What is Dvaita?

[V Subrahmanian]

The meaning of the term 'Dvaita vaada'

About 150 years ago a Madhva scholar Sri Bhimacharya composed a mighty book 'Nyaya Kosha', a compendium of hundreds of terms used in the various disciplines such as Vyakarana, Nyaya, Mimamsa, etc.

https://archive.org/details/nyayakoshabhimacharyajhalakikarbssbori1928_303_G

 In this book under the term 'Dvaita vaada' the author first gives the etymology for the word 'Dvaita' and says 'the system that teaches the difference between the jiva and Ishwara and other aspects'.  He cites the Brahma sutras, the Mundaka passage 'dvaa suparnaa', the Sankhya Sutras and Karikas, etc. 

He lists the Dvaita doctrines as Sankhya, Yoga, Nyaya, Tarka (vaisheshika), Purva Mimamsa and Uttara Mimamsa.  He says the Madhva system is what is meant by Uttara Mimamsa and hastens to list Shankara Advaita, Ramanuja Vishishtadvaita and Vallabha Dvaitadvaita outside Uttara mimamsa.

The doctrinal aspects of the above Dvaita systems are: World is real, difference between Jiva and Ishwara, etc. (pancha bheda), that Paramatma is Supreme (sarvottama) and Independent, Svatantra, multiplicity of jivas, saayujya, etc. mukti-s. 

He also names the proponents of the Shad Darshanas listed above. What is significant is that the author, a Madhva, has listed the Madhva system along with the Sankhya, etc. schools and the doctrinal aspects as common to all these systems.

One can see the images in the Advaitin google groups post. 

One recalls the observation in the 'History of Indian Philosophy', Vol.2, of Das Gupta on p.192 that the realist schools such as that of Madhva have been influenced by the Vaisheshika doctrine. 

Given below are a few passages from the Bhashyas of Shankaracharya where the terms Dvaita and Dvaitin are used in the context of Sankhya, Yoga, Nyaya, Bauddha and Jaina. 

द्वैतिनो हि ते सांख्या योगाश्च नात्मैकत्वदर्शिनः । (ब्रह्मसूत्रभाष्यम्द्वितीयोऽध्यायःप्रथमः पादः सूत्रम् ३ - भाष्यम्)
कपिलकणादबुद्धार्हतादिदृष्ट्यनुसारिणो द्वैतिनो .....शास्त्रोपपत्तिभ्यामवधारितत्वादद्वयात्मदर्शनं सम्यग्दर्शनम् , तद्बाह्यत्वान्मिथ्यादर्शनमन्यत् । इतश्च मिथ्यादर्शनं द्वैतिनां रागद्वेषादिदोषास्पदत्वात् । (माण्डूक्योपनिषद्भाष्यम्कारिका - भाष्यम्)
तस्यैतस्यागमार्थस्य अद्वैतदर्शनस्य प्रतिपक्षभूता द्वैतिनो वैनाशिकाश्च (ಬೌದ್ಧರು) । (माण्डूक्योपनिषद्भाष्यम्कारिका - भाष्यम्)
यथा द्वैतिनां सर्वेषां बन्धावस्थायामेव शास्त्राद्यर्थवत्त्वम् , न मुक्तावस्थायाम् , एवम् ॥ .....ननु आत्मनः बन्धमुक्तावस्थे परमार्थत एव वस्तुभूते द्वैतिनां सर्वेषाम् । (श्रीमद्भगवद्गीताभाष्यम्त्रयोदशोऽध्यायःश्लोक २ - भाष्यम्)

In the Nyaya Kosha the author mentions Advaita along with the etymology given by Sureshwaracharya in the Brihadaranyaka Bhashya Vartika and a passage from Madhusudana Saraswati's Siddhanta Bindu. 

Om Tat Sat    

[Vinodh]

Thank you for sharing this, Subbuji 🙏 

I recently did come across the part in Shankara’s Madukyopanishad/Gaudapada-Karika Bhashya where he refers to Sankhya, Yoga, Vaiseshika as dvatic schools of thought. Specifically, he mentions them when mentioning objections that are related to multiplicity of jivas and reality of jagat. 

While there are certainly many common aspects among these schools (like reality of the world and multiplicity of jivas), I am not sure if difference between Jiva and Ishwara is one of them, at least not for the case of Samkhya. This is because there does not even seem to be a concept of Ishwara in Sankhya (at least based on my understanding of the Samkhya Karika). Nor do I recall any mention of Paramatma, or of its Svatantrata. 

On the other hand, Yoga (based on my understanding of the sutras of Patanjali) although based on the same principles of Samkhya, i.e., the concepts of Purushas, Prakriti and the 24 tattvas of Prakriti, introduces the concept of Ishwara as the Purusha who is untouched by kleshas (the five kleshas of avidya, raaga, dvesha, asmita, abinivesha), karma (kushala or akushala karmas) and vipaka (phala of the karmas). This could then possibly be interpreted also as a ‘paramathma’ or a ‘paramapurusha’ that has svatantra owing to it being unaffected by klesha, karma, and vipaka. 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "advaitin" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to advaitin+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKk0Te0cmMi0bsejxePnNaRh8-6GNQW8GC8oSa-jVbUg3Z-gTQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[V Subrahmanian]

On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 1:10 PM Vinodh <vinod...@gmail.com> wrote:

Thank you for sharing this, Subbuji 🙏 

I recently did come across the part in Shankara’s Madukyopanishad/Gaudapada-Karika Bhashya where he refers to Sankhya, Yoga, Vaiseshika as dvatic schools of thought. Specifically, he mentions them when mentioning objections that are related to multiplicity of jivas and reality of jagat. 

While there are certainly many common aspects among these schools (like reality of the world and multiplicity of jivas), I am not sure if difference between Jiva and Ishwara is one of them, at least not for the case of Samkhya. This is because there does not even seem to be a concept of Ishwara in Sankhya (at least based on my understanding of the Samkhya Karika). Nor do I recall any mention of Paramatma, or of its Svatantrata. 

On the other hand, Yoga (based on my understanding of the sutras of Patanjali) although based on the same principles of Samkhya, i.e., the concepts of Purushas, Prakriti and the 24 tattvas of Prakriti, introduces the concept of Ishwara as the Purusha who is untouched by kleshas (the five kleshas of avidya, raaga, dvesha, asmita, abinivesha), karma (kushala or akushala karmas) and vipaka (phala of the karmas). This could then possibly be interpreted also as a ‘paramathma’ or a ‘paramapurusha’ that has svatantra owing to it being unaffected by klesha, karma, and vipaka. 

Yes, although Snakhy has no Ishwara concept, Yoga has.  The rest of the doctrinal aspects are common across all the dualistic schools.  In fact a few years ago Bannanje Govindacharya, a Madhva scholar, finding their famous traditional profile-statement-verse so overlapping with the Ramanuja system, composed a new verse that brings out some aspects unique to the Madhva school.  

regards

subbu

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAC%2BJcJJe9A8DxjCy0MeBWaRcSa2yTmHFmeejv2OeuKyBYqpXUw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Vinodh]

Interesting! Could you please elaborate a bit on that new verse? I am also not familiar with their traditional verse. I am curious to know how the traditional verse is overlapping with Visishtadvaita and what unique aspects of the Madhva school the new verse brings out. 

Namaskaram 🙏

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKk0Te1687wrfwyJqk2Oa6BRFJDGND-6r5QF5m6RC2yf%2BCsLeQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[V Subrahmanian]

On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 6:43 PM Vinodh <vinod...@gmail.com> wrote:

Interesting! Could you please elaborate a bit on that new verse? I am also not familiar with their traditional verse. I am curious to know how the traditional verse is overlapping with Visishtadvaita and what unique aspects of the Madhva school the new verse brings out. 

A sloka composed by Sri Vyasa Tirtha (this authorship of the verse is disputed by Madhwas themselves), which is considered to be a gem explains Sri Madhwa’s Philosophy in a nutshell:

 

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1B3GPCK_enIN334IN334&q=Navratna+of+Dvaita+Vedanta&aq=f&oq=&aqi=

 

 

// श्रीमन्मध्वमते हरिः परतरः सत्यं जगत्

तत्त्वतो भिन्ना जीवजना हरेरनुचरा नीचोच्चभावंगताः ।

मुक्तिर्नैजसुखानुभूतिः अमला भक्तिश्च तत्साधनं

ह्यक्षादित्रितयं प्रमाणं अखिलाम्नायैकवेद्यो हरिः ॥

 

SreeManMadhwamate Hari: Paratara: Satyam Jagat thatvato

BhinnaaH jeevajanaa: Hareranucharaa Neechotcha Bhaavam gathaa: |

Mukthir Naija Sukhanu Bhutir amala Bhakthishcha Thath Saadhanam

Hyakshaadi Thrithayam pramaanam Akhila AAmnayaika Vedya Hari: ||

 

Nine Tenets are propounded in this sloka and the meaning, in parts,  of this sloka is -

Hari is the most supreme of all…..

This world (Jagat) which is made out five differences, is eternal and not a false.

Attaining the Nija-swaroopa (True-Nature) is called as Mukti.

Faultless Bhakthi (Devotion) is the means to attain Mukti.//

From the above, we come to understand that Hari is Supreme. He is indenpendent and we are regulated and controlled by him. If we understand this and have unflinching faith on God as well as Guru Bhakthi, we can easily cross over the Ocean of Samsara..//

Unfortunately I did not save the verse composed by Bannanje Acharya.  I have seen it though, containing unique features of Madhva system like the jivas have inherent gunas such as sattvika, rajasika, etc. and are classified thus.  This classification is inviolable. Then, they have hierarchy among devatas, taaratamya, where Shiva ranks only fifth.  Then they have pancha bheda: jiva-Ishwara bheda, jiva-jiva bheda, jiva-jaDa bheda, jaDa-jaDa bheda and jaDa-Ishwara bheda.  These diff. too are absolute; can never be otherwise.

regards

subbu

  

Namaskaram 🙏

[Vinodh]

Thank you very much for the explanation! 🙏

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "advaitin" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to advaitin+u...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKk0Te3Kj3xR-ODR50nRLLgiJqvTJJCZdcbdc4KqNMys2n6Ufg%40mail.gmail.com.

[sunil bhattacharjya]

Dear Subbuji,

Shri Madhva was well-read but nor thoroughly well-read. I shall give you just one example. Shri Madhva said that (I don't have the statement in his own words  now) Maharshi Vedavyasa wrote the Mahabharata, so that stree and the Shudra can also get the Vedic knowledge by reading the Mahabharata. With all regards to Shri Madhva I must clarify that what he (Shri Madhva)  said said was only partial truth.  is only a partial truth. Vedavyasa found that what he wrote in the Mahabharata is difficult for Stree and Shudradra to understand and he was very das. then Devarshi Narada advised him (Vedavyasa) to write the Bhagavatam, to make things easy so that Stree and the Shudra could understand it. The total truth is that Vedavyasa wrote the Bhagavatan, so lucidly, that it is understandable to the Stree and Shudra.

What was the worst thing Shri Madhva did was to claim that nobody can understand the Bhagavatam without going through his (Shri Madhva's  commentary on the Bhagavatam. By saying that Shri Madha has challenged Vedavyasa, who was one of the 24 avataras of Lord Vushna. I am unable to accept the egoistic claim of Shri Madhva.

I can't agree to Shri Madhva's  opinion on Lord Shiva versus Lord Vishna. He had not read the fifth Veda, where it is said that Shiva is the heart of Vishnu and Vishnu is the heart of Shiva. There is no difference between Lord Shiva and Lord Vishnu.

Regards,

Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "advaitin" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to advaitin+u...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKk0Te3Kj3xR-ODR50nRLLgiJqvTJJCZdcbdc4KqNMys2n6Ufg%40mail.gmail.com.