[Advaita-l] Abedha

[Srinath Vedagarbha]

On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 11:42 AM V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> On Sun, Aug 2, 2020 at 11:56 AM Kaushik Chevendra via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
> > Did madhawacharya say that people who believe in abedha or bedhaabedha
> > go to eternal hell?
> >
>
> In the Ishavasyopanishad bhashya for the 3rd mantra Madhvacharya has cited
> a verse from a Purana that says 'those who are turned away from Hari will
> reach horrible hellish worlds.'   Expatiating on the Bhashya,
> Jayatirtha's Teeka says: those who hold the jiva is 'nitya shuddha buddha
> mukta svabhavah' are those who have the wrong understanding of the jiva and
> hence they are meant in the bhashya as those who reach such regions.
>
>
That's correct.

In addition, Madhva also quotes Vishnu Purana while commenting on Bhagavat
Gita # 2.20 to establish bhEdha between two sentients;

"alpashakti asArvaj~naM pAratantrayaM apUrNatA |
upajIvakatvaM jIvatvaM IshatvaM tadviparyayaH |
svAbhAvikaM tayoretannAnyathA syAt.h kathaJNchana |
vadanti shAshvatAvetAvat.h eva mahAjanAH"  iti mahAvishhNupurANe

Gist: The jIva is extremely limited in his power and knowledge, dependent
on Ishwara, incomplete, and needs support whereas Ishvara is just the
opposite.
These being intrinsic [laxaNa-s], they never ever change. Hence learned
call it shAshvata.




>  Thus, according to him the Atman should not be deemed to be nitya,
> shuddha (dosha rahita), buddha
> (sentient/chaitanyatmakam), mukta (liberated).  It would be proper indeed
> only if the jiva is sa-dosha, jaDa and bound by nature.
>
>
One should note that the word "Atman" is not meant as Brahamn, but should
consider jIvaatman. Readers outside the school get easily confused by
reading Dvaita texts.

In Dvaita vedanta, the word "Atma" denotes Brahman only. It is established
so based on Shruti pramANa.

Br.U  ask this question quite explicitly `katama aatma iti ?' (note the
suffix 'iti', which indicates Upanishad meant the word 'Atma' here)

The same Upanishad is answering in the same breath that ;

 `yOayAm vijnAna maya prANEshu hridyAnta jyOtirtiH |
purushaH sa samAnaH san ubhoU lOkoU anusaMcharati | dhyAtIva |
lElAyativa | sa hi swapnO bhUtvEmaM lOkamati kramati mrutyO rUpANi ||

Whoever is pUrNa-jnAna-svarUpa and resides in heart and instigates from
within, is Atma.

In another place, same Br. Up (II.5-15) says;

 "sa vA ayamAtmA sarvEshAm bhootAnAm rAjA tadyathA rathanAbhou cha
rathanEbhou
cha arAha sarvE samarpitAha EvamEvAtmani sarvANi bhootAni sarvE dEvAha
sarvE lOkAha sarva Eta AtmAnaha samarpitAha"

This is how Upanishads define AtmA as Controller and Owner.  This is why
AtmA of the Upanishads is indeed Controller Brahman and not jIva.

To avoid all confusions for outsiders, Dvaita uses distinct terms --
'paramAtma' and 'jivAtma'

/sv