Madhwa Vijaya - 9

Sarga 5 Part 1

Desirous of handing the responsibility of the empire of knowledge established by him, Achyuthapreksha, wanting to see it flourish under the able authority of Poornapragnya, anointed him with holy water filled in a conch.

Poornapragnya had installed the joyful form of the lord (filled with aananda) in the lotus-cup of his heart and propagated charming principles and enticing knowledge that diffused aananda, hence the name, “Ananda Tirtha”, given to him by his guru, could not have been more apt.

There came a group of conceited scholars, well-versed in debating, led by an ascetic who was Achyuthapreksha’s friend. They were itching for a debate with Ananda Tirtha, in order to score a victory.

As the debate commenced, they hurled a volley of complicated arguments, assuming that they could easily confound Poornapragnya, but, Poornapragnya, like Garuda tearing apart serpents with his razor-sharp claws, tore asunder every argument! They proposed a new argument, “This world, which is the subject of our contradicting views is false. It is seen by us just as we are able to see the shiny silver in the substance that forms around a mollusk or in shells (mother-of-pearl)*. Poornapragnya replied, “The world is as real as the other things that we can see around us, for instance, a pot.”

*Just a shiny reflective substance, not really silver

They put forth, what they thought was a clinching argument, “This is untrue. For the silver visible in the shell does not really exist”. Poornapragnya’s triumphant repartee was, “The silver in the shell was not present, for it to be ‘seen’. What appears like silver is not silver*, but the shell itself.”**

*It is only perceived as ‘silver’

**This is a literal translation, the principles underlying these statements are profound

Poornapragnya, thus established that inferences and arguments (tarka), can be used cleverly and twisted to prove anything and everything. Therefore, mere inference without direct experience and the backing of Vedas, is unfounded and hollow. Having defeated the retinue of scholars, he came to be known as “AnumaanaTirtha”.

There came to Udupi, Buddhisaagara and his associate Vaadisimha, foremost among the detractors of the Vedas, who having defeated innumerable eminent scholars, were on the look-out for a fresh challenge.

Achyuthapragnya, drew from his quiver and sent forth the sharp arrow called Ananda Tirtha (who was away at the time, but was recalled to the mata), to rupture the insolence of this Buddhisaagara.

Poornapragnya, bowed to Achyuthapragnya in the temple at Udupi before turning his gaze towards the curious gathering crowds, who were hastening to Udupi to witness this debate.

Poornapragnya’s measured, fresh and instantaneous (mitha, haritha, twaritha) response blasted the weighty arguments of Vaadisimha like a sharp arrow destroys a heavy mace by shattering it to pieces.

The slighted Vaadisimha, then put forth a fresh argument, with 18 watertight justifications. Such was the power of the argument that it cast a shadow of doubt in the minds of the audience, whether Poornapragnya, capable of vanquishing the world, could counter this?

Smilingly, Poornapragnya with his clear words pulverized every justification and dispelled the doubt in the minds of people, with the grace of God, like the rays of the sun dispelling darkness from the sky.

Buddhisaagara was like the ocean himself, with infinite depth of knowledge, confidence brimming like the swell of the waves, having numerous scholars accept defeat like the numerous rivers that flow into the ocean. But like rishi Agastya, who drank the mighty ocean, Poornapragnya effortlessly abated the ocean that was Buddhisaagara.

When the duo requested to continue the debate the next day, Acharya Madhwa said, “If you can think of an answer, let’s finish this now.” People knew that the duo had lost, and it was proven by their inglorious flight, in the dark of that very night.

‘Oh how the reputation of Buddhisaagara and Vaadisimha earned over the long years, after having travelled far and wide, has been tarnished in minutes’, pondered the people.

Ananda Tirtha, in a congregation of stalwarts of the false theology, spoke boldly against the commentary (bhaashya) composed by Manimantha, thereby gladdening the hearts of the Devas.

“If one can overcome the deep obstinacy of the mind, and with a clear heart compare the ideas in the commentary with the meaning embedded in the Bramhasutras, then one realises that the two are incompatible”’ said he.

When Ananda Tirtha pointed out some of the major flaws in the commentary, the stalwarts, try as they might, were unable to counter them.

The frustrated scholars challenged Ananda Tirtha, “If you call this commentary erroneous, give us a felicitous commentary which even the likes of you cannot find fault with.”

Achaarya immediately began a lucid explanation which was fully in sync with the Bramhasutras, and interwove the relationship between the Vedas and itihasa and puranas. This was the precursor to Achaarya’s authoritative Bhashya, which was yet to be composed.

Thus Achaarya silenced the critics, the learned, the scholars, those who came to learn, and those who came to debate.

To be continued…