
>> 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
>> PERSONAL GOD....
>> 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....
>>
>>
>