Mayavada Khandanam

नरसिंहोखिलाज्ञानमतध्वान्तदिवाकरः। 

जयत्यमितसज्ज्ञानसुखशक्तिपयोनिधिः ।।

Mayavada Khandanam is one of the Ten Prakarana works composed by Sri Madhwacharya. It is also the first among a collection three texts of debate known as Khandana Traya (The three refutations). The three texts which constitute the Khandana Traya are Mayavada Khandanam, Mithyatvanumana Khandanam and Upadhi Khandanam. They are called as Prakaranas as they deal with only a subset of the originial objective of the Shastra to which they are a part.

Primary Objective

This is a very brief text that deals with the critisicm of Mayavada theory of the Advaita school. Its primary objective is to prove the untenability of Vedic interpretation put forth by the Advaita school. A text is said to be tenable (can be taken for serious study) if it satisfies the four essential requirements Anubandha Chatushtaya viz., – Vishaya, Prayojana, Adhikari and Sambhandha. All these four are shown to be lacking for the Advaita school.

Invocation

Through the invocation to Lord Sri Lakshmi Narasimha, Sri Madhwacharya sets off to establish the chief purport of the Vedic Scriptures. Lord Narasimha is like the sun who drives away all darkness (wrong knowledge). He is full of auspicious attributes. He is Supreme Lord and distinct from individual souls. This is the chief purport of all scriptures.

Advaita Theory

On the contrary, the Advaita school propunds that the essence of all scriptures is in the identity of the soul with Brahman. The individual soul, though identical to Brahman, falls to the Samsara due to ignorance. The scriptures are there to give him right knowledge of his oneness with Brahman, which removes all ignorance and facilitates him to realize himself as Brahman.

Logical Flaws in the Theory of Identity

In this text Sri Acharya questions the conclusions arrived at by the Advaita school. According to Him, the Advaitin's claim of the Identity of the individual soul with the Supreme Brahman (Advaita) to be the true purport of all scriptures is not tenable. It is not only against the conclusions of the established scriptures but also full of logical inconsistencies.

Logic - If such an interpretation is taken to be valid, it makes Scriptures worthless for serious study.

Supporting Logic – a) Anything that makes false claims becomes worthless for serious study b) Claiming the scriptures to propound identity is a false claim.

Conclusion - Hence to make the study of the scriptures worthwhile, advaita interpretation has to be rejected.

Why Identitiy is untenable in Advaita School?

Advaita school proupounds identity of souls with Brahman. But as per their own stand, only Brahman can be real. Everything else is unreal. In such a case, a question can be raised. Whether the identity, as an entity, is one with Brahman or different? The Advaitin cannot accept that the identity is non-different from Brahman. If that were to be the case, there remains no scope for Scriptures. Their study becomes futile as according to them, Brahman cannot be revealed by the scriptures as he is self-effulgent (Svayamprakasha). Anything that is of the nature of Brahman is also self-effulgent. As "identity" is accepted to be "non-different" from Brahman, and hence self-effulgent, there can be no ignorance about "identity". Hence, Advaintins claim that scriptures are useful because they clear ignorance becomes untenable.

Considering the flaws in the previous position, if the Advaitin accepts that the "identity" is different from Brahman, then it amounts to accepting two real entities, making the concept of Advaita invalid. In Advaita, there can only be one real entity. Accepting two real entities amounts to accepting Dvaita.

Knowledge of Brahman is not Knowledge of Advaita?

Considering the Dvaitins opposition, the Advaitin may put forth the following argument. Though Brahman is self-effulgent and already known, Advaita though non-different from Brahman can be concealed. To cite an example, a pot in the middle of a dark room is still known by feeling it. But, its colour, though non-different from the pot, remains concealed. This is because the colour is a Vishesha of the pot. In the same way, the Brahman can be known but not the Advaita. Hence scriptures are useful to reveal the Advaita.

This position of Advaita is not tenable as per their doctrine of Nirviseshatva of Brahman. Color is accepted by everyone as a Visesha of the Pot. Hence, one can have a conception of the Pot without its color. But Advaitin does not accept any Vishesha in Brahman. Hence, knowing Brahman amounts to knowing everything about Him and does not leave anything that can be known later.

There cannot be a veil of Ignorance

Due to Nirvisheshatva doctrine accepted by Advaita, scriptures stand without a purpose. In order to overcome this flaw, Advaitins may put forth a new argument regarding the purpose of scriptures. The role of the scriptures is to only remove the veil of ignorance that is cast over Brahman. Once the veil of igonrance is removed, Advaita is known by itself.

But such an argument is also not tenable. In Advaita, there is nothing that can come under the veil of ignorance. Could it be the very nature of the Brahman or one of his property that is veiled by ignorance? Neither of the above could be true. Brahman is self-effulgent; hence He cannot be veiled. Nor does the Brahman have any properties that can be vield.

Scriptures become redundant

If the Brahman knowns Himself and it is also accepted that the purpose of the scriptures is to tell about Brahman, then clearly, the scriptures become redundant. Not only that, as per the Advaita Theory, a valid Pramana is one which is not reduntant. Hence if the Advaitin accepts redundancy, the scriptures stand to lose their validity.

Implausibility of Ignorance per Advaita

Due to the untenable nature of Ignorance in Advaita, there is nothing to be known (Subject) nor any purpose thereto. Such a theory becomes unworthy of serious study.

Can "Mithyatva" be the subject of the scriptures?

If the Advaita school maintains that Mithatva is the subject matter of scriptures, then the scriptures become invalid because they speak about Mithyatva which is unreal.

Bheda is True

If Advaita is false then, its opposite Bheda is proved to be real. For among the opposites if one is absent the other is bound to be present.

Removal of Ignorance cannot be the purpose of scriputres

If ignorance were to be true, then the scriptures might be required to remove it. But, as the ignorance itself is accepted to unreal, the scriptures end up without any purpose.

Ignorance is accepted to be Sat-Asat-Vilakshana in Mayavada. Liberation according to them is a state devoid of ignorance. Such a Moksha is accepted to be Sat-Asat-Vilakshana-Vilakshana. As Sat-Asat-Vilakshana is itself is not plausible, the next order Sat-Asat-Vilakshana-Vilakshana becomes highly implausible.

There cannot be a seeker as per Advaita

One who has ignorance and has to fulfill a purpose is considered to be the seeker (Adhikari) of the scriptures. But such a person is untenable as per Advaita. There is no one ignorant (Brahman is the only real entity).

Conclusion

In this way, as the Advaita stands rejected, the Supremacy of Vishnu is established to be the correct purport of the Scriptures. This can be established by several authentic statements from Bhagavad Gita and the Brahma Sutras. Acharya concludes by establishing the Supremacy of Lord Vishnu as the only authentic meaning of the scriptures.

नास्ति नारायणसमं न भूतं न भविष्यति ।

एतेन सत्यवाक्येन सर्वार्थान् साधयाम्यहम् ।।