Hare Srinivasa !!!
Jai Bedi Anjaneya !!!
Jai Vijayaraya !!!
Shree Raghavendraya Namaha !!!
In this article we shall see objectively how dvaita stands head and shoulders above
other systems.
We have seen in Paramatha Khandana II that Dvaita or Tattvavada is distinct from
other philosophies in that all other philosophies state equality with God at some
or the other point. advaita claims equality now, vishishta advaita claims equality
in moksha, dvaita-advaita claims difference and equality, iskcon claims continuous
difference and continuous equality.
Dvaita alone stands firm that you are not GOD and can never become GOD at any time !!!
Pure milk is white; even if there is a spot of black it's not pure. There is no use
in arguing that the spot is not black but blue or green. Not pure means not pure;
no room for compromises.
Now, there are many accusations on Dvaita
#1) Dvaita scholars have not understood advaita
This is probably the most common accusation. The hidden agenda being, they can
refute any argument saying first understand then debate. But as long as you object;
you will never have "understood".
I had a discussion with my friend on this, I did'nt speak much and let him talk. He
did'nt tell me anything new that I had'nt heard, but I let him speak. When the
train reached our station, he said "Anyway, this is not of any use practically". I
picked him up on that and said what is the use of such a philosophy if you can't
apply it to your life.
An advaitee has to accept bheda and taratamya in his daily life. His bank account
number and signature is distinct; his juniors are juniors and seniors are seniors.
Not only this; if he is in pain, he cannot claim illusion; he has to treat his
pain. In his day to day life he has to accept Dvaita.So GOD makes him learn Bheda
Gnyana and Tartamya throughout his life; then why should it disappear with Gnyana?
It is like GOD making us study for a Maths paper and then setting a language paper
in the exam !!!
So what is the use of understanding a philosophy that cannot be used (according to
themselves) and one that is counter productive.
#2) Quoting Bhagavad Gita for advaita.
advaitees quote Bhagvad Gita for definiton of Maya and other quotes they claim to
support advaita.
Let us see the end of Bhagvad Gita:
Aham Brahmasmi?? Was Arjuna feeling he is the same as Sri Krishna or as his eternal
servant?
Jagat Mitya??? Was Arjuna feeling real or illusory? If it was all maya; then Sri
Krishna could have finished it in a few sentences; why worry Arjuna it's all maya?
Finish. But the detailed explaination and hierarchy proves it's absolutely real
!!!!
Nirguna Brahma??? Did Arjuna see nirguna or Vishwa roopa ? SriMadAcharya asks this question after showing Vishwaroopa how can you still uphold nirguna roopa.
Even an advaitee will answer the questions the same way. So if Bhagavad Gita was
really teaching advaita; then why this outcome?
After receiving Bhagavad Gita, Arjuna knew Sri Krishna was sarvothamma and not him; he knew his duties and felt real and he had seen a Paripoorna guna roopa of Sri
Krishna; which makes it an out and out Dvaita text !!!
Note Arjuna sees the various deities within the vishwa roopa, which shows the
deities are seperate even in the Vishwa roopa hence refuting Vishishta advaita
which claims that we become one with God on Moksha.
So just by taking a few quotes and twisting the meaning; it is wrong on their part
to quote Bhagavad Gita as supporting advaita. On the contrary the thunderbolt
statement on advaita comes in
BG 16.8
asatyam apratishtham te jagad ahur anishvaram
The demonic people say that this world is unreal, with no foundation, no God in
control.
#3) Dvaita is always attacking advaita.
The claims are that Dvaita scholars are ill mannered and always attacking; where as
advaita scholars are more dignified and have always welcomed dvaita scholars.
This claim is very wrong; biggest proof is Sri Raghavendra Swamy; who graces
everyone. Secondly all the biographies of the Dvaita scholars clearly state that
the defeated advaita opponents were also honoured. In fact many a times it is they
that arrange for the Vijaya utsava for the Dvaita scholar; the claims are utter
nonsense. Some biographies infact shows the humiliating conditions for the debate
thrown by the advaita scholars and how the Dvaita scholars have excused the loser
of the debate from his own conditions. Sri Vyasa Yogi Charitre is a biography of
Sri Vyasarayaru; written by a advaitee; his tremendous respect for Sri Vyasarau is
evident in his writings. A lot of Dvaita scholars were tried to be ill treated and
poisoned because the advaitees were not able to defeat them.
As for attacking the philosophy part, Paramatha Kandana is part and parcel of
philosophy; so there really is no point for that. As for calling shankara a demon;
please see his philosophy and see BG 16.8; why is there any confusion at all ?
#4) shivoham
Most of non dvaita meditation techniques consists of thinking yourself as Shiva or
some other deity; just imagine you are imagining "Paravati Pattitva"??? The whole
scriptures shows who has such feelings and their fate.
The clarity of Dvaita is crisp compared to the confused mind of non-dvaitee
Conclusion: Most of the advaitees I know, have a bigger photo of Sri Raghavendra
Swamy than shankaracharya; they want the fruits of Dvaita. But they follow advaita;
when the chips are down Dvaita; when the mind has no tension advaita; more like a
fiction novel; but has no practical purpose.
Honestly, what problem can you solve by mithya gnyana, nirguna brahma and thinking
you are GOD? So like my friend said; it's of no use in practical problems. So Why
waste time with something that cannot be used?
I have taken just bottom line statements; to make the choices simple and clear. This is to counter advaita quiet simply, without going into any intricate details.
Any mistakes are solely mine.
BharatiRamana MukhyaPranantargata SriKrishnarpanamastu !!!
Jai Bharateesha,
Hrishikesh
Jai Bedi Anjaneya !!!
Jai Vijayaraya !!!
Shree Raghavendraya Namaha !!!
In this article we shall see objectively how dvaita stands head and shoulders above
other systems.
We have seen in Paramatha Khandana II that Dvaita or Tattvavada is distinct from
other philosophies in that all other philosophies state equality with God at some
or the other point. advaita claims equality now, vishishta advaita claims equality
in moksha, dvaita-advaita claims difference and equality, iskcon claims continuous
difference and continuous equality.
Dvaita alone stands firm that you are not GOD and can never become GOD at any time !!!
Pure milk is white; even if there is a spot of black it's not pure. There is no use
in arguing that the spot is not black but blue or green. Not pure means not pure;
no room for compromises.
Now, there are many accusations on Dvaita
#1) Dvaita scholars have not understood advaita
This is probably the most common accusation. The hidden agenda being, they can
refute any argument saying first understand then debate. But as long as you object;
you will never have "understood".
I had a discussion with my friend on this, I did'nt speak much and let him talk. He
did'nt tell me anything new that I had'nt heard, but I let him speak. When the
train reached our station, he said "Anyway, this is not of any use practically". I
picked him up on that and said what is the use of such a philosophy if you can't
apply it to your life.
An advaitee has to accept bheda and taratamya in his daily life. His bank account
number and signature is distinct; his juniors are juniors and seniors are seniors.
Not only this; if he is in pain, he cannot claim illusion; he has to treat his
pain. In his day to day life he has to accept Dvaita.So GOD makes him learn Bheda
Gnyana and Tartamya throughout his life; then why should it disappear with Gnyana?
It is like GOD making us study for a Maths paper and then setting a language paper
in the exam !!!
So what is the use of understanding a philosophy that cannot be used (according to
themselves) and one that is counter productive.
#2) Quoting Bhagavad Gita for advaita.
advaitees quote Bhagvad Gita for definiton of Maya and other quotes they claim to
support advaita.
Let us see the end of Bhagvad Gita:
Aham Brahmasmi?? Was Arjuna feeling he is the same as Sri Krishna or as his eternal
servant?
Jagat Mitya??? Was Arjuna feeling real or illusory? If it was all maya; then Sri
Krishna could have finished it in a few sentences; why worry Arjuna it's all maya?
Finish. But the detailed explaination and hierarchy proves it's absolutely real
!!!!
Nirguna Brahma??? Did Arjuna see nirguna or Vishwa roopa ? SriMadAcharya asks this question after showing Vishwaroopa how can you still uphold nirguna roopa.
Even an advaitee will answer the questions the same way. So if Bhagavad Gita was
really teaching advaita; then why this outcome?
After receiving Bhagavad Gita, Arjuna knew Sri Krishna was sarvothamma and not him; he knew his duties and felt real and he had seen a Paripoorna guna roopa of Sri
Krishna; which makes it an out and out Dvaita text !!!
Note Arjuna sees the various deities within the vishwa roopa, which shows the
deities are seperate even in the Vishwa roopa hence refuting Vishishta advaita
which claims that we become one with God on Moksha.
So just by taking a few quotes and twisting the meaning; it is wrong on their part
to quote Bhagavad Gita as supporting advaita. On the contrary the thunderbolt
statement on advaita comes in
BG 16.8
asatyam apratishtham te jagad ahur anishvaram
The demonic people say that this world is unreal, with no foundation, no God in
control.
#3) Dvaita is always attacking advaita.
The claims are that Dvaita scholars are ill mannered and always attacking; where as
advaita scholars are more dignified and have always welcomed dvaita scholars.
This claim is very wrong; biggest proof is Sri Raghavendra Swamy; who graces
everyone. Secondly all the biographies of the Dvaita scholars clearly state that
the defeated advaita opponents were also honoured. In fact many a times it is they
that arrange for the Vijaya utsava for the Dvaita scholar; the claims are utter
nonsense. Some biographies infact shows the humiliating conditions for the debate
thrown by the advaita scholars and how the Dvaita scholars have excused the loser
of the debate from his own conditions. Sri Vyasa Yogi Charitre is a biography of
Sri Vyasarayaru; written by a advaitee; his tremendous respect for Sri Vyasarau is
evident in his writings. A lot of Dvaita scholars were tried to be ill treated and
poisoned because the advaitees were not able to defeat them.
As for attacking the philosophy part, Paramatha Kandana is part and parcel of
philosophy; so there really is no point for that. As for calling shankara a demon;
please see his philosophy and see BG 16.8; why is there any confusion at all ?
#4) shivoham
Most of non dvaita meditation techniques consists of thinking yourself as Shiva or
some other deity; just imagine you are imagining "Paravati Pattitva"??? The whole
scriptures shows who has such feelings and their fate.
The clarity of Dvaita is crisp compared to the confused mind of non-dvaitee
Conclusion: Most of the advaitees I know, have a bigger photo of Sri Raghavendra
Swamy than shankaracharya; they want the fruits of Dvaita. But they follow advaita;
when the chips are down Dvaita; when the mind has no tension advaita; more like a
fiction novel; but has no practical purpose.
Honestly, what problem can you solve by mithya gnyana, nirguna brahma and thinking
you are GOD? So like my friend said; it's of no use in practical problems. So Why
waste time with something that cannot be used?
I have taken just bottom line statements; to make the choices simple and clear. This is to counter advaita quiet simply, without going into any intricate details.
Any mistakes are solely mine.
BharatiRamana MukhyaPranantargata SriKrishnarpanamastu !!!
Jai Bharateesha,
Hrishikesh
All modern forms of vishnuism are only hate and separation - but Madhwism is so grotesque that it is hard to believe sane people can adhere to it.
ReplyDeleteTo besmirch Siva in Samuddramanthanam by grotesquely introducing Vayu into the picture seems basically obscene.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe moment one admits of a second thing, it is simply discarding the all-pervasiveness of the God, once all-pervasiveness is destroyed, it implicitly discards omniscience and omnipotence. So admitting of a second thing itself is extremely illogical and absurd. The whole dvaita and it's counter argument against Advaita revolves around the false idea that "I am the body", which is ever changing and one day it disappears. How foolish it is to identify oneself with an ever-changing entity. How can a change exist independently without a non changing substratum? Dvaita utterly fails to explain this. Dvaita is valid as long as one is in ajnana and in the process of attaining the Advaita Jnana. I see all the childish arguments brought in to refute Advaita in the name of "Paramata Khandane". It is really a sort of entertainment or witness a chind's prattle for an Advaiti to see how Dvaitis bring about refuting arguments :-D.
ReplyDeleteJaya Jaya Shankara, Hara Hara Shankara. Om Namo Narayanaya