Can Advaita and Vishishtadvaita be reconciled?

[sravna]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

While the discussion is on the means to moksha, let me take up one more major dufference between A and V

A - Knowledge is the way to moksha
V - Bhakti is the way to moksha.

In the above regard some fine points have been raised by Renuka. While "A" explicitly says that knowledge leads to moksha, "V" says that too. In the second case you are surrendering to Lord and in effect recognising his supremacy. The supremacy of the Lord is the knowledge you are exhibiting.

I think bhakthi is used in a different sense by Ramanuja and Sankara though both say that recognizing brahman as supreme is important. The crucial point is mind should be focussed on the higher reslity. Thus the bhakthi of Ramanuja is an all consuming focus on God just like a single minded pursuit of knowledge by a sanyasi.

 

[sravna]

The most major difference between A and V in my opinion is what happens to jiva after moksha:

A- Jiva becomes one with brahman
V- Jiva maintains its separate identity from brahman

In a reality that transcends space and time differences vanish and there is no room for maintaining separate identities.Having said the above, I would say that Ramanuja's above view is consistent with his other interpretations and his overall philosophy.

To make vishistadvaita consistent with advaita, we have to explain why the body of the brahman representing jivas and the jagat is the same as its soul representing ishvara. Ramanuja stops short of this view.

 

[Iyyarooraan]

[FONT=&quot]Reconciliation of A with D and V:
[/FONT] It is a well-intended effort. The success of the effort hinges on its acceptance by all. Some wheels do not get out of the rut even if you want to help. All religions lead to one god however be the number of ways. Like Vedic people or the people of subsequent era, we continue to eat the same way to live on and die out like them. Food was cooked with fire-wood (helped by oomakkuzhzhai in case of wet wood)in maakachchatti and metal vessels. Lignite coal took over with kumutti and iyyachchombu. Pumping stove with kishnaoil dethroned it. Then the LPG stove, electric oven came on with pressure cooker. The same is threatened by microwave and in a few decades we may cook on solar heat. The taste of food cooked today cannot be compared with the taste of food cooked in maakachchatti. But then and now we are gulping down the same way.
Similarly, distorted by various unwanted pulls at those times, Adi Sankara came on the scene to put everything in nutshell to those who were confused. Obviously, his audience was different from others’ of subsequent time and it was necessary to put it across to them. Today’s audience is more confused. Tomorrow’s will say these are all ….*. Basically advaitis have no problem with other expositions. But the others find it hard to go before ‘v’ and ‘d’. How hard it is for them, we cannot fathom. We only know that our shoes do not pinch us. If a point cannot explain itself, then no amount of arguments can do that explanation.

 

[Harini]

[FONT=&quot] Basically advaitis have no problem with other expositions. But the others find it hard to go before ‘v’ and ‘d’. How hard it is for them, we cannot fathom. We only know that our shoes do not pinch us. If a point cannot explain itself, then no amount of arguments can do that explanation.

'v' is always at the extreme calling themselves as veeravaishnavaites. But that doesn't mean that 'a' is a refined group. The veerasaivaites have been excluded from the Brahmins and thus they continue to live as pseudo brahmins spreading brahmin hatred. Yes... there are advatist beyond Brahmin fold and that is not true for other

 

[sravna]

One final point. In addition to the argument that in a space time transcended reality differences are non-existent, one could also argue as follows for non-dualism: Brahman though may have infinite attrubutes, since they are in perfect balance it is in essnece attributeless. So Sankara's nirguna brahman can be taken to be a higher level description and so also his philosophy of absolute non-dualism.

 

[renuka]

Sravna,
I am reading Shivanaandalahari today and came across this line in the intro section;

"Vedanta have held that Jnana and Bhakthi are not antipodes but the observe and reverse of the same coin, being but two aspects of the impact made on the human mind by the realization of the Personal-Impersonal Being revealed by the Vedas.
According to the Vedanta, a philosopher can be a devotee and a devotee a philosopher."

 

[renuka]

Sravna..check this stanza out..do we really want to still think that Bhakti and Jnana are distinctly separated by an unseen border?


Smruthou shasthre vaidhye shakuna kavitha gana phanithou
Puranee manthre vaa sthuthi natana hasyeshwa chatura
Kadham ragman preethirbhavathi mayi koo aham pasu pathe
Pasum maam sarvagna pradhitha kripaya palaya vibho



Ignoramus I am in the science of law,
In the science of life,
In the art of medicine,
In interpretation of events,
In the art of poems and song,
In the difficult tomes of arty grammer,
In the holy books of yore,
In the psalms of Vedas.
In singing about your great deeds,
In the art of dance and in art of comedy,
And so how can I get favour of Kings?
Oh Lord of all beings,
Oh all knowing one,
Of most famous one,
And Oh , all pervading one,
After all who am I?
And be pleased to protect me ,
Showering on me your sea of mercy.

 

[sravna]

Sravna,
I am reading Shivanaandalahari today and came across this line in the intro section;

"Vedanta have held that Jnana and Bhakthi are not antipodes but the observe and reverse of the same coin, being but two aspects of the impact made on the human mind by the realization of the Personal-Impersonal Being revealed by the Vedas.
According to the Vedanta, a philosopher can be a devotee and a devotee a philosopher."

I would think so too. The devotee assumes the truth. The philosopher seeks the truth. The devotee in a person makes the premise, the philosopher in him concludes and confirms the premise.

 

[renuka]

Sravna,

Be ready for busy days..this book seems real interesting with lots of relevant facts on Bhakthi and Jnana weaved by the Divine Adishakaraacharya.
So I will be pasting many stanzas which I might want to discuss with you.

 

[renuka]

Hey guess what!!!
next stanza is a good reminder to all of us.

Ghato vaa mrithir pando apyaraunubhi cha dhoomogni rachala
Pato vaa thanthurva pariharathi kim ghorasamanam
Vridha kantakshebham vahasi tharasa tharka vachasa
Padhambhojam shmbhor bhaja parama soukhyam vrijasudhi.



This is the pot, no, this is only mud,
This is the earth, no , it is only atom,
This is the smoke, no, it is only fire,
This is the cloth, no , it is only the thread,
Can all this debate ever cure the cruel God of death?
Vainly you give pain to your throat,
By these torrent of words,
Instead worship the lotus like feet of Shambu,
Oh , intelligent one, and attain supreme happiness.

 

[sravna]

Sravna,

Be ready for busy days..this book seems real interesting with lots of relevant facts on Bhakthi and Jnana weaved by the Divine Adishakaraacharya.
So I will be pasting many stanzas which I might want to discuss with you.

Yes, I think it should be interesting and illuminating.

 

[talwan]

Dear Sravna,
Here is a Good Topic.I would like to ponder on this topic.
Vishistatvaida is nothing but Advaitha as it is Vishista(means Added,Visheshitha)Advaida.Advaitha is No twins or more of Brahmam(Not Brhman).Brahmam is the ONE.No second.Whtever we see,feel,realise is Maya,Mithya.
Vishista-Advaida is No second to Vishista Brhmam.That is Chith and Achith(Jeevathma and Achethna) are is added with Brhmam.Such a Brahmam has not second to it.Hope I have explained the Reconcillation.
Alwan

 

[renuka]

Sravna,

This is stanza 24 from Shivaanandalahari:

24
Kadha vaa kailase kanaka mani soudhe saha ganai,
Rvasan Shamboragre sphuta ghatitha moordhajali phuta
Vibho sambha swamin paramashiva paheethi nigadhana
Vidhaathrunam kalpan kshanamiva vineshyami sukhada,

When would I live in Mount Kailas,
Along with your attendants,
In the stone studded golden mansion of yours,
Oh God who is the giver of happiness
With hands raised and clasped,
In deference to you,
Oh Lord, who is every where,
Oh Lord Who is with Goddess,
Oh God who is the master,
Oh God who is above all,
Oh God who is good,
And chant with pleasure.
“Oh God save me”,
And spend the time,
As if the creators Kalpa[1] is a second.


Dont you think its so similar to Shiva Tandav Stotram By Ravan?
Stanza 13.

Kada Nilampa Nirjaree Nikunja Kotare Vasan,
Vimuktha Durmathee Sada Sirasthanjaleem Vahan,
Vilola Lola Lochano Lalama Bhala Lagnaka,
Shivethi Manthamucharan Kada Sukhee Bhavamyaham.
​

[Translation: When will I be happy, living in the hollow place near the celestial river, Ganga, carrying the folded hands on my head all the time, with my bad thinking washed away, and uttering the mantra of Lord Shiva and devoted in the God with glorious forehead with vibrating eyes.] (13)

 

[sravna]

Sravna,

This is stanza 24 from Shivaanandalahari:

24
Kadha vaa kailase kanaka mani soudhe saha ganai,
Rvasan Shamboragre sphuta ghatitha moordhajali phuta
Vibho sambha swamin paramashiva paheethi nigadhana
Vidhaathrunam kalpan kshanamiva vineshyami sukhada,

When would I live in Mount Kailas,
Along with your attendants,
In the stone studded golden mansion of yours,
Oh God who is the giver of happiness
With hands raised and clasped,
In deference to you,
Oh Lord, who is every where,
Oh Lord Who is with Goddess,
Oh God who is the master,
Oh God who is above all,
Oh God who is good,
And chant with pleasure.
“Oh God save me”,
And spend the time,
As if the creators Kalpa[1] is a second.


Dont you think its so similar to Shiva Tandav Stotram By Ravan?
Stanza 13.

Kada Nilampa Nirjaree Nikunja Kotare Vasan,
Vimuktha Durmathee Sada Sirasthanjaleem Vahan,
Vilola Lola Lochano Lalama Bhala Lagnaka,
Shivethi Manthamucharan Kada Sukhee Bhavamyaham.

​

[Translation: When will I be happy, living in the hollow place near the celestial river, Ganga, carrying the folded hands on my head all the time, with my bad thinking washed away, and uttering the mantra of Lord Shiva and devoted in the God with glorious forehead with vibrating eyes.] (13)

Yes it is. Any particular reason for this question?

 

[renuka]

Yes it is. Any particular reason for this question?

Sravna,

Refer to post no 34 for answer..

 

[sravna]

sravna,

refer to post no 34 for answer..

ok

 

[hariraghavendran]

Hi to all,
I am a new entry to the blog and I hope I may be of some use in this website.
Then coming to ur question , can advaitha and visisthadvaitha be reconciled and some one here said that dvaita is a plant, visisthadvaitha is flower and advaitha is the fragrance.
It just shows ur ignorance and lack of reading scriptures.
Dvaitha , Visisthadvaitha and Advaitha differ in their fundamental aspects of brahman, jeeva and the mukthi which are the three most fundamental thing in vedanta.
@Renuka
Dont know why? May be to keep some traditions alive..sometimes even truth is denied.
This statement shows ur ignorance and lack of respect for our gurus.Our gurus be it for dvaitha , visisthadvaitha and advaitha have always held debates for churning out the truth in vedas and they are not there debating for years for some kidding and giving entertainment.
It also shows you have not read any scriptures and you are making claims of finding the truth by reading some internet stuff (it seems that u already know the truth which our sages found out in deep meditation and u have apparently found in some internet). By looking at ur post, I think u r one of those who are for name sake brahmins and who consider themselves as knowledgeable persons than our gurus by merely reading some internet stuff.

[h=1][/h]Dont know why? May be to keep some traditions alive..sometimes even truth is denied.Dont know why? May be to keep some traditions alive..sometimes even truth is denied.

 

[renuka]

Beautiful verse that weaves Bhakti and Jnana;

Aarooda bakthi guna kunchitha bhava chapaa,
Yukthai ssivasmarana bana ganai ramoghai,
Nirjithya kilbisha ripoon vijayi sudeendra,
Saananda mavahathi susthira rajalakshmim.



The best among the intelligent bend the bow of their mental disposition with the bow-string of firm devotion and having destroyed the enemy of sins with the unfailing arrows of divine contemplation,become victorious and attain to the undecaying sovereignty of liberation.

 

[renuka]

Hi to all,
I am a new entry to the blog and I hope I may be of some use in this website.
Then coming to ur question , can advaitha and visisthadvaitha be reconciled and some one here said that dvaita is a plant, visisthadvaitha is flower and advaitha is the fragrance.
It just shows ur ignorance and lack of reading scriptures.
Dvaitha , Visisthadvaitha and Advaitha differ in their fundamental aspects of brahman, jeeva and the mukthi which are the three most fundamental thing in vedanta.
@Renuka
Dont know why? May be to keep some traditions alive..sometimes even truth is denied.
This statement shows ur ignorance and lack of respect for our gurus.Our gurus be it for dvaitha , visisthadvaitha and advaitha have always held debates for churning out the truth in vedas and they are not there debating for years for some kidding and giving entertainment.
It also shows you have not read any scriptures and you are making claims of finding the truth by reading some internet stuff (it seems that u already know the truth which our sages found out in deep meditation and u have apparently found in some internet). By looking at ur post, I think u r one of those who are for name sake brahmins and who consider themselves as knowledgeable persons than our gurus by merely reading some internet stuff.

[h=1][/h]Dont know why? May be to keep some traditions alive..sometimes even truth is denied.Dont know why? May be to keep some traditions alive..sometimes even truth is denied.

Here we go again!!! wow I feel like OBL now..everyone is attacking me.

 

[Nara]

Here we go again!!! ....

Renu, I don't like the way this first-time poster is so casually using words like ignorance. We see these kinds of guys, off and on, waltzing in with a chip on their shoulder, telling us fools how ignorant we are. Young or old, this kind of arrogant behavior is deplorable.

I also don't care for his declarations about churning for truth and stuff. Churning superstitions will never produce nectar.

However, there is one point on which I have to agree, however reluctant I am to have to agree with a point made by this person, one who made an unfortunately presumptuous entry into our forum. The early acharyas of A, VA, and D did go tooth and nail, figuratively of course, against each others theories. To think that these divergent Vedantic doctrines can somehow be reconciled is not sensible.

best ....

 

[tbs]

Renu, I don't like the way this first-time poster is so casually using words like ignorance. We see these kinds of guys, off and on, waltzing in with a chip on their shoulder, telling us fools how ignorant we are. Young or old, this kind of arrogant behavior is deplorable.

I also don't care for his declarations about churning for truth and stuff. Churning superstitions will never produce nectar.

However, there is one point on which I have to agree, however reluctant I am to have to agree with a point made by this person, one who made an unfortunately presumptuous entry into our forum. The early acharyas of A, VA, and D did go tooth and nail, figuratively of course, against each others theories. To think that these divergent Vedantic doctrines can somehow be reconciled is not sensible.

best ....

hi nara sir,
can we reconcile with iyer and iyengar fully?....i dont think so....stilll many miles to go....some exceptions are here and there....i dont

think we completely reconcile....we can reconcile iyer with christians/muslims....still we can not reconcile our own brothern.....i think

unity in diversity...its ok....certain siddhantas cannot reconcile by our own acharyas......if our own acharyas sit in single stage/dias,,,

then reconcile it....then may be possible.....OUR OWN ACHARYAS ARE NOT RECONCILE.....SITTING LIKE NAVAGRAHAS......ITS

IMPOSSIBLE TO RECONCILE.....becoz i studied advaitha and visisthadvaita from an ardent SV PROFESSOR.......becoz... even iyers

with thirunamam are not allowed to sit WITH SV GHOSTI......


regards
tbs

 

[Nara]

can we reconcile with iyer and iyengar fully?....

Dear tbs sir, this is the inevitable result of Brahminism. Basic principles of SV, as laid out by its foremost acharya Nammazhvar -- a Shudra per Brahminism -- mandates mutual respect among all SVs. A true SV, according to Azhavrs and hoary acharyas, is one who is blind to the caste of other SVs. Not one single SV religious leader, let alone ordinary office going SVs, practices this. So, when they so nonchalantly flout the teachings of their own foremost acharya, what hope do you have for harmony between Iyer and Iyengar. Not that I support such a narrow harmony, I rather support harmony at a much broader level, among all humans. Iyers don't fare any better with their professed fidelity to dharma shasthras.

Cheers!

 

[hariraghavendran]

@Nara
Renu, I don't like the way this first-time poster is so casually using words like ignorance. We see these kinds of guys, off and on, waltzing in with a chip on their shoulder, telling us fools how ignorant we are. Young or old, this kind of arrogant behavior is deplorable.

If u feel I am arrogant and offensive I am sorry. It was not my intention. But lets see what the most humble person did in the next line.

I also don't care for his declarations about churning for truth and stuff. Churning superstitions will never produce nectar.

Who said it was my declaration, it is a well known fact and every school of vedanta like Advaitha, Visisthadvaitha and dvaitha teaches that vedas are the only pramana to know the brahman the truth. And in the above statement u called vedas as superstitions , here u not only offended the vedas u offended our entire gurus and rishis who studied vedas and called them fools .
As per dharmashastra , a man who doesn't believe in vedas is called a mletcha.
The offense done by u is far greater than me and I think u should be more careful with the usage of words.

@ Renu,
I was not attacking you, I just said the three schools are very much different and it cannot be reconciled on certain things. If people think sticking to the scriptures is superstitious , then yes I am a fool.
Moreover we do not have the rights to discuss about the eternal brahman as I do not think not many here have studied the vedas fully and criticizing acharyas is just not for us as we do not have the eligibility .
The best practice would be to practice as per ur tradition and ur gurus and leave the rest to the almighty.

 

[sangom]

Renu, I don't like the way this first-time poster is so casually using words like ignorance. We see these kinds of guys, off and on, waltzing in with a chip on their shoulder, telling us fools how ignorant we are. Young or old, this kind of arrogant behavior is deplorable.

I also don't care for his declarations about churning for truth and stuff. Churning superstitions will never produce nectar.

However, there is one point on which I have to agree, however reluctant I am to have to agree with a point made by this person, one who made an unfortunately presumptuous entry into our forum. The early acharyas of A, VA, and D did go tooth and nail, figuratively of course, against each others theories. To think that these divergent Vedantic doctrines can somehow be reconciled is not sensible.

best ....

Dear Shri Nara,

I know well your bias in favour of Smt. Renuka Karthikeyan. But IMO, it does not require putting down the new poster Hariraghavendra. I find his post to be very sensible. BTW, what is the relevance of Sivaanandalahari discussion as a side-plot in this thread? I don't understand!

 

[Nara]

...But IMO, it does not require putting down the new poster Hariraghavendra. I find his post to be very sensible. BTW, what is the relevance of Sivaanandalahari discussion as a side-plot in this thread? I don't understand!

Dear Shri Sangom sir, I did agree with the poster's main point, what I didn't like was the way he characterized Renu as "ignorant". I find such provocative language unnecessary. I submit to you, I don't think pointing this out is putting him down.

I did not even notice Sivanandhalahari until you mentioned. You are right, that does not belong here, but then, irrelevant stuff gets posted all the time.

Cheers!