You are on page 1of 4

Mayavada-Khandana Teeka of Sri Jayatheertha is published in Kannada and Sanskrit PDF

downloadable format :

The three compositions named as Khandanas/Criticisms (Khandanatraya) are very short, but
contain a very lucid criticism of Advaita and other similar schools which postulate identity of the
soul with the supreme being.

Such a position originally postulated by Sankara’s Advaita has been taken in varying forms by
Ramanuja, Vallabha, Nimbaraka, etc.

The Prapancha Mithyattvanumana-Khandana demolishes the theory of unreality of the world,
which is prerequisite for the true Advaita doctrine.

The Upadhi-khandana criticizes the contrived explanations, which are unavoidable to support the
doctrine of identity, in the face of very obvious disparities between the Souls and God .

The Mayavada-Khandana deals with the Advaita Theory of the Unreality of worldly bondage
which is also a corollary of the premise that the soul is one with the supreme being.

Acharya Madhwa initialize the criticism by stating that Advaita sruti interpretation does not qualify
for being studied (Anarambhaniya) as it does not have the four fold essential requirements
(Anubandha Chatustaya) i.e.

1. Adhikarin(Qualified aspirant):

As per advaita one has to realize the hollowness of the world of pleasures and suffering, and
desire to liberate himself from the coils of Ajnana(Ignorance), which is the root cause.
As per tatwavada, the adhikarin is one who understands that the bondage in the world of births
and deaths
are real and that they can be overcome only by attaining Salvation/Mukti, by the grace of
Supreme Being. Having realized the futility of aspiring worldly pleasures, he develops resignation
instead and by constant practice attains the desirable qualities of Shama-(wisdom), Dama-(Self-

2. Visaya-(Subject Matter)
In advaita, the essential purpose and subject matter of Shastras is to establish the identity of the
soul with the supreme being.
In tatwavada, on the other hand, the Shruti, Smriti and the Brahma Mimamsa Shastra (which is
regarded as a guide in the correct interpretation of shruties, etc.) teach that Brahman is entirely
different from the world of Sentient beings and non-Sentient matter. He is also the embodiment of
all auspicious Qualities/Attributes and devoid of all blemishes/shortcomings.

3.Prayojana (Objective)
In Advaita when the aspirant understands the shastras correctly, his Ajnana, which is itself
unreal, is destroyed and the soul realizes his identity with Brahman, who has not attributes. He is
thus completely liberated from the worldly bondage.
In Tatwavada, correct understanding of the Supreme being and the five fold differences leads to
Aparoksha – (“Experiencing” of the Lord) and eventually by His grace, leads to
Mukti/liberation/salvation, which is full of Bliss. It is amplified that both the bondage and liberation
are real.

etc. Atman is nirvisesha (not having any qualities which can be defined or cognized separately ) there cannot be any such separate quality which is not cognized by the Svaprakash Atman. In other words. its colour is not. Hence the Advaita interpretation of Shastra suffers from the defect of stating that which is already known (Siddha Sadhanata) and hence is superfluous. Dvaita accepts the concept of Visesha due to which. a quality or an attribute such as dark colour of the object like the pot. If this is accepted by Advaita for the Atman. some feature of itself may not be known by it. Advaita has two possible answers at this stage: The Brahmathmaikya is different in essence from the Brahman itself. This defect is according to Dwaita concept of svaprakashatva of the soul which means Svavishayaprakashtvam – not being known by other means (such as mind etc. Vrittijnana. it is possible to argue that such Islands of ignorance can exist in a Svaprkasha Atman. – A writer of Advaita Khandanakara has written – Everything that is real is Brahma only .4. Dwaita answers: as per Advaita itself. 2nd alternative is to accept that such aikya is real in an absolute sense. but is not different from the Swaroopa or essence of Brahman. This means the Advaita itself is lost. though it is essentially one with itself.) the shastras cannot describe such an indescribable Atman by their own definition. even when aatman is svaprakasha. being Svaprakasha. The Visaya or subject for the Sastras is Advaita (Identity) cannot exist without first accepting the existence of Ajnana. which is not different from the soul cannot be so cognized. based on their nature. who is the only real. Aikya also being not the same as brahma is unreal. Advaita does not accept this concept. They quote the example though the possessor and its quality are identical ( GuNaGuniopi Abheda). but it is also absolutely real. Now Acharya Analyses : He first asks Advaitin : Whether the Aikya(union) of God with the soul is real or not ? In advaita. The accepted tenets of Advaita are all rejected on the basis of the non-acceptance of the concept of Ajnana. On the other hand. Aikya. Advaitin can counter this : Even when the swaroopa ( Essence) of the soul is known by it as a result of its Svaprakasha nature. Sambandha-(Relationships) Appropriate relationships exist between the three above named entities. is cognized separately. it cannot be argued that Aikya is not cognized by a Svaprakasha Atman. all that is part of its essence must always be cognized by Svaprakasha Atman. all entities other than Brahma. Brahma or Jiva must already know himself. To avoid this defect. Hence. the Shastras have to be accepted to say something which is not known before (by other means) which means that the Svaprakasha Jiva (who is already aware of Himself) is not aware of aikya which therefore cannot be his essence. though it is part of essence. whose existence is shown to be impossible. are unreal. when a pot is felt or cognized in darkness. the special feature of the soul/Brahma being one only is known and hence the defect of Siddha-Sadhanata is avoided. If aikya(Unity) is essentially Brahman Himself. Hence. Ajnana cannot exist .

it is stated that moksha which is of the nature of removal of Ajnana. He also establishes the gradation of souls by highlighting the quote from Bhagavadgita/Smriti ददववमम पप रषम ललकक करशचदकर एव च । करर सवदरवण भभतदवन कभ टसथलऽकर उचयतक ॥16॥ उतमर पप रषसतवनयर परमदतमक तयप ददहतर । यल ललकततरयमदववशय वबभतयरवयय ईशवरर ॥17॥ यसमदतकरमतततलऽहमकरददवप चलतमर । अतलऽवसम ललकक वक दक च पतरवथतर पप रषलतमर ॥18॥ यल मदमक वमसस ममभढल जदनदवत पप रषलतममत । स सवरववदतभजवत मदस सवरभदवक न भदरत ॥19॥ इवत गप हतमस शदसततरवमदमप कतस मयदऽनघ । एतददप धत वद बप दतवधमदनसयदतककतककतयशच भदरत ॥20॥ .for the reasons shown earlier – lack of vyapti relationship between Avarana and AvriyamaNa- Ajnana and its subject. Prayojana is not there as Ajnana iself cannot exist. the subject of Ajnana (that which is not known) cannot also exist. Sri Madhwa quotes from them to indicate the correct interpretations. there cannot be any prayojana for the Advaita Shastra. Dwaitin also argues that just as there is no Visaya (subject) there are no adhikari. as expounded both by shrutis (Vedas) and God Himself (who is the most reliable source for this information -Parama Aptatama) is the supreme greatness of Lord Vishnu and not identity of the soul with God. based on their own accepted Nyaya- logic. Therefore. when interpreted as preaching advaita. After having shown that Shastras led by the Vedas would have to be considered as Anarambhaniya (not to be studied) if the Advaita interpretation is accepted. Sri Jayathirtha says that the essence of all the shastras . as Atman is svaprkash. which is to remove the non-existent ajnana is also (non-existent) The final prayojana being Moksha. Smriti to amplify this. The aspirant cannot make efforts to achieve something which he already knows and is his essence Hence nothing is achieved by such efforts. in the absence of Ajnana. is the swarupa or essence of the Atman – Atman is already Siddha or established before commencing any efforts for attainment of Moksha. the prayojana or utility of the Advaita sastras. advaita cannot stipulate that Aikya is distinct from swaroopa of atman. it would be so known. Sri Vyasaraja states in his own inimitable way that the statement of Aikya by the Shastras (if they are stating as per advaita). which is of the nature of removal of the(non-existing)veil of Ajnana cannot also be attained. Hence. If it is so. An advaita text is quoted : Moksha is the extinction or complete removal of avidya(Ajnana) The prayojana of Advaita shastra is also shown to be non existent in another manner – in Istasiddhi . Aikya cannot be the visaya or subject of the shastras. obviously. saying that there is a pot in the middle of a brightly lit place to some one who is intently looking at it. prayojana etc for the shastras. the subject of such statement is well known and hence it cannot be included as a valid interpretation of the shastras. It has to accept that it is a part of its essence. Acharya Madhwa quotes extensively from Shruti. will be like some one. In the same manner.

When one cannot even imitate little of Him.इवनदतरयक भयर परद हथदरर अथर भयशचपरस मनर मनससतप परद बप दतवधर बप दक रदमद महदतन परर महतर परमवयकतमत अवयकतदतत पप रषर परर पप रषदतत न परस वकवञचतत सद कदषठद स परल गवतर In this manner. to aspire and profess the unity of soul with God. Thus ruling out any other interpretation. with Vishnu being the supreme being. the inner controller and sustainer of all such an entities. where is the question of Unity. Avyakta and the Soul. the soul attains Moksha. . who is the lord of Kamala. as well as by Vedas. like a garland of flowers and lead to his Grace. Sri Veda Vyasa himself ultimately confirms. by professing: नदवसत नदरदयण समस न भभतस न भववषयवत एतक सतववदकयक न सवदरथदरन सदधयदमयहमत Therefore it is epitome of ignorance. to show that there is difference (Bheda) between God. cannot be identical with the controlled and limited entities. gradations amongst themselves. which is removed only by knowledge of identity of the soul with God is thus shown to be totally baseless and invalid and also against the clear exposition of Lord Krishna Lord Vedavyasa in the Brahma Sutras. Sri Madhwa quotes Gita Texts and valid PramaNas from Smriti and Brahma Sutras. After establishing that Advaita cannot be the interpretation of the Shastras. the superiority of Vishnu has been concluded by God Himself. Advaita interpretation leading to the concept of eternal Bhava Rupa Avidya. knowing which. as the essential meaning of the shastras. that this is the essence of the sastras. Sri Jayatheertha concludes his Teeka with a summarizing verse: वचनपतरसभनमदलद जयततथदरखयक नवभकप णद रवचतद वधतरयतदस सदयक हदयक कमलमवहलक न पप रषक ण Let this composition of words composed by Jayatirtha Bhiksu adorn the supreme being. He also quotes the solemn promise of the supreme Lord himself.