Detail Study of Hinduism

Salient Features of Vishista Advaita

By:Vinay Dommeti
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Introduction:

Many eminent philosophers differed from Sri Sankara in his advocacy of Non-Duality to be the
essence of the Upanishadic teachings. In the 11th Century A.D. Sri Ramanuja through his work,
Sri Bhashya, a commentary on Vedanta Sutras, popularized a trend of thought called Visisht
Advaita or Qualified Monism. According to him, one need not abandon the reality of the world
and still be able to conceive of an Absolute Monistic God. This God is an object of devotion
unlike the Non-dual Brahman which defies human thought. One of his most eminent successors
was Vedanta Desika who further systematized Sri Ramanuja’s thoughts in a logical and concrete
fashion. His magnum opus Tattva Mukta Kalapa (TMK) is still referenced by Visistadvaitic
scholars as the standard in case of any dispute.

1. The three key principles of Vishishta Advaita are:

Tattva: The knowledge of the 3 real entities namely, Jiva (the sentient); Jagat (the insentient)
and Ishvara (Vishnu-Narayana or Parabrahman)

Hita: The means of realization i.e. through Bhakti (devotion) and Prapatti (self-surrender)

Purush Artha: The goal to be attained i.e. moksha or liberation from bondage.”1

2. Aprithaksiddhi:

The central concept of VisishtAdvaita Philosophy is that Brahman alone is organically related to
the soul (chit) and matter (achit) and is the ultimate reality. Chit and Achit are absolutely
different and yet inseparable from Brahman. Though these two entities draw their very existence
from Brahman. Brahman is independent of them just as the soul is independent from the body
but remains the inner controller of both chit and achit. This relationship of inseparability is called
Aprithaksiddhi.2

Empirically we find that a substance and an attribute though different yet are related to each
other inseparably. Take for example a blue jar. The jar is different from the colour blue but both
are referred to in the judgment, “This is a blue jar”. Perception reveals them to be identical but
yet they cannot be identical, for jar is certainly different from the blue colour and not all jars are
blue nor is blue-ness found only in case of a jar. Thus we perceive a blue jar as two entities tied
together. Both their inseparability and difference is perceived. But it is wrong to conceive the
relation between the substance and the attribute as simultaneously identical and different from
1
http://www.vedamu.org/Veda/KRP-Sir/Visistadvaita.pdf accessed on April 02, 2021, 03:00 p.m.
2
http://egyankosh.ac.in/bitstream/123456789/38178/1/Unit-3.pdf accessed on April 02, 2021, 03:17 p.m.

1
each other. For both are contradictory properties and hence cannot qualify the same locus. Nor
could it be said that both are identical for they are perceived as having a relation with each other
and to have a relation implies a difference as two entities. “Aprithaksiddhi” is just a name to
denote the fact of two things being found to be so related that they are inseparable and different.

A substance is defined as that which is the substratum for changes or modifications. The
modifications do not affect the substratum for they are adventitious. An attribute is that which is
subject to modifications. Accordingly there is a difference between a defining characteristic and
an attribute. The former is the very essence of the thing. A substance shall suffer a complete
change if the modification is of its very essence. But such is not the case with an attribute. For
example cowness is the very essence of a cow. Since it is also the basis of differentiating a cow
from other animals like a goat or a buffalo, it can also be said that the difference is the very
nature of an entity since that difference is defined as that which leads to the empirical usage of
the words, ‘this is different from that’ (TMK 5.13). A cow cannot but cease to be a cow if it
ceases to have cow-ness. But cow-ness is not something over and above the fact of being a cow
i.e. a cow having such properties like a dewlap etc.3

However a jar which has a blue color can have a change of color without ceasing to be a jar. In a
similar fashion, chit and achit are attributes of Brahman. The classic example that is given to
explain the dependence of chit and achit on Brahman is through the body-soul example. The
body is defined by Sri Ramanuja as that substance which a sentient self can completely control
and support for its own purposes. The body is entirely dependent on the self (SB 2.1.9). Thus
when it is said that the whole universe as chit and achit constitute the body of Brahman, the term
‘body’ is used in a very technical sense to denote their absolute dependence on Brahman. Their
existence is by Brahman and for Brahman. They exist for the sake of Brahman and apart from
that they have no meaning. By their very nature they are dependent or subordinate entities.
Brahman is their very soul and pervades them and controls them. However, chit and achit are
organically related to Brahman. There is identity between the two but not absolute identity but a
rather qualified identity, which is the reason this school of thought is known as Qualified
Monism or VisishtAdvaita Brahman. This is the solution offered by Sri Ramanuja to the problem
of relating the ‘One’ ultimate reality to the world of multiplicity.4

3. Chit and Achit:

The self is of the very nature of knowledge and also has knowledge as its attribute. It is infinite
in number, the knowing subject, the agent of action, the enjoyer of the fruits of its karma and is
3
http://www.vedamu.org/Veda/KRP-Sir/Visistadvaita.pdf accessed on April 02, 2021, 04:00 p.m.
4
https://www.scribd.com/document/457912298/Philosophy-of-Vishishtadvaita-pdf accessed on April 03,
10:00 a.m

2
eternal. Knowledge as the very nature of the soul is known as svarupajnana and as the attribute
of the soul is dharmabhutajnana. The self is a monad whose very nature is knowledge.
Knowledge, however, is not only an attribute but also a substance. Knowledge suffers
modifications as we see ‘knowledge states’ arising in reference to different objects. It also
suffers from contraction and expansion. In the state of pralaya (dissolution) or deep sleep we see
that knowledge contracts and in awake state we see its expansion. However the soul is conceived
of being omniscient. The expansion of its knowledge is obstructed by avidya or ignorance in the
form of karma which restricts the expansion aspect of knowledge and causes contraction, the
result of which are the different knowledge states experienced in the everyday world.5

At this point it may be recalled that a substance was defined as that which was the locus for
modifications. The modification of knowledge takes place only in relation to dharmabhutajnana
and not substantive knowledge or svarupajnana. If it is asked as to how can the knower be the
same when the corresponding knowledge is manifold or in other words how can there be one
knower of ‘many’ knowledges without that knower suffering modifications, it may be said that
the conditions of knowledge affect the knower’s attributive knowledge or dharmabhutajnana
and not its very nature or svarupajnana. Knowledge is defined in SB 1.1.1 as that which by its
intrinsic nature reveals as another to its subject. The self is by its very nature is a knower
analogous to Brahman and apprehends an object revealed to it by its attributive knowledge. The
relation between the soul and knowledge is explained by the example of the flame of a lamp and
its luminosity. They are distinct but not physically separable. Like the self, knowledge too is
eternal though it suffers from modification. However, the two facts are not conceived as
contradictory because of the substance-attribute theory accepted by this school.6

Now, both the soul and knowledge being substances, how can it be logically conceived that a
substance can be qualified by another substance? It is possible just as the luminosity is an
attribute of a flame though both are substances. The manner in which a substance is defined in
this system precludes any logical difficulty in conceiving a substance to act as a substance and
yet be an attribute of another substance. As the soul is conceived of being a moral agent, a
question may arise as to how can a man be an independent agent of action and yet dependent on
Brahman? Does he have free will or not? The solution offered by VisishtAdvaita Vedanta is that
Brahman is the cause of the actions of the jiva in as much without Him there can be no
possibility to perform any action, good or bad. A person acts in accordance with his dispositions
which are determined by his past actions or karma. Thus he is the agent of his action and reaps
its fruits too. But Brahman is just the witness who has out of his free will bestowed on the soul
the independence to act as he may like. Brahman guides him to the performance of scripturally
approved actions in order to free himself from the bond of karma, and also by incarnating
Himself in the midst of human beings. But He does not show partiality towards anyone and all
are free to choose Him or reject Him. Brahman is thus like oxygen, freely available and
5
https://www.scribd.com/document/457912298/Philosophy-of-Vishishtadvaita-pdf accessed on April 03,
2021, 12:00 p.m
6
http://rkmathbangalore.org/Books/TheThreeSystemsOfVedanta.pdf accessed on April 03, 2021, 01:00 p.m

3
necessary for the performance of daily activities. However, He is not responsible for the
particular choices that people make.7

Achit is insentient matter. Prakriti is the totality of insentient universe. It is the material cause in
respect of inanimate nature. It is in a state of equilibrium with the three gunas: sattva, rajas and
tamas. When this equilibrium is disturbed by the will of the Lord, it begins to evolve into
inanimate universe. Time is considered here to be a separate category. Time is a substance which
appears limited through various limiting adjuncts into moments etc. It is the material cause in
respect to its modifications which are nothing but temporal divisions. Another category is called
Nityavibhuti which is a category of immateriality. Suddhasattva or just sattva is described as a
Nityavibhuti untainted by rajas and tamas. It is the substance through which the spiritual bodies
of Isvara and liberated jivas are composed and also the various spiritual realms are its products.
All these are eternally dependent on Brahman.8

4. Brahman:

Brahman is the one ultimate reality known only through the means of the scriptures. However
the scriptures describe Brahman sometimes as qualified by attributes and at other times as
attributeless. The Advaitins give more importance to the nirguna (attributeless) texts than the
saguna (with attributes) and hence resort to a secondary meaning of the latter. However all the
words of scriptures should be given equal importance and should be interpreted in their primary
meaning. Accordingly the texts which call Brahman nirguna intend to convey that Brahman
does not possess any inauspicious qualities and is free from the bondage of matter, space and
time. Brahman is all-pervasive and infinite. Truth, consciousness, bliss, purity etc. are the
essential qualities of Brahman. Other attributes like knowledge, strength, lordship, virility,
splendor, etc. are predicated on Brahman. Some secondary characteristics like love,
omnipotence, omniscience, friendly disposition, compassion etc. are also attributes of Brahman.9

As mentioned earlier, Brahman has chit and achit for his body and is regarded as the cause of the
world. There are three types of causes: the efficient cause, the material cause and the co-operant
cause. The first is the agent for producing modifications akin to a potter, the second is the locus
of modifications like clay and the last is that which aids in producing the effect like a potter’s
wheel. Since the Sruti text says that Brahman is one, without a second, Brahman is conceived to
be all the three types of causes in relation to the world. Since the world is produced due to the
will of Brahman, he is justifiably called the efficient cause. But a problem arises when we
consider him to be the material cause as well. The problem is how does Brahman become the
many without transforming Himself? Brahman is in the causal state when its body consists of the
individual selves and physical nature in a subtle condition undistinguishable through
7
http://rkmathbangalore.org/Books/TheThreeSystemsOfVedanta.pdf accessed on April 03, 2021, 01:00 p.m

8
https://tirumalaebooks.blogspot.com/2020/05/vishishtadvaita-english-pdf-book-free.html accessed on
April 04, 2021, 11:00 a.m
9
https://archive.org/details/philosophyofvisi031584mbp accessed on April 04, 11:30 a.m

4
differentiation of name and form. Brahman having the individual selves and nature as its body in
the gross manifested condition distinguished through differentiations of names and forms is the
state of effect. The assumed aspect of manifestation and grossness are described as creation.
Chandogya Upanishad 6.2.2 raised the question: “By what logic can existence verily come out
of non-existence?” There is no logical possibility.10

“Existence alone is the reality” says 6.1.4. However, a simple answer is provided as follows: No
one has seen a unicorn being produced. There is no entity that can be called the son of a barren
woman. That which is non-existent cannot be produced. Hence the world pre-existed in
Brahman as chit and achit in a dormant state and existed as an effect when they were in an active
state. Terms like cause and effect are relative to each other. They are nothing but different modes
of conceiving one underlying substance. One single substance acts as the cause and the effect
depending on the relative conditions. In relation to a pot the lump of clay is the cause and the pot
is nothing but the lump of clay acquiring a name and form. A cause is the prior condition of a
substance without differentiations of name and form and the effect is the posterior condition of
the same substance when it has acquired names and form. A boy grows into a youth, a youth
attains manhood and then comes old age. These different states affect the body but the soul is not
subject to modification. The material causality of Brahman is to be understood in this way.
Brahman being the soul of all creation is unaffected by the changes in the conditions of the body.
It is chit and achit alone that are subject to modification. Brahman is the substratum of that
modification and hence is spoken of as the material cause. So to be the material cause is to be the
substratum of modification and in similar manner is Brahman conceived to be the material cause
of the world.11

5. Sadhana and Mukti:

The jiva is subject to the bondage of a beginningless series of karma. Having compassion on
him, Brahman creates the world so that the jiva can free himself from the bondage of matter. The
means of his liberation are laid down in the scriptures. Broadly speaking there are two ways
towards release. They are bhakti or devotion and prapatti or surrender. The former is reached
through Karma and Jnana Yoga. Karma Yoga is the performance of duties as laid down in the
sacred texts and renouncing the result of the action is devotion to Isvara. This leads to
purification of mind. With such a mind one can meditate on the difference between oneself and
prakriti and consider oneself as existing for the sake of the Lord. This is the stage of Jnana
Yoga. These steps help in generating Bhakti which is defined as a continuous stream of
remembrance of the Lord. When this kind of meditation or upasana culminates in the direct
vision of the Lord, it leads to mukti. However this is a cumbersome and long way to mukti. There
is a shorter route through surrender or prapatti. It is defined as being in conformity with the will
of Isvara. These are the only two ways to liberation of the jiva. But what is the nature of release?
10
http://acharya.org/bk/pb/sc/tposr.pdf accessed on April 04, 2021, 02:00 p.m
11
http://www.srimatham.com/uploads/5/5/4/9/5549439/catechismofva.pdf accessed on April 04, 2021, 02:00
p.m

5
The answer is that release is not just cessation of suffering but also a positive state of
experiencing bliss. On release, the jiva attains equality with Brahman in matters of bliss. This is
known as sayujya. The jiva can do everything except creation, sustenance and dissolution of the
world which are the functions of Brahman alone. There is no loss of personality of the jiva and
his body is composed of Suddhasattva. Thus the jiva, when he considers himself as independent
source of action and knowledge, is subject to bondage and when he realizes his status as
eternally dependent on Isvara, he is freed from bondage. This is the ultimate goal of the jiva.12

Conclusion:

Ramanuja’s approach is an attempt to unite the personal theism with the philosophy of the
Absolute. The system of Visistadvaita in the 11th century developed basically as a reaction to the
Absolutism propagated by Advaita School that seems to leave behind the role of bhakti in the
gamut of means to liberation. Ramanuja made an emphatic return of bhakti, a significant
contribution of Visistadvaita by taking to Realism and retaining the theistic approach. There had
been significant development prior to Ramanuja and post-Ramanuja which does not find scope
in this unit. The two broad views earlier to Ramanuja namely, the non-dual system and school of
thought that holds difference-cum-non-difference has been beautifully synthesised by Ramanuja,
in his system that is widely known as ‘Qualified Monism’. In keeping with the Realistic
approach we have touched upon the epistemological theory of Visistadvaita that presents its
theory of error in a unique manner. We had a brief view on the metaphysical concepts and
categories that constitutes the crux of Visistadvaita School. The Liberation stressed by
Visistadvaita presupposes a disciplined life and total commitment that is in a way need of the
hour.

Bibliography:

Adidevananda, Svami, http://www.vedamu.org/Veda/KRP-Sir/Visistadvaita.pdf accessed on

April 02, 2021, 03:00 p.m.
Bhashyacharya, N, http://acharya.org/bk/pb/sc/tposr.pdf accessed on April 04, 2021, 02:00 p.m
Chari, Srinivasa S.M, https://www.scribd.com/document/457912298/Philosophy-of-
Vishishtadvaita-pdf accessed on April 03, 2021, 12:00 p.m
Devamani B.S, https://tirumalaebooks.blogspot.com/2020/05/vishishtadvaita-english-pdf-book-
free.html accessed on April 04, 2021, 11:00 a.m
http://egyankosh.ac.in/bitstream/123456789/38178/1/Unit-3.pdf accessed on April 02, 2021,
03:17 p.m.
http://rkmathbangalore.org/Books/TheThreeSystemsOfVedanta.pdf accessed on April 03, 2021,
01:00 p.m
http://www.srimatham.com/uploads/5/5/4/9/5549439/catechismofva.pdf accessed on April 04,
2021, 02:00 p.m

12
http://egyankosh.ac.in/bitstream/123456789/38178/1/Unit-3.pdf accessed on April 04, 2021, 02:27 p.m.

6
Mahadevan, TMP, https://archive.org/details/philosophyofvisi031584mbp accessed on April 04,
11:30 a.m