तत्वसंख्यानम् तत्वविवेक: Tattva Sankhyana and Tattva Viveka

Email

Whatsapp

Facebook

Pinterest

Twitter

Copy link

Tatvasankhyana and Tatvaviveka are small treatises in which categories of reality as conceived in Dvaita Vedanta are enumerated. The Tatvas are first classified into two, viz. Svatantra i.e. Independent and Paratantra i.e. dependent. The Supreme God alone is Svatantra, i.e. independent category. All other categories are paratantra. The Svatantra is defined as that which is independent in respect of its very essential nature, the functions, and the comprehension. The Supreme God only is independent in all these respects. All others are entirely dependent upon the supreme God in all these respects.

The Paratantra is further classified as Bhava, Abhava etc.

Tatvaviveka also enumerates the categories, more or less in the same way. This work contains the verses of a larger work of the same name composed by God himself.

Tatvaviveka is not a repetition but an extract of the source work to support Tatvasankhyana.

The classification of the categories in these texts is quite different from the pattern followed in the texts of other systems of philosophy such as Nyayavaisesika. The Nvava Vaisesikas go by the pattern as dravya Guna etc. This is because the objective of that system is to provide the knowledge of the material world while that of Dvaita Vedanta is to lead to the knowledge of Supreme God. Therefore the Supreme God is first stated as Svatantra bringing out his supremacy and all other categories are brought under Paratantra indicating their dependence on the Supreme God. The other categories are to be known only to realise the supremacy and the glory of the God.

Tatva Sankhyana is edited with five commentaries and Tatvaviveka with two commentaries.

The Prakaranagranthas are small treatises on specific issues of philosophy.

Sri Madhvacharya has written ten such Prakarana works which are collectively known as Dasaprakaranas. These are neatly planned. Two of them viz., Prarnana Laksana and Kathalaksana deal with the epistemology and the Art of the Philosophical debate.

Three treatises known as Khandanatraya examine the Advaita concepts of Mithyatva and Upadhi.

Four treatises viz. Tatvasankhyana, Tatvaviveka, Tatvodyota and Tatvanirnaya give an exposition of the central doctrine Visnusarvottamatva and the other doctrines like the reality of the world, the five cardinal differences i.e. Panchabheda, the nature of the Jiva, the nature of the liberation etc. In the course of the presentation of these doctrines, the import of the important Sruti passages is discussed. The interpretations offered by the other School of Vedanta are reviewed.

Karmanirnaya the tenth Prakarana is a unique work. In this work by interpreting the Mahanamni hymns and by pointing out that Indra etc. all the names convey the Supreme God Visnu only, the philosophical import of even the Karmakanda portion of the Vedas is brought out. In this way these ten Prakarana works assist the comprehension of the doctrines of Vedanta enshrined in the Prasthana trayi and elaborated in the Bhasyas. A brief account of the contents of the two Prakaranas included in this volume is given below.

1. Tatvasankhyana
In Tatvasankhyanamas the very name suggests the categories of the reality as conceived in Dvaita Vedanta are enumerated. This small text opens with the definition of a Tatva i.e., a real entity: 'That which is not superimposed is a real entity.' It is further explained as• that which is the object of valid knowledge. For instance, when 'A garland of flowers is comprehended as 'A garland of flowers' then its object of valid knowledge. For instance, when 'A garland of flowers is comprehended as 'A garland of flowers' then its object viz., the garland of flowers is a real entity. But when someone mistakes it as a snake from a distance or in a dark place, his comprehension is not valid knowledge. Consequently its object viz., Snake which is superimposed on a flower garland is not a real entity. It is Aropita i.e. superimposed, and hence it is not a Tatva i.e., a real entity. All those that satisfy this definition i.e., Tatvam Anarpitam' are Tatvas. The Tatvas are first classified into two Svatantra i.e., independent and Paratantra i.e. dependent. The Supreme God alone is Svatantra i.e. independent category. All other categories are Paratantra. The Svatantra is defined as that which is independent in respect of its very essential nature, the functions, and the comprehension. The Supreme God is only independent in all these respects. All others are entirely dependent upon the Supreme God in all these respects. Therefore, all others are Paratantra i.e., Paramatrnatantra.

The Paratantra is further classified as Bhava and Abhava i.e. the Positive and the Negative. 'That which presents itself as 'Is' in its first cognition is Positive' and 'that which present itself as 'Is not' in its first cognition is 'Negative.' The Bhava i.e., the Positive is classified into Chetana and Achetana i.e. sentient and non-sentient. The sentient is further classified as that which is never afflicted by the sorrow and those that are afflicted by the sorrow. Goddess Laksmi only is never affected by the sorrow. She is nityarnukta i.e., ever free from the bondage. All other sentient beings are afflicted by the sorrow sometime or the other. Further classification of these is given in the Text.

The non-sentient are classified into Nitya i.e., eternal and Anitya i.e., perishable. Nityanitya i.e., partly eternal and partly modified. Veda, Varna and Avyakrta Akasa are eternal. Purana, Kala and Prakrti are partly eternal and partly changing.

The negative i.e. Abhava is classified into three viz., Pragabhava i.e., previous negation, Pradhvansabhava i.e. later negation and Sadabhava i.e. total negation. In respect of Abhava two important points have to be noted. (1) Anyonyabhava is not accepted as a category of Abhava. This is because, Anyonyabhava i.e., Bheda, the distinction is considered as Dharmisvarupa i.e., an internal attribute of every entity. To be distinct from all other entities is the very nature of each entity. Therefore, this fact of being distinct from all other entities is part and parcel of the very nature of each entity. Therefore, it is not negative and hence is not to be considered as a category of Abhava. (2) The Sadabhava concept of Dvaita is distinct from the Sansargabhava or Atyantabhava concept of Nyaya Vaisesikas. The Sansargabhava of Nyayavaisesika could be easily included. under Pragabhava, the absence before the Sansarga i.e., the contact, and under Pradhvansabhava after the contact is withdrawn, that is to say before the Jar is brought on the ground, it is Sansarga pragabhava and after the Jar is withdrawn from the ground it is Sansargapradhvansabhava. Therefore,there is no need to accept a separate type of Abhava called Sansargabhava. In respect of the concept of Atvantabhava an important difference between the Nyaya concept and the Dvaita concept is, the Pratiyogin of this Abhava is elsewhere present according to Nyaya view while according to the Dvaita it is only envisaged and denied. It is not a reference to that which is actually present elsewhere and its denial. Therefore, the Pratiyogin of the Abhava is apramanika i.e., not really existing elsewhere. This Abhava is no abhava i.e. absence present at all three times i.e., present and future. That is why it is called Sadabhava.

2. Tatvaviveka
Tatvaviveka also enumerates the categories more or less in the same way. This work contains the verses of a larger work of the same name composed by the God himself. Thirteen verse are quoted in this small work in support of the statements made in Tatvasankhyana. Therefore, it is not a repetition but an extract of a source work to support Tatvasankhyana. Naturally the two texts verbatim agree barring a few passages. The few verses that are differently worded or additional contain some significant points. These are as follows:
1. The achetana i.e., non-sentient is classified into two viz., Nitya and Anitya i.e., eternal and non-eternal. The third group i.e., Nityanitya is not mentioned. This does not involve any conflict between the statement of Tatvasankhyana and Tatvaviveka. The items listed under Nityanitya have an eternal aspect and a modified aspect. From the first aspect point of view these are included under Nitya. The second aspect naturally goes under Anitya. In order to bring out these two aspects more clearly these are first listed under Nitya i.e., eternal, then, it is stated that the modified forms of these are anitya. Some more items in addition to the items listed under Nitya and Nityanitya in Tatvasankhyana are mentioned. The nature of the modification in respect of these items differs from item to item. This is explained in the commentaries.

2. The Tatvasankhyana Guna, Kriya, Jati etc. attributes are not mentioned. . Here these are mentioned. These are classified into two groups viz., n Yavad-dravyabhavt i.e. The attributes that last as long as the substance lasts. ii) Ayavad- dravyabhavi i.e. the attributes that perish even before. The relation between the substance and the attributes, in the former case is abheda while it is bedabheda in the case of the latter.

In Tatvasankhyana the attributes are not separately mentioned keeping in view the fact that the attributes are not totally different from the substance. Here, these are mentioned to bring out the nature and the relation of the two types of the attributes.

Strictly speaking these two texts form one unit. Therefore, these additional statements do not indicate any difference of views on the respective issues.

The classification of the categories in these two texts is quite different from the pattern followed in the texts of the other systems of philosophy such as Nyayavaiseslkas. The Nyayavaisesikas go by the pattern as Dravya, Guna etc. This is because; the objective of those systems is to provide the knowledge of the material world, while that of Dvaita Vedanta is to lead to the knowledge of the Supreme God. Therefore, the Supreme God is first stated as Svatantra bringing out his Supremacy and all other categories are brought under Paratantra indicating their dependence on the Supreme God. The other categories are to be known only to realise the supremacy and the glory of the God. The concluding verses of these two texts make this position abundantly clear. The last verse of Tatvasankhyana enumerates the creation, sustenance, destruction etc. eight states of the world that are caused by the God and glorifies Him by giving his Srstyadi astakartrtva definition. The concluding verse of Tatvaviveka emphatically states that it is the knowledge that the entire world consisting of Chetana and Achetana entirely depends upon the God that enables one to attain the liberation.