You are here: Sri Vaishnava Home Page : Bhakti List : Archives : May 1998

RE: Dvaita and Visishtadvaita

From: Sadagopan (
Date: Thu May 07 1998 - 04:30:06 PDT

Dear BhakthAs :

It is so wonderful to have knowledgable 
members , who can address these difficult questions 
in the traditional manner formulated by our
purvAchAryAs with rigor and logic . Dr.SMS Chari
is a great scholar in comparitive religions 
and especially on Sri Vaishanvism , whom I know of .
That is why he was foremost in my thoughts.
He has studied under some of the greatst 
scholars like ThirukkOshtiUr Swami .
Sriman Anbil Ramaswami is another such scholar we 
all are fortunate to have as a member of this group ,
who has benefitted form rigorous studies under 
great AchAryAs of Ahobila Mutt , Andavans 
and is very much in touch with Parkaala Mutt Jeeyar
and othe rscholars. 
When I referred to the fact that Dr.SMS Chari 
is eminently qualified to address this question ,
I might have inadvertently jumped over the
additional responses from very capable
members like Sriman Murli Rajagopalan , Sri Krishna  
Susrala , Sri Anbil Swami and others .The funny point about
this Bhakthi group is that we do not even know fully 
all the talents that coexist within this special group .
Sriman Rajagopalan's and Sri Susrala's  answers are
clear and concise .Although I admire the devotion
of the members of the CMS , their desire to shoot every
other philosophy down with zeal as if they can not
stand the rigorous examination is unfortunate.
It gets very polemical .Sriman Murli Rajagopal's     
observations on  the apaurusheya aspects of the Vedams 
was a pleasure to read and learn from . 
My apologies for oversight and thanks Sriman Rajagopalan .
>From: "Rajagapalan, Murli, NCSIO" <>
>Subject: RE: Dvaita and Visishtadvaita
>Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 17:54:26 -0400
>Dear Sri Dinakaran and all bhAgawatas,
>PraNAmam.  Adiyen is by no stretch of imagination a shAstrajna.  But here is
>adiyen's attempt at your question.
>Nowhere does visishtAdwaita claim that there is only one entity in the sense
>the question has been posed (bhagawAn vs. bhakta).  Infact, RAmanuja accepts
>not two but six dravyas or perceivable objects: Iswara, jeeva, kAla,
>prakrti, nithyavibhuti, and dharmabhuta jnana.  All of these dravyas are
>REAL, DISTINCT, and ETERNAL, and there is no doubt that there always is a
>seeker and the sought (BhagawAn).
>Let us take the following two dravyas: Iswara and jeeva.  Iswara is by
>nature Satyam, Jnanam, and Anantam.  Satyam means nirupAdhika satta yogi --
>i.e., He exists without an upAdhi.  He is Jnanaswaroopam.  He is also
>Anantam or vibhu -- He is undivided by time, space, and matter.  The jeeva
>on the other hand derives its existence (satyatvam) from the Brahman.  In
>other words, it exists because of that Brahman.  It is monadic (aNu), which
>is the opposite of vibhu.  Also it is impenetrable and undestroyable.
>Only when it comes to the ORGANIC RELATIONSHIP between the various dravyas
>does RAmanuja say it is visishtasya advaitam.  What does this mean?  Again,
>for purposes of our discussion, we will just take Iswara and jeeva into
>consideration and ignore the other four dravyas.  The relationship is that
>of a sareeri/sareera -- the soul/the ensouled;  it is that of an
>AdhAra/Adheya -- supporter/supported, etc, etc.  In other words, the jeeva
>derives its existence from that primal existence -- Brahman.  It is
>supported by Him and exists for His sole pleasure and purpose.  The Brahman
>alone is the parama Bhokta.
>Now, with regard to the first question, here is the reply :-  Why should the
>sareeri/sareera relationship conflict with the swAmi/bhrtya relationship or
>the sought/seeker relationship, or any other relationship?  All of these
>relationships have distinct meanings.  Secondly, the statements "God is
>within us" and "God is controlling us from within" do not mean that God
>literally exists within the precincts of the jeeva itself.  All it means is
>that the jeeva's very existence is due to that Brahman, and He controls
>every aspect of its existence as a master, as a supporter, as a soul, etc.
>So, the words "within" and "inside" should not be taken to mean what they
>mean in our daily life scenarios.
>To summarize, the organic relationship of unity (advaita) between Iswara and
>all the other dravyas does not in any way conflict the sought/seeker
>relationship.  Infact, it strengthens it many fold.  Because, if you the
>seeker come to know that you are linked inseparably with the seeker and
>exist solely because of Him and for Him, your sought/seeker relationship
>attains a different level of perception.  You now realize that the person
>you seek is not just some great, knowledgeable, strong person far away in
>heaven, but rather somebody whose organic relationship with you is
>inseparable, intimate, and existential, and you have NO OTHER choice but to
>seek Him.
>Hope this clarifies.  Adiyen hopes that a more knowledgeable person provide
>a better explanation to the question.
>|| SarvAparAdhAn kshamasva ||
>|| Sarvam Sri KrishNArpaNamastu ||
>Daasan Murali Kadambi
>> ----------
>> From: 	R. Dinakaran[]
>> Sent: 	Wednesday, May 06, 1998 5:57 AM
>> To:
>> Subject: 	Dvaita and Visishtadvaita
>> One of my good friends who is a member of the Cyber Madhava Sangha 
>> says he has a simple definition which proves that Dvaita is more 
>> `down to earth'. 
>> He says that there has to be two entities: Bhagawan and the Bhakta or 
>> the Seeker and the Sought. If God is within us, how can we seek him, 
>> he asks (in the Dvaita mailing list).
>> I was unable to post a proper reply. Can anyone help me out?
>> R. Dinakaran
>> +--------------------------------------------------------------------+
>> |    R. DINAKARAN                                                    |
>> |    Chief Sub Editor                                                |
>> |    The Hindu Business Line                                         |
>> |    Kasturi Buildings                                               |
>> |    Anna Salai                                                      |
>> |    CHENNAI 600 002                                                 |
>> |                                                                    |
>> |    Phones: 8535067 (Ext. 460,452,490)                              |
>> |            8534574 (    do          ) (After office hours)         |
>> |            8531328 (News Editor)                                   |
>> |                                                                    |
>> |    Pager : 9622701590                                              |
>> |            9622702590                                              |
>> |            (Please dial all the numbers)                           |
>> |                                                                    |
>> |    E-mail:                                    |
>> |                                                                    |
>> |    Residence                                                       |
>> |                                                                    |
>> |    Plot No. 2, Flat No. 7                                          |
>> |    Otraivadai Street                                               |
>> |    West KK Nagar                                                   |
>> |    Chennai 600 078                                                 |
>> +--------------------------------------------------------------------+