Gurupoornima (2003)

Gurupoornima is important for three groups of people. It is important for sanyasis as they start their yearly vratham. The chattur matsya vratham. For a grihastha, this ritual is done every four months. Sanyasis are supposed to stay in one place during this period. Sanyasis have taken a vow to move around and not stay in one place. The idea being if one is moving constantly he will have to sustain himself with bare necessities. Even a householder who changes houses frequently, he will soon get rid off all the unnecessary items. During this period it is supposed to rain and hence the sanyasis takes permission from the Lord to violate the law of traveling. This injunction for sanyasis to move around is designed so that he does not develop attachment to either people or place. Another reason is that during this season insects crawl all over the place. So as not to step on them even accidentally the sanyasi undertakes this chattur matsya vratham for practice of Ahimsa.

To avoid attachment this prescription of moving from one place to another is recommended. Otherwise one sanyasi will fight with another sanyasi for his tree! Attachment goes only with Athma Jnanam. Also a sanyasi must avoid taking bhiksha from the same family. Then he will say- I only like their salt or their tamarind. During this period, he takes shelter in one place for nidhidhyasanam and also give knowledge to the people residing there.

So, at the beginning of this ritual, Vysyacharya puja is done. It is also called Vysya Poornima day or gurupoornima day. Vysya is one of the most important gurus in our tradition and we revere him and show our respects on this day.

Another group for whom this day holds special significance are mumukshus. For every seeker of moksha, be it a sanyasi or a grihastha, Vysyacharya is very important. For Vysya gave us moksha upayah. Therefore we are eternally grateful and indebted to him. What is the role of Vysyacharaya in learning about moksha upayah? We have three basic granthas (textbooks) called prasthana thriyam. These guide the mumukshus on the path of moksha.

Shruthi or Marga prasthanam is the veda purva and Vedanta. Both are important as one prepares the seeker and another grants moksha. Vysya is respected not as the author of Vedas but as a compiler. He divided the scriptures into four divisions according to the type and metre and assigned it to four students to maintain the veda parampara. That is why he is called Veda Vysya. The preserver of the Vedas. Vysya means the one who compiled and divided the Vedas appropriately. The original name of Vysya is Krishna. He is also dark in complexion like Lord Krishna. To avoid confusion, he is Krishan Dwaipayana (where the Lord is born and residing) and the Lord is called Vasudeva Krishna. Both Lord Krishna and Vysya are dark in complexion and if anyone is dark, they are in good company.

Smruthi Prasthanam. There are many smruthis of which Bhagavat Gita is the most important. These are secondary scriptures. Vysyacharya is the author of Bhagavat Gita. It is a part of Mahabharatha and Vysya is the author. Therefore, in the Dyana sloka, we chant Namostha Vysya vishala budhe and thereby show our respects. Therefore, Vysya is not only a compilor but also shrithi but also the author of smrithi.

Nyaya Prasthanam is the work of Brahma Sutras and Vedanta Sutras. The logical support, reasoning, reinforcement to the teaching contaioned in Shruthi and Smruthi. Here all the doubts are clarified. This is also the work of Vysya and that is why he is also called as Bhadharayana Shrutrani. Hence Vysyacharay is glorified as Trimurthi Himself. We do not look upon him as a human being but trimurthi himself. He is Brahma without four heads, Vishnu without four hands, Shiva without three eyes. He is Brahma-Vishnu-Shiva rolled in to one. Therefore, Vysya is very important to every mumukshu and hence on this day Vysya puja is done.

Vysyacharya through these three prasthanam has given us Vedantic Dharshanam. Technically we don’t say Vedantic philosophy. Any teaching which has been derived purely from reason is called philosophy. So any revealed book like the Quran, Bible, or the Bhagavat Gita are not philosophies. These are all not the works of unaided reason. But nasthika philosophies like Budhism can be called philosophy. But not Sankya for it uses the scriptures. Hereafter, we will not say Vedantic philosophy but Vedantic Dharshanam or Vedantic teaching. Vysya in his Brahma Sutras establishes the superiority of Vedantic Dharshanam. In the second chapter, second section he makes some important observations.

- Logic will not help in knowing the absolute or in attaining moksha. He explains this very logically! Logic or reasoning can help us understand only relative truths and not absolute.
- Another important point is that logic based on human intellect and human perceptions suffer from six fold dosas. That human perception through which data is collected and the intellect that interprets the data is defective. It suffers from Ajnanam(ignorance), Samshayam(doubt), Vipraya(erroneous perception), Prmadha(neglignce or oversight), Vipaabdhi(teaching of others) and Apattukarnathvam(limitation of sense organs).

Therefore any philosophy based on human intellect and perceptions will have these dosas. It will only be a fallacious phyliosophy. Vysyacharya dismisses 11 darshanams which were prevalent at his time and establishes the primacy of Vedanta. Six of them – four branches of Buddhism, Jainism, and Charvaka philosophy (materialism) which neither believe in God or Veda. These are nasthika philosophies born out of unaided reason. Vysya dismisses them logically.

There are five Asthika darshanams- Sankya, Yoga, Nyaya, Vaishashika, and Purva Mimamsa. All of them accept the Vedas and treat it secondary to Tarka. They give more importance to Tarka. They are as good as nasthikas as they treat Vedas subserviently to logic. Vysya once again dismisses them logically.


Vysya says that only in the Vedanta, we accept veda pramana. We place the Vedas on top and accept tarka as an aid to understand Vedas. So don’t follow either nasthika or asthika philosophies. To follow Vedas, one has to study Prasthana Triyam (Vedas, Bhagavat Gita, and Brahma Sutras). So don’t follow Sankya, Nyaya, Jainism or Buddhism. To follow the Vedanta Dharshanam, one will have to take recourse to Prasthana Triyam. For a mumukshu study a few Upanishads, Bhagavat Gita and at least four sutras. These are compulsory reading for every mumukshu. Vysya gives two advices.

Advice number one: Study Vedanta Triyam
Advice number two: Never study them independently. Study under a Guru.

Who is a Guru? Not a self declared guru. Swayambhus are not gurus. Swayambhu in the case of Shiva lingam is okay. Study under one who comes from guru-shisya parampara. Only one who has been a sishya before. Only an ex-sishya can become a guru. Not a eternal sishya.

Once a person studies Prasthana Triyam (this is how the seeking starts) he will confront a very serious problem. Here we are talking about a serious student (a mumukshu) seriously studying the Vedanta Triyam. That mumukshu understands this very clearly: this is given by the Lord and so does not suffer from human limitations. By studying them, I will gain moksha. But then there is a serious problem.

The problem is Vedanta Dharsahanam is interpreted differently by different Acharyas. This is the first discovery of a mumukshu. There is no confusion in dismissing all the other darshanams but in Vedanta darshanam one comes across internal dissensions and different traditions….like the Janatha Dal. There is a split within a split. What then is the teaching of vedantic darshanam? If you claim that you are a Vedantic student in academic circles, they will ask: from which school? Are you Dwaithin, Vashista Advaithin, or an Advaithin. And there are many more. Here I get in to a serious problem. Which version of Vdentic teaching should I follow? All of them claim that they come from a long parampara. All of them accept that their traditions came from Narayana. Should I follow Ramanuja’s Vashista Advitha, or Madhvacharya’s Dwaitha or Advaitha. What then does a serious student do? Which one is correct?

All the three systems criticize one another. Vashista Advaitha begins with a criticism of Advaitha. Books have been written, “ 100 defects of Advaitha. Shatha Dosah. Another Advaithin immediately published a version Shatha Bhushanani. The defects that you mention are not problems not all. You have not understood properly.

And if you take the authors, all of them are giants. Adi Shankara in the 7 AD, Ramanuja in the 11 AD and Madhvacharya in the 13th. If you go by their qualifications, all the Acharyas are equally great. Each tradition claims that their Acharya is an Avatharam. If you say Shankara is an avatharam they will also say that Ramanuja and Madhvacharya are Avatharams too. So which one will you accept?

Even now there is no reconciliation. Each one claims that there’s alone is the right tradition. Each one claims victories over the other in debates and even cite Lord’s grace. All the three were allowed to float to float and two of them got drowned. Vashista Advaitha floated while the other two submerged in to water. You can never convince a Dwiathin or a Vashista Advaithin. Dwaitha and Advaitha also have their own stories of asserting the superiority of their tradition. So debating and convincing others is out of the question.

If you are not a serious student then there is no problem because you are in any case not follow the Prasthana Triyam. Whether chemeotherapy is better or surgery or both. It is only an academic discussion to a layman but is a serious issue to a cancer patient. Similar is the problem with mumukshus. Which is the right interpretation of Vedanta for he has to choose a particular course of study. You will have to decide which one is right or wrong for me. For my intellect, my thinking. One cannot say that the choice is between three right ones. I cannot follow all the three. Neither can I use it selectively for they are mutually exclusive. That is if one is right then the other two must be wrong for the teaching is different. In my mind I must have a clear picture. This is right and the other two are wrong fro me. This is very important and when someone asks me, I must have humility. I can only say,” I go by what I am convinced of. And this is my conviction.” But I don’t deride the other two. I must not say that these are wrong. It is not done and it is not proper.

And I must know the three darshanams or atleast the basics and only then follow one which suits me. Even in the fundamentals, all the three are diagonally opposite. There is no kichidi. Anjanam is white like tumeric powder means that he doesn’t know any of them. We have to know the basic differences of all the three interpretations of Vedanta darshanam. If we are not a mumukshu, then there is no problem. Go to the temple and be the devotee of the Lord. As long as one is interested in Artha, Karma, and Dharma be the devotee of the Lord. Do puja and service. But if you are a serious student or seeker, you will have to decide on a course of action.

Six basic items are involved and in all the three the answers are different.
a) Who is jiva? All the three have different definitions.
b) What is the nature of God? Again different viewpoints.
c) What is the nature of the world?
d) What is bondage?
e) What is moksha swarupam?

Swami Dayananda says – all the religions lead to the same goal is such an illogical statement. Because all religions do not have the common goal. If the goals are not the same, then where is the question of all the religions leading to the same goal. Even these three Vedanta Darshanam does not lead to the same goal. What to talk of different religions?

Therefore, one has to ask themselves: what is my goal? Is my goal the goal of Dwaitha, Vashita Advaitha, or Advaitha? For if the goals are different then the sadhanas will also be different.

Taje jiva, for instance. Both Dwaitha and Vashista Advaitha says that Jiva is atomic in size. But Advaitha says Sarvagathah. Now how can one accept both philosophies? One says Jiva is small and the other says Jiva is big. There is a basic difference in the very swarupa. Eshwera, according to both Dwaitham and Vashista Advaitham is Saguan where as in Advaitha says the real nature of Eshwera is Nirgunam. Both Dwaitham and Vashista Advaitha say that there is no such thing as Nirgunam. In Vedanta, we have been talking repeatedly of nirgunam while the other tow one has to constantly keep negating it and you assert that Saguna is Eshwara. When you come to the world, Dwaitha says the world is different from God, Vashista Advaitha says that the world is a part of God where as Advaitha says that there is no world at all. Then what is there? Brahman alone and there is no such thing called world. How will you combine all this three philosophies?
So Jiva Swarupam is different, Eshwara is different and Jagat Swarupam is different. What about Budhi? Both Dwaitham and Vashista Advaitha say that bondage is born out of a misconception that I am an independent fellow. That I am Swathantrah is a misconception and that bondage according to them. What is liberation? You are not independent but eternally dependent on God. So, in both of them the travel is from independence to dependence either as a dosa or an anga. So moksha is serving the Lord eternally. Always a dependent Jiva. Whereas Advaitha says it is different. That I am dependent is the greatest misconception. That is Bandah (bondage) and moksha is travel from dependence to independence. I am not dependent on the world, not even dependent on the Lord. And I am Soham. Dasoham is the goal of Dwaitham and Vashista Advaitham, while Soham is the goal of Advaitha.

Now you have to decide which is your goal? Whether you want to promote fromlocal Gods to a higher God or the discovery that Brahman in which the Jiva, the Jagat , and even the Lord rests on me. This is the teaching of Advaitha. But the interesting thing is all these are derived from the same Prasthana Triyam, from the same Vsyscharya. And all the sanyasis – whether Dwaitha or Vashista Advaitha or Advaitha will worship Vysyacharya. One will thank Vysya for saying,” I am Bhagawan’s dasa.” And the other will thank him for saying,” My nature and Bhagawan’s nature are similar.” Now which one is the teaching of Vedanta? I have to reject two and accept only one. But I cannot say that Ramanuja and Madhvacharya are wrong. We have to respect both of them for their knowledge and devotion. It is arrogance to say that anyone is wrong. I can only say,” that for my intellect, that is right and I am convinced on this and following Advaitha.” And you under a guru if you are coming to my classes. I am completely convinced of Shankaracharya parampara which tells me that I am free. I don’t want to be the dasa of anyone. I don’t want to be under someone. I am the master, the swami.

So on this gurupoornima day, let us follow this beautiful tradition and attain moksha.