H.H The Jeeyar elaborated on the five incorrect views
(pakshams) that define the five different mathams:
A. Aathmaikya Paksham of Yaadhava Prakaasan
B. Dhevathaikya Paksham
C. Thrimoorthy Saamya paksham
D. Thrimoorthy Eikhya paksham
E. Anyathra Isvarya paksham
These 5 mathams are very important to understand in the context of the
correctness of Sri VisishtAdhvaitham as proven by Swami Desikan in Tattva
Muktha Kalaapa, Sarvaartha Siddhi (a commentary on the latter) and Srimath Rahasya
Thraya Saaram. I will try to summarize them , although they are difficult Vedanthic
concepts and will defy brief descriptions.
A.Aathmaikya Paksham of Yaadhava Prakaasaa
This system of philosophy is known as the BhEdhAbhEdha Vaadam and is attributed to
BhaaskarA and Yaadhava PrakaasA. This is a powerful school of VedanthA at one time,
as seen from the lengthy steps taken by Sudarsana Soori to refute the above darsanam
following the lines of AchArya RaamAnujA's Sri Bhaashyam. BhEdhAbhEdham means literally,
identity in difference.
The issue is related to how one can explain the material causality of Brahman?
For reference, a lump of clay is the material cause (upAdAna Kaaranam) for an
earthern pot. How does Brahman, which upanishads assert as immutable transform
into the universe? How is the material casuality of Brahman accounted for without
affecting the svarUpam of Brahman?
BhaskarA and YaadhavaprakAsA accounted for this by stating that Brahman itself
transforms into the material universe. This is generally recognized as BRAHMA
-PARINAAMA - VAADHAM.
VisishtAdhvaithins connected Brahman with chEthanam and AchEthanam
sentient/chith and insentient/achith) and held that the subtle form
of assoication of Brahman with Chith and achith (Sookshama - chith- achidh
visishta form) is how one can explain the material causality of Brahman.
This is a considered a modified form of BRAHMA-PARINAAMA-VAADHAM.
Advaithins had the view based on the illusory nature of the universe.
They held that Brahman is the basis of the illusory appearance of of the universe
IS its material cause. Vedantha Desika classed this view as Vivartha Vaadham
and dismissed both the Advaithin's and the Yaadhava prAkAsaa's views following
the line of AchArya RaamAnujA and established the soundness of VisishtAdhvathic
darsanam.
In YaadhavaprakAsA's (YP's) matham, Brahman has three fold power (sakthi)
and it transforms into chith, achith and Isvara sakthis. Brahman, which is
being (sath) transforms itself into a triadic form, while maintaining its
svarUpam unchanged although its sakthi undergoes transformation. In YP's
matham, Brahman undergoing threefold changes (BhEdham) as Chethanam,
Achethanam and Isvaran, while the svarUpam of Brahman remains unchanged
(abEdham). SwamiDesikan rejects this view as unsound on the basis that
acceptance of bhEdham and abEdham in one breath amounts to self-contradiction.
This aathmaikyam (the identity of aathmA/Paramaathma with prapancham (material
universe) is thus rejected.
B. dEvathaikya Paksham
This accepts that Brahman, ChEthanam and AchEthanam
are distinctly different. But, it commits the blunder by holding the view that
there is no difference between dEvAs like BrahmA, RudrA, Indran and ParamAthmA
(BhagavAn/Isvaran). This point of view promulgates that the aathmA underlying
all of them is one and the same. Since the same aathmA is present in the bodies
of both BhagavAn and devathAs according to this view, it leads to the conclusion
that there is no difference between the supreme God and the demi-Gods. Our
SiddhAntham in distinct contrast recognizes limitless jeevans occupying
limitless sarirams while our Lord shines as the antharyAmi of all these
multitudinous Jeevans. Swami Desikan rejects this view as well.
C. ThrimUrthy Saamya paksham
This point of view overcomes the inherent
limitation of the dEvathaikya paksham. It recognizes that the bodies of
BrahmA-VishNu-Rudhran house different aathmAs. Those three aathmAs have
the six auspicious attributes of Jn~Anam, Sakthi, Bhalam, Eisvaryam,
Veeryam and Tejas in the same measure. These six attributes associated
with the three aathmAs belonging to Brahma-VishNu-Rudhran are considered
identical in value. There is no thAra Tamyam in these GuNams. They have
saamyam or identical value among the thrimUrthys. This view recognizes
that other DevAs like Agni, Indran will have less or more of each of
the six guNAs, but not the thrimUrthys.
Our siddhAntham based on Sruthis assert that Brahma and Rudran are karma
vasyAs, who derive their origin/power from Sriman naarAyaNA and the Lord
takes on the incarnation of VishNu from para VaasudEva Roopam. VishNu is
not born like Rudran and BrahmA. Jeevans like BrahmA and Rudran are born
because of their karmAs and that VishNu is not born, but is an avathAram
of Sriman NaarAyaNA.
D. ThrimUrthy Eikhya paksham
Here, a subtle change is made from the
above ThrimUrthy Saamya Paksham. Here the sarirams of the thrimUrthys
are recognized as different, but the same aathmA resides inside all
the three. All the other devathAs would have aatham bhEdham, but not
these three.
When one takes into account pramANams such as "aadhyO
NaarAyaNOdhEva:tasmaath BrahmA tathO Bhava:",it is hard to support
either the ThrimUrth Eikhya or Saamya pakshams. The first and foremost
Jagadh KaaraNam is Sriman naarAyaNan in our sampradhAyam and hence
views 3 & 4 are rejected. We believe in the PramANam:
"AadhyO naarayaNa: deva:, ParO NaaraayaNa: deva: (He is the
first and ancient as well as the supreme devan : para devathai).
E. Anyathra Eisvarya Paksham
This view is known as utthIrna vaadham.
This view holds that VishNu because He is part of the trinity can not
have jagath KaaraNathvam and hence there must be yet another (anyathra Isvaran)
beyond the Trinity, who must have jagath kaaraNathvam. In this vaadham
known also as VyOmAdhitha vaadham, VishNU's status as an incarnation of
para Vaasudevan is deemphasized and He is lumped with BrahmA and Rudran.
This view is therefore not acceptable to us based on PramANams once again.
What is acceptable after rejecting the above five pakshams?
The theme of the sixth chapter, ParadEvathA PaaramArthya adhikhAram deals
at great length about this subject and establishes unambigously that Sriman
NaarAyaNA is the Para dEvathai and that is the true status (paaramArthyam)
among all gods. Swami says in the second half of the introductory slOkam of
the sixth chapter that all the VedAs announce Sriman NaarAyaNA's supremacy
in a united voice (Yekha kantam) as well as Sage VyAsaa and other great ones:
thrayyanthi: yEkha KaNtai: tadhanuguNamanu:VyAsamukhyOkthibhisccha
What do they say? They say clearly that Sriman NaarAyaNan is the supreme
Lord to All and has the chEthanams and achEthanams as His body; He is the
one and only One, who can grant us Moksham and He is the One, who is enjoyed
by the Muktha Jeevans:
Sriman NaarAyaNO na: pathirakhila tanu: mukthidhO MukthabhOgya:
Thus the refutation of the five points of view leaves us convinced that Sriman
NaarAyaNan is para Tatthvam and He is the Sarva sEshi to us all and is our
Supreme Swami. Manu Smruthi, MahA Bharatham, Sri VishNu PurANam provide us
the PramANams to recognize Sriman NaarAyaNan as Jagadh KaaraNan and Para Tatthvam.
H.H. The Jeeyar pointed to us that all of the above are incorrect and
misleading views and have to be rejected following the upadesam of Swami
Desikan. He asked us to accept the view that Sriman Naaraayanan is our Para
Dhaivam beyond any shadow of doubt and He is the Sarva Seshi having all the
chethanams and achethanams as His body. He is the only One, who has the
power to grant us Moksham and He is the One enjoyed by Mukthaas. He is
the Upaayam, upeyam and phalan. Such a dhaivam is the Para Dhaivam,
who has to be approached, worshipped for performing prapatthi. H.H.
the Jeeyar profusely quoted from Sruthis and Divya Prabhandhams to
support this view of Sriman Naaraayanan as PARA DEVATHAI and His
Supremacy over all the other subservient Devathaas. H.H. The Jeeyar
appealed to us to reject any incorrect views (Vipareetha pakshams)
that do not recognize Sriman Naaraayanan as the Para Devathai and fail
to establish His paaramaarthyam.