What isTattvavada?

[Guest guest]

Dear Nayana-ranjana Prabhu,

please accept my respectful obeisances.

All glories to Srila Prabhupada and all other Vaisnavas!

All glories to Sri Sri Gaura-Nitai and Sri Sri Radha-Govinda!

 

> Anyone knows what is the Tattvavada philosophy (in-detail if possible) of

> the 'so-called' Madhvas which is rejected by the Gaudiya Vaisnavas as

> given in Cc Adi 1.19. Thanks in advance.

Actually, tattva-vada is Madhvacarya's philosophy (CC Adi 7.110

purport). This term stands for dvaita-vada, just as the term maya-vada

stands for Sankaracarya's advaita-vada. The reason is a simple one: maya

means illusion, and the opposite thing, i.e. truth, is tattva, hense

tattva-vada versus maya-vada (dvaita-vada versus advaita-vada).

In the passage You have qouted from CC, as far as I understand, only

the so-called followers of Madhvacarya are meant. Just as in the case with

Sankaracarya.

Sankaracarya was a Vaisnava (not a Saiva, as many people, who have a

poor fund of knowledge, say). Just see what works has he commented on or

written himself: commentary on Gita, commentary on Visnu-sahasra-nama-stotra

(was his first work at all), Bhaja Govindam, etc. The point is that he

generally gave instruction on the first aspect of the Absolute Truth, namely

Brahman. But he didn't reject Paramatma & Bhagavan aspects, as many of his

followers did, because they misunderstood his works as proclaming existence

of only Brahman and nothing else.

No, Sankara new well about Paramatma & Bhagavan aspects, and he has

even written some words about them. This is the only reason why Sankaracarya

is accepted as an Acarya (even Srila Prabhupada respected him). But one has

to correctly understand him.

So, similarly there were (I have no idea how many in general and who

in particular) so-called followers of Madhvacarya, who have misinterpreted

his dvaita-vada aka tattva-vada in their own way. I don't know these details

so far.

One more point, we don't call ourselves dvaita-vadis or

tattva-vadis, because pure dvaita (or pure advaita) is, strictly speaking,

wrong, because the jivas and all other objects are simultaneously different

(bheda) and non-different (abheda) from the Lord, hence we call ourselves

bheda-abheda-tattva-vadis. This term indicates that the disciplic succession

comes from Madhvacarya (tattva-vadi), but is brought to the ideal, absolute

understanding of things as they are (bheda-abheda). And since this

simultaneous difference & oneness is inconceivable by our minds, we say

acintya-bheda-abheda-tattva.

I hope my comment helps somehow.

 

Your most unworthy servant,

Sergei.

Hare Krsna.