The Tattva-MuktavaliGaudapurnanandacakravarti, active 17th century
Religion
The Tattva-Muktavali
Gaudapurnanandacakravarti, active 17th century
Dvaita (Vedanta) -- Early works to 1800; Hindu philosophy -- Early works to 1800
Originally scanned at sacred-texts.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.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account