The Tattva-Muktavali — Gaudapurnanandacakravarti
You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org . If you are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this eBook. Title : The Tattva-Muktavali Author : active 17th century Gaudapurnanandacakravarti Translator : Edward B. Cowell Release date : December 1, 2004 [eBook #7175] Most recently updated: December 30, 2020 Language : English Other information and formats : www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/7175 Credits : Originally scanned at sacred-texts.com by John B. Hare. This eBook was produced by Chetan K. Jain *** START OF com by John B. Hare. This eBook was produced by Chetan K. Jain THE TATTVA-MUKTAVÂLÎ by Pûr.nânanda Chakravartin JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL ASIATIC SOCIETY. [New Series, Volume XV] [London, Trübner and Company] [1883] {Scanned and edited by Christopher M. Weimer, April 2002} ART. IV.—__The Tattva-muktavâlî of Gau.da-pûr.nânanda-chakra- vartin__. Edited and Translated by Prof. E. B. COWELL. The following poem was written by a native of Bengal, named Pûr.nânanda Chakravartin. Nothing is known as to his date; if the work were identical with the poem of the same name mentioned in the account of the Râmânuja system in Mâdhava's Sarvadaršanasa.mgraha, it would be, of course, older than the fourteenth century, but this is very uncertain; I should be inclined to assign it to a later date. The chief interest of the poem consists in its being a vigorous attack on the Vedânta system by a follower of the Pûr.naprajña school, which was founded by Madhva (or Ânandatîrtha) in the thirteenth century in the South of India. Some account of his system (which in many respects agrees with that of Râmânuja) is given in Wilson's "Hindu Sects;" [Footnote: Works, vol. i. pp. 139-150. See also Prof. Monier Williams, J.R.A.S. Vol. XIV. N.S. p. 304.] but the fullest account is to be found in the fifth chapter of the Sarvadaršanasa.mgraha. Both the Râmânujas and the Pûr.naprajñas hold in opposition to the Vedânta [Footnote: As the different systems are arranged in the Sarva D. S. according to the irrespective relation to the Vedânta, we can easily understand why Mâdhava there places these two systems so low down in the scale, and only just above the atheistic schools of the Chârvâkas, Buddhists, and Jainas.] that individual souls are distinct from Brahman; but they differ as to the sense in which they are thus distinct. The former maintain that "unity" and "plurality" are equally true from different points of view; the latter hold that the relation between the individual soul and Brahman is that of a master and a servant, and consequently that they are absolutely separate. It need not surprise us, therefore, to see that, although Râmânuja is praised in the fifty-third sloka of this poem as "the foremost of the learned," some of his tenets are attacked in the eightieth. The Sanskrit text of this poem was published in the Benares Pa.n.dit for Sept. 1871, by Pa.n.dit Vechârâma Šarman. An edition, with a Bengali translation, was also published some years ago in Calcutta, by Jagadânanda Goswâmin; [Footnote: No date is given.] but the text is so full of false readings of every kind, and the translation in consequence goes so often astray, that I have not found much help from it. I have collated the text in the Benares Pa.n.dit (A.) with a MS. (B.) sent to me by my friend, Pa.n.dit Mahešachandra Nyâyaratna, the Principal of the Calcutta Sanskrit College. He has also sent me the readings in certain passages from two MSS. in the Calcutta Sanskrit College Library (C.D.); and I have to thank him for his help in explaining some obscure allusions. The poem itself seems to me an interesting contribution to the history of Hindu philosophical controversy, [Footnote: Dr. Banerjea has quoted and translated several stanzas in his 'Dialogues on Hindu Philosophy.'] and so I have subjoined a literal English translation. I would venture to remind my readers of the words of the manager in the prologue of the Mâlavikâgnimitra, "Every old poem is not good because it is old, nor is every modern poem to be blamed simply because it is modern." TRANSLATION. 1. Victorious is the garland-wearing foster-son of Nanda,—the protector of his devotees,—the destroyer of the cruel king,— dark-blue like the delicate tamâla blossoms,—formidable with his many outspread rays,—mighty with all his attendant powers, [Footnote: The Bengali translation explains these as the internal powers (__antara"ngâ__) Hlâdinî, etc., and the external (__bahira"ngâ__) Prahvâ, etc.]—and having his forehead radiant like the moon. 2. This follower of the Purâ.nas, who holds by his own belief, reads to his heart's content the Purâ.na in the morning, and he listens devotedly with profound meditation, his whole mind intent on the meaning of the book. 3. Having abandoned the doctrine of the oneness of the individual and the Supreme Soul, he establishes by argument their mutual difference; having used Šruti and Šm.riti as a manifold proof, he employs Inference in many ways in the controversy. 4. This individual soul must be different from Brahman because it is always circumscribed,—many are the similar arguments which are to be acknowledged in the course of our reasonings. 5. "Might we not say that a jar and a web could be called identical because both are cognizable?" [Footnote: There is a favourite Naiyâyik example of a __kevalânvayi__ middle term, "a jar is nameable because it is cognizable as a web is."] But we cannot say so in regard to these two things in question, for Brahman alone is that which cannot be cognized. 6. The sentence "Thou art That" (__tat tvam asi__) which is understood in its primary meaning as referring to the object of the Veda, [Footnote: Or __vedavishaye__ may perhaps simply mean __vede__, cf. šl. 112.]—the author thus explains its meaning, as he knows his own doctrine, and has fixed his