You are here: SriPedia - Oppiliappan - Archives - Jan 2008

Oppiliappan List Archive: Message 00193 Jan 2008

 
Jan 2008 Indexes ( Date | Thread | Author )
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]


NOTE: Readers having difficulty in reading the text
may need to change their encoding to UTF-8.  
------------ 
srI:
SrI  upakAra  sangraham ? 47
--- 
adikAram ? 1
poorva upakAra paramparai
(The Foremost Series of Favours) 
---   
SECTION ? 5 (11) [continued] 
(27 Favours of the Lord leading to the means for
MOKSHAM)  
-----   
   
        After mentioning the cArvAka theory, SwAmi Desikan
next refers to Buddhism, which also does not accept
the authority of the Vedas. 

2) Buddhism: 
        Buddhism was founded by Gautama who was a prince at
KapilAvastu before renouncing the royal life.
According to Gautama Buddha, life is a stream of
becoming and nothing is permanent. One thing is
dependent on another. Even the self is a composite of
perception (samjn~A), feeling (vedanA ), volitional
dispositions (samskAras), intelligence (vijnAna) and
form (roopa). All these change according to the law of
karma. Buddha?s four truths are: there is suffering,
it has a cause, it can be suppressed and there is way
to accomplish this. The cause of suffering is
ignorance and selfish craving. When one gets rid of
ignorance and its practical consequence of
selfishness, he attains nirvana.  He postulated an
eight-fold path of morality for the attainment of
nirvAna. The Buddha does not believe in a positive
reality underlying the world which is continuously
changing. He also does not affirm a self underlying
the mental happenings and the positive character of
nirvana. As time passed two forms of Buddhism, namely,
the HeenayAna (early) and the MahAyAna (later)
emerged. The HeenayAna developed the theory of
transitoriness of substances or individuals, and
nirvAna is liberation from suffering. The MahAyAna
developed a positive philosophy which believes in the
reality of an Absolute, the essence of existence. It
personified Buddha himself as the law. 
The fundamental points of distinction between the
HeenayAna and the MahAyAna concern the ultimate goal
of the religion, the instructions, the means and the
realization. The ultimate good of a follower of the
HeenayAna is to attain his own salvation whereas that
of a MahAyAna follower is not to seek his own
salvation but to seek the salvation of all beings.
Hence the goal of the HeenayAna was lower than that of
the MahAyAna.  
In the course of development of the Buddhist theory,
many philosophical schools emerged. Four are the main
among them: the VaibhAshika, the sautrAntika, the
YogAcAra, and the MAdhyamika. They differ among
themselves in sub-theories. 

a)      VaibhAshika School: This does not accept the
existence of atma. It says that only objects which
appear to the perception and the perception alone are
true. They are momentary like a light?s effervescent
or the flood waters of a river. They appear to be same
but as the light of a lamp burning from moment to
moment and the water in a river flows out and new
water flows in. The external objects, therefore,
appear to be the same, whereas they are changing every
moment.  
[The VaibhAshikas are said to be the followers of the
VibhAshA, an ancient commentary on the philosophical
teachings of the Buddha known as the Abhidhamma. They
are known as realists.]  
b)      SautrAntika School: According to this school of
Buddhism, the external objects do exist. But they
cannot be perceived, but can be known through
inference, just like knowing the objects from the
reflections in a mirror. An object is a conglomeration
of atoms. This theorist, therefore, does not accept
the objects but says they are only paramANus, big
atoms, which are alone true.   
[The VaibhAsika and the SautrAntika schools belong to
HInayAna.]  

c)      YogAcara: This school rejects the theory of
soonyavAda, total void. Even the external objects are
all true. Knowledge is the cause for both suffering
and enjoyment. Both objects and the knower are only
aspects of knowledge and both do not exist as separate
entities. As no outside object exists independent of
knowledge, it is soonya, void. 
[The YogAcaras are idealists. They evidently derive
their name from their association with yoga
practices.] 

d)      The MAdhyamika: This is also known as the treatise
on the Middle Doctrine. This was expounded by
NAgArjuna. According to him, whatever is perceptible
in unreal like those seen in dreams. The outside
objects are changing every moment. The world can not
be said to be true nor untrue. At the same time it
cannot be said to be true as well as untrue. This
theory is known as soonyavAda, theory of void.
However, he differed from the main Buddhism by saying
that the inner knowledge is true and only the outside
objects are untrue.  
        [The MAdhyamikas claim to hold a middle position in
various ways. But they arer extreme nihilists. ]
        [The YOgAcAra and the MAdhyamika Schools belong to
the MahAyAna Buddhism.]

SrIbhAshyakara has dealt with these theories in his
works on VedAnt Sootras, SrIbhAshyam, VedAnta Deepa
and VedAnt sAra. Besides, SwAmi Desikan himself has
clarified our stand in his ?Paramatabhangam?. 
We shall see with the help of these grantams, the
un-tenability of these theories. In the Brahmasutra,
the second quarter of the second Chapter deals with
various theories of philosophies which do not accept
the authority of the Vedas. 
        Among the different theories within the Bhuddhist
philosophy, the doctrine of two classes, namely,
VaibhAshika and SautrAntika are taken up first by
SrIBhAshyakAra for consideration. The reason is that
it is almost similar to the doctrine of the
NaiyAyika-VaishEShika that has been discussed in the
previous AdhikaraNa. Both are based on the theory of
paraMaNu (big atom or molecule) being the source for
the origin of this world.

a & b)  VaibhAshika & SautrAntika Schools:  
The third adhikaraNa, ?samudAyAdhikaraNam?,  of the
second quarter of the second Chapter of the
Brahmasutra discusses the doctrine of these two
Buddhist schools. It covers as many as ten sutras (17
to 26). 
        These two schools accept the existence of the world,
but say it is only momentary.  Their view is rejected
in this AdhikaraNa.  In very first sutra,
SrIbhAshyakAra demolishes their theory.         
Sutra ? (2-2-17) ? ?samudAya ubhayahEtukE api tad
aprAptih?  -- The creation of the aggregate does not
become established even in the aggregates caused by
its two causes, i.e., atoms and earth and others. 
        
The theory that the aggregate is caused by these two,
i.e., atoms and elements cannot be established. These
do not become established by the reason of the
assertion of momentariness to all entities. Because,
atom, earth etc., exist for a moment only according
their theory. When an object joins with another, it
should happen at the first moment itself. In the next
moment it has to mingle with yet another. In the third
moment, a body or a world should emerge. If the atoms
disappear at the very moment they appear, when they
will do the act of joining together? Similar is the
case with the elements which are supposed to form the
body or the world by joining, according to the
Buddhist theory. Hence, as this philosophy proposes
the destruction of things within a moment of their
existence, there cannot be a world nor can be a body.
Also, there will not be any activity because things
will not exist the next moment after their appearance.
Therefore, for the creation of the world and the
physical matter, one has to accept the Brahman as the
cause. 
        In this way, SrIbhAshyakAra demolishes the theory of
momentary existence of matter and as propounded by
these two Schools of Buddhism.   

        c) YogAcara School:

The fourth AdhikaraNa, namely, ?upalabdhyadhikaraNa?,
of the second quarter of the Second Chapter of the
Brahmasutra deals with the doctrine of this Buddhist
School. Three sutras come in this adhikaraNa: 
 i) ?nA-bhAva uplabdEh //? (2-2-27) ? There is no
non-existence (of things other than knowledge),
because it (i.e., the external world) is perceived. 
This sutra discusses whether the doctrine of the
YogAchAras that vijnAnam alone is real, is based on
valid reasons or not. 
SrIbhAshyakAra says that it is not. The person who
says, ?I know the jar?, the knowledge and the jar
which is being known ? as these are known separately,
to say that only knowledge exists and not the other
two, is not based on valid means of knowledge. Such a
theory deserves to be rejected by scholars. Knowledge
of all persons in the world is experienced as related
to a knowing subject and an object that is being
known. Hence, only a mad cap will assert that only
consciousness exists unrelated to the subject and the
object. 

The second Sutra says: ?vaidharmyacca na svapnAdivat?
(2-2-28) ? The perceptions of waking state too are not
like dream perceptions, because of differences in
their nature. 
        
        The YogAcAra theory says that the knowledge in waking
state is devoid of objects as it is of the nature of
knowledge, like that in dreaming state. 

SrIbhAshyakAra?s reply to this is that knowledge is
devoid of objects only under certain circumstances
like dreaming etc. Another notion of the YogAcAra is
that knowledge in general is devoid of objects as it
is of the nature of knowledge. The reply given to this
is: This inference which is also knowledge about an
object. So, knowledge is seen, even according to the
YogAcAra, to be both with an object and without it.
Thus the nature of knowledge is not without an object.


        The third Sootra says: ?na bhAvO anupalabdhEh //?
(2-2-29) ? There is no existence (of such knowledge as
is devoid of objects), because it is not cognized.  

Everywhere in this world, knowledge devoid of knower
and the object is not at all seen. Hence, nowhere
knowledge devoid of an existing object is possible. It
is concluded that the doctrine of YogAcArya is totally
inappropriate. 
d)  MAdhyamika School:
        The fifth AdhikaraNa, namely,
?sarvathApapattyadhikaraNam?  deals with the
inappropriateness of the MAdhyamika Buddhist theory.
The Sutra (30) says: ?sarvathAnupapathEsca? ? meaning,
?Because also it (i.e., the theory of the MAdhyamikas
is altogether inappropriate.? 

        SriBhashyakAra first raises the question whether the
doctrine of total void propounded by the MAdhyamika is
possible. 

The prima facie view of the MAdhyamika is that it is
possible. How? Consciousness and the external objects
like jars etc. do not exist, as their origin cannot be
proved. An object cannot originate from another
object. For example, jars cannot originate from the
lump of clay that is not destroyed. Nor they can
originate from nothing. Therefore, the doctrine of
total void is the reality. Whatever appears is all
myth. The destruction of this myth is the salvation.
The MAdhyamika argues that the Buddha had proposed the
theory of momentariness of consciousness and the
external objects for those who are not mature enough
to accept the void theory. They are the VaibhAshikas. 

        SrIbhAshyakAra now states his reply:  The view of the
MAdhyamika that all things are nothing, is not
possible, because it is completely inappropriate. The
terms ?being? and ?non-being? and the related ideas
are referring to different states of a thing or an
object which is perceived by the means of valid
knowledge.  In this world, if it is said that a jar is
not there, it means that the form of jar is absent.
But it is in the form of pot-pieces. That way it is
perceived. If it is said the jar exists, it refers to
the form of the jar and it is perceived as such.
Therefore, the terms ?being? and ?non-being? refer
only to the respective form that is perceived. Both
terms proves the existence of the object and not a
void. 

        Here, one recalls a pAsuram of SrI nammAzhvAr in
TiruvAimozhi:

?uLan enil uLan, avan uruvam ivvuruvukaL,
uLan, alan enil, avan aruvam ivvaruvukaL,
uLan ena, ilan ena, ivai kuNmudaimaiyil
uLan irutakaimaiyodu ozhivilan  parantE.?             

 (Tiruvaimozhi, 1-1-9)

(If it is stated that the Lord exits, He exists with a
form and all the attributes. If it is stated that He
does not exist (as stated by nihilists), then also He
exists; these formless things are His own; being and
non-being are the two facets and attributes of the
Lord. In such two ways, He has spread all over leaving
nothing uncovered.)  
           
        Here, we may refer to SrI ParAsara Bhattar?s verses
on these theories. 

?yOgAcArO jagadapalapatyatra sautrAntikah tat 
 dhee vaicitryAt anumitipadam vakti vaibhAShikastu /
 pratyakSham tatkShaNikayati tE ranganAtha! trayOpi
 jnAnAtmatvakShaNbhiduratE cakShatE tAn kShipAmah //?
(SrIrangarAjastavam,2-8)

(Oh RanganAtha! This yOgAcAra Buddhist denies this
world; SautrAntika Buddhist says that world can be
inferred, because of various appearances; VaibhAshika
Buddhist dismisses this perceptive world as momentary.
All these three say that knowledge is the Atma and it
is also momentary. We reject their views.)
?jagadbhanguram bhangurA buddhirAtmEti asadvEtrabhAvE
tathA vEdyavittyOah /
  kShaNadhvamsatashca smrutipratyabhij~nAdaridam
jagatsyAdidam rangacandra! // ?
                                                                                
                  (-do-, 2-9)
(Oh Rangachandra! To say that the world is momentary
and the momentary knowledge is the Atma, is false.
Because, if there is no a knower different from
knowledge and so are the objects and the knowledge,
this world will be devoid of cognition and
remembrance.)
        SwAmi Desikan says that the Lord saved the jIva from
being confused by these Buddhist theories.

[Books consulted:
1) Indian Philosophy by Dr. S.Radhakrishnan
2) The VedAnta Sutras with the SrI-Bhashya: Translated
by M.Rangacharya & 
                                                        M.B.Varadaraja Iyengar 
(Vol ii);
3) VedAnta Deepa, (vol i) of Bhagavad Ramanjacharya:
English Translation 
                                                        by Dr.N.S.Anantha 
Rangachary, Bangalore.
4) ShAreekakArikAvaLi, with Tamil Commentary by Sri
S.Krishnaswami Iyengar, 
Puthur AgrahAram, Tiruchirapalli.] 

(To continue)
dAsan
Anbil S.SrInivAsan
------------ 



      
____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for last minute shopping deals?  
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.  
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping


Oppiliappan Koil Varadachari Sadagopan
http://www.sadagopan.org  
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Oppiliappan/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Oppiliappan/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:Oppiliappan-digest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
    mailto:Oppiliappan-fullfeatured@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    Oppiliappan-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index ] [Thread Index ] [Author Index ]
Home Page
http://www.ibiblio.org/sripedia
oppiliappan-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
To subscribe to the list