Beyond
Nirvaana
came to
attend Väsudeva Särvabhauma’s discourses for seven days.
Särvabhauma
expatiated upon Çré Çaìkaräcärya’s commentary to the
Brahma-Sütra
zealously trying to impress Çré Caitanya with the Mäyäväda
philosophy.
Çré Caitanya listened attentively to the discourses for a
complete
seven days in a row without saying a word. On the eighth day,
Särvabhauma
requested Çré Caitanya to comment on this mammoth
dissertation.
In this context, I request the respected reader to scrutinise
the 6th
chapter, madhya-lélä of Çré Caitanya Caritämåta. In this
famous
discussion,
Çré Caitanya then picked out a multitude of mistakes in
Särvabhauma’s
scriptural conclusion, impressing him with both His
profound
erudition, and his deep esoteric understanding of the true
meaning of
the Vedic texts. He became immediately attracted to the Lord
and
finally surrendered to Him. This is documented in the Çré Caitanya
Caritämåta
Madhya 6/201, 205–206
ätmä-ninda
kari laila prabhura sarana
krpa
karibare tabe prabhura haila mana
dekhi’särvabhauma
dandavat kari’ padi’
punah
uthi’stuti kare dui kara yudi
prabhura
krpaya tnara sphurila saba tattva
nama-prema-dana-adi
varena mahättva.
Särvabhauma
denounced himself as an offender and took shelter
of the
Lord, who then desired to show him His mercy.
Särvabhauma
Bhaööäcärya was granted divine vision with which
to see
the form of Lord Kåñëa manifested in Caitanya Mahäprabhu,
at
which he immediately fell down on the ground to offer Him
obeisances.
He then stood up and began to offer prayers with
folded
hands. By the Supreme Lord’s mercy all ontological truths
were
revealed to Särvabhauma and he could understand the
importance
of chanting the holy name and of distributing love of
Godhead
everywhere.
In His
engagement to root out Mäyävädism, which He succeeded to
do
wonderfully in Jagannätha Puri, He was aided competently by His
disciples
and followers. Other Vaiñëava sampradäyas,
acknowledging that
Çré
Caitanya Mahäprabhu was the Supreme Personality of Godhead, also
came
forward to contain the menace of impersonalism. All these devotees
in the
propagation of theism and Bhägavata-dharma simply assisted Çré
Caitanya
and thus participated in His transcendental pastimes. Among
the
Vaiñëavas from other sampradäyas most worth mentioning are the
names of
Çré Keçava Kaçmiri from the Nimbärka sampradäya and Çré
The
Turning of the Tide
114
Beyond Nirväëa
Vallabhäcärya
of the Rudra sampradäya. Both these spiritual preceptors
accepted
spiritual instructions from Çré Caitanya Mahäprabhu. Who in
India has not
heard of Çré Caitanya’s meeting with Çré Kesava Kasmiri,
who had
earned the title of Digvijaya ‘he who conquerors in all
directions’?
However,
the real highlight of his career was to actually be defeated by
Çré
Caitanya Mahäprabhu – which he came to realise was his greatest
fortune,
returning back to his home with the treasure of direct divine
instruction
from the Supreme Lord Himself. Later, in his spiritual maturity
he
authored momentous treatises and books like Vedänta Kaustubha,
which are
landmark texts of the Nimbärka sampradäya. In fact
the great
storehouse
of books that have been published continuously and have
enriched
Nimbärka sampradäya must be understood as being the direct
result of
the dynamic propagation of Çré Caitanya Mahäprabhu.
Upendra
Sarasvaté
Upendra
Sarasvaté was a towering influence among the monist scholars
of
Väräëasé. The Vaiñëava preceptor Çré Vallabhäcärya had received the
mercy of
Çré Caitanya, and it was he who in Väräëasé soundly defeated
Upendra
Sarasvaté in a contest of theological dialectics. The defeat caused
Upendra to
harbour so much ill feeling towards Vallabhäcärya that he
even
desired to inflict physical torture on him. He began to harass Çré
Vallabhäcärya,
who meanwhile departed from Väräëasé exclaiming in
disbelief
on how a person learned in scriptures could stoop to such depths
of
depravity. The great preceptor moved on to other cities where there
were other
Mäyävädés that he also defeated resoundingly. Again, the
Mäyävädés
were forced to move on elsewhere to save face. Thus we see
that by
exposing the Mäyävädés, Çré Vallabhäcärya, played his valuable
part in
fulfilling Lord Caitanya’s hearts desire.
Çré
Caitanya Mahäprabhu and Vyäsa Räya
In his
visit to Uòupé, Çré Caitanya had met the leaders of the Madhvasampradäya
and had
long discussions on sädhya-sädhana-tattva, the
highest
spiritual
goal and the best process for attaining it. The head of the Uòupé
temple at
that time was Raghuvarya Äcärya, and after him Vyäsa Räya
became the
head of the temple and remained in his position for a long
time. He
was a pandit of Nyäyä (logic), an erudite scholar par excellence
in
spiritual dialectics. It is for this reason that he is still widely revered in
learned
circles. Many historians say that he was the temple head from
1486 AD to
1539. Although there may be some differences of opinion
over the
time period of his appearance, there can nevertheless be no
disagreement
that he met Çré Caitanya Mahäprabhu, who was in Uòupé
115
around
1515 AD, when Vyäsa Räya was in charge of the temple. Whether
or not
some scholars where fortunate enough to recognise Çré Caitanya
Mahäprabhu’s
divinity, they nevertheless all unanimously acknowledged
that Çré
Caitanya was the undisputed monarch of Nyäyä philosophy. Çré
Caitanya’s
fame preceded Him everywhere He went, so when He arrived
in Uòupé
many great devotees and erudite scholars including Raghuvarya
Äcärya and
his successor äcärya Vyäsa Räya, came to pay their respects.
Since
Vyäsa Räya himself was a towering scholar of Nyäyä, on meeting Çré
Caitanya
he was eager to receive more knowledge from Him and to
capitalise
on the rare opportunity. His famous book Nyäyämrta can be
considered
as a direct outcome of his meeting with Çré Caitanya. Äcärya
Vyäsa Räya
and other followers of Çré Caitanya totally devastated much of
the
remaining pockets of influence that Mäyävädé preachers had so
meticulously
assembled by their own vehement presentation of ‘Bhägavatdharma’.
The
Secret Writings of Madhüsudana Sarasvaté
As if
hearing the piteous cries of the Mäyävädés, the Supreme Lord
Kåñëa, who
is also known by the name ‘Madhusüdana’ (the killer of the
Madhu
demon) sent them succor in the form of Madhusüdana Sarasvaté,
a great pandita
and one of the most learned of the advaitavädis
(impersonalists).
Madhüsudana Sarasvaté was born in the small village of
Unsiya in
Fardiapura district of East Bengal, present day Bangladesh. After
completing
his studies of Nyäyä in Navadvipa, Bengal, he
travelled to
Väräëasé
where he studied the Mäyäväda commentary on Vedänta from
Çré Ramacandra
Pandita. Later he authored his magnum opus ‘Advaita
Siddhi’ –
an impressive treatise written with the daunting task of confuting
Vyäsa
Räya’s Nyäyämrta, which as we have just discussed struck an
awesome
blow to the impersonalist community. He may have realised
that his
attempt had fallen short of defeating Vyäsa Räya, for he developed
the
peculiar eccentricity of never allowing anyone from a different
sampradäya
to study his book. No copies of it were distributed and as the
book could
not be read firsthand, one had to hear it from Madhusüdana
Sarasvaté
himself. In this way, it became almost impossible for anyone to
refute any
part of the treatise with exact certainty. Vyäsa Räya had a
brilliant
disciple by the name of Räma Tértha, who conjectured correctly
Madhusüdana
Sarasvaté’s real intentions. Disguising himself as a Mäyäväda
scholar,
he approached Madhusüdana on the pretext of studying this
elusive
work. Räma Tirtha, who was blessed with an incredible mind,
committed
the entire book to memory and then used this information to
write a
commentary to his guru’s book Nyäyämrta. This commentary,
The
Turning of the Tide
116
Beyond Nirväëa
entitled
Tarangini, was a resounding rebuttal to Madhusüdana Sarasvaté’s
Advaita-Siddhi.
It was a scathing riposte, which ripped Madhusüdana’s
impersonalist
arguments to shreds.
The crest
jewel of scholars from amongst all sampradäyas, Çréla Jévä
Gosvämé,
was a contemporary of these two panditas. There
are some who
say that
Çréla Jévä Gosvämi studied Vedanta from Madhusüdana Sarasvaté.
There is
no concrete evidence to substantiate this notion, but there is no
doubt that
the two personalities had met. During his stay in Väräëasé,
Çréla Jévä
often discussed the principles of the science of bhakti
with
Madhusüdana
Sarasvaté. Over this period of time, it was seen that this
high,
spiritual association had a transforming effect on Madhusüdana and
he became
strongly attracted to Çré Caitanya Mahäprabhu. Since he was
already
very advanced in knowledge, he could grasp the sublime, esoteric,
and
transcendental conclusions from Çréla Jévä, who had realised these
understandings
from Mahäprabhu Himself. It is documented that he
became
inundated with love for Çré Caitanya and the process of bhakti, as
is evident
in his later life when he authored the beautiful treatise named
‘Bhakti
Rasayana’. The first verse of this book gives clear indication of the
deep
transformation in his mood:
nava-rasa-militam
vä kevalaà va pumartham
param
iha mukunde bhakti-yogaà ‘vadanti
nirupama-sukha-saàvid-rüpam
aspåñta duùkham
tam
aham akhila-tuñöyai çästrä-dåñöyä vyanajmi
I am
about to describe, after scrutinising the scriptures, the highest
good
and supreme benediction, which results in complete
satisfaction
for the jéväs. This goal lies in
engaging in pure
devotional
service, devoid of any anxiety or distress, to the
Supreme
Personality of Godhead Mukunda Kåñëa, who is the
embodiment
of incomparable bliss and complete transcendental
knowledge.
This bhakti-yoga, –
the transcendental process of pure
devotional
service- is suffused with the nine spiritual humours
(tastes)
and is the singular goal of all human aspiration – this
truth
has been promulgated by the greatest of sages.
In the
above verse the word vadanti is in the plural and implies that
several
personalities who have preached the highest truth in the world,
especially
Çréla Jévä Gosvämé, are in the exalted position of his guru. We
see that
Madhusüdana Sarasvaté does not write that kevala-jïäna or
empirical
knowledge of non-dualism is the purusartha (supreme
goal of
human
life). Rather he explicitly writes that kevala-bhakti – pure
devotion
117
exclusive
to Lord Kåñëa, is the highest Vedic goal. Madhusüdana Sarasvaté,
once a
stalwart preceptor of monists and Mäyävädés became an empowered
upholder
of the bhakti cult.
Mäyävädism
in Jaipur
After the
disappearance of Çré Caitanya Mahäprabhu, the future
prospect
of Mäyävädism continued to look bleak. For about 200 years
Mäyävädés
had no stalwarts who could lead them out of this period of
depression.
Around the beginning of the 18th century AD Mäyävädism
attempted
to make its presence felt again. A group of monists in the garb
of
Vaiñëavas of the Çré sampradäya tried to disrupt the worship of the
famous
deities of Çré Rädhä-Govindajé in Jaipur, which were under the
direct
patronage of the King of Jaipur. They began creating disruption in
the
community by challenging the procedures and rituals of the daily
worship,
which had been introduced by the Gauòéya Vaiñëavas in the line
of Çréla
Rüpa Gosvämé. The king was helpless and observed that these
vociferous
Mäyävädés were about to spark off a raging controversy. Seeing
this
volatile situation, King Jai Singh requested help from the then preceptor
and leader
of Gauòéya Vaiñëavas, Çréla Viçvanätha Cakravarté Öhäkura
who
resided in Våndävana. Due to his advanced age and a strong desire
not to
leave Våndävana, he decided to send his foremost disciple and
scholar
par excellence Çréla Baladeva Vidyäbhüñaëa as his representative.
He was
sent to rectify the situation by upholding the honour of the Gauòéya
tradition,
which maintained the sanctity of the worship of the Govindajé
deity.
This deity had originally been installed by Rüpa Gosvämé himself in
Våndävana,
but due to the constant fear of Muslim desecration, had been
brought to
the royal city of Jaipur
for protection. Çréla Baladeva humbly
arrived at
the assembly of the Çré sampradäya, bare-footed and carrying a
water-pot
and an old quilt. Standing before them, he boldly declared that
the
founder of the Gauòéya sampradäya was Çré Caitanya Himself, and that
Çréla
Vyäsadeva wrote the Çrémad-Bhägavatam as the natural commentary
to his
Vedänta-sütra. Referencing this, he said all explanations were given
to reveal
the appropriate hierarchy in the spiritual family, and that this
formed the
system of worship for the deity of Govindajé. The panditas
being
short sighted and wishing to protect their position maintained that
Çréla
Baladeva could make no argument unless and until there was a
legitimate
commentary on the Vedänta-sütra by the Gauòéya sampradäya.
It seems
that these proud scholars underestimated the humble sädhu
who
stood
before them. Later that night Lord Govindajé personally appeared
to Çréla
Baladeva in a dream and directed him to write the Gauòéya
commentary
to Vedänta-sütra. Within a short time he created the famous
The
Turning of the Tide
118
Beyond Nirväëa
work and
titled it Govinda Bhasya indicating that the commentary was
actually
that of Lord Govindajé Himself. On presenting the work the
Mäyävädés
were all dumbfounded and at a complete loss being unable to
detect any
defects in the text. They surrendered to him and wrote a letter
of
victory, which Çréla Baladeva offered at the feet of his guru
in Våndävana.
The news
of the victory spread far and wide, as this timely divine
intervention
helped stem any dissension regarding the celebrated worship
of Çré
Rädhä Govindajé who is still worshipped in this present day by both
the royal
family and the people of Jaipur.
The
Ghosts of Mäyävädism
The 18th
and 19th centuries witnessed the presence of Mäyävädism in a
declined
state. It survived like a haunted institution - abandoned and in
ruins. At
times a notable Mäyävädé, like a restless spirit, would appear to
try and
salvage some of its past glory, but exactly at these times a stalwart
Vaiñëava,
almost acting in the capacity of an exorcist, would thwart any
attempts
of a Mäyävädé ‘come back’. Especially worth mentioning among
these
Vaiñëavas is Çré Räma Çästri of the Rämänuja sampradäya who
defeated
in a theological debate Svämé Saccidananda, the leader of
Çaìkaräcärya’s
Çångeri monastery. Then there was the awesome pandita
Ananta
Äcärya, also from the Rämänuja sampradäya who
defeated the
Mäyäväda
scholars Rajesvari Çästri and Viresvara Çästri at the Mäyäväda
stronghold
of Väräëasé. Satyadhyana Tértha of the Madhvä sampradäya
also
defeated the then heads of Mäyävädism that were based in Väräëasé
and
authored two very famous books, Advaita-mata Vimarsa and Tripundra-
dhihkara.
These books went a long way to undermine Mäyävädism
by
exposing intrinsic flaws in their theories.
It is also
worth mentioning here that there were other erudite
and wise
sages, who were not affiliated to any of the four Vaiñëava
sampradäyas, but were
nevertheless extremely critical of Mäyävädism in
all its different
forms. These sages were from diverse philosophical schools
like
Nyäyä, Mémäàsa, Säìkhya etc. They have deftly picked out
philosophical
discrepancies in Mäyävädism. Just to name but a few of
these
worthy personalities; Gaìgesa Upadhyäya, Rakhaladasa Nyäyäratna,
Näräyaëa
Bhatta, Bhäskaräcärya, Vijïänabhiksu and so on.
Çré Vyäsa
Räya’s Nyäyämrta was a masterpiece in dismantling
Mäyävädism.
Madhusüdana Sarasvaté’s Advaita Siddhi was composed as
a rebuttal
to it. Then, in turn Räma Tértha wrote Tarangini to checkmate
Advaita
Siddhi. In an attempt to then refute Tarangini, the Mäyäväda
scholar
Brahmänanda wrote his ‘Brahmänandiya’. Taking up the theistic
cause in
response, Vänamala Miçra of the Madhva sampradäya authored
119
five
treatises famous as the Panca Bhangi. These intriguing works are all
well
preserved in the Mysore
State library. Not only
do the five books
confute
Mäyävädism, they also expose all the other unauthorised so-called
‘Vedic’
philosophies that are non-theistic. The conclusion of this work
rightfully
leaves only the four authorised Vaiñëava sampradäyas as the
true
upholders of Vedic knowledge, faith and dharma. It
should be noted
that all
of these sampradäyas have historically remained
untarnished by
attacks
from inauthentic deviant sects.
The
Turning of the Tide
120
Beyond Nirväëa
Mäyävädism
in the Modern Age
In our
modern times, Mäyävädism has spawned worldwide into many
different
shapes and hues. In this age of technology and with the spread of
modern
science and its related culture, communication between nations
and
cultures has been revolutionised. In the resultant machine driven
society
the emphasis on material vision becomes greater and greater, as
the
material incentive becomes the dominant perspective and goal, taking
total control.
From its epicenter in India Mäyävädism in all its different
forms has
been widely propagated in this era of global communication,
and as
anyone can plainly see has been well received.
A plethora
of diverse philosophies are ubiquitously rampant especially
in the
materially advanced western societies where for all the technical
advancement,
spiritual understanding remains in a deplorable condition.
Although
these westernised philosophies often appear opposed to each
other as
well as ostensibly contradicting the precepts of Mäyävädism, in
the end
they are in one way or another a nourishing force for Mäyävädism.
These
ideas range from antagonistic ‘left-hand path’ mystical sects, to
extreme
fundamentalism, and on to subtle, camouflaged forms of atheism
and nihilism.
Unraveling the long journey of development that these deviant
philosophies
undertook, and their subsequent influence on western
thought
demands the focused attention and energy required of a detective.
For
instance among many stories and ideas, numerous Indian philosophers
and sages
have sufficient proof that Greek philosophers visited India when
accompanying
Alexander the Great in his quest for world conquest. They
studied
and trained here, learning the philosophy of non-dual monism or
Mäyävädism,
after which they returned to their respective countries to
preach
Mäyävädism. This fact is confirmed in the writing of some western
researchers
and scholars.
In the
final analysis it can be safely concluded that in truth – any
philosophy
which has the propensity to dilute, divide, and confuse the
rational,
logical or factual understanding of the Supreme Lord’s personal
form, has
at some juncture been influenced by the deceptive forces of
Mäyävädism.
An objective observation of the modern global society reveals
that the
symptoms of Kali-yuga are abundantly evident. It is a nefarious
age of
deception and trickery, feint and counter-feint, misinformation and
disorganization.
Opportunistic politicians controlled by zealous financial
magnates
covertly and craftily engineer public opinion by manipulation
of the
media in a relentless pursuit of ephemeral visions of illusory power
rooted in
the bodily concepts of ‘I’ and ‘mine’. These personalities and
121
their
respective ideologies are without doubt the true deputed agents of
Mäyävädism.
We find
that the other four prominent religions of the world have
succeeded
in divesting the Supreme of form, personality and personal
attributes.
The Buddhists, being atheistic, follow the theory that only the
timeless
void of non-existent nothingness is the real ‘existence’. This is
illustrated
throughout their teachings, as well as in their holy scripture
Prajïänpäramitä,
which we have examined earlier in this book. The
Hebrew
Torah states in the Book of Ezekiel, chapter one, verse 28, that
the Lord
had the appearance of a mass of clouds on a day of pouring rain
(i.e.
blackish blue). The Muslim Koran in the second sura, 138th ayat
states
that they
take their colour from the Lord. The Prophet Mohammed, who
dictated
the Koran, was a Bedouin whose colour is known to be very
dark. The
name Allah merely means the Supreme. The Christian Bible in
Revelations,
chapter four, verse 3, gives some reference that, God seated
upon a
throne has the appearance like a jasper stone. Jesus Christ, apart
from
stressing the path of devotion also taught that the name of God
should be
worshipped, ‘hallowed be thy Name’. However,
despite certain
references
to form and quality in the writings of these world religions, it
appears
that any detailed mention of the identity and intimate attributes
of the
Supreme Lord are conspicuously absent in their latter-day teachings.
In India, there
are two principal offspring of Mäyävädism. The first is
the system
of Païcopäsanä, which is the idea that Çiva, Kali, Ganesh,
Durga,
Viñëu etc, can all be worshipped on the same level, in a philosophy
of ‘All
paths lead to God’. Although this seemingly innocent concept makes
a show of
theism, it leads to the ultimate conclusion that there is no
existing
difference in the relationships within that eternal family, and so
they
reject the concept of one Supreme God.
The second
wave of Mäyävädism is seen in the idea of samanvayaväda,
(religious
egalitarianism). The progenitor of this form of religion was the
Mughal
emperor Akbar. He was a crafty politician who for the sake of his
own
political gain propagated his own concocted ‘egalitarian’ philosophy
that he
called the ‘Dine-ilahi’ religion.
In the modern age many social and
philosophical
leaders hoping for even small mundane rewards and
advantages
have become infatuated with egalitarian theories, which on
closer
inspection are yet more takes on impersonalism.
Vaiñëavism
has also had to endure the ravages of Kali-yuga in the form
of
aberrations in its precepts and practices, which have made gradual
creeping
advances especially in Bengal. This is seen in
the groups of
Mäyävädism
in the Modern Age
122
Beyond Nirväëa
unauthorised
cults who deceivingly preach their own brands of concocted
philosophies.
Groups like Avla, Baula, Kartabhaja, Neda, Darvesa, Sahajiya,
Sakhibheki,
Smarta, Jati-gosain, Ativädi, Cudadhari, Gauranga-nagari etc.
All of
these groups follow a form of Mäyävädism that on the surface does
not give
an impression of impersonalism. However, all of these groups
deny the
eternal, divine form of the Supreme Lord by disavowing from
the
sections and passages of authorised scriptures that verify His reality
as
evidenced in His name, fame, incarnations and pastimes.
Those who
appeared after the advent of Çré Caitanya Mahäprabhu such
as
Rämänanda, Kabir, Nanaka, and Dadu, were all synthesists who in the
name of
egalitarian religion actually promoted Mäyävädism. Even Svämé
Vivekänanda
followed this synthesis approach by choosing to eschew the
true, pure
meaning of Vedänta, in preference to a diluted version mixed
with
ephemeral concepts of universal brotherhood for all. These concepts
are
presented without regard for any understanding of the qualitative
diversity
of the Lord’s energies that are described in detail in the Vedic
texts, which
leads to a covert assimilation of the Mäyävädé consensus
that ‘all
is one’.
Contemporary
times are fortunate to have witnessed the intrepid
manner of
two gigantic spiritual stalwarts: Çréla Bhaktivinode Öhäkura
and after
him the universal preceptor Çréla Bhaktisiddhänta Sarasvaté
Öhäkura.
Both of these preceptors have exposed the many faces of
Mäyävädism
with the expressed purpose of opening the eyes of the sincere
seekers of
truth with the torch light of transcendental knowledge.
Their real
goal was not merely to refute the concocted Mäyäväda
theories
that are deceptively based on Vedic conclusions but to reveal
the true
Vedic conclusions, specifically by publishing spiritual literature
and by
forcefully preaching that pure message as taught by Çré Caitanya
Mahäprabhu.
In this way they created a spiritual revolution in the hearts
and minds
of conditioned souls, giving them a platform of real knowledge
with which
to chase away religious misconceptions and frustrating
ideologies
that are based on trying to satisfy the senses. Their message
reached
the far corners of the Western Hemisphere to a
world known as
the
citadel of uninhibited, unrestricted carnal pleasures. In this way they
have
fulfilled the Supreme Godhead Çré Caitanya Mahäprabhu’s future
prediction,
as stated in the Çré Caitanya Bhagavata by Çréla Våndävana das
Öhäkura:
123
påithvéte
äche yata nagarädi gräma
sarvatra
pracära hoibe mora näma
My
holy Name will be preached in every town and village of
the
globe.
Hare
Kåñëa
Hare
Kåñëa
Kåñëa
Kåñëa
Hare
Hare
Hare
Räma
Hare
Räma
Räma
Räma
Hare
Hare
Mäyävädism
in the Modern Age
124
Beyond Nirväëa
Concluding
Words
Section
A
Çaìkaräcärya
I will try
and keep the conclusion as brief as possible as I do not want
to test my
reader’s patience. At the end of every chapter I have offered
my humble
opinions. Here I will compile them and give a summary. After
reading
this book, which is but a short essay, the following are the salient
points
that constitute its backbone. Not a single adherent of pure
Vaiñëavism
had to concede defeat in spiritual dialectics to a Mäyäväda
philosopher
or any other philosopher, and thus subsequently be forced
to forsake
his own Vaiñëava persuasion in exchange for his opponent’s
path of
dry empiricism. On the other hand the best of the Mäyäväda
philosophers
and preceptors were vanquished in spiritual dialectics by
Vaiñëava äcäryas. They
could then realise the truth that Lord Viñëu is the
supreme
Absolute Truth, Personality of Godhead and that the realm of
bhakti-yoga
is far superior to the speculative path of monistic knowledge.
They
gladly relinquished Mäyävädism and embraced the Vaiñëava religion
of
devotional service.
In his
quest for world conquest, Çré Çaìkaräcärya’s most impressive
triumph
came when he defeated Mandana Miçra, who was a follower of
Jaimini’s
philosophy that is based on ritualistic activities recommended
in the karma
khaëòa section of the Vedas. This and other instances of Çré
Çaìkaräcärya’s
victories in the world of spiritual dialectics have been dealt
with in an
earlier chapter. After this victory, the only other noteworthy
victory we
hear about is mentioned in the biography of Acärya Çré Nåsiàha
Äçram.
Çaìkaräcärya defeated a Çaivite by the name of Äcärya Apyaya
Dékñita
and brought him into the empirical school of impersonalism.
However,
from Äcärya Apyaya’s many writings it can be easily established
that he
was already drawn to Païcopäsanä (worshipping the five principal
deities on
an equal level) before he encountered Çaìkaräcärya. So for
him
conceding defeat and changing over to the path of empiricism was
not a
major paradigm shift, but merely slight philosophical adjustment.
Çaìkaräcärya
always laid special stress on the Païcopäsanä process.
According
to Bhäskaräcärya however, Äcärya Dékñita was not a true Çaivite
in the
real sense. Whatever the case may be, if Äcärya Apyaya as a non-
Vaiñëava
embraced another path of empirical knowledge then its effect is
inconsequential
to the cause of Vaiñëavism, while its enhancement to the
reputation
or pre-eminence of Mäyävädism is nill.
125
In
Çaìkaräcärya’s Çariraka-bhañya, it is interesting to note that he
quoted
verses from Bhagavad-gétä while commenting on the Vedänta-sütra
verse
1/2/5 beginning çabda viç sät. Noting this very unusual
inconsistency
by
Çaìkaräcärya way back in the 1200’s AD, Madhaväcärya the founder
of the
Brahma Vaiñëava sampradäya wrote in his illustrious treatise Sri
Tattva-muktävalé
verse 59 as follows:
småteç
ca hetor api bhinna ätmä
naisargikaù
sihyati bheda eva
na
cet kathaà sevaka-sevya-bhävaù
kaëöhoktir
eñä khalu bhäñyakartuh
In his
commentary on the Vedänta-sütra, Çaìkaräcärya also
quoted
verses from the Vedic scriptures that demonstrated the
nature
and the difference between the Supreme Lord and the
individual
soul. Indeed, if Çaìkaräcärya did not accept this
conception,
then how could he utter this statement?
The verse
that Çaìkaräcärya quoted was from Bhagavad-gétä, chapter 18,
çloka 61:
éçvaraù
sarva-bhütänäà håd-deçe’rjuna tiñthati
bhrämayam
sarva-bhütäni yanträrüòhäni mäyayä
The
Supreme Lord is situated in the hearts of every living entity
O’
Arjuna, and is directing the movements of all living beings who
wander
in the cycle of birth and death, by His mäyä, as
if they are
mounted
upon a machine.
It is
ironic that Çaìkaräcärya should quote a verse that recognises the
supra-mundane
majesty of the Supreme Lord, and which specifies in no
uncertain
terms the clear and precise distinction between God and the
living
entities. As such the verse completely contradicts his own Mäyäväda
hypothesis
that the living entities and the Supreme Lord are one.
What is
even more surprising is that Çaìkaräcärya also quotes from
the Gétä,
chapter 18, verse 62:
tam
eva çaraëaà gaccha / sarva-bhävena bharäta
tat
prasädät paräm çäntià / sthänaà präpsyasi çäçvatam
O’
descendent of Bharata, exclusively surrender to that Éçvara in
every
respect. By His grace, you will attain transcendental peace
and
the supreme abode.
Concluding
Words
126
Beyond Nirväëa
Both the
above verses indicate that, contrary to what Çaìkaräcärya
may have
propounded in his Mäyäväda hypothesis, he was clearly aware
that the
Supreme Lord and the living entities existed in distinct
relationships,
and that the path to salvation was complete surrender to
the
Supreme Lord Kåñëa. Further evidence of this can be found in his
most
revealing and extraordinary departure from the world, in a welldocumented
verse that
Çaìkaräcärya spoke to his disciples prior to his
infamous
submergence into the boiling cauldron of oil.
bhaja
govindam bhaja govindam bhaja govindam müòha-mate /
sampräpte
sannihite käle nahi rakñati òukån-karaëe
You
fools! All your word jugglery will not protect you when the
time
of death arrives; so just worship Govinda! Worship Govinda!
Worship
Govinda!
Govinda is
one of the confidential names of the Supreme Lord Kåñëa.
It was
first revealed in the ancient poem called Brahmä Saàhita, the hymn
of Lord
Brahmä, which was sung at the very beginning of the creation of
the
material universe. One of the main verses repeated throughout the
Brahmä
Saàhita is ‘govindam ädi puruñaà tam ahaà bhajämi’, which
translates
as “I worship Govinda, who is the primeval Lord.” After being
lost for
many hundreds of years, this exceptionally beautiful poem was
uncovered
by Çré Caitanya Mahäprabhu, long after the departure of
Çaìkaräcärya.
For Çaìkaräcärya to use the confidential name of the Lord
in this
verse factually reveals his true position as an incarnation of Lord
Çiva, ‘the
auspicious one’, who is eternally the greatest servitor of the
Lord. From
examples like these it is clear that although Çaìkaräcärya
was
executing his service by preaching the Mayavada hypothesis, he himself
was
factually well aware of the actual truth.
Though I
realise the necessity of presenting here the numerous Vaiñëava
arguments
and reasons that have convincingly routed the theories of
Mäyävädism,
I must defer due to the limited length of the essay. At the
same time
I request the venerable readers to refer to the following books
for a
clearer and more exhaustive explanation of these topics. 1
__ Ñaö-sandarbha,
Krama.sandarbha and Sarvasaàvädiné, by Çréla
Jévä
Gosvämé
__ Govinda
Bhäñya, Siddhänta Ratnam, Prameya Ratnävalé,
Viñëusahasranäma
Bhäñya, and Upaniñadä Bhäñya, by Çréla
Baladeva
Vidyäbhüñaëa.
__ Also Çréla
Bhaktisiddhänta Sarasvaté Prabhupäda’s, Caitanya
Caritämåta,
Anubhäñya, Çrémad-Bhägavatam and Gauòéya
Bhäñya.
127
Section
B
The
concept of ‘Nirväëa’
What
emerges as a consequence of discussing the biography of
Mäyävädism
is that all historical facts and the entire range of its’ corner
stone
principles can be refuted merely on the basis of ‘Aitihya-pramäna’
(evidence
based on time-honoured precepts). Mäyävädism stands on very
weak
logic, faulty arguments and faulty evidence. Hence, in open debates
or direct
dialectical exchanges it has always known defeat. If in spite of
hearing
the facts about Mäyävädism one still desires to pursue a path to
attain nirväëa,
then our advice is to not forget that nirväëa, as
enunciated
by the
Mäyävädés, is a falsity and a figment of the imagination that
hazardously
misleads and deceives the innocent. This statement is easily
substantiated
by simple, traditional knowledge and without recourse to
further
support from other readily available evidences. Nirväëa, the
concept of
a liberation attained by merging into a void, is for the living
entity a
factually non-existent condition of being or awareness that can
never be
attained.
There is
not a single instance or example of any monist or impersonalist
attaining
the state of nirväëa. Of this we are certain, because if
we scour
the
biographies of Goudapäda, Govindapäda, Çaìkaräcärya or Mädhava,
we would
be forced to conclude that none of them attained the state of
nirväëa,
liberation. It is a well known fact that Çaìkaräcärya’s spiritual
master
Goudapäda appeared to Çaìkara when he was in deep meditation
one day
and said: “I have heard many praises about you from your guru
Govindapäda.
Show me the commentary you have written to my
composition
Maëòukya Kärikä.” Çaìkaräcärya handed him his
commentary
and Goudapäda was extremely pleased and approved it. From
this story
it thus appears that neither Goudapäda nor Govindapäda had
merged
into void to be silenced forever. If both had attained nirväëa,
liberation,
it would have been impossible for Govindapäda to speak to
Goudapäda.
Furthermore, it would have been impossible for Goudapäda
to later
appear before Çaìkaräcärya and describe his meeting with
Govindapäda
– all of which took place after the physical demise of both.
The
followers of Çaìkaräcärya will give no occasion to doubt the veracity
of this
mystical event having taken place, and therefore the only intelligent
conclusion
one may draw from it is that neither had forsaken their
individual
identity and existence after their demise – nirväëa is simply
a
myth.
Concluding
Words
128
Beyond Nirväëa
Another
story that all Mäyävädés swear upon as an authentic component
of their
tradition, is their belief that Çaìkaräcärya reincarnated as
Vidyäranya.
They furnish many hypotheses to prove their point. The
question
then is, did Çré Çaìkaräcärya really merge into void or attain
nirväëa
liberation? The concept of reincarnating or appearing as an
apparition
or in any other form after attaining impersonal liberation
contradicts
the nirväëa thesis. Therefore, the conclusion is that nirväëa
is a flawed
philosophy, a myth concocted to confuse the innocent and
allure
them into swelling the number of their followers. What to speak of
the common
man, even those who are considered to be the innovators of
this
theory and its principal promulgators could not attain nirväëa.
The
Eternal Effulgence
Regarding
conclusive evidence concerning Kåñëa’s aspect of brahman,
we
quote from
Brahmä-Saàhita, chapter five, verse 40:
yasya
prabhä prabhavato jagad-aëòa-koöi
koöiñv
açeña-vasudhädi vibhüti-bhinnam
tad
brahma niñkalam anantam açeña-bhütam
govindam
ädi-puruñaà tam ahaà bhajämi
I
worship Govinda, the original primeval Lord, who is endowed
with
great power. His glowing effulgence is the non-dualistic
brahman,
which is absolute, fully complete and unlimited, and
which
manifests innumerable planetary systems with variegated
opulence
in millions and millions of universes.
In Çré
Caitanya Caritämåta, Ädi-lélä, chapter two, verse 15, we find further
description:
koöé
koöé brahmäëòe ye brahmera vibhüti
sei
brahma govindera haya aïga-känti
The
opulence of brahman is
spread throughout tens and tens of
millions
of universes. That brahman is but
the bodily effulgence
of
Govinda.
It can be
understood from this that factually, there is no question of
any
impersonal aspect of the Lord, there is only the personal aspect – but
to
comprehend this one must have the proper understanding as
authentically
presented in the Vedas, and the intelligence to apply the
understanding.
The Sun provides a good example. In a secluded, shaded
place we
can look out and see sunlight, and although we may not see the
129
sun disk
itself, a correct understanding tells us it is there – that the sunlight
has no
independent existence from the sun disk. In the same way, one
who has
correct knowledge can understand that what appears to be the
impersonal
brahman is in fact the shinning, transcendental effulgence of
the
Supreme Lord Kåñëa, who is also known as Govinda.
We need
not engage in fruitless speculation to understand how the
impersonal
brahman is the transcendental effulgence of the Supreme Lord
Kåñëa’s,
rather there are practical examples to look to here on Earth. For
instance,
modern science estimates the Sun’s distance to be 93 million
miles from
Earth, and although to us it looks no bigger than a small ball in
the sky,
it is able to illuminate the earth and cause countless varieties of
living
things to exist and grow. It’s light travels at a speed of 186,000
miles per
second and it is so powerful that its rays make it hot enough at
some
places to boil water. If the sun is able to manifest this ‘opulence’ as
a part of
ordinary nature, then certainly it is not difficult to contemplate
how the
Supreme personality of Godhead is able to manifest an infinitely
greater
opulence that is even more phenomenal and wonderful.
In the
book Lanka Avatär that we quoted at the beginning of this
humble
treatise, it is mentioned that Rävaëa would journey to Mount
Kailaça to
discuss impersonalism with Lord Buddha. In another portion
of that
book, Lord Buddha gives pertinent information about nirväëa
that
we think
our readers will find quite compelling. There He states that
nirväëa
is the manifestation of noble wisdom that expresses itself as a
perfect
love for the enlightenment of all. Now, what Çaìkaräcärya’s
Mäyäväda
hypothesis postulates is that nirväëa is a state
of merging into
the
formless, non-distinct, attribute-less brahman for the
final emancipation
of
uninterrupted bliss. In this we have a diametrical dichotomy regarding
nirväëa. Viñëu
Avatär Buddha’s nirväëa reveals a very profound and
compassionate
level of consciousness that naturally expresses itself for
the
benefit of all living entities. Çaìkaräcärya’s nirväëa
however, expounds
(like
Gautama Buddha) an extinction of individuality, a state of being
where
one’s mind, senses and consciousness dissolve into some abstract
emancipation.
From this we are able to recognise Çaìkaräcärya’s cloaked
deception,
veiling his hypothesis with a diaphanous form of Vedänta, he
preached
this Buddhist-atheism throughout India without mercy.
Another
astounding fact is that Çaìkaräcärya has borrowed from others
to
emphatically postulate the falsehood or illusory nature of the existence
of this
world by comparing it to a dream, thereby denying the authenticity
and
reality of a dream. But his followers have contradicted him. The strict
adherents
of the Mäyäväda theory who penned Çré Çaëkara’s biography
Concluding
Words
130
Beyond Nirväëa
write
exactly the opposite, disproving the dream theory he postulated.
When
Çaìkaräcärya’s mother was carrying him in her womb, she had
decided to
end her life to escape the shame of having conceived in the
absence of
a husband and of giving birth to a stigmatised child. Her father
Mandana
Miçra, was informed in a dream that his unborn grandson was
an incarnation
of Lord Siva and that he must stop his daughter from
committing
suicide at all costs. Thanks to the dream a child was born
endowed
with extraordinary qualities, proving the dream to be authentic.
So, are we
to accept the Mäyävädés’ theory that dreams are an illusion,
yet
another manifestation of non-reality? On one hand they would have
everyone
believe that Çaìkaräcärya as a baby in the womb survived
because of
his mother’s belief in a dream. On the other hand, they would
also have
everyone believe that all dreams, including the dream-like
existence
of this universe, are unreal, false and a figment of the conditioned
mind.
Section
C
Analysing
the Brahma-Sütra verse 3/2/3
I would
like to draw the attention of our readers to the original title of
this book
‘Vaiñëava Vijay’. The real title should be ‘Vaiñëava Vijay –
Triumph of
Vaiñëavism’, but by elaborating on ‘The Biography of
Mäyävädism’
(now entitled ‘Beyond Nirvana’) and its’ historical
background,
the universal Vedic truths encrypted in the Brahma-Sütra
verse
3/2/3, (cited on the first page of the book) are systematically
described.
My intention in this was to present in conformity with Vedic
siddhänta, the
truth that Çaìkaräcärya’s view was not Brahmaväda
(brahmanism), but
rather ‘Mäyävädism’. Once the respected reader has
patiently
and thoroughly gone through this entire essay they will quite
easily
grasp that the true concept that brahman is not çunya
(void). The
omnipotent,
energetic principal Çré Kåñëa is the possessor of all energies
and the Supreme
Controller of both the inferior illusory energy called
mäyä, and the
superior spiritual energy. These are truths that have been
unequivocally
substantiated by all the scriptures.
While
delineating on the Supreme Personality of Godheads’
original
identity and characteristics, the Supreme Absolute Truth is also
described,
as is found in the Çrémad-Bhägavatam: 1/2/11:
vadanti
tat tattva-vidas yaj jïänam advayam
brahmeti
paramätmeti bhagavän iti çabdyate.
131
Great
seers of the truth, who perceive the nature of the Absolute,
describe
that same non-dual truth in three ways, - as brahman,
Paramätmä
and Bhagavän.”
After this
verse, the Çrémad-Bhägavatam goes on to enumerate the
names of
incarnations like Räma, Nåsiàha, and Väraha, etc. who are the
embodiments
of the brahman principle, omnipotent personalities who are
the sum
total of all the three truths mentioned above. This Supreme
energetic
principle is summed up with the following verse from Çrémad-
Bhägavatam
1/3/28
ete
cäàça-kaläù puàsaù kåñëastu bhagavän svayam
All of
the above mentioned incarnations are either plenary portions
or
portions of plenary portions of the Supreme Lord, but Lord
Çré
Kåñëa is the original Personality of Godhead, fountainhead of
them
all.
Besides
this, in many places the scriptures describe the brahman
principle
as Parabrahma or Paramabrahma. Furthermore in many
instances,
Çaìkaräcärya’s has erroneously changed the expression ätmä
to
Paramätmä. We must understand that brahman and ätmä are
different
to Parama,
the Supreme. Both Parama-brahman and Param-ätmä are
irrefutably
proven to refer to the Parama, the Supreme Absolute
Principle.
Yet,
another powerful fact is that nowhere is there an example of the
word
Parama being used as a prefix to the word Bhägavata, thus a term
such as Parama-Bhagavän
does not exist. This is a sure proof that the
Bhägavata
principle is in truth the highest supreme principle or truth and
not the brahman
principle – brahman is not Paraman2. In the
Vedäntasütra,
Vedavyäsa’s
initial question about the nature and personality of
brahman
is answered by the first aphorism athäto
brahma jijïäsä – which
declares
Çré Kåñëa the Supreme Personality of Godhead to be brahman,
and
indeed, not Çaìkaräcärya’s concept of an impersonal, impotent
brahman.
Çaìkaräcärya
postulates that – “brahmann is impotent and without
energy,
hence how can he possess the potency to create, maintain and
annihilate.
However, when brahman comes under the sway of mäyä, the
illusory,
material energy he becomes a jévä, and as a
jévä he is executor of
creation,
maintenance and annihilation. It is the mäyä-afflicted
Brahman
who alone
carries out all action. In this condition brahman is no
longer to
be
addressed as brahman, because he is now in the category
of a jéva”
Concluding
Words
132
Beyond Nirväëa
This is
the Mäyäväda philosophers’ main argument. It is for this reason
that
Çaìkaräcärya is a Mäyävädé. He is not a true, unalloyed Brahmavädé.
We have
quoted the Brahma-Sütra verse beginning with ‘mäyämatrantu’
at the
beginning of this book to illustrate the above viewpoints and to
expose Çré
Çaëkara’s dubious and speculative arguments written in his
Mäyäväda
commentary to this verse.
Section
D
Dream
Does Not Mean Falsehood
Çaìkaräcärya
claimed that both the process of creation, and creation
itself,
are false. According to him even God, the Supreme Being is false. In
his
attempt to preserve the concept of falsehood he obfuscated the real
meaning of
the word mäyä, and so even the Mäyäväda definition he proffers
of the
word mäyä is intrinsically false. Wishing to prove his theory that
the
creation is false he ended up equating mäyä with a
dream, as if both
were
founded on the same principle. In analysing the innate form and
nature of
a real substance he tried to prevaricate the truth and have
everyone
believe that it is false – as the dream so also the
creation. It is true
that
dreams, as well as other activities and experiences of the conditioned
jévä
deluded by mäyä, are mostly false. Circumstances and
objects etc.
that the jévä
sees in his dreams while asleep are not in their full and real
form and
are not present in their true dimensions, thus they are all false.
The
important point we want to make is that the Supreme Godhead is
present
as a reality, eternally in the jévä’s original self, in his soul. Since
the
Supreme
Godhead inherently possesses the ability to create the universe,
the jévä
(who is a tiny transcendental spark of the Supreme Lord’s marginal
energy)
also naturally has the mystic power in his heart to create dreams.
Consequently
many dreams prove to be true. The prime reason for this
being that
the jévä possesses the quality of satyasaìkalpatä or the
resoluteness
to make a desire come true. An apropriate example is
Çaìkaräcärya’s
maternal grandfather Maghamaëòana, who heard in a
dream that
his daughter was carrying Çaìkaräcärya in her womb. This
dream
proved to be absolutely true, disproving unequivocally
Çaìkaräcärya’s
contention that ‘dreams are false’. To asseverate that all
dreams in
general are false is illogical and unreasonable. Besides, what
appears in
a dream is never completely false. Generally, that which exists,
that which
we have some experience of and has left some tangible psychic
impression,
lodges itself in the jévä’s heart and appears in a dream. The
crux of
the matter is that the creation, etc. carried out under the influence
133
of the
Supreme Controller’s mäyä potency, is not false as in
Çaìkaräcärya’s
concept of
dream, but is proven to be an experiential, verifiable reality.
Section
E
Two
forms of Mäyä, and the definition of ‘Chäyä’ &
‘Pratibimba’
According
to the Vedas, the material creation as a product of the mäyä
potency is
by definition illusory, for it is temporary and mutable. In spite
of this,
it is a shadow image of Vaikuëöha, the spiritual world that is situated
beyond the
influence of the deluding mäyä potency.
The
meaning of dvibidha is two-fold and indicates the
distinct difference
between
the Supreme Lord and the living entities, as well as the distinct
difference
between the eternal spiritual worlds and the temporal material
worlds.
They are clearly not one, as Mäyävädism propounds. The meaning
of mäyä is
illusion. Here too the word is indicative of two distinct forms
of mäyä: Yogamäyä
and mahämäyä. There is frequent use of the word mäyä
throughout
the scriptures. It was not Çréla Vyäsa’s desire that both yogamäyä
and mahämäyä
should be grouped together into the same category and
regarded
as one. In the Vedas and the Upaniñadäs, mahämäyä is
described
as the
shadow of yogamäyä, which is a transcendental spiritual energy in
the
eternal pastimes of Çré Kåñëa. A shadow is a replica or image of a form
produced
by the play of light and is not a reflection. The shadow is
inseparably
connected to its object or form, whereas a projection always
depends on
its object. The most crucial distinguishing feature is that
yogamäyä’s
intrinsic form is projected on mahämäyä as her
image. This
means that
yogamäyä replicates her own form and superimposes it on
mahämäyä, thus
bending her form but not her personality and
characteristics.
Mahämäyä is bereft of the qualities and fruits yogamäyä
possesses.
This truth is encrypted in the words of Brahma-Sütra –
mäyämatrantu. To
classify this point further we should bring in an analogy.
In the
phrase kärtsnyenäbhivyakta svarüpatvät, the word kärtsnyena
means ‘in
fullness’ and the prefix abhi also means ‘entirely’. In the shadow
of a
person we find the body’s image, but in this shadow we cannot find
any of the
person’s intrinsic qualities and characteristics, neither their
physical
features nor their personality. The white of the eyes, the beauty
and charm
of the face, the colour of the hair, the beauty spots or
birthmarks,
none can be observed in the shadow. Furthermore, if a
person’s
shadow merges with another’s shadow it will be impossible to
separate
them, even though the actual persons in front of the light retain
Concluding
Words
134
Beyond Nirväëa
their
individual, physical entity. Thus the shadow may give us a general
idea of
the actual object, but not its details and distinguishing features. A
shadow
does not reveal if its owner is a light-skinned or a dark-skinned
person. In
this way, the distinctions between yogamäyä and mahämäyä
function
on similar principles and while there may be some existing
similarities
between the world of mahämäyä and that of yogamäyä, they
are
eternally worlds apart. Observing the destructibility, mutability,
coarseness,
inferiority, and temporary nature of the creation, the universe
we live
in, it would be a gross inaccuracy to think that same characteristics
and nature
is to be found in the spiritual realm of Vaikuëöha.
Earlier we
spoke of shadows merging into one another, making it
impossible
for one to separately identify the persons from their shadow
or vice
versa. Now, even if two young men stand next to each other with
their
individual shadows falling separately, it would be extremely difficult
to
identify each individual. Using the following example we would like to
show the
difference between chäyä, shadow and pratibimba,
reflection.
Çaìkaräcärya
attempted to establish the falsity of this universe by taking
for
granted that the above two are one and the same. The moon does not
cast its
shadow on the water, but its reflection is seen on the surface of
the water.
If the water reflecting the moon is agitated, the moon’s reflection
also
quivers. This does not mean however that the moon itself is quivering.
This is
the basic difference between shadow and reflection (chäyä
and
pratibimba). Another
distinction is, when the person moves his right hand,
the shadow
does the same; but the reflection, since it faces the object or
person, it
seems to move the wrong hand – i.e. its (the reflected image’s)
left hand.
Therefore Çaìkaräcärya’s philosophical red herring was to equate
shadow
with reflection, thus further compounding the Mäyäväda
hypothesis.
Section
F
The
Six Vedic Philosophical Schools: Four of Them are
Atheistic
The
Mäyävädés are atheists, hence the atheist may think the Mäyävädés
belong in
their sampradäya, school of thought, which would make
Çaìkaräcärya
the founder of Mäyävädism also an atheist. Atheism at
present is
rampant in many forms and shapes and here we like to analyse
the
etymological aspect of the word ‘atheism’. Man uses language primarily
to
communicate. The scholars of etymology, in order to understand the
intrinsic
meanings of words, have discovered different branches of study
135
and
expression like grammar, poetry, philosophy etc. Regarding
philosophy,
there are various schools of thought in different parts of the
world. In India there are
six prominent schools of philosophy that have
after a
very long time arrived to the present day. These are mentioned
with their
main promulgator:
__ Kanada’s
atomic theory of Vaiçeñika
__ Gautama
Åiñi’s system of logic and rhetoric (Nyäya)
__ Sage
Kapila’s school
of Säìkhya
__ Pataïjali’s
Yoga system
__ Jamini’s
Mémäàsa (which argues that if there is a God, he is
not
omnipotent)
__ Çréla
Vyäsa’s Uttara-mémäàsa, also known by several names
like
Brahma-Sütra, Vedänta-darçana, Saririka-sütra etc.
Of these
six philosophical schools Nyäyä and Vaiçeñika both subscribe
to similar
views, while Säìkhya and Yoga also have much in common
philosophically.
These four are known in India
as atheistic schools. The
other two
schools, Purva-mémäàsa, and Uttara-mémäàsa, are considered
theistic
schools. Purva-mémäàsa poses many questions in the form of
theses,
which are then answered in the Brahma-Sütra. Çréla Vyäsa’s
philosophy,
which is delineated in these answers, is known as Uttaramémäàsa,
or
conclusive answers. The theistic philosophy can thus in its
strictest
sense, can be narrowed down to just this one school – Uttaramémäàsa
or
Vedanta-darçana. The others cannot be called theistic schools
of
philosophy in the true sense of the word.
The reason
why the first four schools of thought are termed atheistic
should be
discussed. They do not accept the authority of the Vedas, neither
do they
acknowledge the existence of God, the Supreme Being. These
four
schools are categorised as atheistic philosophical schools because to
date they
have never subscribed to the truth that there is a Supreme
Controller,
who is omnipotent, the energetic principal and who is the
Supreme brahman. The
general definition of the term ‘atheism’ or atheistic
is the
philosophy or person who does not accept the Supreme Being as
the
possessor of inconceivable potencies, as being omnipotent and as
capable of
making the impossible possible. They claim that the Vedic
scriptures
are mistaken by saying that God created the universe. The
personal
God or Supreme Controller is never mentioned in their
philosophy,
or written about anywhere in their books.
The
Buddhists also do not accept the existence of a Supreme Personality,
they do
not respect the Vedas or their precepts and thus they are atheists
who are
placed in the category of Mäyävädés. True religion must necessarily
Concluding
Words
136
Beyond Nirväëa
be
theistic. How can a religious philosophy claim to propagate theism
without
accepting God? Religion without God is a convenient theory for
conditioned
souls who have no understanding of human nature, the
material
world, the process of creation, and the ultimate purpose of their
existence.
Devout atheists are repulsed by the notion that they, like
everything
else in the cosmic creation, are under the control and
jurisdiction
of a Supreme Being. If they would only consider that eternal
happiness
can never be had by attempting to annihilate one’s identity in
void or brahman. If they
would rather submit themselves at the lotus-feet
of the
source of all bliss and happiness, the Supreme Personality of
Godhead,
their lives would be transformed.
Section
G
Mäyävädés
are Atheists
The
non-dualist Buddhists and the monist Çaìkaräcärya followers are
both
Mäyävädés and as such they are atheists. The derivative meaning of
nästika, atheist
is na + asti is nästi, meaning
‘that which does not exist’.
Those who
deliberate on philosophy based on the premises that nothing
exists are
called nästikas. All etymologists unanimously agree that the
definition
of an atheist is: one who sees everything as false (i.e. one who
has not
seen any true or real substance; one who constantly denies the
existence
of everything and has no information about the existence of
any real
substance).
The
atheists in general postulate that God does not have a form,
qualities,
personality, power, potency and energy. The continuously deny
the
existence of anything. The philosophers of the Çaìkaräcärya school
are the
main corroborators of this view of God and of this deductive
process of
knowledge. Despite this offensive stance the followers of the
Vedic
religion (Sanätana-dharma) have not ostracised them as they have
other
atheistic groups who do not accept the authority of the Vedas,
Upaniñadäs
etc. Çaìkaräcärya’s deception was soon exposed however,
since
neither the Vedas nor the Upaniñadäs concur either to atheistic
views, or
to philosophies promulgating that God is impersonal, impotent
etc. The
Vedic scriptures foretold that the quarrelsome, Iron Age of Kali
would be
permeated with atheism and the views of the asuras (demons).
The
demonic nature is envious of God because He is the transcendental
autocrat
and the ‘sole-enjoyer’, a position they can never assume. They
resent the
idea that human beings are only His part and parcel, who by
their
eternal constitution are meant to be enjoyed by the Supreme Enjoyer,
137
God. The
atheists adamantly refuse to accept the transcendental
philosophy
that they, like all other beings, are infinitesimal parts of the
Infinite
Whole. They are not attracted to the idea that as soon as they
forsake
this envious mentality and acquiesce to their eternally subordinate
position
to the Supreme, they will connect with a state of pure joy never
perceived
before.
By their
constant denial of the existence of a Supreme Enjoyer and
their
tireless struggle to destroy their individuality and existence by merging
into void
and brahman the only joy the Mäyävädés can experience is the
bliss of
deep ignorance. This is an ignorance of the intrinsic nature of
their
eternal self, of the nature of the temporary world they live in and the
nature of
the creator of both.
Om Tat Sat
(Continued...)
Post a Comment