different type of vedanthas

8/3/2019 Different Type of Vedanthas

1/17

1 2003ASIAN STUDIES GRADUATE STUDENT COLLOQUIUM

Ved nta: A Comparative Analysis of Diverse SchoolsPrem Pahlajrai

Asian Languages and Literature

University of Washington

IntroductionTo the average person familiar with Hinduism, Ved nta is simply the last of the six

dar anas or systems of Hindu philosophy, based on the speculative inquiry into being

found in the Upani ads constituting the end, the anta, of the Vedic corpus. Some scholars

are prone to use Ved nta to refer to Advaita Ved nta alone, strict non-duality, of which

a kara is the most famous exponent. However, there are other Ved ntas, the better

known of which are R m nuja's vi i dvaita o r q u a l i f i e d n o n - d u a l i t y and Madhva's

dvaita, strict duality. In this paper I present the salient features of these schools along

with those of seven lesser known schools. Together with the aforementioned three,

Nimb rka's sv bh vikabhed bheda or natural difference and non-difference, Vallabha's

uddh dvaita or pure non-duality, constitute the paca-ved nta-samprad ya, the five

Ved nta traditions. The next five schools examined are lesser known but nonethelessinteresting interpretations: Bh skara's aup dhikabhed bheda or adventitious difference

and non-difference, r ka ha's vi i a iv dvaita o r q u a l i f i e d n o n - d u a l i t y w i t h i v a a s t h e

b a s i s , r pati's vi e dvaita o r s p e c i a l n o n - d u a l i t y , Vij nabhik u's avibh g dvaita or

non-duality of non-separateness, and Baladeva's acintyabhed bheda or inexplicable

duality and non-duality. Every one of these schools accepts the testimony of the

Upani ads as authoritative yet chooses to interpret them in different ways to support their

particular positions. I will briefly overview the standpoints of all these schools

individually. This will then facilitate comparison across several broad aspects and permit

us to make certain observations.

Brahmas

trabh

ya MethodologyIt is almost a requisite for proponents of any alternative views of Ved nta to give

credence to their views by providing a commentary of the Brahmastras of B

dar

ya

a,

thus attempting to demonstrate that their philosophy is the "true" interpretation of theVed nta (the Upani ads) as summarized in the Brahmas tra

1. The Brahmas tra is also

referred to as the Vedntas

tras or the

rirakam

m

s

s

tras and has a total of 560

s

tras or aphorisms intended as a systematized synthesis of the Upaniads. It may date as

far back as late second century or early first century BCE.2

The text is divided into four

adhy

yas, chapters. Each adhy

ya is divided into four quarters,p

das. The first adhy

ya,

the Samanvay

dhy

ya establishes that Brahman, the impersonal Absolute, is the sole

subject of the scriptures, the source of creation and the goal of one's life. The first four

s

tras of this chapter are commonly known as the Catu

s

tr

. The second chapter, theAvirodh

dhy

ya "deals with the consistency of the ideas relating to Brahman and

tman

1The Brahmas tras, the U p a n i s a d s and the Bhagavadg t together constitute theprasth natray , the

threefold authoritative foundation of Ved nta. The Upani ads are considered the rutiprashth na, the

Brahmas tras the ny yaprasth na and the G ta the sm tiprasth na. (Sastri, p.ii, Deutsch, p.3)2

Dasgupta, p. 421. Ayyangar (1979) claims that "occidental writers" picked this date in order to "show to

the world that the Indians copied everything from Greek literature." He suggests that B dar ya a was noneother than Vy sa and lived "about 3101 B.C. i.e. the beginning of the Kali age." (p.x)


2/17


drawn from the Upaniads"

3and refutes "the rival views of

S k h y a -yoga, Ny

ya-

Vaiesika, Buddhism, Jainism,

aivism and

aktism or

V a i s n a v i s m ".

4These two chapters

together constitute the philosophical portion of the text. Chapter three, S dhan dhy ya isabout the means for attaining moks

a, and chapter four, Phal

dhy

ya, is about the

successive stages ofm o k s a culminating in a final merging with Brahman.

The work is also divided into several sections, adhikara

as, with each sectionhaving six parts: 1. vi

aya, subject. 2. sa

aya, doubt. 3.p

rvapak

a, prima facie view.

4. uttarapaka, opposite view. 5. siddh

nta, conclusion and 6. sagati, consistency with

other parts of the work. Sa gati is intended to demonstrate that there is no conflict withthe rest of the work at the p da, adhy ya and scriptural level, as well as between sections

by way consistency of

k

epa, objection; d

nta, illustration; pratid

nta counter-

illustration; prasa ga, incidental illustration; utpatti, introduction and apav da,exception.

5

The Brahmastras are rather terse and a commentary is needed for it to be

understood. The first known commentary is thought to have been by either the

grammarian Bharthari

6in the fifth century CE about which not much is known or by

Baudh

yana

7

who is referred to in R

m

nuja's introduction to his commentary on theBrahmas tra. Baudh yana's commentary is not extant. Within the Ved nta system,

a

kara's is the earliest extant commentary though, and it is the one that everyone else

who follows takes great pains to refute. It is believed that the monistic views of a k a r a

were inspired by Gaudap da's commentary of the M ukya Upani ad rather than by the

original Brahmastra.

8Dasgupta, for example, believes that the Brahmas

tra was

probably more of an authoritative theist, dualist work.9

The schools of Vednta considered in the following are those where the founders

have written a commentary on the Brahmas

tras for the sake of demonstrating the

conformity of their views to the ruti, revealed scriptures. First let us consider the dates

of these individuals and a brief synopsis of their distinctive philosophies and views onliberation, to set the stage to enable a meaningful comparison. What follows has beengreatly informed by Chaudhuri (1973, 1975, 1981), Dasgupta (1922) and Sastri (1995).

1. KevaladvaitaWhen Ved nta is mentioned without any qualifications, most people tend to think

of keval

dvaita or absolute monism.

akara is the most famous proponent of this

school. The typical dates for him are 788-820 CE10

. But Paul Hacker suggests a timebefore or about 700 A.D. based on a karas quoting Dharmak rti in Upade as hasr ,

3Brockington, pp. 106-7

4

Sastri, p. ii.5Sastri, p. iii.

6Brockington, p. 107

7Dasgupta, v.1, pp. 70, 433

8Brockington, p. 107 and Dasgupta, v.1, pp. 422-3. G a u d a p d a was Govinda's teacher, who in turn was

a kara's teacher.9

Dasgupta, p. 432. Also confirmed by Thibaut, quoted in Apte, p. xxi. It appears that Thibaut was the

originator of this view, presented in the introduction to his translation of a kara's Brahmas trabh ya.However, Apte strenously objects to this view (pp. xxi-iii).10

For example, Brockington, 1996, p. 109.


3/17

PREM PAHLAJRAI 3

who lived mid-seventh century.11

Karl Potter argues for late seventh-early eighthcentury.

12Sure

vara, Padmap

da and To

aka were his direct students and other notable

advaitins in this school are V caspati Mi ra (840 CE), Vidy ra ya (1350 CE) to name

but a couple. To

akara, all diversity is unreal, mithy

and only Brahman is real, sat.

This reality is eternal, perfect, causeless, without change and all-pervading, the

substratum of everything. The individual self,j

va and the world,jagatappear as real dueto ignorance, avidy

. It is an illusion, vivarta, which has Brahman as its substratum. The

word m

y

is also sometimes used to describe the creation. It (m

y

) is consideredneither real nor unreal, but yet it is not ultimate. Epistemologically, m y is avidy . From

a metaphysical standpoint, m

y

may be considered as the mysterious power of Brahmanthat deludes us into taking the empirical world as reality

13though

a

kara takes pains

to not establish a connection between Brahman and m y . The means to liberation,

mok

a is the removal ofavidy

and the means for this is knowledge, j na alone.Mok ais not an attainment but simply a recognition of ones true nature as Brahman. Though this

school is typically described as monism,

a

kara actually called it non-dualism,advaita.

2. Vi i dvaitaR m nuja, the founder of the Vi i dvaitaor qualified monism doctrine is held to

have lived from 1017 to 1137 CE, a prodigiouslifespan of a hundred and twenty years!14

His birth date most likely was brought forward to permit him to be a successor ofY muna, who died in 1038.

15His doctrine attempted to synthesize Vai avism with

Ved

nta by emphasizing the theistic aspects of the Upaniads and the Brahmas

tras.

Whereas

a

kara maintained that Brahman, j

va and jagatare identical, for Rm

nuja,

j

va andjagatare real and distinct from Brahman but they exist based on Brahman alone.Though there is plurality among j

vas and jagat, the Brahman embodied in them is

singular. As Hiriyanna puts it, it is the qualifiedor the embodied that is one, while thefactors qualifying or embodying it are quite distinct, though inseparable, from it.

16In

other words, the plurality of the j

vas and jagat is the qualification of the non-dualBrahman, and hence the name of this system. Rather than Brahman, R

m

nuja prefers to

use the term vara, who is none other than Vi u or N r ya a. vara exists in all of us

j

vas as the inner controller, the antary

m

. He is omniscient and moves us all to action,fulfilling our desires according to our karma. Our free will is given to us by

vara. He

has created this world out of spontaneity and in play, l l . Liberation is the attainment ofthe world of N r ya a and the enjoyment of freedom and bliss there. This can be

achieved by prapatti, absolute self-surrender to Nr

ya

a and bhakti, which for

R m nuja means not faith-based devotion but rather meditation based upon the highest

knowledge which seeks to ignore everything that is not done for the sake of thedearest,

17i.e.

vara.

11In Halbfass, p. 27.

12Potter, Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies, v. 3, p. 14.

13Deutsch, p. 30.

14Karmarkar, pp. xiii, xv and Dasgupta, pp. 100, 104. However Sastri, p. iv has 1140 A.D.

15Brockington, p. 134.

16M. Hiriyanna, p. 178.

17Dasgupta, v. 3, p. 161.


4/17


3. DvaitaMadhva is considered the principal exponent of the doctrine of duality (or

plurality), dvaita. Like Vi i dvaita it is theistic and has N r ya a as its principal deity

and its followers too consider this to be as old as the Upaniads and Madhva was merely

a great exponent of this truth in later times. Madhva himself went by the name of

nandat

rtha and claimed that he received his revelations directly from Vedavy

sahimself. There is some uncertainty over his dates Dasgupta gives 1197-1276 CE,Brockington merely suggests he flourished in the thirteenth century,

18and Sastri provides

1238-1317 CE.19

Madhva opposes the identity of Brahman and the j va and posits afivefold bheda or difference in reality: between Brahman and j vas, Brahman and jagat,

jvasandjagat, between individual j

vas, and withinjagatin its various forms. He claimsthis view is supported by common sense. Upani

ad statements such as Sarvam

khalvidam Brahma, all this is indeed Brahman, are explained from the standpoint of

teleology despite the differences, Brahman, i.e. Vi u, is immanent in the entire

creation and is its controller. And these differences persist, even past liberation, mok

a.

Mok

a is attained through our recognition of our own and Vi

us true natures and our

utter dependence on him. Knowledge of our own and Vi

us true natures may beachieved through study of the scriptures, but it is only mediate. Through devotion, bhakti,

one realizes Vi

us greatness and goodness, which leads to Vi

us grace, which alone

can cause mok

a. To develop this philosophy, Madhva dismisses monistic passages in theUpani

ads as merely figurative and instead accepts the authority of the entire Vedas and

the Vai ava Pur as as well. Another unique characteristic of this doctrine is that it

divides j

vas in to three kinds: those chosen for eventual liberation, those doomed toeternal damnation and those destined to perpetual rebirth

20and some argue for Christian

influences on his work.21

4. Sv bh vikabhed bhedaOnce again, there is uncertainty and debate regarding the dates of the founder of

this doctrine, Nimbrka. His bh

ya appears to reflect Rm

nujas style and thus he is

assumed to have lived after him. But there is some controversy whether he lived evenafter Madhva.

22He is commonly held to be extant before Madhva around either mid-

twelfth century CE23

or the mid-thirteenth century. However Malkovsky reports on theradical proposal of Joseph Satyanand who holds Nimb

rka to predate

a

k a r a at about

475-525 CE.24

Nimb rkas Brahmas trabh ya is relatively brief and does not contain

any refutation, siddh nta of opposing views, p rvapak as. His doctrine is considered tobe an adaptation of Bh skaras bhed bheda doctrine which we shall discuss shortly.

Similar to Rm

nuja, he holds that j

va andjagatare distinct from Brahman as regards

18

Brockington, p. 148.19These (Sastri, p. iv) are the dates I provide in the table below for Madhva, somewhat arbitrarily.

20Brockington, p. 150.

21For example, Torwesten, p.162.

22Dasgupta, v. 3, pp. 399-400.

23Tapasy nanda, p. 85 presents 1162 CE as the year of Nimb rkas death.

24Satyanand, Joseph (1994)Nimb rka: A Pre- a kra Ved ntin and His Philosophy, Christnagar-Varanasi:

Vishwa Jyoti Gurukul. Satyanands arguments are summarized in Malkovsky, pp.116-127. Regrettably, I

have only very recently come across this and beyond mentioning this fact, I am unable to incorporate it anygreater detail at this point.


5/17

PREM PAHLAJRAI 5

their forms, attributes and functions, i.e. their gu

as, yet by nature, svar

pa they areidentical. Where R

m

nuja emphasized the identity of nature, Nimb

rka holds that the

difference, bheda and identity, abheda are both equally important. The seemingcontradiction of identity and difference coexists in harmony in Brahman as an organic

whole and this is just inherent to Brahmans nature, i.e. it is sv

bh

vika. Brahman is

non-different from the j

vas and jagat because they depend on Him for their being ortheir very existence, but He is different from them as He is self-dependent and possessesthe unique qualities of omniscience, omnipotence and the like which the latter do not

possess.25

Nimb rka doesnt consider j va-jagat as qualities or attributes of Brahmansince to do so differentiates the possessor of the attribute from the attribute. J vas are

liberated only by

varas grace. This liberation is achieved either throughj nayoga, thepath of knowledge or through bhaktiyoga, devotion. Performance of ones duties without

personal desire prepares the way for passionate devotion of vara and for self-surrenderto him. Liberation is achieved only on death and is of four grades, ranging from

proximity to

vara to merger with him without losing ones individual nature. In otherwords the difference and identity persists throughout.

5. uddh dvaitaThe system of Vallabha (1479-1531 CE)

26puts forth the pure, uddha non-duality

of Brahman, untouched by m

y

. J

va-jagatare nothing but manifestations of Brahman,which is K

a. M

y

is the power of K

a, which causes the misunderstanding of the

jagat. It is only the non-difference, abheda that is real, while the perception of all

seeming difference, bheda exists for the sake of K

as sport, l l . While Brahman can

be attained via action and knowledge, this is the lower or ak

ara Brahman with limitedbliss. The bhakti m

rga is superior and easy to follow, resulting in participation in the l

l

of K

a. Liberation of the j

va is dependent on K

as grace. Vallabhas philosophy

may be felt to lack the intellectual arguments and debate that characterizes a karas

work. Brahman is to be known not intellectually, but intuitively.27

J

vas are to Brahman

like sparks to a fire, they are parts of Brahman which lack the divine qualities owing tosuppression, tirobh va, of Brahmans bliss. There are a multiplicity of types ofj vas,

includingj

van-muktas, pu

i j

vas andprav

ha j

vas among others.28

Pu

im

rga or thepath of grace is the path of complete self-surrender and innate faith in K a, that his

grace will certainly save the follower on this path. This has implications of pre-

destination and denial of free will, total dependence on K

as grace. But for apu

i j

va,

devotion is the means and the end, service of K a leads to the highest bliss. Bhakti

results in a three-fold fruit: K

a subordinates himself to the devotee, the devotee attains

association with the divine and ultimately a supernatural body is attained whereby thedevotee can participate in the divine sports of K a.

25Tapasy nanda, pp. 89-90.

26This (1479-1531 CE) is the date in Marfatia, p. 8, Reddington, p. 1 and Brockington, p. 165. Sastri, p. iv

has 1479-1544. But Shah, pp. 4,52 suggests 1473/9-1532, Tapasy nanda, p. 201 gives 1473-1531 and

Dasgupta, v.4, p.371 has 1481-1533.27

Shah, p. 55.28

For a detailed treatment, see Marfatia, p. 24.


6/17


6. Aup dhikabhed bhedaThis version of the bhed

bheda or identity in diversity doctrine was formulated by

Bh skara and is considered a precursor to Nimb rkas doctrine. Bh skara is known to be

definitely after

a

kara and before Rm

nuja, who refutes his views in his bh

ya.29

Hajime Nakamura dates him to 750-800 CE.30

Bh

skara also is critical of

a

karas

doctrines dependence on m

y

he believes that

a

kara ignored the Upani

adicpassages which describe Brahman as possessed of attributes. For Bhskara, Brahman

manifests itself in various forms and effects, asj

va-jagat, by taking on up

dhis, limiting

adjuncts. These up dhis are real and due to Brahmans power, they cause the bondage ofj

vas. His sense ofup

dhi here is different from that of

a

kara, who holds that up

dhis

are ultimately unreal, mithy . Liberation or mok a is a state of fullest bliss, nanda and itis not ever present and eternal it has to be attained through both karma andj na and is

achieved only after the fall of the physical body. In other words, j

van-mukti is notpossible. By performance of ones duties prescribed by the Vedas without any attachment

to the fruits, as well as by meditation on Brahman and the j

vas oneness with it, one canrelease oneself from the bondage of the up

dhis. Interestingly, there is no bhakti involved

in this process. Bh

skaras doctrine is considered a forgotten system in Indianphilosophy.31

Though he is critical of a karas view, his alternate system is hobbled by

the logical inconsistencies of his unique up

dhi doctrine.

7. Vi i a iv dvaitaThe date of 1270 CE that I have for the founder of this school, r ka ha, occurs

only in one source32

and is not substantiated elsewhere. The only thing known for certainis that he came after

a

kara, aspects of whose doctrine he refutes

33and before the

sixteenth century, from when we have a commentary on his Brahmas tra bh ya.34

Thephilosophy of this doctrine is coupled with the theism where

iva is the highest deity and

is equated to Brahman. Brahman is different in nature from the j

va-jagat, yet these arepervaded by Brahman and hence non-different too. However, r ka ha doesnt support

absolute monism, absolute dualism or identity-in-difference, bhed

bheda. The relation is

one of cause and effect the effect is not separate from the cause, yet they are notidentical either, since the cause transcends the effect, despite being immanent in the

effect. Brahman,

iva is qualified, vi

i

a byj

va-jagatand together they form an organic

whole, advaita, hence the name of the doctrine, vi i a iv dvaita. Individuals achieveliberation through knowledge, for which one prepares by performing karmas in

accordance with dharma. And it is the knowledge of

iva-nature,

ivatva which isachieved through meditation on the nature of

iva as being non-different from ones own.

In fact it is only through

ivas grace that karma has efficacy and can allow for thepossibility of liberation.

35Liberation is possible both while still living (j

van-mukti), as

29See Chaudhuri (1981), pp.3-5 where the evidence presented can put Bh skara anywhere in the 8th to

10th century CE, coming after a m k a r a , but before V caspati Mi ra, 841-2 CE and R m nuja 1016-17 CE.Hacker, on the other hand, held V caspati to the tenth century. (Halbfass, p.100, n.44).30

InA History of Early Ved nta Philosophy, pp. 66-7, cited in Malkovsky, p. 3.31

Tapasy nanda, p. 87.32

Sastri, p. iv. I did later find a date of13th

century AD ascribed to him in Khanna, p. 470.33

Chaudhuri (1962), pp. 5-7.34

Appaya D k itas iv rka-Ma i-Dpik c.1550 AD.35

Dasgupta, v.5, pp. 86-7.


7/17

PREM PAHLAJRAI 7

well as after death (videha-mukti). Yet, the liberated individual, though all-pervading,vibh

still lacks

ivas powers of creation and destruction and is not quite united with

iva a slight difference still persists.

8. Vi e dvaitaThis doctrine is followed by the V ra aiva or Li g yat sect and its founder, r pati

is dated approximately to fourteenth century CE, with the usual uncertainties.36

Here,

Brahman is iva, and is sagu a and savi e a, i.e. possessed of qualities and differences.Creation is a sport, l

l

on the part of

iva, in order that j

vas can work out their karma.

The relation between Brahman andj

va-jagatis that ofbhed

bheda, identity in differenceas seen in other doctrines also, with abheda, identity dominant. But he also asserts that

bheda and abheda dont coexist at the same time. The bheda is during bondage and the

abheda during liberation. He provides two explanations for the term vi

e

dvaita: vi

e

adenotes the bheda, difference and advaita the abheda between Brahman and j va.

Alternately, vi

e

a can be interpreted as special to denote that this is a special kind ofadvaita. This term is deliberately chosen to differentiate this doctrine from R

m

nujas

vi

i

dvaita which he refutes in his bh

ya along with those of

a

kara and Madhva.Liberation is similar to that of Vi

i

a

iv

dvaita, thej

va takes on the nature of Brahman

but remains subservient to iva. Butj van-mukti is not possible according to this system.The means for liberation are similar too, with the added stipulation that the seeker should

apply the outer marks of

iva on ones body. In fact, merely doing so may be adequate toachieve liberation.

37

9. Avibh g dvaitaVij nabhik u, the formulator of this doctrine, is more famous for his commentary

on the S

khyas

tras and is assigned to either the sixteenth century or the mid-

seventeenth century CE.38

His philosophy is theistic monism grafted onto the classical

S

khya dualism ofpuru

a andprak

ti. Brahman holds within itselfpuru

a andprak

tiand manifests itself in diverse forms. It is the basis for the universe, it holds it togetherand it exists in the universe, undivided and indistinguishable. There is no duality as the

universe cannot be conceived of apart from Brahman which forms its basis yet remainsunchanged in its transcendental reality.J

vas are derived from Brahman like sparks from

a fire. They are the nature of pure consciousness, like Brahman, yet they retain their

individuality. Prak

ti andpuru

a together form the conditioning factors, up

dhis for the

j

vas which cause them to appear limited and finite, distinct from Brahman. Trueknowledge of Brahman cannot be found through the intellect, buddhi, since it continually

reaffirms the tendency for separation. Brahman thus can only be realized by bhakti aslove. The process of listening to

varas name, adoring him, describing his virtues, and

meditation ultimately lead to true knowledge and a state of non-difference with ultimate

consciousness, Brahman.

36Rao, p. 31: between 1300 and 1400 A.D. Dasgupta, p. 173: latter half of the fourteenth century.

Chaudhuri (1981) p. 187: probably during the 14th

Cent. A.D. Sastri, p. iv. 1400 A.D.37

For a discussion of the differences between r pati, a kara, R m nuja and r ka ha and an overallevaluation of r patis doctrine, see Rao, pp. 698-704 and Chaudhuri (1981), pp. 229-40.38

Dasgupta, v.1, pp. 212, 221: sixteenth century. Rao, p. 153: mid-seventeenth century. Sastri, p. v: 1600A.D.


8/17


10.Acintyabhed bhedaThere is some degree of agreement that Baladeva, the spokesman of this school of

inexplicable, acintya identity in difference, duality and nonduality, can be located in themid-to-latter half of the eighteenth century.

39He was a Vai ava follower of the Caitanya

sect and the Bengali Gau

ya school and he also traced his lineage back to the Madhva

school.

40

Brahman is the same as

vara who is also K

a. He possesses all thedifferences and yet is without difference. This inconsistency is resolved by a novel

conception ofvi e a, peculiarity, which allows affirmation of the qualities of Brahmaneven though there is no difference between Brahman and its qualities. Thus there is

bheda and abheda between Brahman andj

va-jagat. Baladeva resolves this inconsistencyuniquely by claiming that it is inexplicable, acintya from the human perspective, it is the

play, l

l

of Vi

u. Liberation, mukti is only possible without a body, i.e. it is videha, and

has five grades, ranging from attaining the form of

vara to being in the closest possiblerelation with him. Still, even at the highest grade of mukti, the j

va is different from

Brahman. Karma performed unselfishly (ni

k

ma) helps purify the heart in preparation

for mok a. Knowledge, j na is the only means to liberation, but bhakti is also

considered a form of knowledge and involves worship of and self-surrender to

vara.Ultimately, liberation requires

varas grace.

Having now overviewed these schools individually, we can proceed to compare

them with each other. To facilitate this, I've laid out their characteristic aspects in tabularform.

39

Chaudhuri (1981), p. 241: flourished in the 18th

century A.D. Dasgupta, v.4, p. 438, locates one of his

works to 1764 CE and Sastri, p. v, dates him to 1725 A.D. The only dissenting opinion is from Rao, p. 181,

with two sets of almost similar dates: 1486-1534 and 1485-1533.40

Chaudhuri (1981), pp. 241-4, 249-51.


9/17


T y p e :

A s p e c t

K e v a l d v a i t a

4 1

V i i d v a i t a S v b h v i k a -

b h e d b h e d a

4 2

D v a i t a

4 3

u d d h d v a i t a

4 4

A u p d h i k a -

b h e d b h e d a

4 5

V i i a -

i v d v a i t a

T r a n s l a t i o n A b s o l u t e

m o n i s m

Q u a l i f i e d

m o n i s m

N a t u r a l

d i f f e r e n c e a n d

n o n - d i f f e r e n c e

D i f f e r e n c e o r

P l u r a l i t y

P u r e m o n i s m A d v e n t i t i o u s

d i f f e r e n c e a n d

n o n - d i f f e r e n c e

Q u a l i f i e d

m o n i s m w i t h

i v a b e i n g

c e n t r a l

P r o p o n e n t a k a r a R m n u j a N i m b r k a M a d h v a V a l l a b h a B h s k a r a r k a h a

D a t e s

4 7

L a t e 7

t h

/ e a r l y 8

t h

c e n t u r y C E

1 0 1 7 - 1 1 3 7 C E M i d 1 2

t h

/ m i d

1 3

t h

c e n t u r y

C E

4 8

1 2 3 8 - 1 3 1 7 C E 1 4 7 9 - 1 5 3 1 C E 7 5 0 - 8 0 0 C E 1 2 7 0 C E

B r a h m a s t r a

C o m m e n t a r y

r i r a k a -

m m s -

b h y a a . k . a .

k a r a - b h y a

r b h y a V e d n t a -

p r i j t a -

s a u r a b h a

P r a -

p r a j a b h y a

4 9

A u b h y a B h s k a r a - b h y a

a . k . a . r i r a k a -

m m s - b h y a

a i v a b h y a ,

a . k . a . B r a h m a -

m m s -

b h y a

T y p e o f

D o c t r i n e

M o n i s m ,

i l l u s i o n i s m

M o n o t h e i s m M o n o t h e i s m M o n o t h e i s m M o n o t h e i s m N o n - t h e i s t i c

m o n i s m

M o n o t h e i s m

V i e a t v a o f

B r a h m a n

( p a r t i c u l a r i t y )

N i r v i e a ,

d e v o i d o f

i n t e r n a l

d i f f e r e n c e s

S a v i e a ,

p o s s e s s e d o f

s v a g a t a - b h e d a s ,

i n t e r n a l

d i f f e r e n c e s

S a v i e a ,

p o s s e s s e d o f

s v a g a t a - b h e d a s

N i r v i e a N i r v i e a N i r v i e a a s

k r a a , c a u s e ;

s a v i e a a s

k r y a , e f f e c t

S a v i e a ,

a b o d e o f a l l

s u p r e m e l y

a u s p i c i o u s

q u a l i t i e s

E k a t v a o f

B r a h m a n

( o n e n e s s )

" E k a m e v -

d v i t y a m "

C h n d . U . 6 . 2 . 1

u n c o m p r o m i s -

i n g

E k a , j v a &

j a g a t a r e

a t t r i b u t e s o f

B r a h m a n

E k a , j v a &

j a g a t a r e

a t t r i b u t e s o f

B r a h m a n

E k a , j v a & j a g a t

a r e p r a t i b i m b a s ,

r e f l e c t i o n s o f

B r a h m a n

E k a , b u t o n l y

r e g a r d i n g c a u s e

a n d e f f e c t . J v a s

d i f f e r f r o m

B r a h m a n i n g u a

a n d a k t i

E k a i n k r a a -

r p a , b u t

n n t v a a s

k r y a - r p a

E k a

41

Also termed nirvi

e

dvaita42

Also referred to as dvait

dvaita with or without the sv

bh

bika qualifier.43

Also known as bhedav

da44 There is also the uddh dvaita of Vi usv min, which may be a precursor but there is not much directly known ab45

This is also often referred to as simply bhed bheda, or dvait dvaita46

Also variously referred to as se var dvaita, iv dvaita, v ra aiva-v i i s t d v a i t a , sarva rutis ramata, and confusingdvait

dvaita47

Controversies regarding dates are footnoted where relevant and also in the sections above on the respective school48

Joseph Satyanand however places Ni b

rka at 475-525 CE. See s.v. and footnote 24 above.49

This is also often referred to as simply

rimad Brahmas

trabh

sya. Madhva also wrote a summary of his views in


10/17


T y p e :

A s p e c t


4 1


b h e d b h e d a

4 2

D v a i t a

4 3

u d d h d v a i t a

4 4

A u p d h i k a -

b h e d b h e d a

4 5

V i i a -

i v d v a i t a

G u a t v a o f

B r a h m a n

( P o s s e s s i o n o f

q u a l i t i e s )

N i r g u a S a g u a ,

p o s s e s s i n g o n l y

a u s p i c i o u s

a t t r i b u t e s .

S a g u a ,

p o s s e s s i n g o n l y

a u s p i c i o u s

a t t r i b u t e s .

S a g u a S a g u a a n d

n i r g u a

5 0 , 5 1

S a g u a S a g u a

K r i y a t v a ,

a g e n c y o f

B r a h m a n

N i k r i y S a k r i y S a k r i y S a k r i y S a k r i y N i k r i y S a k r i y

V i k r a t v a ,

t r a n s f o r m a t i o n

o f B r a h m a n

N i r v i k r a N i r v i k r a N i r v i k r a N i r v i k r a N i r v i k r a N i r v i k r a N i r v i k r a

T h e o r y o f

C a u s a t i o n

V i v a r t a v d a ,

a p p a r e n t

m a n i f e s t a t i o n

P a r i m a v d a ,

r e a l


P a r i m a v d a ,

r e a l


P a r i m a v d a ,

r e a l

m a n i f e s t a t i o n .

A l l t h i n g s

d e p e n d o n

B r a h m a n w h i c h

i s a l l - p e r v a s i v e .

B u t B r a h m a n i s

n i m i t t a k r a a

o n l y , e f f i c i e n t

c a u s e a n d n o t t h e

u p d n a k r a a ,

m a t e r i a l c a u s e .

2 k i n d s .

P a r i m a v d a ,

r e a l


a n d a v i k t a

p a r i m a v d a ,

u n c h a n g e d

t r a n s f o r m a t i o n .

I n f o r m e r : j v a

a n d j a g a t c o m e

f r o m B r a h m a n

a n d a r e a p a r t o f

i t . B u t d u e t o t h e

l a t t e r B r a h m a n

r e m a i n s

u n c h a n g e d .

a k t i v i k e p a

p a r i m a v d a ,


v i a p r o j e c t i o n o f

B r a h m a n ' s

p o w e r s . A l l

t h i n g s d e p e n d o n

B r a h m a n w h i c h

i s a l l - p e r v a s i v e .

B r a h m a n i s

n i m i t t a k r a a ,

e f f i c i e n t c a u s e a s

w e l l a s t h e

u p d n a k r a a ,

m a t e r i a l c a u s e .

T h e c a u s e a n d

e f f e c t a r e

i d e n t i c a l a s w e l l

a s d i f f e r e n t :

b h i n n b h i n n a

P a r i m a -

v d a .

B r a h m a n i s

b o t h , t h e

n i m i t t a a n d

u p d n a

k r a a ,

e f f i c i e n t a n d

m a t e r i a l

c a u s e . T h e

e f f e c t i s a


o f t h e

u n c h a n g e a b l e

B r a h m a n

b r o u g h t a b o u t

t h r o u g h l l ,

p l a y a s a n

e x p r e s s i o n o f

i v a ' s a k t i

P h e n o m e n a l

E x i s t e n c e

M i t h y d u e t o

m y , w h i c h i s

i n d e f i n a b l e , a n d

d u e t o a v i d y

S a t y a S a t y a S a t y a S a t y a . M y i s

n o t a v i d y b u t

B r a h m a n ' s

a c i n t y a a k t i

S a t y a , b e c a u s e

t h e u p d h i

5 2

i s

r e a l , t h o u g h

a n i t y a

S a t y a

50

For Vallabha, Brahman has svar pa and svabh va, ie. s a g u n a , but these are outward manifestations and are absolu

is ultimately n i r g u n a 51

Theg u n

a s

of brahman are acintya and ananta, inconceivable by us and therefore apparently contradictory52

For a m k a r a however, the up dh, limiting condition is anitya and asatya, ap ram rthika


11/17

PREM PAHLAJRAI

T y p e :

A s p e c t


4 1


b h e d b h e d a

4 2

D v a i t a

4 3

u d d h d v a i t a

4 4

A u p d h i k a -

b h e d b h e d a

4 5

V i i a -

i v d v a i t a

R e l a t i o n s h i p

b e t w e e n

B r a h m a n , j v a

a n d j a g a t

P r a m r t h i k a

( u l t i m a t e )

i d e n t i t y ,

v y a v a h r i k a

( e m p i r i c a l )

r e a l i t y &

d i f f e r e n c e d u e t o

m y

I d e n t i c a l

( a b h e d a ) i n

s v a r p a ,

e s s e n t i a l n a t u r e ,

b u t d i f f e r e n t i n

v i e a g u a -

h e n c e t h e n a m e

o f t h i s s c h o o l .

T h e a b h e d a

t a k e s

p r e c e d e n c e .

B r a h m a n i s t h e

w h o l e w h i l e

j v a - j a g a t a r e

t h e p a r t s o f

w h i c h B r a h m a n

i s t h e

a n t a r y m , t h e

i n t e r n a l

r e g u l a t o r .

C a u s e

( B r a h m a n ) a n d

e f f e c t ( j v a -

j a g a t ) i d e n t i c a l

i n s v a r p a , b u t

d i f f e r e n t i n

g u a . T h e

a b h e d a a n d

b h e d a a r e o n

p a r w i t h e a c h

o t h e r

A b s o l u t e

d i f f e r e n c e

b e t w e e n

B r a h m a n , j v a

a n d j a g a t . .

A b s o l u t e

i d e n t i t y .

B r a h m a n h a s s a t -

c i t - n a n d a

g u a s , j v a s a t -

c i t , a n d j a g a t

o n l y s a t

B r a h m a n i s

v i b h , j v a i s a u

J v a - j a g a t a r e

b h i n n b h i n n a


d u r i n g i t s

k r y v a s t h ,

s a s r a , b u t

n o n - d i f f e r e n t

d u r i n g i t s

k r a v a s t h ,

d u r i n g

d i s s o l u t i o n a n d

l i b e r a t i o n .

B r a h m a n a n d

j v a - j a g a t a r e

n e i t h e r

a b s o l u t e l y

d i f f e r e n t , n o r

a b s o l u t e l y

i d e n t i c a l , n o r

b o t h d i f f e r e n t

a n d n o n -

d i f f e r e n t . T h e

r e l a t i o n i s t h a t

o f c a u s e a n d

e f f e c t , o n e i s

i m p o s s i b l e

w i t h o u t t h e

o t h e r . T h e

c a u s e

t r a n s c e n d s t h e

e f f e c t t h o u g h

i t i s i m m a n e n t

i n t h e e f f e c t .

R e l a t i o n s h i p

b e t w e e n

B r a h m a n a n d

v a r a

v a r a i s s a g u a

B r a h m a n , t h e

m y r e f l e c t e d

f o r m o f B r a h m a n

B r a h m a n i s

v a r a , n o n e

o t h e r t h a n

V i u

B r a h m a n i s

v a r a , n o n e

o t h e r t h a n r

K a

B r a h m a n i s

v a r a , n o n e

o t h e r t h a n V i u

B r a h m a n i s

v a r a , n o n e

o t h e r t h a n r

K a

B r a h m a n i s

v a r a , b u t n o n -

t h e i s t i c .

B r a h m a n i s

i v a


12/17


T y p e :

A s p e c t


4 1


b h e d b h e d a

4 2

D v a i t a

4 3

u d d h d v a i t a

4 4

A u p d h i k a -

b h e d b h e d a

4 5

V i i a -

i v d v a i t a

M o k a ,

l i b e r a t i o n

I d e n t i t y w i t h

B r a h m a n a l r e a d y

e x i s t s , b u t

f o r g o t t e n d u e t o

a j n a

R e a l i z a t i o n o f

t h e s v a r p a

i d e n t i t y w i t h

B r a h m a n ; g u a

d i f f e r e n c e

p e r s i s t s . J v a n -

m u k t i , l i b e r a t i o n

i n t h e p r e s e n t

e x i s t e n c e i s n o t

p o s s i b l e .

R e a l i z a t i o n o f

t h e s v a r p a

i d e n t i t y w i t h

B r a h m a n ; g u a

d i f f e r e n c e

p e r s i s t s . E v e n

p a s t d e a t h , a

m u k t a j v a i s

s e p a r a t e f r o m

B r a h m a n

D i f f e r e n c e

b e t w e e n

B r a h m a n a n d

j v a p e r s i s t s p o s t -

m o k a . J v a i s

u n l i m i t e d

k n o w l e d g e a n d

b l i s s , b u t s t i l l

d e p e n d e n t o n

v a r a .

J v a n m u k t i i s n o t

p o s s i b l e .

I d e n t i t y w i t h

B r a h m a n a l r e a d y

e x i s t s . J v a i s

b o u n d i n

s a s r a d u e t o

a v i d y . A m u k t a

j v a s t i l l d i f f e r s


r e m a i n i n g a u

a n d l a c k i n g

p o w e r s o f s i ,

s t h i t i a n d l a y a

J v a n - m u k t i i s

s u p p o e r t e d .

M o k a i s n o t

p u r e k n o w l e d g e ,

b u t f u l l n e s s o f

n a n d a . J v a i s

n o t n i t y a m u k t a .

J v a n m u k t i i s n o t

p o s s i b l e . M o k a

i s p o s s i b l e o n l y

a f t e r f a l l o f t h e

e a r t h l y b o d y .

M o k a i s t h e

a t t a i n m e n t o f

i v a t v a . B u t

t h e j v a o n l y

b e c o m e s

s i m i l a r t o , n o t

i d e n t i c a l w i t h

i v a . T h e

m u k t a j v a i s

v i b h , a l l -

p e r v a s i v e b u t

l a c k s t h e

p o w e r o f s i ,

s t h i t i a n d l a y a .

J v a n - m u k t i

a n d v i d e h a -

m u k t i a r e

s u p p o r t e d .

M u k t i i s n i t y a .

S d h a n a T a t t v a j n a o f

t m a a n d

B r a h m a n

B h a k t i , w h i c h i s

c o n s i d e r e d t h e

m a t u r e f o r m o f

j n a . T h i s

i n v o l v e s r a t h e r

t h a n f e e l i n g ,

c o n t e m p l a t i o n

o f t h e s t e r n e r ,

m o r e d i s t a n t

a s p e c t s o f

v a r a

E m o t i o n a l

b h a k t i ,

i n v o l v i n g

c o n t e m p l a t i o n

o f t h e s w e e t e r ,

m o r e b e n i g n ,

c l o s e r a s p e c t s o f

v a r a

J n a l e a d s t o

b h a k t i , b h a k t i t o

d h y n a ,

m e d i t a t i o n . T h e

l a t t e r t w o a r e

d i r e c t m e a n s t o

m o k a . U l t i m a t e

c a u s e t h o u g h i s

v a r a ' s g r a c e

T h r o u g h j n a ,

t h e a k a r a

B r a h m a n c a n b e

r e a l i z e d . B h a k t i

a l o n e r e v e a l s t h e

n a n d a o f

B r a h m a n . P u i -

b h a k t i r e q u i r e s

o n l y v a r a ' s

g r a c e

J n a a l o n g w i t h

k a r m a i s n e e d e d

f o r m o k a .

A t t a c h m e n t t o

B r a h m a n i s

r e q u i r e d i n t h e

f o r m o f b h a k t i

w h i c h r a t h e r t h a n

f e e l i n g - b a s e d i s

d h y n a o n

n i r g u a ,

n i r v i e a ,

n i r k r a

B r a h m a n .

J n a , n o t

k a r m a , i s t h e

m e a n s . J n a

l e a d s t o

u p s a n a o r

d h y n a o n t h e

s v a r p a o f

i v a b e i n g

n o n - d i f f e r e n t

f r o m o n e ' s

o w n n a t u r e .

D i v i n e g r a c e

t h e n l e a d s t o

m o k a

53

Dasgupta, v.3, pp.450-1 uses terms as "Ultimate Being," "Ultimate Principle" to be different from "great soul, par

these corresponds to Brahman


13/17

PREM PAHLAJRAI

T y p e :

A s p e c t


4 1


b h e d b h e d a

4 2

D v a i t a

4 3

u d d h d v a i t a

4 4

A u p d h i k a -

b h e d b h e d a

4 5

V i i a -

i v d v a i t a

S p e c i a l

F e a t u r e s

" w h a t i s

p r a m r t h i k a t o

R m n u j a i s

v y a v a h r i k a t o

a k a r a "

E t e r n a l h e l l i s

p o s s i b l e . V y u ,

s o n o f V i u

m e d i a t e s

s a l v a t i o n t h r o u g h

V i u - i n f l u e n c e

o f C h r i s t i a n i t y ? ?

M o n i s t i c

p a s s a g e s o f t h e

U p a n i a d s a r e

d i s m i s s e d a s

m e r e l y

f i g u r a t i v e .

A t t e m p t s t o

a d d r e s s

w e a k n e s s o f

m y i n

a k a r a ' s

d o c t r i n e .

S o m e c o n s i d e r

B h s k a r a t o b e a

p r a c c h a n n a

a d v a i t i n , a

d i s g u i s e d m o n i s t

M y a s U m

i s a p a r a a k t i

o f i v a . i v a

i s l o v e , a n d

f o r a n o b j e c t

o f h i s f u l l e s t

l o v e , U m

a p p e a r s a s

t h o u g h

d i f f e r e n t f r o m

i v a , t h r o u g h

l l

L i m i t a t i o n s ,

O b s t a c l e s ( a s

p e r c e i v e d b y

t h o s e e x t e r n a l

t o t h e s y s t e m )

M y i s h a r d t o

a c c e p t , t h e r e

b e i n g n o

e m p i r i c a l

e v i d e n c e . T h e

m o n i s t i c d o c t r i n e

i s a g a i n s t a l l

e x p e r i e n c e . I t i s

v e r y i m p e r s o n a l

a n d n i r g u a

B r a h m a n i s h a r d

t o r e l a t e t o .

F e n c e - s i t t e r

c a n t b e b o t h

d u a l a n d

n o n d u a l ! T h e

p a r t s ( j v a -

j a g a t ) c a n ' t b e

i d e n t i c a l w i t h

B r a h m a n i n

s v a r p a a n d y e t

d i f f e r e n t i n

g u a a n d a k t i .

M o k a s

d e p e n d e n c e o n

V i u s g r a c e i s

v i e w e d a s

s u b v e r t i n g t h e

l a w s o f k a r m a .

T h e j v a - j a g a t

a r e n o t i d e n t i c a l

w i t h B r a h m a n

b e c a u s e t h e n

B r a h m a n w o u l d

s u f f e r t h e i r

i m p e r f e c t i o n s .

C o e x i s t e n c e o f

b h e d a a n d

a b h e d a i s

i l l o g i c a l .

D o e s n ' t b o t h e r

w i t h t h e

r e f u t a t i o n o f

r i v a l t h e o r i e s .

S t r i c t s e p a r a t i o n

o f B r a h m a n , j v a

a n d j a g a t i s

p h i l o s o p h i c a l l y

c o n t r a d i c t o r y t o

n i r v i e a t v a o f

B r a h m a n

p a r t i c u l a r l y i f

B r a h m a n i s a l l -

p e r v a s i v e

t h r o u g h j v a -

j a g a t . A l s o ,

e t e r n a l h e l l a n d

g r a c e d o n o t f i t

w i t h k a r m a

t h e o r y .

C o n t r a d i c t i o n o f

e k a t v a o f

B r a h m a n w i t h

s e p a r a t i o n o f

m u k t a j v a s f r o m

B r a h m a n . D v a i t a

s t i l l p e r s i s t s !

S a m e w i t h

s a g u a t v a a n d

n i r v i e a t v a o f

B r a h m a n . P u i

b h a k t i i m p l i e s

p r e d e s t i n a t i o n

a n d l a c k o f f r e e

w i l l .

U n l i k e f o r

a k a r a ,

B r a h m a n i s f r e e

f r o m 3 o f t h e 4

v i k r a s : c r e a t i o n ,

c h a n g e , r e f o r m .

I t i s h o w e v e r

p y a , a t t a i n a b l e

t h i s s e e m s t o

i m p l y t h a t j v a

j a g a t a r e o t h e r

t h a n B r a h m a n , a

c o n t r a d i c t i o n .

B r a h m a n a s b o t h

n i r g u a a n d

s a g u a i s a l s o

i l l o g i c a l . P e c u l i a r

d e f i n i t i o n o f

u p d h i

S i m i l a r i s s u e s

a s R m n u j a ' s

V i i d v a i t a .


14/17


Doctrines Not ConsideredIn the above analysis, I chose to leave out Vi

usv

min'suddh

dvaita which is

treated as a separate school by Chaudhuri (1981). What little is known about him and his

views is only through the writings and references of others, and does not seem to be anydifferent from Vallabha's views. Some consider Vi

usv

min to be a predecessor of

Vallabha, but this view is not accepted by all.

54

Chaudhuri also presents Vivekananda'sschool as mnav

dvaita, humanistic monism.

55I didn't deem it to merit an independent

column in the above analysis, since it is mainly monistic advaita combined with a theistic

bhakti approach towards one's fellow humans, considered them as Brahman personified.As such, bhakti is added as a secondary s dhana.

A more significant omission from this comparative analysis might be that of neo-advaita. It may come down to be no different than

a

kara's advaita as presented in the

above analysis, but mostly due to time constraints, I have chosen not to delve deeper at

present.56

I will simply present a token quote here to provide a sense: "[Neo-Vednta]

strives to find ever more adequate concepts for describing the Absolute [author's term for

Brahman], not as a goal to be achieved (only mok

a is the goal) but as progress in the

interminable search for understanding. [] Neo-Ved

nta is not a doctrine to be acceptedor rejected but a way of thinking capable of infinite development and variation, a livelyshoot on the ancient stock of Ved

nta philosophy."

57

Some Observations

What may not readily be apparent from this analysis is that all these differentschools accept the "law" of karma and that one's highest purpose in life is to strive for

mok

a, liberation from the cycle of birth and suffering and death, sams ra. These schoolsmay disagree about how moks

a can be best achieved, what form it will take and whetherit is attainable in the present life or beyond but none denies that freedom is actually

possible.

I am reminded of the Buddhist references to ku

ala up

ya, expedient means toreconcile divergent and seemingly contradictory teachings ascribed to the Buddhahimself. For Ved

nta it is slightly different rather than ascribing their opinions to a

specific person like the Buddha, it is the ruti that the "founders" of the various schoolsinvoke to support their views and their task is made harder by the fact that the words of

the

ruti are fixed, only the interpretations can vary and it is their burden to justify thecorrectness of their interpretation. I cannot but help see these diverse attempts as up yas

as there are many different personalities, it is only fitting that there be many diverse

ways of achieving the highest goal,m o k a

. I suspect that one cannot clinically andobjectively determine the superiority of any one approach over the rest. One tends

naturally to choose the approach that fits best within one's ideology and predilections,whether due to ones environment or ones past karma as the case may be. If one prefers

to relate to "supreme perfection" personified, perhaps the approach via bhakti will seem"best" with as much or as little non-duality as one is willing to tolerate providing a reason

54See Dasgupta, pp.382-3, Chaudhuri (1981), pp. 54-6, and Brockington, pp.165-6 for historical

background.55

Chaudhuri (1981), pp.366-41756

And, as far as I know, it conveniently does not match my original criterion of having a Brahmas tra

bh ya!57

George Bosworth Burch in his introduction to Bhattacharyya (1976), p.2.


15/17

PREM PAHLAJRAI 15

for the variance from strict dvaita through bhed

bheda to advaita qualified in one formor another. But if one is more partial to "pure" reason alone, unencumbered by emotion,

then the uncompromising non-duality of a k a r a ' s advaita might appeal.

Ultimately though, the proof of the pudding is in the eating, or as a commentator onthe works of Madhva, Vy

sat

rtha says:

n a h k s u l e h a n e n a i v a j t a i k s u r a s o b h a v e t .

n a c e k s u d a n d a m n i s p d y a l a b d h o n e k s u r a s o b h a v e t .58

"By merely licking the outer surface of sugarcane, one can't taste and enjoy its

sweetness; Without squeezing it between the teeth, one cannot enjoy the flavor ofthe sugarcane."

It is only through praxis, through applying these philosophies to one's own life, that

one can determine if any of these schools deliver the goods on moka. That there has

been and continues to be healthy debate between the proponents of these various schoolsserves to indicate that each seeker is trying to test the efficacy of their avowed doctrine

against others. That these debates continue to this date without any resoundinglyconclusive victory on the part of any given school may suggest that in their own fashion

these diverse schools are efficacious suited to the individual practitioners' propensitiesand predilections, and that there may be more than just one way to attaining moksa.

58Sharma, p.xi


16/17


References

Apte, Vasudeo Mahadeo (1960),Brahma-Stra Sh

nkara-Bh

shya. Bombay: Popular

Book Depot.

Ayyangar, M.B.Narasimha, trans. (1979), Ved

ntas

ra of Bhagvad R

m

nuja. Adyar

Library and Research Center.

Bhattacharyya, Krishna Chandra (1975), Search for the Absolute in Neo-Vedanta. ed.George B. Burch. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

Brockington, J. L. (1996), The Sacred Thread: Hinduism in its Continuity and Diversity.Edinburgh University Press.

Chaudhuri, Roma (1962),Doctrine of Srikantha (and other Monotheistic Schools of the

Vednta) Vol I. Calcutta: Pracyavani.

Chaudhuri, Roma (1972), Ten Schools of the Ved nta: Part I (Five Schools). Calcutta:

Rabindra Bharati University.

Chaudhuri, Roma (1975), Ten Schools of the Ved

nta: Part II (Further reflections of the

Five Schools of the Vednta). Calcutta: Rabindra Bharati University.

Chaudhuri, Roma (1981), Ten Schools of the Vednta: Part III (Five Remaining Schools,

Together with the Unique School of Swami Vivekananda). Calcutta: Rabindra

Bharati University.

Dasguta, Surendranath (1922),A History of Indian Philosophy, v.1-5. Delhi: Motilal

Banarsidass.

Deutsch, Elliot (1973),Advaita Ved

nta: A Philosophical Reconstruction. Honolulu:

University of Hawaii Press.

Hiriyanna, M. (1996),Esseentials of Indian Philosophy. London: Diamond Books.

Karmarkar, Raghunath Damodar, ed. (1959), r b h s y a

of R

m

nuja, Part I:C a t u h s t r

.University of Poona.

Khanna, A. B. (1998),Bhskar

c

rya (A Study with Special Reference to his

Brahmas tra-bh ya). Delhi: Amar Granth Publications.Malkovsky, Bradley J. (2001), The Role of Divine Grace in the Soteriology of

a

kar

c

rya. Leiden: Brill.

Marfatia, Mrudula I. (1967), The Philosophy of Vallabh c rya. Delhi: MunshiramManoharlal.

Potter, Karl H. (1981),Encyclopediaof Indian Philosophies, v.3: Advaita Ved

nta up to

a

kara and His Pupils. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.

Potter, Karl H. (1999), Presuppositions of India's Philosophies. Delhi: Motilal

Banarsidass.

Rao, C. Hayavadana, (1936) The

r

kara Bh

shya being the Vir

saiva Commentary on

the Ved

nta-Stras by Sr

pati. Vol. I Introduction. Bangalore Press.

Reddington, James D. (1983) Vallabh c rya on The Love Games of K a . D e l h i :

M o t i l a l B a n a r s i d a s s .

Sastri, Shri Anant Krishna (1995)Brahmastra-

k a r a b h s h y a m with Nine

Commentaries, v. 1. Delhi: Chaukhamba Sanskrit Pratishthan.

Shah, Jethalal G. (1969) Shri Vallabhacharya: His Philosophy and Religion. Nadiad:

Pushtimargiya Pustakalaya.


17/17

PREM PAHLAJRAI 17

Sharma, B.N.K, (1971) The Brahmastras and their Principle Commentaries (A Critical

Exposition) Vol. I. Bombay: Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan.

Tapasy

nanda, Sv

mi (1990)Bhakti Schools of Ved

nta (Lives and Philosophies of

R

m

nuja, Nimb

rka, Madhva, Vallabha and Caitanya). Mylapore: SriRamakrishna Math.

Torwesten, Hans (1985) Vedanta, Heart of Hinduism. New York: Grove Press.

different type of vedanthas

Documents