home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
Path: senator-bedfellow.mit.edu!faqserv From: Dvaita FAQ maintainer <info -at- dvaita.org> Newsgroups: soc.religion.vaishnava,soc.culture.indian,soc.culture.indian.karnataka,alt.magick.tyagi,alt.answers,soc.answers,news.answers Subject: soc.religion.vaishnava -- Dvaita FAQ Supersedes: <religions/vaishnava/dvaita-faq_931524737@rtfm.mit.edu> Followup-To: poster Date: 24 Jul 1999 11:49:29 GMT Organization: Poornaprajna Samshodhana Mandiram <ppsmb -at- dvaita.org> Lines: 659 Approved: news-answers-request@MIT.EDU Distribution: world Expires: 21 Aug 1999 11:48:18 GMT Message-ID: <religions/vaishnava/dvaita-faq_932816898@rtfm.mit.edu> Reply-To: Dvaita FAQ maintainer <info -at- dvaita.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: penguin-lust.mit.edu Summary: This is a small intro to the Dvaita school of philosophy, for current or prospective subscribers of the Dvaita Mailing List and Dvaita Digest. Keywords: noarchive, Vedanta, Vaishnava, Hindu, India, philosophy, religion, logic, epistemology X-Last-Updated: 1998/11/21 X-Url: http://www.dvaita.org/ Originator: faqserv@penguin-lust.MIT.EDU Xref: senator-bedfellow.mit.edu soc.religion.vaishnava:5375 soc.culture.indian:634824 soc.culture.indian.karnataka:24443 alt.magick.tyagi:18065 alt.answers:43313 soc.answers:12154 news.answers:162988 Archive-Name: religions/vaishnava/dvaita-faq Posting-Frequency: every 14 days Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) for Tattvavaada, a.k.a. Dvaita Last Updated: November 21, 1998 Dvaita Home Page http://www.dvaita.org/ Dvaita FAQ (web version) http://www.dvaita.org/faq.html Dvaita FAQ maintainer info -at- dvaita.org Dvaita List -- archive http://www.dvaita.org/list/ Dvaita List/Digest help http://www.dvaita.org/list/help.html Dvaita List -- subscription dvaita-list-request -at- dvaita.org Dvaita Digest -- subs. dvaita-digest-request -at- dvaita.org Dvaita List -- admin list -at- dvaita.org Haridasa Home Page http://www.dvaita.org/haridasa/ Haridasa FAQ (web version) http://www.dvaita.org/haridasa/faq.html Haridasa FAQ maintainer haridasa -at- dvaita.org NOTE: Throughout this document, every occurrence of ` -at- ' in e-mail addresses should be understood as an occurrence of the symbol `@'; the substitution is made to avoid spam coming to these addresses, and any difficulty caused on this account is regretted. Contents: I. General information; the Dvaita Mailing List and Dvaita Digest II. Frequently asked questions about Maadhva siddhaanta III. Appendix A: terms commonly used in Tattvavaada (A) General terms and their definitions (B) Error terms and their definitions (1) Semantic errors (2) Logical errors IV. Appendix B: Disclaimer and restrictions I. General information: ----------------------- TO SUBSCRIBE TO THE DVAITA MAILING LIST OR DVAITA DIGEST: Send a message with just the one word `subscribe' (no quotes) in the Subject, to the appropriate request address -- dvaita-list-request -at- dvaita.org for the list, and dvaita-digest-request -at- dvaita.org for the digest; to receive a help file with more details about the Dvaita list and digest, send a message with subject `help' to the same address, or refer to http://www.dvaita.org/list/help.html for the web version. See questions 18 and later below if your query relates to the mailing list or digest. This document is auto-posted to the newsgroups soc.religion.vaishnava, soc.culture.indian, soc.culture.indian.karnataka, alt.magick.tyagi, alt.answers, soc.answers, and news.answers every two weeks. To obtain a copy of this document, send a message to info -at- dvaita.org with `send dvaita faq' as the subject; the body of your message will be discarded. As with other periodic postings approved by the *.answers team, this FAQ can also be had by anonymous ftp to rtfm.mit.edu, in the directory /pub/usenet/news.answers/religions/vaishnava/dvaita-faq (ftp://rtfm.mit.edu/pub/usenet/news.answers/religions/vaishnava/dvaita-faq if you're using a web browser). If you do not have access to anonymous ftp, you can obtain a copy by sending mail to mail-server@rtfm.mit.edu, with the command "send usenet/news.answers/religions/vaishnava/dvaita-faq" (no quotes) in the body of the message. You can also look up this document on the World-Wide Web, at the address http://www.dvaita.org/faq.html; this address and the Dvaita Home Page are inter-reachable. Because of the possibility of using hypertext links, quotes, etc., on the web version, that location is probably better for you to refer to if you have any choice. If you find this document hard to understand in certain respects, then it may help you to read the general FAQ for the UseNet newsgroup soc.religion.vaishnava, available by sending a message to the address info -at- dvaita.org with `send srv faq' as the subject. II. Frequently Asked Questions: ------------------------------ 1> What is Dvaita? Dvaita, or Maadhva siddhaanta, is the name for the doctrine of Vedanta that asserts the eternal and immutable difference between the individual soul, or jiiva, and the Supreme Lord, or Iishvara (also known as Vishnu). 2> Why is Dvaita known as Tattvavaada? Because that is the correct, and preferred name; the doctrine asserts _five_ differences, not just the one referred to above, and its scholars and proponents call it the "doctrine of reality," where the three kinds of entities in the universe (insentient or jaDa, sentient or chetana, and Vishnu or Iishvara) are all real, and the differences between any two are also real. Hence, 'tattva' means real entity, and 'Tattvavaada' means "doctrine of real entities." Some have also referred to Tattvavaada as Bheda-vaada (doctrine of difference), and also as Bimba-pratibimba-vaada (doctrine of object and image -- to be explained later), etc. These names are not in normal use. 3> What are the five differences in Tattvavaada? Simple -- by considering the three types of entities in pairwise fashion, one can derive the list of differences between them, which are: (i) jiiva-Iishvara-bheda, or difference between the soul and Vishnu; (ii) jaDa-Iishvara-bheda, or difference between the insentient and Vishnu; (iii) mitha-jiiva-bheda, or difference between any two souls; (iv) jaDa-jiiva-bheda, or difference between insentient and the soul; and (v) mitha-jaDa-bheda, or difference between any two insentients. Here, "insentient" is used to refer to _all_ entities which are not 'chit' or having consciousness, such as matter, energy, etc. -- including so-called "living bodies" of creatures, and also such other insentients as space, linguistic or mathematical entities and their symbols, etc. To clarify: Iishvara is a sentient Being, and the jiiva is sentient also. However, this does not imply that both are fully alike; Iishvara is totally independent, while the jiiva is completely dependent. It is the energization by the Iishvara that is the responsible for the activity of the jiiva. 4> Why are the five differences important? The understanding of these five differences is seemingly trivial, but upon careful consideration, one sees that to properly understand all of them, one needs to know the significant properties of every kind of entity in the whole universe! Thus, such understanding is not easily gained, and it is said that _all_ misery and unhappiness is due to one's lack of understanding of one or more of these differences. For instance, if one acts in ignorance of the Supremacy of Lord Vishnu, and suffers as a consequence, then one can be said to have falsely arrogated to oneself His unique and irreproducible properties like independence, potency, etc. Similarly, the grief one experiences due to loss of physical beauty, strength, vitality, etc., or due to the passing of a loved one, is due to the false identification of the insentient and ever-changing body with the sentient, immutable soul. In the mundane world, mistaking copper for gold, glass for diamond, etc., which are also failures to perceive difference, are known to bring grief. One who correctly and fully perceives and understands all the five differences can be said to have attained knowledge, and to be fit for mukti (liberation). 5> Who is the founder of Tattvavaada? As has been noted in the general FAQ, no school of Vaishnavism can be said to have been "founded" in a true sense; in historical times, the doctrine of Tattvavaada was revived by Ananda Tiirtha (1239-1319), also known as Sukha Tiirtha, PuurNa-bodha, and PuurNa-pragnya. Srimad Ananda Tiirtha is identified with Madhva, the third avataara (incarnation) of Mukhya PraaNa, the god of life. This identification comes from the BaLitthaa Suukta of the Rg Veda. Srimad Ananda Tiirtha is also referred to by his devotees as Srimad Aachaarya, and by everyone as Sri Madhvaachaarya, based on the identification with the Vedic deity Mukhya PraaNa, the god of life, who is also known as Vaayu. A detailed disquisition upon the BaLitthA Suukta can be seen at http://www.dvaita.org/madhva/AnandaT_2.html 6> What are the tenets of Tattvavaada? There are nine important points-of-note, given by a verse by Sri Vyaasa Tiirtha, which translates approximately as: "In Shriiman Madhva's school, (i) Hari (Vishnu) is supreme; (ii) the universe is real; (iii) the [five] differences are real [and are the properties of the differents]; (iv) the leagues of jiivas are cohorts of Hari; (v) and are with superiority and inferiority [among themselves]; (vi) mukti (salvation) is the experience of [the jiiva's] own innate joy; (vii) that is achieved by flawless devotion to the Supreme and correct knowledge; (viii) the three pramaaNas are aksha, etc., (pratyaksha, anumaana, aagama - sense-perception, logic, and scripture); (ix) Hari is the only entity [primarily] described in all Aamnaayas (Shrutis or Vedas)." A slightly more detailed treatment of the verse can be seen at http://www.dvaita.org/shaastra/prameya.html 7> Why does Tattvavaada emphasize debate with and denunciation of other doctrines? Can it not just just state its own tenets? In order to correctly understand the tenets of _any_ worthwhile doctrine, is it essential that one be exposed to conflicting views, and be convinced of the truth of said doctrine. Therefore, Srimad Aachaarya's school has always held that one needs must understand all relevant countervailing hypotheses, and must reject them _only_ after careful analyses and consideration. Mere dogmatic repetition of facts that are accepted too readily either by accident of birth or inability to think, is not acceptable as such cannot lead to conviction; a critical examination of all Tattvavaada precepts with a detailed analysis of alternative theories in each case -- to arrive at the truth based on valid proof -- is itself part of the tradition of Srimad Ananda Tiirtha's school. Though this practice has been followed earlier by Sri Shankaraachaarya and Sri Ramanujaachaarya also in essence, their criticisms of rival theories were not complete and comprehensive. 8> Isn't Dvaita the mere opposite of Advaita? Such misperception is one of the reasons why some reject the use of 'Dvaita' to refer to the doctrine of Tattvavaada. While it is true that Advaita and Tattvavaada have had many debates over hundreds of years, and that the latter denies the jagan-mithyatva (illusory nature of the universe) that is one of the fundamental tenets of Advaita, it is certainly not the case that there is disagreement everywhere, nor is it the case that one can derive Tattvavaada merely by taking the opposite of everything claimed by Advaita. But it can be said with full certainty that on most fundamental issues such as the nature of Iishvara, jiiva, attainment of mukti, etc., the two have total and irreconcilable differences. 9> Isn't Dvaita the first step towards learning Advaita? If it is, then it is a quite large, reverse, first step! While adherents of Advaita say that by nature and everyday experience one believes in the reality of the universe, etc., and that such belief must be got rid if one is to attain complete union with the nirguNa-Brahman, no serious scholar of Advaita claims that studying Tattvavaada is a first step towards learning Advaita. For one thing, it is a rule of all learning that things learned first must not contradict things learned later; for another, Tattvavaada specifically examines and denounces many Advaita concepts, and hence, one who has learned Tattvavaada first cannot possibly accept Advaita later. In fact Advaitha has not built up a credible system of analysis where the puurva paksha or the initial proposition of Tattvavaada is examined and rejected thereby establishing Advaita. The exact reverse obtains today. 10> Why are scholars and devotees of Sri Madhvaachaarya's school referred to as "prachchhanna taarkika"? This tongue-in-cheek appellate was allegedly affixed by some followers of Advaita, who were piqued at being called "prachchhanna bauddha" (disguised Buddhists). This latter designation was used because of the great similarity between Buddhism and Advaita (both schools do not accept the reality of the universe, both deny that the Creator is an eternal real, etc.). In turn, Advaitis labeled devotees of Srimad Aachaarya as "prachchhanna taarkika" (disguised logicians) because of the latters' use of logic to show that Advaita is inconsistent. 11> How does worship by Maadhvas differ from other Vaishnava worship? According to Sri Madhvaachaarya, Vishnu is "worshippable by all (other) deities, and by everyone, to their best ability." Thus, in common with other Vaishnava traditions, Maadhvas worship other deities only as iconic representatives of the Lord, and not as independently authoritative figures. However, Maadhvas believe that all deities except for Vishnu's eternal consort Lakshmi, are amukta-jiivas (un-liberated souls) performing service to Him. Tattvavaada also does not acknowledge that worship of other claimed deities or prophets, besides those authorized by shaastra, is useful. Maadhvas have a "taaratamya" or divine hierarchy of deities after Vishnu, which is derived from shaastra sources, and said hierarchy is very important in considerations of worship, since each lesser deity is worshipped as the iconic representative of the next higher one, with the idea being that all worship is ultimately meant for Vishnu only. Thus, Maadhvas acknowledge a hierarchy of worth among deities other than Vishnu, and say that each lesser deity is akin to an image in a mirror, of the one higher. This concept of images captures both the notion of difference (since the object and its image are not identical) and an hierarchy of worth (since the image is never of the same worth as the object), and is what causes Tattvavaada to also be referred to as Bimba-pratibimba-vaada (doctrine of object and image, as mentioned previously). Worship according to Srimad Aachaarya's tradition also differs from certain other kinds of worship, since the icons or images used for worship are considered to be completely distinct from the Deity who is the actual object of worship. The icon is an adhishThaana, or location symbol, while the Deity is invoked for purposes of worship. Tattvavaada emphasizes that it is important to understand the difference between the adhishThaana (Image) and the aavaahita (invoked Diety), and to keep it in mind at all times -- one should never worship the icon itself as the Lord, as that would be violative of jaDa-Iishvara-bheda, one of the five kinds of difference. According to Srimad Ananda Tiirtha, icons are of two kinds: "chala-pratimaa" or "moving icon," and "achala pratimaa" or "non-moving icon." The "chala" icons are one's elders, Gurus, other deities besides Vishnu, etc., while the "achala" icons are statues, statuettes, pictures, saaligramas etc., that may also be used as icons for worship. Of the two kinds of icons, the "chala" have a naturally higher rank than the "achala" -- therefore, service to elders, one's Gurus, etc., when performed as worship of the Lord, is of greater importance than the worship of stationary symbols. However, at all times, it is important to be aware that the object or person to whom one offers service or respect, is not the Lord Himself, nor is authoritative independently of Him, but is merely His icon. A detailed account of worship at the Krishna temple in Udupi can be seen at: http://www.dvaita.org/madhva/udupi/worship.html 12> What is the Tattvavaada concept of moksha? Under Tattvavaada, the soul upon liberation does not lose his distinct identity, which is different from Vishnu, nor does he become equal to Him in any respect. While the mukta does become free of all suffering, his enjoyment is not of the same caliber as His, nor does said mukta become independent of Him. The mukta experiences the joy which is his own nature, in mukti; whereas in daily life, joy derives from the contact of senses with sense-objects, joy in mukti is due to the jiiva's own immutable nature. And because such joy is the jiiva's own nature, it does not fluctuate or end, and it is not mixed with pain. Since the nature of the jiiva is different from that of Iishvara, his joy is also of a different nature than His, even upon mukti. Even the joy which is intrinsic to the nature of the jiiva can only be realised due to the grace of the Supreme being. 13> Why does Tattvavaada deny jiivan-mukti? Because a mukta, or liberated person, should not even be physically present in the material universe, unlike the un-liberated. A person who is living in the world cannot be said to be free of sorrow born of material contact, and also cannot be said to experience the joy of his own nature at all times. The very act of living in a gross material body entails things such as eating, sleeping, pleasure and pain, etc., which cannot be accepted in a mukta. 14> What is the concept of scripture, according to Tattvavaada? The apowrusheya-aagamas, or unauthored scriptures, are the primary sources of all knowledge of the atiindriya (extra-sensory) entities. Only those powrusheya-aagamas or authored scriptures that closely adhere to the former have value as explanatory sources of knowledge about the atiindriya. Independent powrusheya texts are considered to bring ignorance and delusion, if used to learn about the atiindriya. In common with other schools of Vaishnavism, Tattvavaada considers the prasthaana-traya (the triad of the Brahma-Suutra, the Bhagavad Gita, and the Vedas and Upanishads) to be canonical texts. Srimad Ananda Tiirtha however denies claims that part of the Vedas, the so-called "karma-kaaNDa" or "mantra" portions, are of no use as scripture, and claims that even those parts are only meant to educate us about Hari. His school, following his lead, also does not accept that any part of the Vedas teach anything but the truth, and says that arbitration of apowrusheya texts, as "true-saying" and "false-saying" is impermissible logically and spiritually. All canonical texts _must_ be considered, and a coherent meaning found without imposing one's own biases upon the evidence obtained. An essay comparing Tattvavaada's take on scripture with the monistic view may be found at http://www.dvaita.org/shaastra/article.html 15> Who are some of the leading scholars of Tattvavaada? Historically, there have been many great scholars and saints in the tradition of Srimad Achaarya. Some of them are: Sri Vaadiraaja Tiirtha -- is considered the senior-most scholar of Tattvavaada after Srimad Ananda Tiirtha himself; his works include the Yukti-Mallikaa, the RukmiNiisha-Vijaya, etc., and a number of well-known stotras; he has also translated Srimad Aachaarya's Mahaabhaarata-taatparya-nirNaya into Kannada, and has composed a number of devotional songs in that language. There is a page on the web devoted to Sri Vaadiraaja Tiirtha, at http://www.dvaita.org/scholars/VaadiraajaT.html Sri Jayatiirtha -- has written commentaries on a number of Srimad Aachaarya's works, and is known for his extremely pleasing style of writing and argument; his work, the Nyaaya-Sudhaa, which is an exposition of Shriiman Madhvaachaarya's Anu-Vyaakhyaana commentary on the Brahma-Suutra, is an outstanding example of his scholarship, and is certainly one of the greatest works in Vedanta. There is a page on the web devoted to Sri Jayatiirtha, at http://www.dvaita.org/scholars/Jaya_tiirtha.html Sri Purandara Dasa -- is widely renowned as the father of Carnatic music; is less widely known as the founder of the Hari-Daasa tradition, that seeks to propagate the doctrine of Tattvavaada through music, in a language that ordinary people can understand. A contemporary of Sri Vaadiraaja Tiirtha and Sri Vyaasa Tiirtha, he is regarded by Maadhva-s as an outstanding scholar and devotee. There is a page on the web devoted to Sri Purandara Dasa, at http://www.dvaita.org/haridasa/dasas/purandara/purandara.html Sri Vyaasa Tiirtha -- wrote further commentaries on the works of Sri Jayatiirtha and Srimad Ananda Tiirtha; is known for his extra-ordinary ability to run any opponent down by force of argument; he ranks as one of the most renowned polemical scholars of Vedanta. There is a page on the web devoted to Sri Vyaasa Tiirtha, at http://www.dvaita.org/scholars/VyaasaT.html Sri Raghavendra Tiirtha -- is widely known today, thanks to his excellent reputation for providing succor in times of major crises. Although he ranks as one of the greatest scholars of Tattvavaada, he is better known and worshipped by millions, as an infallible source of support when one is faced with dire circumstances. There is a page on the web devoted to Sri Raghavendra Tiirtha, at http://www.dvaita.org/scholars/Ragh_T.html 16> What are the Maadhva institutions of the present day? The most important one is probably the temple of Krishna at Udupi, in south-western Karnataka, India. There are eight MaTha-s, called the Udupi-ashhTa-maTha-s, that are dedicated to serving Krishna, at Udupi and elsewhere. Besides these, there are several other important maThas, like the Uttaraadi MaTha (which is claimed to be the institution of Sri Jayatiirtha), and the MaTha-s of Sri Vyaasa Tiirtha and Sri Raghavendra Tiirtha, known by their names. Some information about the temple in Udupi, and associated facts and entities, is available at: http://www.dvaita.org/madhva/udupi/ 17> Where can I get more information? One place to look would be the Dvaita Home Page (address given at the top of this document), which, although not nearly as complete or exhaustive as its supporters would like, still offers some information. In particular, it has some biographical information about Srimad Ananda Tiirtha and some other scholars of his school, and some bibliographical information as well. Besides these, a number of books have been written in English, especially by B. N. Krishnamurti Sharma, of which one, 'The History of the Dvaita School of Vedanta and its Literature', Motilal Banarsidass, 1981, is considered quite broad-based, if not completely authoritative. Another work by Dr. Sharma that may be of some interest is 'Madhva's teachings in his own words'. 18> How can I add <> to the Dvaita Home Page? If some new material is to be added to the page, and the suggestion is not merely a correction of an error in existing material, then it is requested that you please post your proposed addition to the Dvaita list/digest so that the same can be reviewed by other prospective readers of the website, and their comments obtained. This is a peer-review process that has been adhered to for quite some time now, and has the added benefit of enriching the list/digest as well. If the material proposed to be added is not your own, then copyright concerns may have to be addressed. 19> I'm having some trouble with the Dvaita List; or: I have this specific query or request concerning the List. Please see the List/Digest Help File, address given above. III. Appendix: terms commonly used in Tattvavaada. -------------------------------------------------- Canonical definitions are given within square brackets, where known. A. General terms: ----------------- 1. pramaaNa ["yathaarthaM pramaaNam.h"] -- something that describes as-is, is called a pramaaNa. This can be of two types: 1.1 kevala-pramaaNa ["yathaartha-GYaanaM kevalam.h"] -- knowledge of something as-is, is called kevala-pramaaNa. 1.2 anu-pramaaNa ["tat-saadhanaM anu-pramaaNam.h"] -- a source of the previous, is called anu-pramaaNa; such can be of three types, which are: i> pratyaksha ["vishayaan.h prati-sthitam hi aksham.h"] -- flawless interaction between a sense of perception (like sight), and an object or entity in its domain, is called pratyaksha. ii> anumaana ["tarkaH adushhTaH"] -- inference without flaw constitutes logic. Flaws of inference are described below. iii> aagama ["adushhTa vaakya"] -- sentences, or bodies of sentences (texts) without flaw, are called aagama. Also of interest are: 2.1 pramaataa ["pramaavaan.h pramaataa"] -- a person in whom pramaa exists, is the pramaataa. 2.2 prameya ["pramaavishayaH prameyaH"] -- the subject of pramaa, is the prameya. 2.3 pramaa ["yathaarthaGYaanaM pramaa"] -- knowledge of something as-is, is called pramaa. Note: pramaa thus means the same thing as kevala-pramaaNa, except that it is used in a singular sense, to denote _one_ piece of correct knowledge, etc.; the latter is more often used to indicate a body of correct knowledge, and such. 3.1 hetu -- antecedent, in an inference. 3.2 saadhya -- consequence, likewise. 3.3 upa-jiivya -- anu-pramaaNa by which hetu is known. 3.4 upa-jiivaka -- anu-pramaaNa fed by, or created by, saadhya. B. Error terms. --------------- 1. Semantic errors (shabda-doshhaaH): 1.1 virodha ["yogyataaviraho virodhaH"] -- This can loosely be translated as 'opposition,' and the definition reads loosely as: "Lack of ability is opposition." What the definition means to say is that if a statement runs counter to one already accepted, and is unable to force its own way, then it must be rejected, for being opposed to a known fact. 1.2 asaN^gati ["aakaaN^kshaaviraho asangatiH"] -- This can be translated as 'irrelevance,' and the definition reads: "Lack of fulfillment of expectation is irrelevance." In a discussion, if a reply given, a point raised, or a statement made, is not in accordance with the expectation that it be pertinent to the matter under discussion, then it is irrelevant. 1.3 nyuunataa ["vivakshitaasaMpuurtirnyuunataa"] -- This can read as 'nullity,' with the definition reading loosely as: "Non-satisfaction of the claim constitutes nullity." In a discussion, if someone makes a claim, and later gives evidence that does not support the claim in full, then such evidence suffers from nullity, with respect to the claim. Another type is where a definition given does not cover all cases of the objects or entities to be defined. 1.4 aadhikyaM : "sangataavadhikatvamaadhikyam.h" -- This can be translated as 'superfluity,' and the definition as: "An excess over what is relevant, constitutes superfluity." In a discussion, if someone takes the meaning or definition of something to cover more than what it should, then such is superfluous. Another type is where a definition given covers more than the object, entity, or set to be defined. Note: nyuunataa and aadhikya have also been referred to, in special cases, as a-vyaapti (non-domination), and ati-vyaapti (over-domination). The latter, ativyaapti, is the error responsible for Russell's paradox. 2. Logical errors (tarka-doshhaaH): 2.1 aatmaashraya : This can loosely be translated as "assuming the consequence," in some cases. More generally, however, if something "rests on itself," in the sense that an object or entity is stated to have a property such as presence within itself, support of itself, etc., then this flaw exists. A standard example is "sva-skandha-aarohaNa" or "mounting one's own shoulder." 2.2 anyonyaashraya : Loosely, "mutual reliance." If a statement is proved by another, and the latter by the former, then this error exists. 2.3 chakrakaashraya : "circular reliance," a.k.a. circular reasoning. A more general case of the above; if instead of two, we have 'n' number of disputed statements, that are tied in a circle so that each one proves the next, then circular reasoning is shown. 2.4 anavasthaa : Infinite regress. If the proof of a statement requires an assumption, and proof of that assumption requires another, and proof of that still another, and so on, then infinite regress is said to occur. 2.5 pramaa-haana : "neglect of evidence," as in, when a statement neglects to take into account the fact that it is in opposition to accepted evidence. This itself has various forms: shruta-haana (neglect of Shruti), dR^ishhTa-haana (neglect of pratyaksha), etc. 2.6 kalpanaa-gaurava : "Respect for imagination." If a statement must be assumed without proof, so that an inference based upon it may be accepted, then the inference is subject to the respect that has been accorded to one's imagination, and is unacceptable. Economy in assumptions is a virtue. 2.7 upajiivya-virodha : "Opposition to upajiivya." If an inference is made where the consequence runs counter to the source of knowledge by which the antecedent is known, then the inference is considered incorrect, for opposing the source of its own antecedent, and the error made is known as upajiivya virodha; as has already been noted, 'upajiivya' is the name given to the anu-pramaaNa from which the antecedent is known. 2.8 apa-siddhaanta : "Invalid thesis." If a doctrine or a proponent puts forth a claim earlier in an argument, but subsequently attempts to defend a contrary position (i.e., a claim different from the previous), then the apa-siddhAnta-doshha -- the error of an invalid thesis -- is said to occur. Note: upajiivya virodha is actually a form of pramaa-haana, but is often referred to separately. IV. Appendix B: Disclaimer and restrictions ------------------------------------------- This FAQ is the result of a combined effort by the following individuals: Bala R. Krishna <bkrishna -at- dvaita.org> N. A. P. S. Rao <napsrao -at- dvaita.org> Narahari S. Pujar <pujar -at- che.udel.edu> Shrisha Rao <shrao -at- dvaita.org> The above people would like to thank Dr. D. Prahladachar, Director, Poornapragna Samshodhana Mandiram <ppsmb -at- dvaita.org>, for kindly taking the time to review and correct an earlier version of this FAQ. However, any residual errors that remain are their responsibility. The above people have tried their best to ensure that their descriptions conform to the doctrine of Srimad Ananda Tiirtha most exactly. However, it is possible that owing to inadvertence or even inadequacy of understanding on their part, there are errors in this document. If so, your forgiveness is requested. This FAQ is the property of the Poornaprajna Samshodhana Mandiram and may be freely used for non-commercial purposes. However, to use it in for-profit endeavors requires specific permission to be obtained by sending mail to info -at- dvaita.org; use without permission is covered in the U.S. under the No Electronic Theft Act, 1997, and similar laws in other countries. In addition, this document may *NOT* be reposted to any UseNet newsgroup other than the one(s) to which it is sent by its maintainers. If you think it is appropriate to another newsgroup and would like to post it there, please request permission first. Any such re-posting of this FAQ must be only for the whole document, including this section. ******* ++ ******* 
