1

2003 ASIAN STUDIES GRADUATE STUDENT COLLOQUIUM

Ved nta: A Comparative Analysis of Diverse Schools

Introduction To the average person familiar with Hinduism, Ved nta is simply the last of the six dar anas or systems of Hindu philosophy, based on the speculative inquiry into being found in the Upani ads constituting the end, the anta, of the Vedic corpus. Some scholars are prone to use Ved nta to refer to Advaita Ved nta alone, strict non-duality, of which a kara is the most famous exponent. However, there are other Ved ntas, the better known of which are R m nuja's vi i dvaita and Madhva's dvaita, strict duality. In this paper I present the salient features of these schools along with those of seven lesser known schools. Together with the aforementioned three, Nimb rka's sv bh vikabhed bheda or natural difference and non-difference, Vallabha's uddh dvaita or pure non-duality, constitute the paca-ved nta-samprad ya, the five Ved nta traditions. The next five schools examined are lesser known but nonetheless interesting interpretations: Bh skara's aup dhikabhed bheda or adventitious difference and non-difference, r ka ha's vi i a iv dvaita , r pati's vi e dvaita , Vij nabhik u's avibh g dvaita or non-duality of non-separateness, and Baladeva's acintyabhed bheda or inexplicable duality and non-duality. Every one of these schools accepts the testimony of the Upani ads as authoritative yet chooses to interpret them in different ways to support their particular positions. I will briefly overview the standpoints of all these schools individually. This will then facilitate comparison across several broad aspects and permit us to make certain observations. Brahmas trabh ya Methodology It is almost a requisite for proponents of any alternative views of Ved nta to give credence to their views by providing a commentary of the Brahmas tras of B dar ya a, thus attempting to demonstrate that their philosophy is the "true" interpretation of the Ved nta (the Upani ads) as summarized in the Brahmas tra1. The Brahmas tra is also referred to as the Ved ntas tras or the rirakam m s s tras and has a total of 560 s tras or aphorisms intended as a systematized synthesis of the Upani ads. It may date as far back as late second century or early first century BCE.2 The text is divided into four adhy yas, chapters. Each adhy ya is divided into four quarters, p das. The first adhy ya, the Samanvay dhy ya establishes that Brahman, the impersonal Absolute, is the sole subject of the scriptures, the source of creation and the goal of one's life. The first four s tras of this chapter are commonly known as the Catu s tr . The second chapter, the Avirodh dhy ya "deals with the consistency of the ideas relating to Brahman and tman
The Brahmas tras, the and the Bhagavadg t together constitute the prasth natray , the threefold authoritative foundation of Ved nta. The Upani ads are considered the rutiprashth na, the Brahmas tras the ny yaprasth na and the G ta the sm tiprasth na. (Sastri, p.ii, Deutsch, p.3) 2 Dasgupta, p. 421. Ayyangar (1979) claims that "occidental writers" picked this date in order to "show to the world that the Indians copied everything from Greek literature." He suggests that B dar ya a was none other than Vy sa and lived "about 3101 B.C. i.e. the beginning of the Kali age." (p.x)

ytilaud-non laiceps ro eht sa avi htiw ytilaud-non deifilauq ro

sdasinapU

ytilaud-non deifilauq ro

Prem Pahlajrai Asian Languages and Literature University of Washington

sisab

2003 ASIAN STUDIES GRADUATE STUDENT COLLOQUIUM

msivansiaV ayhk S

drawn from the Upani ads"3 and refutes "the rival views of -yoga, Ny ya4 Vai esika, Buddhism, Jainism, aivism and aktism or ". These two chapters together constitute the philosophical portion of the text. Chapter three, S dhan dhy ya is about the means for attaining moksa, and chapter four, Phal dhy ya, is about the successive stages of culminating in a final merging with Brahman. The work is also divided into several sections, adhikara as, with each section having six parts: 1. vi aya, subject. 2. sa aya, doubt. 3. p rvapak a, prima facie view. 4. uttarapak a, opposite view. 5. siddh nta, conclusion and 6. sa gati, consistency with other parts of the work. Sa gati is intended to demonstrate that there is no conflict with the rest of the work at the p da, adhy ya and scriptural level, as well as between sections by way consistency of k epa, objection; d nta, illustration; pratid nta counterillustration; prasa ga, incidental illustration; utpatti, introduction and apav da, exception.5 The Brahmas tras are rather terse and a commentary is needed for it to be understood. The first known commentary is thought to have been by either the grammarian Bhart hari6 in the fifth century CE about which not much is known or by Baudh yana7 who is referred to in R m nuja's introduction to his commentary on the Brahmas tra. Baudh yana's commentary is not extant. Within the Ved nta system, a kara's is the earliest extant commentary though, and it is the one that everyone else who follows takes great pains to refute. It is believed that the monistic views of were inspired by Gaudap da's commentary of the M ukya Upani ad rather than by the original Brahmas tra.8 Dasgupta, for example, believes that the Brahmas tra was probably more of an authoritative theist, dualist work.9 The schools of Ved nta considered in the following are those where the founders have written a commentary on the Brahmas tras for the sake of demonstrating the conformity of their views to the ruti, revealed scriptures. First let us consider the dates of these individuals and a brief synopsis of their distinctive philosophies and views on liberation, to set the stage to enable a meaningful comparison. What follows has been greatly informed by Chaudhuri (1973, 1975, 1981), Dasgupta (1922) and Sastri (1995). 1. Kevaladvaita When Ved nta is mentioned without any qualifications, most people tend to think of keval dvaita or absolute monism. a kara is the most famous proponent of this school. The typical dates for him are 788-820 CE10. But Paul Hacker suggests a time before or about 700 A.D. based on a karas quoting Dharmak rti in Upade as hasr ,
3 4

Brockington, pp. 106-7 Sastri, p. ii. 5 Sastri, p. iii. 6 Brockington, p. 107 7 Dasgupta, v.1, pp. 70, 433 8 Brockington, p. 107 and Dasgupta, v.1, pp. 422-3. was Govinda's teacher, who in turn was a kara's teacher. 9 Dasgupta, p. 432. Also confirmed by Thibaut, quoted in Apte, p. xxi. It appears that Thibaut was the originator of this view, presented in the introduction to his translation of a kara's Brahmas trabh ya. However, Apte strenously objects to this view (pp. xxi-iii). 10 For example, Brockington, 1996, p. 109.
adpaduaG

arak a

askom

PREM PAHLAJRAI

who lived mid-seventh century. 11 Karl Potter argues for late seventh-early eighth century.12 Sure vara, Padmap da and To aka were his direct students and other notable advaitins in this school are V caspati Mi ra (840 CE), Vidy ra ya (1350 CE) to name but a couple. To a kara, all diversity is unreal, mithy and only Brahman is real, sat. This reality is eternal, perfect, causeless, without change and all-pervading, the substratum of everything. The individual self, j va and the world, jagat appear as real due to ignorance, avidy . It is an illusion, vivarta, which has Brahman as its substratum. The word m y is also sometimes used to describe the creation. It (m y ) is considered neither real nor unreal, but yet it is not ultimate. Epistemologically, m y is avidy . From a metaphysical standpoint, m y may be considered as the mysterious power of Brahman that deludes us into taking the empirical world as reality13 though a kara takes pains to not establish a connection between Brahman and m y . The means to liberation, mok a is the removal of avidy and the means for this is knowledge, j na alone. Mok a is not an attainment but simply a recognition of ones true nature as Brahman. Though this school is typically described as monism, a kara actually called it non-dualism, advaita. 2. Vi i dvaita R m nuja, the founder of the Vi i dvaita or qualified monism doctrine is held to have lived from 1017 to 1137 CE, a prodigious lifespan of a hundred and twenty years!14 His birth date most likely was brought forward to permit him to be a successor of Y muna, who died in 1038.15 His doctrine attempted to synthesize Vai avism with Ved nta by emphasizing the theistic aspects of the Upani ads and the Brahmas tras. Whereas a kara maintained that Brahman, j va and jagat are identical, for R m nuja, j va and jagat are real and distinct from Brahman but they exist based on Brahman alone. Though there is plurality among j vas and jagat, the Brahman embodied in them is singular. As Hiriyanna puts it, it is the qualified or the embodied that is one, while the factors qualifying or embodying it are quite distinct, though inseparable, from it.16 In other words, the plurality of the j vas and jagat is the qualification of the non-dual Brahman, and hence the name of this system. Rather than Brahman, R m nuja prefers to use the term vara, who is none other than Vi u or N r ya a. vara exists in all of us j vas as the inner controller, the antary m . He is omniscient and moves us all to action, fulfilling our desires according to our karma. Our free will is given to us by vara. He has created this world out of spontaneity and in play, l l . Liberation is the attainment of the world of N r ya a and the enjoyment of freedom and bliss there. This can be achieved by prapatti, absolute self-surrender to N r ya a and bhakti, which for R m nuja means not faith-based devotion but rather meditation based upon the highest knowledge which seeks to ignore everything that is not done for the sake of the dearest,17 i.e. vara.
11 12

In Halbfass, p. 27. Potter, Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies, v. 3, p. 14. 13 Deutsch, p. 30. 14 Karmarkar, pp. xiii, xv and Dasgupta, pp. 100, 104. However Sastri, p. iv has 1140 A.D. 15 Brockington, p. 134. 16 M. Hiriyanna, p. 178. 17 Dasgupta, v. 3, p. 161.

2003 ASIAN STUDIES GRADUATE STUDENT COLLOQUIUM

3. Dvaita Madhva is considered the principal exponent of the doctrine of duality (or plurality), dvaita. Like Vi i dvaita it is theistic and has N r ya a as its principal deity and its followers too consider this to be as old as the Upani ads and Madhva was merely a great exponent of this truth in later times. Madhva himself went by the name of nandat rtha and claimed that he received his revelations directly from Vedavy sa himself. There is some uncertainty over his dates Dasgupta gives 1197-1276 CE, Brockington merely suggests he flourished in the thirteenth century,18 and Sastri provides 1238-1317 CE.19 Madhva opposes the identity of Brahman and the j va and posits a fivefold bheda or difference in reality: between Brahman and j vas, Brahman and jagat, j vas and jagat, between individual j vas, and within jagat in its various forms. He claims this view is supported by common sense. Upani ad statements such as Sarvam khalvidam Brahma, all this is indeed Brahman, are explained from the standpoint of teleology despite the differences, Brahman, i.e. Vi u, is immanent in the entire creation and is its controller. And these differences persist, even past liberation, mok a. Mok a is attained through our recognition of our own and Vi us true natures and our utter dependence on him. Knowledge of our own and Vi us true natures may be achieved through study of the scriptures, but it is only mediate. Through devotion, bhakti, one realizes Vi us greatness and goodness, which leads to Vi us grace, which alone can cause mok a. To develop this philosophy, Madhva dismisses monistic passages in the Upani ads as merely figurative and instead accepts the authority of the entire Vedas and the Vai ava Pur as as well. Another unique characteristic of this doctrine is that it divides j vas in to three kinds: those chosen for eventual liberation, those doomed to eternal damnation and those destined to perpetual rebirth20 and some argue for Christian influences on his work.21 4. Sv bh vikabhed bheda Once again, there is uncertainty and debate regarding the dates of the founder of this doctrine, Nimb rka. His bh ya appears to reflect R m nujas style and thus he is assumed to have lived after him. But there is some controversy whether he lived even after Madhva. 22 He is commonly held to be extant before Madhva around either midtwelfth century CE23 or the mid-thirteenth century. However Malkovsky reports on the radical proposal of Joseph Satyanand who holds Nimb rka to predate a at about 475-525 CE.24 Nimb rkas Brahmas trabh ya is relatively brief and does not contain any refutation, siddh nta of opposing views, p rvapak as. His doctrine is considered to be an adaptation of Bh skaras bhed bheda doctrine which we shall discuss shortly. Similar to R m nuja, he holds that j va and jagat are distinct from Brahman as regards
Brockington, p. 148. These (Sastri, p. iv) are the dates I provide in the table below for Madhva, somewhat arbitrarily. 20 Brockington, p. 150. 21 For example, Torwesten, p.162. 22 Dasgupta, v. 3, pp. 399-400. 23 Tapasy nanda, p. 85 presents 1162 CE as the year of Nimb rkas death. 24 Satyanand, Joseph (1994) Nimb rka: A Pre- a kra Ved ntin and His Philosophy, Christnagar-Varanasi: Vishwa Jyoti Gurukul. Satyanands arguments are summarized in Malkovsky, pp.116-127. Regrettably, I have only very recently come across this and beyond mentioning this fact, I am unable to incorporate it any greater detail at this point.
19 18

arak

PREM PAHLAJRAI

their forms, attributes and functions, i.e. their gu as, yet by nature, svar pa they are identical. Where R m nuja emphasized the identity of nature, Nimb rka holds that the difference, bheda and identity, abheda are both equally important. The seeming contradiction of identity and difference coexists in harmony in Brahman as an organic whole and this is just inherent to Brahmans nature, i.e. it is sv bh vika. Brahman is non-different from the j vas and jagat because they depend on Him for their being or their very existence, but He is different from them as He is self-dependent and possesses the unique qualities of omniscience, omnipotence and the like which the latter do not possess.25 Nimb rka doesnt consider j va-jagat as qualities or attributes of Brahman since to do so differentiates the possessor of the attribute from the attribute. J vas are liberated only by varas grace. This liberation is achieved either through j nayoga, the path of knowledge or through bhaktiyoga, devotion. Performance of ones duties without personal desire prepares the way for passionate devotion of vara and for self-surrender to him. Liberation is achieved only on death and is of four grades, ranging from proximity to vara to merger with him without losing ones individual nature. In other words the difference and identity persists throughout. uddh dvaita The system of Vallabha (1479-1531 CE)26 puts forth the pure, uddha non-duality of Brahman, untouched by m y . J va-jagat are nothing but manifestations of Brahman, which is K a. M y is the power of K a, which causes the misunderstanding of the jagat. It is only the non-difference, abheda that is real, while the perception of all seeming difference, bheda exists for the sake of K as sport, l l . While Brahman can be attained via action and knowledge, this is the lower or ak ara Brahman with limited bliss. The bhakti m rga is superior and easy to follow, resulting in participation in the l l of K a. Liberation of the j va is dependent on K as grace. Vallabhas philosophy may be felt to lack the intellectual arguments and debate that characterizes a karas work. Brahman is to be known not intellectually, but intuitively.27 J vas are to Brahman like sparks to a fire, they are parts of Brahman which lack the divine qualities owing to suppression, tirobh va, of Brahmans bliss. There are a multiplicity of types of j vas, including j van-muktas, pu i j vas and prav ha j vas among others.28 Pu i m rga or the path of grace is the path of complete self-surrender and innate faith in K a, that his grace will certainly save the follower on this path. This has implications of predestination and denial of free will, total dependence on K as grace. But for a pu i j va, devotion is the means and the end, service of K a leads to the highest bliss. Bhakti results in a three-fold fruit: K a subordinates himself to the devotee, the devotee attains association with the divine and ultimately a supernatural body is attained whereby the devotee can participate in the divine sports of K a.

Tapasy nanda, pp. 89-90. This (1479-1531 CE) is the date in Marfatia, p. 8, Reddington, p. 1 and Brockington, p. 165. Sastri, p. iv has 1479-1544. But Shah, pp. 4,52 suggests 1473/9-1532, Tapasy nanda, p. 201 gives 1473-1531 and Dasgupta, v.4, p.371 has 1481-1533. 27 Shah, p. 55. 28 For a detailed treatment, see Marfatia, p. 24.
26

25

5.

2003 ASIAN STUDIES GRADUATE STUDENT COLLOQUIUM

6. Aup dhikabhed bheda This version of the bhed bheda or identity in diversity doctrine was formulated by Bh skara and is considered a precursor to Nimb rkas doctrine. Bh skara is known to be definitely after a kara and before R m nuja, who refutes his views in his bh ya.29 Hajime Nakamura dates him to 750-800 CE.30 Bh skara also is critical of a karas doctrines dependence on m y he believes that a kara ignored the Upani adic passages which describe Brahman as possessed of attributes. For Bh skara, Brahman manifests itself in various forms and effects, as j va-jagat, by taking on up dhis, limiting adjuncts. These up dhis are real and due to Brahmans power, they cause the bondage of j vas. His sense of up dhi here is different from that of a kara, who holds that up dhis are ultimately unreal, mithy . Liberation or mok a is a state of fullest bliss, nanda and it is not ever present and eternal it has to be attained through both karma and j na and is achieved only after the fall of the physical body. In other words, j van-mukti is not possible. By performance of ones duties prescribed by the Vedas without any attachment to the fruits, as well as by meditation on Brahman and the j vas oneness with it, one can release oneself from the bondage of the up dhis. Interestingly, there is no bhakti involved in this process. Bh skaras doctrine is considered a forgotten system in Indian philosophy.31 Though he is critical of a karas view, his alternate system is hobbled by the logical inconsistencies of his unique up dhi doctrine. 7. Vi i a iv dvaita The date of 1270 CE that I have for the founder of this school, r ka ha, occurs only in one source32 and is not substantiated elsewhere. The only thing known for certain is that he came after a kara, aspects of whose doctrine he refutes33 and before the sixteenth century, from when we have a commentary on his Brahmas tra bh ya.34 The philosophy of this doctrine is coupled with the theism where iva is the highest deity and is equated to Brahman. Brahman is different in nature from the j va-jagat, yet these are pervaded by Brahman and hence non-different too. However, r ka ha doesnt support absolute monism, absolute dualism or identity-in-difference, bhed bheda. The relation is one of cause and effect the effect is not separate from the cause, yet they are not identical either, since the cause transcends the effect, despite being immanent in the effect. Brahman, iva is qualified, vi i a by j va-jagat and together they form an organic whole, advaita, hence the name of the doctrine, vi i a iv dvaita. Individuals achieve liberation through knowledge, for which one prepares by performing karmas in accordance with dharma. And it is the knowledge of iva-nature, ivatva which is achieved through meditation on the nature of iva as being non-different from ones own. In fact it is only through ivas grace that karma has efficacy and can allow for the possibility of liberation.35 Liberation is possible both while still living (j van-mukti), as
See Chaudhuri (1981), pp.3-5 where the evidence presented can put Bh skara anywhere in the 8th to , but before V caspati Mi ra, 841-2 CE and R m nuja 1016-17 CE. 10th century CE, coming after Hacker, on the other hand, held V caspati to the tenth century. (Halbfass, p.100, n.44). 30 In A History of Early Ved nta Philosophy, pp. 66-7, cited in Malkovsky, p. 3. 31 Tapasy nanda, p. 87. 32 Sastri, p. iv. I did later find a date of 13th century AD ascribed to him in Khanna, p. 470. 33 Chaudhuri (1962), pp. 5-7. 34 Appaya D k itas iv rka-Ma i-D pik c.1550 AD. 35 Dasgupta, v.5, pp. 86-7.

29

arakma

PREM PAHLAJRAI

well as after death (videha-mukti). Yet, the liberated individual, though all-pervading, vibh still lacks ivas powers of creation and destruction and is not quite united with iva a slight difference still persists.

8. Vi e dvaita This doctrine is followed by the V ra aiva or Li g yat sect and its founder, r pati is dated approximately to fourteenth century CE, with the usual uncertainties. 36 Here, Brahman is iva, and is sagu a and savi e a, i.e. possessed of qualities and differences. Creation is a sport, l l on the part of iva, in order that j vas can work out their karma. The relation between Brahman and j va-jagat is that of bhed bheda, identity in difference as seen in other doctrines also, with abheda, identity dominant. But he also asserts that bheda and abheda dont coexist at the same time. The bheda is during bondage and the abheda during liberation. He provides two explanations for the term vi e dvaita: vi e a denotes the bheda, difference and advaita the abheda between Brahman and j va. Alternately, vi e a can be interpreted as special to denote that this is a special kind of advaita. This term is deliberately chosen to differentiate this doctrine from R m nujas vi i dvaita which he refutes in his bh ya along with those of a kara and Madhva. Liberation is similar to that of Vi i a iv dvaita, the j va takes on the nature of Brahman but remains subservient to iva. But j van-mukti is not possible according to this system. The means for liberation are similar too, with the added stipulation that the seeker should apply the outer marks of iva on ones body. In fact, merely doing so may be adequate to achieve liberation.37 9. Avibh g dvaita Vij nabhik u, the formulator of this doctrine, is more famous for his commentary on the S khyas tras and is assigned to either the sixteenth century or the midseventeenth century CE.38 His philosophy is theistic monism grafted onto the classical S khya dualism of puru a and prak ti. Brahman holds within itself puru a and prak ti and manifests itself in diverse forms. It is the basis for the universe, it holds it together and it exists in the universe, undivided and indistinguishable. There is no duality as the universe cannot be conceived of apart from Brahman which forms its basis yet remains unchanged in its transcendental reality. J vas are derived from Brahman like sparks from a fire. They are the nature of pure consciousness, like Brahman, yet they retain their individuality. Prak ti and puru a together form the conditioning factors, up dhis for the j vas which cause them to appear limited and finite, distinct from Brahman. True knowledge of Brahman cannot be found through the intellect, buddhi, since it continually reaffirms the tendency for separation. Brahman thus can only be realized by bhakti as love. The process of listening to varas name, adoring him, describing his virtues, and meditation ultimately lead to true knowledge and a state of non-difference with ultimate consciousness, Brahman.
36

Rao, p. 31: between 1300 and 1400 A.D. Dasgupta, p. 173: latter half of the fourteenth century. Chaudhuri (1981) p. 187: probably during the 14th Cent. A.D. Sastri, p. iv. 1400 A.D. 37 For a discussion of the differences between r pati, a kara, R m nuja and r ka ha and an overall evaluation of r patis doctrine, see Rao, pp. 698-704 and Chaudhuri (1981), pp. 229-40. 38 Dasgupta, v.1, pp. 212, 221: sixteenth century. Rao, p. 153: mid-seventeenth century. Sastri, p. v: 1600 A.D.

2003 ASIAN STUDIES GRADUATE STUDENT COLLOQUIUM

10. Acintyabhed bheda There is some degree of agreement that Baladeva, the spokesman of this school of inexplicable, acintya identity in difference, duality and nonduality, can be located in the mid-to-latter half of the eighteenth century. 39 He was a Vai ava follower of the Caitanya sect and the Bengali Gau ya school and he also traced his lineage back to the Madhva school.40 Brahman is the same as vara who is also K a. He possesses all the differences and yet is without difference. This inconsistency is resolved by a novel conception of vi e a, peculiarity, which allows affirmation of the qualities of Brahman even though there is no difference between Brahman and its qualities. Thus there is bheda and abheda between Brahman and j va-jagat. Baladeva resolves this inconsistency uniquely by claiming that it is inexplicable, acintya from the human perspective, it is the play, l l of Vi u. Liberation, mukti is only possible without a body, i.e. it is videha, and has five grades, ranging from attaining the form of vara to being in the closest possible relation with him. Still, even at the highest grade of mukti, the j va is different from Brahman. Karma performed unselfishly (ni k ma) helps purify the heart in preparation for mok a. Knowledge, j na is the only means to liberation, but bhakti is also considered a form of knowledge and involves worship of and self-surrender to vara. Ultimately, liberation requires varas grace. Having now overviewed these schools individually, we can proceed to compare them with each other. To facilitate this, I've laid out their characteristic aspects in tabular form.

39

Chaudhuri (1981), p. 241: flourished in the 18th century A.D. Dasgupta, v.4, p. 438, locates one of his works to 1764 CE and Sastri, p. v, dates him to 1725 A.D. The only dissenting opinion is from Rao, p. 181, with two sets of almost similar dates: 1486-1534 and 1485-1533. 40 Chaudhuri (1981), pp. 241-4, 249-51.

atiavdtsiiv

namharB htiw etarapes-non tey lacitnedi ton era hcihw strap sa

.atkum fi neve avj morf etarapes reve ,akE

savj htiw ,akE

a eivriN

a eivriN

msiehtonoM

msiehtonoM

ay hb-adnivoG
ht

ay hb -at mnjiV EC yrutnec ht71 dim/ 61

ht

EC yrutnec 81 etal ro diM avedalaB

u kihbanjiV

ytilaud -non dna ytilaud ssenetarapes-non elbacilpxenI fo ytilaud-noN

adehbdehb -aytnicA atiavdghbivA

Also termed nirvi e dvaita Also referred to as dvait dvaita with or without the sv bh bika qualifier. 43 Also known as bhedav da 44 There is also the uddh dvaita of Vi usv min, which may be a precursor but there is not much directly known about this school 45 This is also often referred to as simply bhed bheda, or dvait dvaita 46 Also variously referred to as se var dvaita, iv dvaita, v ra aiva, sarva rutis ramata, and confusingly also as bhed bheda or dvait dvaita 47 Controversies regarding dates are footnoted where relevant and also in the sections above on the respective schools. 48 Joseph Satyanand however places Ni b rka at 475-525 CE. See s.v. and footnote 24 above. 49 This is also often referred to as simply rimad Brahmas trabh sya. Madhva also wrote a summary of his views in the Anuvy khy na

namharB fo snoitcelfer

gni -simorpmocnu 1.2.6 .U.dnhC

akE

akE

apr-ayrk sa avtnn tub ,apr -a ark ni akE

itka dna a ug ni namharB morf reffid savJ .tceffe dna esuac gnidrager ylno tub ,akE

,sabmibitarp era tagaj & avj ,akE

namharB fo setubirtta era tagaj & avj ,akE

namharB fo setubirtta era tagaj & avj ,akE

"maytivd -vemakE"

a eivaS

seitilauq suoicipsua ylemerpus lla fo edoba ,a eivaS

tceffe ,ayrk sa a eivas ;esuac ,a ark sa a eivriN

sadehb-atagavs a eivriN a eivriN

fo dessessop ,a eivaS

secnereffid lanretni ,sadehb-atagavs fo dessessop ,a eivaS

secnereffid lanretni fo dioved

,a eivriN

msiehtonoM

msiehtonoM

msiehtonoM

msiehtonoM

msinom msiehtonoM msiehtonoM citsieht-noN ay hb ay hb -s mm ay hb-s mm -akarir .a.k.a -aviaarV .a.k.a -amharB .a.k.a ,ay hbarakr ,ay hbavia ay hb-arakshB EC yrutnec 41
ht

ay hbu

94

ay hbajarp -a rP

ay hbr EC 7311-7101 ajunmR msinom deifilauQ

atiavd iiV

msinoisulli ,msinoM ay hb-arak .a.k.a ay hb -s mm -akarir

ht

84

EC 0721

EC 008-057 arakshB ecnereffid-non dna ecnereffid suoititnevdA

54

EC 1351-9741 ahballaV msinom eruP

44

EC 7131-8321 avhdaM ytilarulP ro ecnereffiD

34

ahbaruas -atjirp -atndeV EC yrutnec 31 dim/ 21 diM

ht ht

EC yrutnec 8 ylrae/ 7 etaL

ht

itapr msinom laicepS

64

ah akr lartnec gnieb avi htiw msinom deifilauQ

atiavdvi -a iiV

akrbmiN ecnereffid-non dna ecnereffid larutaN

24

arak a msinom etulosbA

14

atiavd eiV

adehbdehb -akihdpuA

atiavdhddu

atiavD

adehbdehb -akivhbvS

atiavdlaveK

42 41

)sseneno(
namharB fo avtakE

)ytiralucitrap(
namharB fo avta eiV enirtcoD fo epyT yratnemmoC artsamharB
74

setaD

tnenoporP noitalsnarT tcepsA

:epyT

2003 ASIAN STUDIES GRADUATE STUDENT COLLOQUIUM

arakma
sanug

a nugrin

aytaS

itka

ll

,a

andpu

attimin

. k eht si s'u iV fo noisserpxe ti ,deifidom ton na sa yalp si namharB .eno , hguorht latnednecsnart a tuoba thguorb ylno si namharB namharB dna esrevinu eht elbaegnahcnu neewteb noitaler eht fo eht namharB morf elba noitamrofsnart -hsiugnitsidni a si tceffe ehT .esuac lairetam si tceffe ehT dna tneiciffe .esrevinu eht ar rof reniatnoc ro dna eht sisab eht , htob si namharB eht si namharB .
s ,aghbiva a ark ihda anh advam iraP

arkivriN yirkaS

a ugaS adehbdehb -aytnicA

For Vallabha, Brahman has svar pa and svabh va, ie. , but these are outward manifestations and are absolutely identical with Brahman which is ultimately 51 The of brahman are acintya and ananta, inconceivable by us and therefore apparently contradictory 52 For however, the up dh , limiting condition is anitya and asatya, ap ram rthika
anugas
aytina itka aytnica ydiva

namharB naht redro tnereffid a fo tub ,aytaS

aytaS

aytaS

hguoht ,laer si 25 ihdpu eht

s'namharB ton
ydiva

ym

esuaceb ,

aytaS

tub si

yM aytaS

aytaS

aytaS

aytaS

ot eud dna ,elbanifedni si hcihw , ot eud

yhtiM

itka

annihbnnihb

ll

:tnereffid sa llew sa lacitnedi era tceffe dna esuac ehT .esuac lairetam
,a

ark

andpu

k attimin

tagaj

.esuac lairetam ,a ark andpu eht ton dna esuac tneiciffe ,ylno
a
ar

avj

k attimin

'savj

s'avi fo noisserpxe na sa yalp , hguorht tuoba thguorb namharB elbaegnahcnu eht fo noitamrofsnart a si tceffe ehT .esuac lairetam dna tneiciffe
,a

ark

ll

andpu attimin

advam

k eht ylno si arav dna samrak eht htiw ecnadrocca ni ecalp sekat ti tub , s'arav si noitaerc eht oot ereh ,atiavdvia iiv ekiL

dna eht ,htob si namharB .

adv -am iraP

eht sa llew sa esuac tneiciffe , ar si namharB .evisavrep-lla si hcihw namharB no dneped sgniht llA .srewop s'namharB fo noitcejorp aiv noitamrofsnart ,
advam irap ape

advam iraP

kiv

itka

.degnahcnu sniamer namharB rettal eht ot eud tuB .ti fo trap a era dna namharB morf emoc dna :remrof nI .noitamrofsnart degnahcnu , irap at kiva dna noitatsefinam laer ,advam iraP .sdnik 2
arkivriN yirkaS

si namharB tuB .evisavrep-lla si hcihw namharB no dneped sgniht llA .noitatsefinam laer ,advam iraP
arkivriN yirkaS

noitatsefinam laer ,advam iraP

arkivriN yirkaS

noitatsefinam laer ,advam iraP

arkivriN yirkaS

noitatsefinam tnerappa ,advatraviV

arkivriN yirk iN

arkivriN yirkaS

arkivriN yirkaS

arkivriN yirkaS

arkivriN yirk iN

a ugriN
atiavdghbivA

a ugrin( a ugaS
64

)namharB fo smrof atrma ot era serutpircs eht ni secnerefer

atiavd eiV

15,05 dna a ugaS

a ugrin

a ugaS
34

.setubirtta suoicipsua ylno gnissessop

24

.setubirtta suoicipsua ylno gnissessop

atiavd iiV

,a ugaS
14

a ugriN
atiavdlaveK

a ugaS atiavdvi -a iiV

54

a ugaS adehbdehb -akihdpuA

44

atiavdhddu

atiavD

,a ugaS adehbdehb -akivhbvS

50

ecnetsixE l anemone hP

noitasuaC fo yroehT namharB fo noitamrofsnart ,avtarkiV namharB fo ycnega ,avtayirK

)seitilauq fo noissessoP(

:epyT

namharB fo avta uG tcepsA

10

2003 ASIAN STUDIES GRADUATE STUDENT COLLOQUIUM

ym

u iV osla ,a K r naht rehto enon ,arav si namharB

.itur

.noitaerc tuoba sgnirb namharB hcihw hguorht arav fo ihdpu eht era it karp dna a uruP

avi si namharB

avi si namharB

.citsieht -non tub ,arav si namharB

a K r naht rehto enon ,arav si namharB

u iV naht rehto enon ,arav si namharB

a K r naht rehto enon ,arav si namharB

u iV namharB fo mrof detcelfer naht rehto eht ,namharB enon ,arav ugas si arav si namharB
a

arav dna namharB neewteb pihsnoitaleR

aytnica

,myratna

tagaj-avj

sa

apravs

.noitarebil dna noitulossid gnirud

,htsav

ark

avj ,hbiv

adehb

adehba

adehb

adehba .a

ym

avJ .

tas

.rotaluger lanretni eht eht si namharB hcihw fo strap eht era elihw elohw eht si namharB .ecnedecerp sekat ehT .loohcs siht fo eman eht ecneh
- a

tagaj

sti gnirud tnereffid-non tub as

,ars ,htsavyrk

a si si namharB ylno dna

tagaj ,tic -tas avj ,sa

ug

eiv

-avj

ug

.tagaj

apravs

ot eud ecnereffid & ytilaer )laciripme(

akirhavayv

adnan-tic

avj

tagaj

ni tnereffid tub erutan laitnesse

,apravs adehba

sti gnirud namharB morf

annihbnnihb

-tas

-avj

apravs

it

tagaj

tagaj-avj

,ytitnedi )etamitlu(

adehba

fo sisab eht no detpecca eb ot si tI .nialpxe ot nek namuh dnoyeb , si noitcidartnoc tnerappa sihT .cte noitcefrep fo eerged ,emit ,ecalp fo snoitatimil sa hcus ug dna gnidrager oot meht neewteb si ereht teY .tceffe sa dna esuac eht sa namharB neewteb ug dna fo si erehT
adehbdehb -aytnicA

urup dna karp rof sisab eht si namharB

-avj

.erutan lanrete nwonknu on sah adehbdehb lacitnedi era yeht kom ni tub egadnob fo etats gnirud tcnitsid era dna namharB
64

.tceffe eht ni tnenammi si ti hguoht tceffe eht sdnecsnart esuac ehT .rehto eht tuohtiw elbissopmi si eno ,tceffe dna esuac fo taht si noitaler ehT .tnereffid -non dna tnereffid htob ron ,lacitnedi yletulosba ron ,tnereffid yletulosba rehtien era dna namharB
atiavdvi -a iiV

era

tagaj-avJ

sah namharB .ytitnedi etulosbA

. dna ,namharB neewteb ecnereffid etulosbA

34

rehto hcae htiw rap no era dna ehT ug ni tnereffid tub , ni lacitnedi ) ( tceffe dna )namharB( esuaC
24

ni ) ( lacitnedI
atiavd iiV

akihtrmarP

atiavdghbivA

atiavd eiV

54

adehbdehb -akihdpuA

44

atiavdhddu

atiavD

adehbdehb -akivhbvS

14

atiavdlaveK

tagaj dna avj ,namharB neewteb pihsnoitaleR tcepsA :epyT

PREM PAHLAJRAI

11

arkrin

.a

kom

ivrin

anyhd

anj

itkahb

itkahb

apravs anyhd

itkahb

-i

.a

adnan

anJ

itkahb

anaspu

anyhd

itkahB

anj

ag astaS

anaspu

anJ

anyhd

ihddu-attic

ro tsum

anJ ihddu

ara

itkahb itkahb anJ

itkahb

namharB dna
amt anjavttaT

.yllanif enola .elbissop ecarg s'arav hguorht si yllacihposolihp koM .pihsrow ton fo tcejbo dna "lacitsym" si lanrete sa arav noitaler citsieht fo egdelwonk sihT .arav otni segrem , fo dnik dna fleseno .lps a si ,snaem lanif eht sevlossid eno hguorhT si enola .noitazilaer .snaem tcerid a tsehgih ot snaem eb nac eht si arav . sesuac amraK fo evol sa
itkahB itkum -ahediv

ot sdael ecarg enivid yletamitlU .ydob no avi fo skram retuo ecalp dluohs rekeeS .avi fo mrof tsefinamnu dna tsefinam eht no ot dael . rof si amraK
-attic

.namharB kom ot sdael neht ecarg eniviD , e .erutan nwo , ugrin s'eno morf no tnereffid-non si desab-gnileef gnieb avi naht rehtar hcihw fo fo mrof eht no eht ni deriuqer ro si namharB ot sdael ot tnemhcattA .snaem . kom rof eht si ,amrak dedeen si amrak ton htiw gnola
,anJ anJ aytin itkuM

ecarg s'arav ylno seriuqer uP .namharB fo eht slaever enola .dezilaer eb nac namharB ka eht hguorhT ,
anj

ecarg s'arav si hguoht esuac arav etamitlU ko fo stcepsa resolc ot snaem tcerid ,ngineb erom era owt rettal ,reteews eht fo ehT .noitatidem noitalpmetnoc , gnivlovni ot , , ot sdael lanoitomE

arav fo stcepsa tnatsid erom ,renrets eht fo noitalpmetnoc ,gnileef naht rehtar sevlovni sihT . fo mrof erutam eht deredisnoc si hcihw ,
itkahB

fo

itkum

-ahediv

atkum

itkum-navJ

.ylno si erehT .reverof arav ni egufer gnikat ,nruter t'nseod ehT .esle erehwyreve
adehb agohb

ayal

itihts

ahediv aytina

,i

itkum-navJ itihts

ayal

avj

,i

itkumnavJ

adehba ayal

hbiv

itihts

hbiv

avj

avj atkum

,i

avj

ayal ,itihts

avj atkum

,i

avj

,itkum

itkum navJ

atkum

ydiva

-navJ

avj atkum

atkum aytin

ars

avJ a

anja

avj

avJ adnan

avj

aymtdt

avtavi

avJ

apravs

,enola fo smret ni si erehT . dna s fo srewop eht skcal dna a sniamer eht tpecxe setubirtta s'namharB fo tnemniatta eht si koM
a

. si .detroppus era dna .ytitnedi sa emas eht ton si ecnereffid . dna , -noN .namharB .ylno s fo rewop eht skcal htiw gnigrem si koM .gnimoceb ni ssensuoicsnoc a , eht tub evisavrep .ydob ylhtrae rof etats wen a si dna egdelwonk -lla , eht fo llaf retfa si sihT . si fo dioved si eht kom eht tuB . ylno elbissop si ehT .avi nI .elbissop si koM .elbissop htiw lacitnedi s fo srewop noitaler lanosrep gnikcal ,avi ot ton ,ot ralimis ton si on hcihw tneivresbus llits tub ton semoceb . htiw 35namharB si . ylno eht avi htiw ytitnedi fo ssenlluf tub tuB . , si sihT htiw ecnereffid -non fo etats a si .avi fo tnemniatta fo tnemniatta ,egdelwonk erup ton si koM eht si koM eht si koM etamitlU
a

kom

.detreoppus si dna .elbissop s fo srewop ton si gnikcal dna .arav a gniniamer no tnedneped llits tub ,ssilb namharB morf sreffid llits dna egdelwonk detimilnu A. ot eud as si . kom ni dnuob -tsop stsisrep si .stsixe dna namharB ydaerla namharB neewteb ecnereffiD htiw ytitnedI
44

namharB .elbissop morf etarapes ton si ecnetsixe si tneserp eht ni a ,htaed tsap noitarebil nevE .stsisrep .stsisrep ecnereffid ecnereffid ug ;namharB ug ;namharB htiw ytitnedi htiw ytitnedi eht apravs eht fo noitazilaeR fo noitazilaeR
24

ot eud nettogrof tub ,stsixe ydaerla namharB htiw ytitnedI

14

adehbdehb -aytnicA

atiavdghbivA

64

atiavd eiV

atiavdvi -a iiV

54

adehbdehb -akihdpuA

atiavdhddu

34

atiavD

adehbdehb -akivhbvS

atiavd iiV

atiavdlaveK

53

12

Dasgupta, v.3, pp.450-1 uses terms as "Ultimate Being," "Ultimate Principle" to be different from "great soul, param tman" - I can't tell which of these corresponds to Brahman

anahdS

noitarebil
,a

:epyT

tcepsA

koM

2003 ASIAN STUDIES GRADUATE STUDENT COLLOQUIUM

ihdpu

itkahb

tagaj

sa koM a

avJ

tagaj

uP

-avj

itka

avj

avta

ivrin

adehba adehb

avta

apravs

aytnica

ayp

avj

aytin

avta

ivrin

tagaj

sarkiv

savj atkum

avj

ivrin

tagaj

anugas

avtake

avj

.gniyfsitas ton si " " ,yllacihposolihP .)ahballaV dna avhdaM rof sa( melborp a si e tub sa namharB

.detirehni era ayhk S ni tnerehni msilaud fo smelborp eht oslA .elbanetnu yllacihposolihp sraeppa msieht eht ayhk S ot no detfarg msinom citsieht si sihT

fo noitinifed railuceP .lacigolli namharB osla si ugas fo ycneiciffe dna ugrin dna ycamirp htob sa namharB senimrednu .noitcidartnoc namharB morf a ,namharB naht tnereffid gnieb rehto era .ressel dna taht ylpmi tneivresbus niamer ot smees siht llits dna namharB elbaniatta , .w ytitnedi revewoh si tI eveihca tonnac .mrofer ,egnahc ehT . ,noitaerc : tey dna gnimoceb a 4 eht fo 3 morf eb tonnac namharB :tnetsisnocni .atiavd iV eerf si namharB ,arak a yllacigol si s'ajunmR sa rof ekilnU fo noitinifeD seussi ralimiS
kom
ll

.seiroeht lavir fo noitatufer eht htiw rehtob t'nseoD .lacigolli si dna fo ecnetsixeoC .snoitcefrepmi rieht reffus dluow namharB neht esuaceb namharB htiw lacitnedi ton era ehT
tagaj-avj

.amrak fo swal eht gnitrevbus sa deweiv si ecarg su iV no ecnedneped .ot etaler ot . dna ug drah si namharB ni tnereffid ugrin dna tey dna lanosrepmi yrev ni namharB si tI .ecneirepxe htiw lacitnedi lla tsniaga si eb t'nac ) enirtcod citsinom - ( strap ehT .ecnedive ehT !laudnon laciripme on gnieb dna laud htob eb tnac ereht ,tpecca rettis-ecneF ot drah si
yM

)metsys eht ot lanretxe esoht yb deviecrep sa( selcatsbO ,snoitatimiL

adehba

adehb

"adehba"

atiavda

"atiavda" "adehb"

smelborp
adehbdehb

,nitiavd

"a

iv"

"arak a
akirhavayv

tsinom desiugsid a,
nitiavda annahccarp

ym

ot
ot

si ajunmR
si tahw"

hguorht ,avi morf tnereffid hguoht sa sraeppa mU ,evol tselluf sih fo tcejbo na rof dna ,evol si avi .avi fo a si
itkaarap

akihtrmarp

. dednuoporp tey a ,avhdaM fo elpicsid a flesmih deredisnoc avedalaB

ot rewsna evitaerc a si ytitnedi morf tnereffid sa ssen -etarapes-noN

atiavdghbivA

!tsixeoc ton od dna tuB . sa dna sa deredisnoc eb nac i s'ajunmR morf etaitnereffid ot reifilauq sa desu e
"a iv"

mU sa

yM

a eb ot arakshB redisnoc emoS

54

.yroeht amrak htiw .lliw eerf fo kcal dna tif ton od ecarg dna lleh lanrete noitanitsederp ,oslA . seilpmi hguorht .namharB evisavrep fo e -lla si namharB dna ugas fi ylralucitrap htiw emaS namharB !stsisrep llits fo e atiavD .namharB ot yrotcidartnoc morf yllacihposolihp fo noitarapes si dna htiw namharB ,namharB fo fo fo noitcidartnoC noitarapes tcirtS .evitarugif ylerem sa dessimsid era sda inapU eht fo segassap citsinoM ??ytinaitsirhC fo .enirtcod ecneulfni - u iV s'arak a hguorht noitavlas ni setaidem fo ssenkaew u iV fo nos sserdda ,uyV .elbissop si lleh lanretE ot stpmettA
44

adehbdehb -aytnicA

64

atiavd eiV

atiavdvi -a iiV

adehbdehb -akihdpuA

atiavdhddu

34

atiavD

24

adehbdehb -akivhbvS

atiavd iiV

14

atiavdlaveK

:epyT

serutaeF laicepS tcepsA

PREM PAHLAJRAI

13

14

2003 ASIAN STUDIES GRADUATE STUDENT COLLOQUIUM

Doctrines Not Considered In the above analysis, I chose to leave out Vi usv min's uddh dvaita which is treated as a separate school by Chaudhuri (1981). What little is known about him and his views is only through the writings and references of others, and does not seem to be any different from Vallabha's views. Some consider Vi usv min to be a predecessor of Vallabha, but this view is not accepted by all.54 Chaudhuri also presents Vivekananda's school as m nav dvaita, humanistic monism.55 I didn't deem it to merit an independent column in the above analysis, since it is mainly monistic advaita combined with a theistic bhakti approach towards one's fellow humans, considered them as Brahman personified. As such, bhakti is added as a secondary s dhana. A more significant omission from this comparative analysis might be that of neoadvaita. It may come down to be no different than a kara's advaita as presented in the above analysis, but mostly due to time constraints, I have chosen not to delve deeper at present.56 I will simply present a token quote here to provide a sense: "[Neo-Ved nta] strives to find ever more adequate concepts for describing the Absolute [author's term for Brahman], not as a goal to be achieved (only mok a is the goal) but as progress in the interminable search for understanding. [] Neo-Ved nta is not a doctrine to be accepted or rejected but a way of thinking capable of infinite development and variation, a lively shoot on the ancient stock of Ved nta philosophy."57 Some Observations What may not readily be apparent from this analysis is that all these different schools accept the "law" of karma and that one's highest purpose in life is to strive for mok a, liberation from the cycle of birth and suffering and death, sams ra. These schools may disagree about how moksa can be best achieved, what form it will take and whether it is attainable in the present life or beyond but none denies that freedom is actually possible. I am reminded of the Buddhist references to ku ala up ya, expedient means to reconcile divergent and seemingly contradictory teachings ascribed to the Buddha himself. For Ved nta it is slightly different rather than ascribing their opinions to a specific person like the Buddha, it is the ruti that the "founders" of the various schools invoke to support their views and their task is made harder by the fact that the words of the ruti are fixed, only the interpretations can vary and it is their burden to justify the correctness of their interpretation. I cannot but help see these diverse attempts as up yas as there are many different personalities, it is only fitting that there be many diverse ways of achieving the highest goal, . I suspect that one cannot clinically and objectively determine the superiority of any one approach over the rest. One tends naturally to choose the approach that fits best within one's ideology and predilections, whether due to ones environment or ones past karma as the case may be. If one prefers to relate to "supreme perfection" personified, perhaps the approach via bhakti will seem "best" with as much or as little non-duality as one is willing to tolerate providing a reason
See Dasgupta, pp.382-3, Chaudhuri (1981), pp. 54-6, and Brockington, pp.165-6 for historical background. 55 Chaudhuri (1981), pp.366-417 56 And, as far as I know, it conveniently does not match my original criterion of having a Brahmas tra bh ya! 57 George Bosworth Burch in his introduction to Bhattacharyya (1976), p.2.

54

a kom

PREM PAHLAJRAI

15

for the variance from strict dvaita through bhed bheda to advaita qualified in one form or another. But if one is more partial to "pure" reason alone, unencumbered by emotion, then the uncompromising non-duality of advaita might appeal. Ultimately though, the proof of the pudding is in the eating, or as a commentator on the works of Madhva, Vy sat rtha says: .58 "By merely licking the outer surface of sugarcane, one can't taste and enjoy its sweetness; Without squeezing it between the teeth, one cannot enjoy the flavor of the sugarcane." It is only through praxis, through applying these philosophies to one's own life, that one can determine if any of these schools deliver the goods on mok a. That there has been and continues to be healthy debate between the proponents of these various schools serves to indicate that each seeker is trying to test the efficacy of their avowed doctrine against others. That these debates continue to this date without any resoundingly conclusive victory on the part of any given school may suggest that in their own fashion these diverse schools are efficacious suited to the individual practitioners' propensities and predilections, and that there may be more than just one way to attaining moksa.

58

Sharma, p.xi

tevahb osarusken ohdbal aydpsin madnaduskec an .tevahb osaruski atj avianenaheluskh an

s'arak a

16 References

2003 ASIAN STUDIES GRADUATE STUDENT COLLOQUIUM

Apte, Vasudeo Mahadeo (1960), Brahma-S tra Sh nkara-Bh shya. Bombay: Popular Book Depot. Ayyangar, M.B.Narasimha, trans. (1979), Ved ntas ra of Bhagvad R m nuja. Adyar Library and Research Center. Bhattacharyya, Krishna Chandra (1975), Search for the Absolute in Neo-Vedanta. ed. George B. Burch. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Brockington, J. L. (1996), The Sacred Thread: Hinduism in its Continuity and Diversity. Edinburgh University Press. Chaudhuri, Roma (1962), Doctrine of Srikantha (and other Monotheistic Schools of the Ved nta) Vol I. Calcutta: Pracyavani. Chaudhuri, Roma (1972), Ten Schools of the Ved nta: Part I (Five Schools). Calcutta: Rabindra Bharati University. Chaudhuri, Roma (1975), Ten Schools of the Ved nta: Part II (Further reflections of the Five Schools of the Ved nta). Calcutta: Rabindra Bharati University. Chaudhuri, Roma (1981), Ten Schools of the Ved nta: Part III (Five Remaining Schools, Together with the Unique School of Swami Vivekananda). Calcutta: Rabindra Bharati University. Dasguta, Surendranath (1922), A History of Indian Philosophy, v.1-5. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. Deutsch, Elliot (1973), Advaita Ved nta: A Philosophical Reconstruction. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Hiriyanna, M. (1996), Esseentials of Indian Philosophy. London: Diamond Books. Karmarkar, Raghunath Damodar, ed. (1959), of R m nuja, Part I: . University of Poona. Khanna, A. B. (1998), Bh skar c rya (A Study with Special Reference to his Brahmas tra-bh ya). Delhi: Amar Granth Publications. Malkovsky, Bradley J. (2001), The Role of Divine Grace in the Soteriology of a kar c rya. Leiden: Brill. Marfatia, Mrudula I. (1967), The Philosophy of Vallabh c rya. Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal. Potter, Karl H. (1981), Encyclopediaof Indian Philosophies, v.3: Advaita Ved nta up to a kara and His Pupils. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. Potter, Karl H. (1999), Presuppositions of India's Philosophies. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. Rao, C. Hayavadana, (1936) The r kara Bh shya being the Vir saiva Commentary on the Ved nta-S tras by Sr pati. Vol. I Introduction. Bangalore Press. Reddington, James D. (1983) Vallabh c rya on The Love Games of K Sastri, Shri Anant Krishna (1995) Brahmas trawith Nine Commentaries, v. 1. Delhi: Chaukhamba Sanskrit Pratishthan. Shah, Jethalal G. (1969) Shri Vallabhacharya: His Philosophy and Religion. Nadiad: Pushtimargiya Pustakalaya.

rtshutaC

:ihleD

.a

mayhshbarak

ayshbr

.ssadisranaB lalitoM

PREM PAHLAJRAI

17

Sharma, B.N.K, (1971) The Brahmas tras and their Principle Commentaries (A Critical Exposition) Vol. I. Bombay: Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan. Tapasy nanda, Sv mi (1990) Bhakti Schools of Ved nta (Lives and Philosophies of R m nuja, Nimb rka, Madhva, Vallabha and Caitanya). Mylapore: Sri Ramakrishna Math. Torwesten, Hans (1985) Vedanta, Heart of Hinduism. New York: Grove Press.