Is Ramanuja's visistadviat incomplete ?

[Guest guest]

Namaskaram,

Adiyen came across the following remarks in a Gaudiya web site. I

refer to the comment on the "shortcoming of Ramanuja's metaphysic".

Is the author justified in his comments and can someone please

clarify. Thank you

 

" It appears that in reality Ramanuja finds it difficult to describe

the relationship of identity and difference but accepts both of them.

Indeed, according to Ramanuja himself (Sribhasya 2.2.12), aprthak-

siddhi is not strictly a relation, although his followers such as

Vedanta Desika sometimes speak of it as such. Thus through careful

examination both scholars and acaryas of other sampradayas came to

conclude that acceptance of Ramanuja's term aprthak-siddhi really

involves forgoing logic. In this regard, the Gaudiya acaryas have

determined that this logical shortcoming of Sri Ramanuja's metaphysic

is resolved with the concept of acintya, or inconceivability with

regard to the nature of ultimate reality and its being simultaneously

one and different.

 

Thus the Gaudiyas feel that the metaphysic of acintya-bhedabheda

tattva better explains the nature of ultimate reality, and that this

explanation is an improvement on the efforts of Ramanuja and others.

Ramanuja and others have struggled to come to grips with the fact

that the concepts of either oneness or difference are inadequate to

comprehensively explain the nature of the Absolute.

 

The Gaudiyas have concluded that Brahman is both one and different

simultaneously, and that this is possible because the Absolute

possesses inconceivable power (acintya-sakti)".

 

Questions or comments may be submitted at the Q&A Forum

http://www.swami.org/sanga/ or email sangaeditor.