[advaita & visishtadvaita]

[Guest guest]

Dear Sri Badri Narayanan,

(A bit lengthy mail but not too lengthy)

Answer for your first question:

The term "VisishtAdvaita" has the form "visishtasya advaitam" and

"visishtayO: advaitam".

"Visistasya Advaitam" means - The Brahman qualified by all chit and achit

entities as his Saareeram/Prakaaram/Viseshanam (body/mode/attribute) is

without a second entity meaning unparalleled and unsurpassed. This brings out

the ultimate supremacy of Shreeman Narayana Para Brahman who is Akila Heya

Pratyaneeka: and Ananta Kalyaana Gunaakara:

 

(chit - jIvAthman; achit - matter)

(Akila heya pratyaneeka: being untouched by all impurities

Ananta kalyaana gunaakara: being attributed by infinite divine qualities)

 

"Visistayoho Advaitam" means - The Brahman having the subtle (sukshma)

chit and achit entities as his Saareeram/Prakaaram/Viseshanam

(body/mode/attribute) before creation is the same Brahman having the expanded

(stUla) chit and achit entities as his Saareeram/Prakaaram/Viseshanam

(body/mode/attribute) after creation. This brings out the fact that Shreeman

Narayana Para Brahman is the only material cause and efficient cause of the

universe.

 

Shreeman Nigamaantha Maha Desika defines the same as "Asesha Chit-Achit

Prakaaram Brahmaikameva Tatvam". This is the most precise definition of our

VisishtAdvaita Siddhaantham.

 

On the other hand, the philosophy called Advaita is as follows:

Brahman is the only knowledge-self reality and is without any attributes.

There three types of differences namely difference in individuality,

difference in types and differences in its integral parts are not in Brahman.

Nothing other than this Brahman is reality. Though the Brahman is eternally

free and only knowledge self, it gets obstructed/covered by ignorance and

without realizing itself as Brahman (as told above) becomes to realize itself

wrongly as Jeevaatman and gets bound in the material universe which is not a

reality. This is what conveyed by the Veda through verses like "Tat Tvam Asi".

Except that Brahman, everything is illusion-falsehood. The God and the

sentient-living and insentient-matter which are controlled by God are only

illusion and has no reality. There is nothing called bound Jeevaatman and

liberated Jeevaatman as the Brahman and Jeevaatman are the same entity. Only

one body is with Jeevaatman, which is Brahman covered/obstructed by ignorance.

Other bodies are without Jeevaatman as they are just the illusion of the

Brahman covered by ignorance. It is not possible to point out which body has

that Jeevaatman. The experiences of Brahman during its illusion are also

false. The preceptor who imparts this knowledge about Brahman is unreal. The

disciple who listens to the preceptor is unreal. The Veda, which gives this

knowledge about the Brahman, is also unreal. The Brahman by the knowledge of

knowing that nothing other than itself (which is only knowledge-self reality

without any attributes) is real gets its ignorance cleared and realizes itself

as Brahman and this is liberation. Advaita thus declares everything is unreal

except the only knowledge-self Brahman, which is without any attributes using

the unreal(!) Saastra, which is Veda!

 

Hope the differences between Visishtadvaita and Advaita is clear. I will

write one more difference between the two: Advaita is personal opinion

of people like SrI Adi Sankara. On the other hand, Visishtadvaita is

the parama-vaidika-matham.

 

Answer for your second question:

There are four concepts

1. PramANam

2. PramEyam

3. PramAthA

4. PramA.

 

PramANam is authority/source of knowledge. It is 1.pratyaksham,

2.anumAnam and 3.sabdam. The God cannot be established through pratyaksham

and anumAnam. It is possible only through sabdam. To understand this,

one has to study philosophy with its accesories atleast upto a basic

level. When pramANam it is clearly understood, the pramAthA (he

who knows) will get the pramA (knowledge) that the pramEyam (object

which is known) is SrIman NArAyaNa. This is established logically

on the base of pramANam. There is only one Supreme Brahman and

he is SrIman NArAyaNa. It is difficult to realise this unless and

until a person gets to know clearly about pramANam first.

Siva, BrahmA etc., are only jIvAthmAs like us and are different

from the (God) ParamAthma SrIman NArAyaNa.

 

Let me just outline the importance of pramANa briefly. I showed a

real diamond and its certificate of authenticity to a layman. He

understood it as diamond because it is transparent, costly jewel

and glittering. There was no contradiction at this point. But I

told him that the diamond is nothing but carbon ©. He did not

accept my words because according to him carbon is black, cheap

fuel. I cannot make him to understand my point unless and until

I teach him chemistry, atomic theory etc, use advance pramANam

and anumAnam to prove my point that carbon is in allotropic form

as graphite and diamond. The layman has just used simple pratyksham.

It is not adequate to prove my point. Thus pramANam has different

levels. pratyaksham and anumAnam are not adequate to establish

God. The sabdam establishes God and the God is SrIman NArAyaNa.

>Doesn't Advaita seem to be logical in saying the there is only one >Supreme

being without Name ,form and qualities and Naryana ,siva are >merely

manifestations of that Brahman and so the question of who is >Supreme never

comes into play.please enlighten me.Pardon my ignorance.

 

Advaita is not aiming at telling this. Its aim is nirviSesha Chin

mAthram Brahma and Brahma satyam jagan mithyA. Advaita is sUnya-vAdam

in polished way.

 

All these things can be learnt in two ways:

1. Emmotional

2. Knowledge

 

The first method is suitable for those who already know the

pramANam. Otherwise, the pramA got through this method is likely

to be shaken by another powerful emmotional way.

The second method is suitable for those who want to know the

tatva-hita-purushArthas clearly along with critical study of

all exisiting philosophies based on sabdam and not having base on

sabdam. This way leads to unshakable pramA. This is my opinion.

The second method requires 100% rational thinking. If suppose I

write openly "Advaita is not rational", few will take it personally

and argue emmotionally. Such things are not suitable in knowledge

way. If a person has basic understanding that advaita philosophy

is taken for critical study and not the author of the philosophy,

then he is the most suitable person for the second way.

 

Thanks & Regards

M.S.HARI RAmAnuja DAsan.

 

 

 

__________________

Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1