VISISHTAADVAITHAM Vs ADVAITHAM
VISISHTAADVAITHAM Vs ADVAITHAM
VISISHTAADVAITHAM Vs ADVAITHAM
Adi Shankara had argued that all qualities or manifestations that can
be perceived are unreal and temporary. Ramanuja believed them to
be real and permanent and under the control of the Brahman. God can
be one despite the existence of attributes, because they cannot exist
alone; they are not independent entities. They are Prakaras or the
modes, Sesha or the accessories, and Niyama or the controlled aspects,
of the one Brahman.
He also holds that the Advaitin argument about prior absences and
no prior absence of consciousness is wrong. Similarly the Advaitin
understanding of a-vidya (not-Knowledge), which is the absence of
spiritual knowledge, is incorrect. “If the distinction between spiritual
knowledge and spiritual ignorance is unreal, then spiritual ignorance
and the self are one.”
VII. The removal of Avidya: For the Advaitin, the bondage in which
we dwell before the attainment of Moksa is caused by Maya and
Avidya; knowledge of reality (Brahma-vidya) releases us. Ramanuja,
however, asserts that bondage is real. No kind of knowledge can
remove what is real. On the contrary, knowledge discloses the real; it
does not destroy it. And what exactly is the saving knowledge that
delivers us from bondage to Maya? If it is real then non-duality
collapses into duality; if it is unreal, then we face an utter absurdity.