Madhwa Vijaya - 30

Sarga 15 Part 1

Poornapragnya stayed for a while at a place called Koodlu, expanding on his bhaashya. He came face to face with Trivikrama Pandithaachaarya, who was armed with sharp weapons of logic, riding the crest of the Maayavaada wave. Words flowed out of the blessed mouth of Poornapragnya in a steady stream, neither too fast nor too slow, like an army determined to win the war, marching towards the battlefield in a single file.

The Bramhasutras were like chariots, the undefeatable Vedas like elephants, irrefutable arguments like foot soldiers, the puraanas and the itihaasas, like the cavalry.

With a voice as deep as thunder reaching out across the sky, his walk like the march of horses, his words like the spread of the army determined to win, Madhwa, the beloved of Sri Hari, whose grace destroys the six afflictions* that plague the jeevas, reminded one of another… the bright, buxom, beloved of Sri Hari, the daughter of Saagara…**

*grief, attachment, dotage, disease, hunger and thirst

**Lakshmi, emerging during the churning of the ocean

His words were as pure as the one who is capable of purifying everything that she* comes in contact with, the one who emerges from the feet of Narayana, the one who is used by Chaturmukha for his saadhane, whom Shiva cherishes and carries in his matted locks…

*Ganga

Madhwa articulated that it was Narayana who is the repository of all attributes, he is ‘Bramhan’, he is the one the Vedas praise and allude to, he is the creator…

For those* who claim that the universe was created by explosion and creation of matter without a higher force guiding the process with the analogy of milk turning into curd by itself, Madhwa’s retort was, ‘Milk does not turn into curd by itself! And behind the creation of the universe, there is a divine will, for all creation happens as a result of the creator’s intent’.

*atheistic sankhya

Some* argue that inanimate matter (jada) is primary and the animate (chethana) plays a secondary role in the formation of the universe. This is unacceptable as it does not acknowledge that the supreme lord is omni powerful.

*theistic sankhya

A section* of people argue that the all-powerful god has indeed created the universe. This is proven by the fact that the universe came into existence and is perishable. But those (atma/soul) which are not perishable have not been created by a creator!

*kevalanvayi anumana

The Vedas are the foundation of every theory. Those theories* that are not backed by the Vedas can be unfettered like the errant wives of ineffectual husbands.

*anumaana

The theory* that the bramhan** itself has transformed into the universe is unjustified, for that which transforms is not chethana.

*propounded by Bhaskaraachaarya

**pure intelligence, formless

So who is the chethana, the creator of all? It definitely cannot be Shiva (Pashupathi), for the Vedas state that he is not free from shortcomings. When such is the case, what can be said of lesser gods like Surya, Ganapathi and others? There is a doubt expressed by some others*…

The supreme lord cannot be the embodiment of bliss for joy and sorrow go hand-in-hand, but he is devoid of sorrow.

*vaisheshika

“Does this also mean that since awareness and delusion co-exist, the supreme lord has no awareness because he does not have delusion?” argued the master debator (Anumaana-tirtha*)!

*Madhwaachaarya

If the vaisheshikas agree that the Vedas speak of a god who is infinitely aware (Sarvagnya), then how is it that the parts of the Vedas that extol the supreme bliss of the lord have not been heard by them?

If it is argued that if one does not acknowledge happiness in order to avoid sorrow, then does he* have to forcibly accept sorrow for want of happiness?

*the supreme lord

The relationship between an object and its guna (cause and effect) is called samanvaaya. Thus pain and pleasure, happiness and sorrow etc. go hand-in-hand for mortals. So the argument that samanvaaya is the same for jeeva and the lord, falls flat as this would mean that god experiences both.

You may further argue that samanvaaya is the same but appears different in degrees. Please answer, whether samanvaaya is originally the same or not?* And of course, you cannot deflect the question by saying, ‘It’s neither true nor false’, like the Maayavaadis.

*If the answer is no, then there are many samanvaayas, if the answer is yes, then god too experiences dualities

The boudha dharma* and the so-called vedantins, refer to the supreme truth as shoonya** and bramhan respectively. As these various philosophies and (mis)interpretations had hitherto gone unchallenged, they had flourished and spread. But Poornapragnya put a forceful stop to the spread of these ungodly theories.

*madhyamikas

**Madhwaachaarya argued that the shoonya (non-existent/ bereft of attributes) cannot be the cause of creation, for something or someone to be a creator, they have to exist.

Naarayana Pandithaachaarya elaborates on the arguments against each of these theories, by Madhwa. They may be better appreciated by more involved readers and have not been included here.

Having listened to these detailed analyses of Tattvavaada, the colossus of Advaitha philosophy, Trivikrama Pandithaachaarya, shot arrows of defence from the mighty bow of his scholarliness.

But the arrows were shattered effortlessly even as they left the bow, by a smiling Poornapragnya.

When Trivikrama Pandithaachaarya hurled points that could not be refuted, twisted or opposed, like the unstoppable astra of fire, Madhwa hurled back counterpoints putting out the raging fire, like the astra of water.

The debate raged on for eight days. Finally Trivikrama Pandithaachaarya had no more questions to ask and no more answers to give. He fell at the feet of Poornapragnya beseeching him to forgive him for his insolence and to grant him an opportunity to serve him.

Then Poornapragnya re-commenced his explanation of the sutras to the delight of Trivikrama Pandithaachaarya. The virtuous were elated to listen to the discourse (and to have Pandithaachaarya on their side) while the wicked were upset to have had lost Pandithaachaarya from their fold.

To be continued…