Dvaitha, Advaitha and Vichishathdvaitha

An excellant for - against discussion by knowledgeable people on Dvaitha, Advaitha and Vichishatdvaitha held in Iyer Group.
Been appended for the benefit ordinary people like me.

 
 


Comments By KV Chellappa:It is incorrect to say that advaitha disintegrated. There have been powerful exponents of it since the days of Upanishads. Ramakrishna, Vivekananda and Ramana stand out in recent times. Only advaitha and Buddhism accord well with science and the observed world.


But they are not good enough for the ordinary people. We are still like toddlers and require the toy world. Bhakthi is the best for us. But sectarianism that only a particular deity, call it Narayana, Siva, Jesus or Allah, can save is narrow-mindedness and is an avoidable aberration of Hinduism, which is eclectic and acknowledges sarvadharma samthva.

The message of Gita is also that all three margas, Karma, Bhakthi and Gnana, are equally valid. One has to choose according to one's calling. It is as well to remember Kalki's words from Ponniyin selvan, "Ariyum sivanum Onnu, ariyathavan vayil mannu". It applies to all deities and all philosophical doctrines. Debates and differences persist only till we are unenlightened.

It is OK to carry on such discussion to learn better and to hone our understanding, but with keenness to understand, rather than to vindicate a position we have taken.

Sri Ramanuja was a powerful personality and a social reformer long before social consciousness was aroused by a democratic process. His works are scholarly and ingenious. He set in motion the procedures for Tirumala temple worship and it has a hallowed status among all Hindu temples. But visishtadvaitha cannot be said to be the final word on the understanding of Vedantha.

Comments by: Srinivasan
Adhi Sankara may have integrated all the three philosophies of Dvaitha, Advaitha, and Vichishtadvaitha into his original concept of Dvaitham. Some time later, these principles of Dvaitham probably got radicalized over the years and many may not have accepted it in principle and in its faith and may have continued to stay their own course. I suspect then some serious Hindu religious emancipation might have come about in the 10th century, which probably led Sri Ramanuja to enunciate or propound a new theory called Vichishtadvaitha, a new and distinguished drawing of the lines from Dvaitham. In the 120 years that Sri Ramanuja lived, he seemed to have spread the Vichishtadvaitham far and wide and the Srivaishnava siddantham propagated by him, has been around for well over 1,000 years. Very soon, we are about to celebrate the 1,000th birthday or Thirunakshthram of Sri Ramanuja. Maybe some expert historian in this group can discuss what exactly transpired from the times of Adhi Sankara, to Sri Ramanuja, later on to Desikar, then on to Sringeri, to our current day. A series of religious transformation must have occurred during Sri Ramanuja's life time bringing about a new concept in His teachings or siddhantham that many follow even today!. As my esteemed colleague, Sri K.V. Chellappa points out, Sri Ramanuja who came later saw the need to reorient the faith as Advaitha seemed to have veered off course into cynicism or was beginning to disintegrate!

I did not belittle Dvaitham or Advaitham but merely pointed out to fellow Brahmins that there was another higher octave school of thought in Vichishtadvaitham, as enunciated by Sri Ramanuja, of which there are many ardent followers like me, in this Forum and the world over! I wanted to bring out the underlying principles of Vichistadvaitham and its basic differences between the two other schools of thought! I was not saying that our school of thought was superior to the two others! Although over the centuries that have rolled by, Heads of each Peetam or Madathipathi' s proclaimed and propagated it as such! And there existed some "dvesham" between one another, trying to acclaim each as its "supreme gospel"!

Later, 150 years ago, Sri Thyagaraja who sang in one of his kritis in reethi gowla raagam, which I am appending below, too seemed to have his own doubts about Dvaitham or Advaitham being superior and was pleading to Lord Rama! Maybe there were no Forums or internet back them and he was crying at the Lotus Feet of Lord Rama to answer his prayers.

Dvaithamu sugama? , Advaithamu sugama?
Chaithanyama vinu sarva sakshi
vistharamu ganu telupumu na'tho!

Gagana, pavana, thapana
bhuvana dhayavanilo
naghadha raja shivendradhi suralo
bhagawadha bhaktha varaghre' sarulalo
bhaga raminche' thyagarajarchita
Dvaithamu sugama, Advaithamu sugama?

briefly translating to:

Which conduces to bliss? Dvaitha or Advaitha? Pray, instruct me, Clear my doubt, You have in this Universe of Pancha Bhutas, vouched happiness to gods like Siva, Brahma, Indra, etc., and to great devotees,

Which path should I follow? Pray, tell me! If I follow the path that gards one's self as everything, it will be hard for you; on the other hand, if I appeal to you for protection as a Dass, You say that I am Dvaithin!

In the process of trying to analyze and broadcast what Dvaitham, Advaitham or Vichistadvaitham is all about, let us not put down the other school of thought! Let us bring about the uniqueness and greatness in each one of them and follow our own traditions in their most righteous ways! That is the greatness of Hinduism! That is what we all take pride in! And that is why we are gathered here in this Forum as Brahmins! Someone on another topic is discussing about "Death to Brahminism" or Brahminism dying in another 20 or so years, because some boys and girls are marrying outside of Brahmin community. I think that despite all the radicalism that has crept into Brahminism thrust upon Brahmins by modern day scientific and technological changes, on their eating, drinking, living, marrying, begetting children and multifarious changes in our life style, more pronounced in the third quarter of last century and during the first quarter of this century, that Brahminism will continue to thrive and flourish!


Comments by Gopalswamy:

I AM NEITHER ADVAITHA HATER NOR DVAITHA LOVER. BUT I FOUND ONE COMMON THING AMONG THE PEOPLE WHO ADVOCATE THESE PHILOSOPHY. ALL ARE ACCEPTING THE IDOL WORSHIPS. THE RITUALS LIKE PUJA, READING PURANAS AND OBSERVING VARIOUS VRITHAMS ARE MORE OR LESS COMMON. WHY SHOULD WE FIGHT EACH OTHER. LET US DO THESE RITUALS VERY SINCERELY WITH ALL DEVOTION AND FIND OUT BY OUR OWNSELVES EITHER JEEVATMA AND PARAMATMAS ARE SEPERATE (DWAITHA), OR JEEVATHMAN IS PART OF PARAMATHMAN, (VISISHTADVAITHA M) OR JEEVATHMAN AND PARAMATHMAN ARE ONE AND THE SAME (ADVAITHA). iT MAY TAKE LOT OF JANMAS TO REALISE THIS TRUTH. BUT IF WE FOLLOW THE PATH PRESCRIBED BY OUR OWN GURUS AND OUR ANCESTORS,, WE CAN ACHIEVE THIS GOAL. IN THAT RESPECT, I WANT TO QUOTE FROM ADHISANKARA, '' O MOTHER!! WHEN I AM THINKING THAT I AM BODY, I FEEL THAT I AM YOUR SERVANT; WHEN I AM THINKING I AM MIND, I REALISE I AM PART OF U; WHEN i AM THINKING THAT I AM ATMAN, I AND U ARE ONE '' IN THESE WORDS, ADHI SANKARA INTEGRATED ALL THE THREE PHILOSOPHIES, ADVAITHA, VISISHTA DVAITHA, AND DVAITHA.


Comments : Srinivasan

I am neither a Dvaitha "Basher" nor an Advaitha "Hater" but in between the criss-crossings of some "bashings" counter-bashings or heated exchanges or should I say "comic-interlude" that occurred in the columns of this Forum a few weeks ago, between the proponents and the opponents, of one group versus the other, they seem to have almost forgotten that there exists another unique and distinguished spices or breed called "Vichshthadvaitham" of which faith, I am an ardent follower!

I thought I would share with Members of this distinguished Forum the values and underlying principles that distinguishes Vichishthadvaitham, from Dvaitham and Advaitham. I am appending below a link to a lecture-presentatio n in English language by Sriman Velukkudi Krishnan, founder of Kinchithkara Trust in Triplicane, Chennai 600 005. Sriman Velukkudi Krishnan, we believe, is the present day "Avatar" or descendant or incarnation of Sri Ramanuja, propagating His preachings and ideals to the SriVaishnavite community, the world over! Sriman Velukkudi Krishnan is well known, recognized and well respected by all SriVaishnavites (both Thenkalai and Vadakalai). I have heard many of Velukkudi's Upannayyasams, in which he holds Desikan in very high esteem!

Thought Dvaitha Bashers and Advaitha Haters, might find a higher ground in listening to his Lecture Presentation! Hope you all listen it!

Srimathe Ramanujaya Namaha

Here is a wonderful lecture in English on the Vishistadvaita philosophy.

http://antaryami.net/news/index.php/philosophy/videos/91-what-is-visishtadvaitha-uve-sri-velukkudi-krishnan-swami.html

I thank Mr and Mrs. Sumithra, Varadararajan, who work on behalf of the Webteam of Vanamamalai and were able to assist me with Sriman Velukkudi Krishnan's UpannYaasam, for the enlightenment of Fellow-Brahmins.
Asmad gurubhyO namaha


Comments by G.Balasubramanian


I have heard that there is no salvation for people who think they are different from God. And those who think that God is one who has a particular form and name like say, Krishna, Vishnu only are considered ignorant. The Supreme can not be limited to any particular name and form. It is the Supreme who thought" Ekoham Bahusyama"."I am one, let me become many." Creation started thereafter. It is the same Supreme being that becomes all beings. Those who can understand the Upanishads and Bhagawad Gita correctly, will realize the meaning of various scriptural declarations like---

1.Sarvam Khalu idam Brahma( Chandogya Upanishad3-14- 1)"The entire Universe is Brahman"

2.Ekam Sat Vipraah Bahuda vadanti (The one is spoken differently by realized persons)

3.Jiva is none other than Brahman(Jivo Brahmaiva na aparah).

4.Brahman is non-different from Jiva

5.Release is possible only through knowledge of non-difference between jiva and Brahman.

6.The illumined soul,having become free from name and form, reaches the Self-effulgent Purusha,that is higher than the higher.(Tathaa vidwan namarupaat vimuktah paraat param purusham upaiti divyam. Mundaka Upanishad 3-2-8)

7.Yato va imani bhutani jayante Yena jatani jivanti Yatprayanti abhisamvisanti Tadvijijinaasavasva Tadbrahma( That from which all these beings take birth, that by which they live after being born, that towards which they move and into which they merge,that is Brahman. Taittireeya Upanishad 3-1-1).i P

8. Sadeva somya idamagra aaseet.Ekameva adviteeyam Tattejo srujata(Chandogya Upanishad 6-2-1 and 3) (In the beginning, my dear, this was Being alone, one only without a second. it created fire.)

9.Atma va idameka evaagra aaseet . Sa imaanlokaanasrajata (Aitareya Upanishad 1-1-1&2)." In the beginning this was but the Absolute Self alone. He created these worlds"

10. Aham sarvasya prabhavo mattah sarvam pravartate. iti matvaa bhajante maam budhaa bhaavasamanavitaah (Gita 10.8) " I am the origin of all; from me things evolve. The wise know this and worship Me( not Vasudeav Krishna) with all their heart".

11.Mamaivaamso Jeevaloke Jeevabhtassanatanah Manasshashtaaneendr iyaani Prakritisthaani Karshati( Gita 15.7) (A ray of Myself, the eternal Jiva in the world of jivas, attracts the senses...... .....".

Any number of extracts from Upanishads and Bhagawad Gita in this regard can be quoted. Only those who can understand them in the correct way will be able to see the Truth.



"Advaita" is neutral for its LOVERS and HATERS as it is beyond all the duality of love and hate.
The ultimate truth named as "BRAHMA" in Upanishads is not an object for someones approval or someone else's rejection.
The Vedanta Sutras start with
"athato BRAHMA jignasa"

Bhagavan Baadarayana if he wanted to tell it is the enquiry into vishnu, siva, sakti etc., he should have told
athato vishnu jignaasa etc., so, let us keep the vedanta as vedanta and not equate the word BRAHMA with something else.

Also, vedanta uses the word "ATMA" in synonyms to the word BRAHMA. In most cases, the word ATMA is used to mean BRAHMA.

There are several instances shruti teaches that ATMA is BRAHMA. There is no instance shruti directly teaches ATMA is NOT BRAHMA.

All the confusion comes from the ISWARA (SAGUNA BRAHMA) who appears as the triad of

a. ISWARA (sattva guna or controlling and harmonizing feature)
b. jeeva (rajo guna of active/enjoyer nature)
c. jagat (tamo guna of inert and inactive or unconscious nature)

jeeva and jagat are ever controlled and sustained by the Iswara.

So, when there is no differentiation of the whole of jeeva+jagat+ iswara it is called BRAHMA. When the GUNAS (qualities, attributes, or judgements) are superimposed on the BRAHMA it is called ISWARA (representing the pure sattva) or called saguna Brahma (= iswara+jeeva+ jagat).

As the "rajoguna" of jeeva is not fully subsided, the jeeva continue to see the differentiation. .. so, dvaita is a correct philosophy as long as the true NATURE of BRAHMAN is not understood and BRAHMAN is only equated to ISWARA keeping the JAGAT and JEEVA seperate and dependent on the ISWARA. This iswara is given a supreme name as Vishnu, Krishna, Siva, Sakti, Devi etc., ADVAITA is not against this personification. ADVAITA is all inclusive and accepts whatever personification a devotee prefers, they are free to choose the ISWARA naama and roopa that best suits themselves.

But when JEEVA is completely purified and the TRUE NATURE OF BRAHMAN is realized the WHOLE is experienced as a WHOLE and no differentiation is such an ABSOLUTE WHOLE is possible. Such a Jnani concludes "vasudeva sarvam iti" all this is verily vasudeva (vasati sarvam iti vasu, sah deva vasudeva) and surrenders unconditionally and completely to the supreme lord who dwells within and who is beyond all the dualities and differentiation.

बहूनां जन्मनामन्ते ज्ञानवान्मां प्रपद्यते।
वासुदेवः सर्वमिति स महात्मा सुदुर्लभः।।7.19।।
om tat sat.
Note: This is my humble opinion that was arrived after studying the scriptures for few years. My understanding need not be approved by scholars of various schools. It is purely my understanding and serves its purpose!

Contribution by Narendra Sastry:
Dvaita finds its existence ONLY by opposing advaitha, if not , it has nothing much to get attraction

i have a story here to share with which some of you might have known

once a king wanted to have brahmagnaana, so he approached guru, while his visit, guru was having his head shaved by a barber, king started conversing with guru and requested him to teach him brahmagnaana as he has studied vedantha for 10 years, which has made him to realize about brahman, which as can NOT be same as his athma, so he was unsure about it

listening to these words guru just shook his head, after completion of his shave, he stood up and started prostrating to barber saying YOU ARE BRAHMAN,, YOU ARE GOD, with this unusual behavior barber stunned and said, NO NO I AM NOT BRAHMAN NOR GOD

so guru laughed and said king, look your 10 years of study to know you are NOT god , is also known this barber who have not studied any thing

king realized his mistake told guru that he will be learning under him to realize his true SELF

so lets not bother on dvaithis, let them talk and argue

please be advised, for any philosophy, these three things are primary

shruthi, yukthi and anubhava.... .rest remaining is just a game on jugglery of words which is of NO use

OM TAT SATH

Naren

Comments by Chellappa

It is futile to project one sect as higher or lower than another. Sankara was a great philosopher- poet who achieved in 32 years in pre-technology days what we cannot even think of. He is credited by many as being chiefly responsible for resurrecting Hinduism from non-vedic creed getting ascendance. He is hailed as great by many scholars across the shores, no one else seems to have got the same recognition. It is due to his power of thinking and expression.

His interpretation of the brahma sutras and the Upanishads has been cogent and daring at places. The mahavakyas seem to back him rather than any other acharya. Sri Ramanuja who came later saw the need to reorient the faith as advaitha seemed to veer out of course into cynicism, which was not what Sankara would have inteneded. Maya was not an invention of Sankara. Maya occurs in Srimad Bhagavatham and even several passages in that vaishnavite grantha seem to uphold advaitha.

Gnana marga is only for a very few, one in a million according to Gita. Worship of personal gods is thus the path for the ordinary people such as we are in religious parlance. Sankara himself has written several hymns in praise of deities on a non-sectarian basis.

The personal gods that we worship do not have empirical or scientific basis, the scintillating episodes of many mystics notwithstanding. They are useful and help us in ordering our life around a central purpose. Without the various deities our culture will fall apart. But in the vastness of space and immensity of time, the usefulness of such deities as a beacon light to lead our mundane life can be no guarantee of their intrinsic merit. The world seems to respond to our assumtions and if we believe fervently in something, it comes to pass. Christianity, Islam and other faiths have grown on this basis. Such numbers or examples cannot guide us to truth. The message of the vedanta is to seek in earnest and not stop until the last doubt in the mind is conclusively cleared. The ultimate truth can only be experienced and is ineffable.

Let all follow their chosen belief, but let none claim that his belief is superior. That will be diluting Hinduism

Comments by Mr. Ramani:

I would like to know whether all the above school of thoughts were available prior to AD 788 to 820 ( the period of Sankara- Advaitha great)

I very much doubt.

Sriyuths: Nathamuni AD 824 to 924; Sri Ymuna charya Ad918 to 1028, Sri Ramanujacharya Ad 1017 to 1137 ( Vishistha Advaitha greats)
Sri vyasa Thirtha AD 1447 to 1539 Sri Ragagendra AD 1598 to 1671Sri Madhwacharya AD 1238to 1317( Dwaitham greats)

All the above greats have interpreted in their own way. Defenitely there may not be any difference as stated above before the period of Sri Sankara.
All the above followers necessarily abide by Vedas which states:-:

"Prakjnam Brahma" in Rigveda,

"Aham Brahama" in Yajurveda,

"Tat twam Asi) in Samaveda and

"ayamathma Brahma- in Atharvana Veda

etc quote only one thing-that all are Gods and nothing else. So where is the necessity to discuss which following is superior.
Our understaning should be on the above line only and nothing else.

Request: If you know anything more or better, kindly post your comments please.