SRI MADHWAVIJAYA - PANCHAMAHA SARGAHA - STANZAS 6 AND 7

(In the sixth stanza, the defeat of some scholars  has been exposed. Please read, comment and share. SDN)

Logicians surrender

HEtOrativyAptiravAdi tairyadA sakautukaistUrNamasAvavismayaha|

Na shuktirUpyAdi matam yadanyaThAmatam tadityAdivadan jigAya tAn||6||

SUMMARY: Puzzled by the retort, they (Logicians) tried to counter Sri Poornaprajna by stating that ‘whatever is being seen is true is infinitive’. Sri Madhwa then said that the concept of truth should be purported by tangible evidence as otherwise it would suffer from a fallacy called unsound analogy by citing the example of a shell, which might appear like silver as it shines under sunlight. This cannot actually be accepted since it is based on fake or false or incomplete and mistaken knowledge. The Logicians conceded their complete defeat after Sri Poornaprajna proved their contentions as erroneous.  

Details of this debate and defeat of Logicians are available in PrapanchamithyatwAnumAna Khandana, TattvOdyOta, ViShNutattwanirNaya” and other works of Sri Madhwacharya.

Bhavaprakashika mentions:

GhaTAdinidarshanamasampratipannamiti chEt shuktirajatAdi cha bADhyatwAdasatvEnAnuBhUyamAnam sadasadvilakShaNatayA na sampratipannam” Tat sADhayiShyatE cEdidam pratyakShENa sADhitamityuttaramiti ityAdishabdABhiprEtam|

  

TatvE(a)pyatattvE vimatE(a)numAm vadamstadapratiShThAm pratipAdukaha swayam|

Vijitya vishwAn viduShaha saBhAswasau jagAma nAmnA(a)pyanumAnateerThatAm||7||

SUMMARY: Thus Sri Madhwacharyaru became popular as “Anumanatirtharu” in scholarly conventions by effectively proving that Logic or logical analyses alone cannot be an independent proof as he pointed out, demonstrated and contended through counter argument, that there are lose ends, inconsistency and inadequecies in theology and insensible hypotheses.

Debators indulge in wilful argument with the power of their eloquence, dexterity and some inherent capacity. However, hypotheses, like Pratyaksha and Agama, cannot stand as a concrete, perceptible and undoubtable verdict. This is what Sri Madhwacharyaru has substantiated and demonstrated here.

Sri Madhwacharyaru liberally drew from Brahmasootras, explained the inner meaning and proved that whatever others were contending with Pratyaksha and Agama citations was dubious, untenable and hence unacceptable. Since it was Sri Madhwacharyaru who first demonstrated the correct status of hypothetical and illusory theories, he came to be known as Anumana Tirtharu, where Anumana means hypothesis. Hy also decried the supremacy of logical interpretation and said that logic alone cannot be conceived as the ultimate knowledge.

“TarkatAnDava” by Sri Vyasarajaru dwells in detail on how Sri Poornaprajnaru pushed or dumped the various theories that were existing then.