The explanation that “what does not exist cannot be born, and what exists cannot be destroyed” faces criticism from Bhaskaracharya’s theory. According to him, something new is born, and what exists can be destroyed. His argument revolves around the emergence of phenomena and the cessation (destruction) of non-phenomena.

He questions, “Wouldn’t suffering exist only if I remain after death? If I do not exist, where is the question of suffering? Why discuss what exists instead of what does not exist?” As an example, he refers to a pot formed from clay. What does destruction mean? The word “Naasha” (destruction) originates from the root “Naas”, which implies disappearance or invisibility. Thus, destruction signifies the disappearance of what exists.

Bhaskara’s argument contradicts perception. For instance, milk turns into curd. How can curd exist without milk? Something that existed at some point must transform. In such cases, reasoning is of little use. Srimadacharya asserts that decisions should be based on experience.

For example, it is commonly said that the body turns to dust. This means the body that existed turned into dust. According to Bhaskara, we would have to claim that a non-existent body turned into dust. However, the body exists and transforms into dust, which is evident through experience. After all, doesn’t the body itself arise from dust (through food)?

 

~ Sri Sugunendra Theertha Swamiji of Paryaya Sri Puthige Sri Krishna Matha

Participate in the ‘Koti Gita Lekhana Yajna’
Gita Mandir, Udupi
Contact Number: 8055338811