Vaishnava acaryas at odds with each other?
There are differences in their explanations, but the point is that they all accept the same conclusion that the soul is an eternal servant of the Lord, and the goal of life is to revive this forgotten
A widespread misconception is that different Vaishnava acaryas like Ramanujacarya and Madhvacarya were preaching different philosophies and were at odds with each other. Of course, technically, the philosophy of Ramanujacarya is called Visistadvaita-vada, and the philosophy of Madva is called Suddha-dvaitavada, just as the philosophy of Nimbarka is called Dvaitadvaita-vada and the philosophy of Vishnusvami is called Suddhadvaita-vada. There are differences in their explanations, but the point is that they all accept the same conclusion that the soul is an eternal servant of the Lord, and the goal of life is to revive this forgotten relationship. They all came in order to uphold this highest principle, pulling people out of the grip of the Mayavada philosophy. For this, they had to explain certain points in different ways, according to what their followers could understand, and even made certain compromises.
When we study their teachings under the influence of the mode of passion, we pay more attention to the differences, and then it looks like they are at odds with each other. Certain authors make their careers writing books emphasizing these differences and pitting the acaryas against each other, but as we progress to the mode of goodness, we eventually understand that they just use different words to describe the same absolute truth.
The history is that these different acaryas came to gradually reestablish the proper conclusion of the scriptures after the true conclusions of the Vedas had been lost at the beginning of Kali-yuga. By the time of the appearance of Lord Buddha, the so-called followers of the Vedas had degenerated into hedonists who were killing animals to eat their flesh, using the rituals prescribed in the Vedas as an excuse. Thus, Buddha had to reject the Vedas to stop this nonsense and establish his teachings. With this, he took people out of hedonism and established basic religious principles such as non-violence, austerity, and simplicity, which form the core of the original Buddhism. He was followed by Sankaracarya, who brought the Vedas back, and by the different Vaishnava acaryas, culminating with Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, who gradually restablished the proper conclusions of the scriptures.
Certain philosophies are considered dualists because they believe in the existence of another force separated from God, like in the case of the atheistic Sāṅkhya, where there is the dichotomy of Puruṣa and Prakrti, being both considered independent forces that interact. The philosophy of Sankaracarya is called non-dualism because he rejected the idea of dualism, explaining that there is nothing separated or independent from God or Brahman. However, because people at the time were not able to accept the idea of a personal God, Sankaracarya was forced to limit his explanation, transmitting the idea that there is nothing separate from God, without explaining the existence and interactions of His different energies. In this way, Sankaracarya denied dualism, but He was not able to explain the whole truth, having to settle on the idea that Brahman is everything and we are all Brahman. While this is generally true, because he couldn't enter into the details that balance the idea, he had to settle into the idea that the material manifestation is illusory and that we are all God.
Ramanujacarya protested against both dualism and monism, explaining that while everything is God, there are distinctions between His different energies. That's why his Visistadvaita philosophy is called non-dualism with distinctions, or purified monism, since his philosophy sits between both, giving a more balanced and complete view of the absolute truth. Ramanujacarya explains that God has different energies, emphasizing the difference between sentient and non-sentient, and also between the souls and God. Everything is God, but at the same time, there are distinctions between His different energies. This allowed him to explain both the nature of the cosmic manifestation (as being illusory, but not false), the nature of God as a sentient being who has transcendental qualities, and to emphasize the idea of the relationship between the soul and God and devotional service as a process to revive such a forgotten relationship.
In the process, he also dismissed incorrect interpretations, such as the idea that Krsna assumes a material body when He appears in this material world, or that souls have their origin in this material world. It's funny that some nowadays argue that the soul has always been conditioned based on the misinterpretation of certain passages, while in reality, this idea was rejected almost one thousand years ago, since the times of Ramanujacarya. He explained that Krsna is always transcendental, and the souls are part of His spiritual, sentient energy, and are thus eternally connected with the Lord, although such an eternal relationship may be temporarily forgotten when they come in contact with the non-sentient material energy.
Because of the particularities of material time, it appears that the soul is eternally conditioned since this conditioning starts before the beginning of the influence of material time, and it is thus not possible to trace its origin. However, in a higher sense, the soul is not part of the material world and simply gets in contact with the material energy, somehow or other, at a certain stage. By the practice of devotional service, however, a soul can reestablish such an eternal relationship and thus be reinstated in his original transcendental position.
As Srila Prabhupada mentions: "Except for Lord Visnu, anything else, either cosmic manifestation or living entities, are not independent but are dependent on the Supreme Lord. The living entities are qualitative representations of the Supreme Lord. The doctrine that man is made after God is accepted by Madhvacarya. The features of man are an exact reflection of the features of the Supreme Lord. He also accepts that the Supreme Lord expands in multi-pleanary-portions, as well as separated portions called jiva-tattva. All the jiva-tattvas, or living entities, are eternal associates of the Supreme Lord to render transcendental loving service to Him. The living entities' knowledge is always inferior or incomplete."
Madhvacarya emphasized the differences between the souls and the Lord, as well as the differences between the souls and matter, between matter and the Lord, and between one soul and another. In this way, He emphasized individuality, and thus put a nail in the coffin of the misguided idea that we are all one and ultimately all God. No, God is eternally a person, and we are eternally separated from him. I am different from you, you are different from me, and we are both different from the Lord. Just like a son can't merge back into his father, much less merge into his brothers, we can't merge into God or merge into each other. We are all eternally separated individuals.
By emphasizing individuality, he reinforced the idea of devotional service to the Lord, which is the central part of his teachings, just like in the case of Ramanujacarya and all other Vaishnava acaryas. In reality, there is no contradiction between the Visistadvaita and Suddha-dvaita philosophies; they just emphasize different aspects of the same Absolute Truth.
The philosophy of Madhvacarya is called purified dualism because it reconciles the idea of everything being part of the Supreme Lord with the idea of the souls and matter being different from Him. In this way, this philosophy speaks about a personal God and loving relationships between Him and the individual souls, as well as a distinction between the material and spiritual natures. By emphasizing the differences, he positioned his philosophy as diametrically opposite to the monism of Sankaracarya, fighting against the mistaken concept that we are all one.
The philosophy of Vishnusvami is called Suddhadvaita-vada (purified monism), and his commentary on the Vedanta Sutra is the Sarvajna Bhasya. This is the oldest of the four commentaries. It explains that the souls are parts and parcels of the absolute truth, one with Him, but at the same time separated, just like sparks coming from a fire. The material world is manifested from the energy of the Lord and is thus not false. Just like bars of gold can be molded into different ornaments and later melted back into bars, the material world is created by the molding of the Lord's eternal energy. The Lord has no material qualities, but at the same time is full of eternity, knowledge, and bliss. He is omniscient, omnipotent, Supreme, the bestower of the fruits of action, and the cause of all auspiciousness. The Lord can never fall under the influence of Maya, but being very small, the jivas can. When they do, they forget about the Supreme Lord and are covered by ignorance. The goal of life is to attain uninterrupted contact with the Lord in Vaikuntha, from where there is no return. This supreme goal can only be achieved through the practice of devotional service.
The philosophy of Nimbarka is called Dvaitadvaita-vada (monism and dualism, oneness and difference), and sits between the non-dualism of Sankaracarya and the purified dualism of Madhvacarya. The philosophy of Nimbarka is described in the Parijata Saurabh Bhasya, his commentary on the Vedanta Sutra. According to him, the concepts of unity and differentiation between the Lord's energies are equally true, just like waves and the ocean or the sun and its rays. Both matter and souls are considered parts of God, although at the same time separated from him.
According to him, the cause of bondage for the soul is contact with karma (material activities), which in turn results from ignorance, and the process of salvation is through the uninterrupted worship of the Lord. The ultimate goal is the realization of the eternal nature of the soul.
In this way, all four Vaishnava acaryas wrote their commentaries on the Vedanta-sutra, explaining their philosophical views. Although their explanations may sound different in certain points, they all describe how the soul is simultaneously one with Krsna and different from him, and thus the conclusion is the same. The soul is one with Krsna because it is part of his spiritual potency, but at the same time, the soul is eternally an individual who can't ever merge back into Krsna, although the soul can be temporarily put into his effulgence. This is the basis for the concepts of devotional service and spiritual rasas, since there is no question of relationships with oneself. Relationship implies two, and therefore, the distinction between the Lord and the soul is essential to establish the eternal relationship between them.
If you read this article to the end, give it a like or write a commentary. This makes Substack recommend it to more people.
Read also:
Hare Krishna Prabhu ji. Very informative article nicely explained philosophies of different acharyas and reconcile in one conclusion. Thank you Prabhu ji🙏
Hare Krishna Prabhuji.This is a doubt I would always have in my mind from the begining.Differences between explanations in what acarayas give , I would sometimes foolishly think that they are different.But this article just clears all such doubts , every thing you have explained is spot on.
Thank you prabhuji. Jaya Srila Prabhupad