Dvaita(Tatvavaadha)philosophy

Very informative Venky…….Keep it up

Hallo Mr.Venky Rao,
Kudos for such a wonderfull blog and we hope you will embark us on to the new journey to teach the Dwaita Philosophy…We wish to see tons of information going fwd.
Thanks to you,
LakshmiNarayana Rao.
HCL-Chennai.

Very nice blog abt Dwaita Philosophy and very well expressed in simple words! Keep it up!

Dear Sir,
I saw your postings on Orkut, really excellent. Your blogs are very useful. Keep up your good work.

Hare Srinivasa.
Keep it up and Please keep adding more..
Seema.

THANK YOU FOR THE VALUABLE INFORMATION VENKY
YOU ARE DOING A GREAT KEEP IT GOING
LET HARI VAYU GURU RAYA BLESS YOU WITH LOADS OF SUCCESS AND HAPPINESS
SEEKING BLESSINGS FROM ALL VAISHNAVAS
REGARDS
ARUN

really good work and easily accesible…..
By this way the dwaita philosophy that is the must for us can be easily spread……. and do mail us with good teachings weekly

Hi Venkatesh Rao,
Greetings!
I got the opportunity to visit your blog and got essence of philosophy of Dvaita. Very informative .. sure that everyone will get benefited this kind of posting.
To my knowledge, God created all human beings are equal i.e. no caste, no sub-caste at least for the Hindu religion is concerned. I had been to few mutts and understand that people are not equally treated. This not happening in other temples. I fail to understand this with my small wisdom. When I read something good about Dvaita and thought i can share this with you.
Keep posting !
All the best!
Krishnan Ramachandran

Hare Srinivasa
hi Venky
Superb blog abt Dwaita Philosophy,Very usefull information to All
Thanks a Lot
Urs,
Srikanth K

Nice & Useful Blog!!
Sri..

Really …..Very informative !
Keep Going on !!!!!!
Really ur Work is Apprecitable,,,,

REALY VERY GOOD BLOG ABOUT DWAITA philosophy.
VERY USEFULL INFORMATIONS.
MAY HARI VAAYU GURUGALU BLESS U.

GOOD BLOG

KEEP GOING

THANK YOU FOR THE VALUABLE INFORMATION
JANARDHANA REDDY
YOU ARE DOING A GREAT KEEP IT GOING
LET SREE GURU DHATHA BLESS YOU WITH LOADS OF SUCCESS AND HAPPINESS

Your work is appreciable, please keep on this work .Your work is inspiring, illuminating, thought provoking .

Hey venky:
Awesome Blog..really good to learn stuff which are not really told abt.Anyways I was also looking for information about Mangalasutra, Kalungra and kumkuma..all these in realtion to both vedic philosophy and scientific philosophy..if you find any doeuments..please pass on…
Thanx

PLEASE ACCEPT MY HEARTY GREETINGS FOR U R WORK AT ORKUT.COM.SOON TRY 2 BRING A CATLAGUE OF MADHVA SAINTS BRINDHAVAN N LOCATIONS IN SOUTH INDIA.VERY SPECIALLY ONLY MOOLA BRINDHAVANAS.FOR NY HELP U CAN CONTACT BY MY EAMIL ADDRESS.MAY HARI VAYU GURUGULE BLESSES N U DIVINE DUTY.

Dear Mr Venky,
It was very nice to visit this website. Please continue your good work in sharing the information about Madhwcharaya & Madhwa to all.
I was also wondering if you can please publish Shri Hari Vayustuthi in your website. I had learnt this through my uncle, but I have forgotten it. Would like to recite it everyday and hence looking for an online publication (either Kannada or English).
Best Regards
Srivathsa

Good work. I’ll keep returning to see updates and new content.
Keep it up
Keshav

The philosophic aspect of Dwaita vedanta, particularly the epistemoloy, seems very impressive – much different from the philosophies expounded by the predecessor acharyas. But, delving too much into mythology, elaborate classification of dieties, too much emphasis on ritualistic compliances seems to have taken away the philosophical fervour of Dwaita Vedanta.
There is a faint hint that Dwaita Vedanta might have been influenced by Islam: the strict dualism, difference between matter, live and the Lord, not to speak of staunch monotheism in favour of Vishnu. Acharya’s biography speaks of his knowledge of Persian language!

Dear Sir,
Being a madhwa, I found this more informative.

I AM SPELL BOUND..
MILLION MILLION THANKS TO U FOR VISHNU TATVAVINIRNAYA..

Dear Sir
in a nutshell you have tried to sum up the essence of tenets of Dwaita tatwa Of Acharaya SrimanMadhwacharyaru.
Great job done

dear Mr. Venkatesh Rao thanks you, ple tell me more abt. Acharaya SrimanMadhwacharyaru.

Hare Krishna!!! jaya Sri Madvacarya!

Hi Venky,
Very good piece of info.

I am deep into Dvaita . But unfortunately I am not able to understand the Upanishads in detil. Please also buy TS Raghavendra’s books .This simple learned , humble and kind hearted soul ha sset a record in writing a number of books .I advise all my beloved brothers and sisters to read all his books.
Dvaita is the only way to moksha ..
We can serve the author by buying his books .Please also do your duty and donate

Thanks for the information.

madhva mathave mathavu sakala shruthi sammathavu
madhvaraaya dhyana amrutha paana||
each and everyone on this planet accepts DWAITHA sidhantha in one or OTHER way…but what to do MANDHAMATHIGALU they dont know that this is the only way to moksha.
HARI SAVOTHAMA VAAYU JEEVOTHAMA

I would like to get a detailed book on Tatvavadha with sanskrit verse and english explanation. Which book do you recomend. Please provide title and author name and where available in bangalore.
thanks

I have quoted 2 paragraphs from your work here and given credit and a link back.
http://ancientindians.wordpress.com/2009/11/30/halalladaru-ha…ರು-ಹಾಕು-ನೀರಲ್ಲ/

Thank you for the nice explanation of Dvaita Basics.

Hi Venkatesh Rao,
Great Work. And Continue this sath Karma…
@Krishnan Ramachandran,
Thaara thamya is one of the Core the principles of Shri Madhwacharya – which means hierarchy.
This can be seen in everything and everywhere.
No two stones are same. Some are brick some pebbles and some diamonds.
Similarly no two human are alike. One is good, the other is bad, and other is philanthropic.One intelligent, one greedy and the list goes on.
Modern day science also agrees to this. Genetically no two humans can be alike.
So there is a clear distinction among every organism in the world. Rather object in the world.
This philosophy is emphatic in Madwa sidhantha. From this arises the concept of Karma, papam, punya,. We must read more books in this, listern to pravachana and must work to understand this (appearing to be complex) philosophy, which is made easier by many of our own gurus from Shri Madwa to Shri Raghavendra Guru.
And more importantly this has nothing to do with discrimination.
Please ignore if my understanding is incorrect.

Hare Srinivasa

Hello Mr. Venkatesh Rao:
I am basically not a very religious person but me and my family members are devotees of Sri Raghavendra Swami. Blogs like this one should make us aware of the teachings of the saints of yesteryears. Please keep updating new things. Let the enlightment start from you.
thank you

Great.
I am happy to see our people help us know our philosophy in detail. Pray to God to give more blessings to us to do more such good things

hari sarvottama vayu jeevotama
what is basic difference between madhva gaudiya sampradya and tattvadi sampradaya ?
plz tell the difference.
prahlad

Dear sir
Great to visit this blog.
thank you for your work

i want lyrics of madhwacharya “vande vandhyam sadanandham”

namo laxminrusimha
excellent work .keep it up.

nice blog on Dvaita pholosophy

great to know about Hinduism debating on monotheism. I heard dwaita siddhanta is influenced by monotheistic religion Islam.

@bhadravati..
Definately not so, as Dwaita speaks of Pancha-Bheda(5 fold difference), Taratamya(Gradation of Souls). These are cardinal principles of Sanatana Dharma not Islam.
The very fact that God and Individual Soul are distinctively unique is true of other Dharmas also. A learned “Pesudo-Secular” lady known as Romila Thapar(am sure many of you here are aware of her) had given a humongous and blasphemous explanation that Madhva was influenced by christianity!!!.. But Dr.B.N.K Sharma refuted her bogus-claims and sent her fitting reply. Islam, Christianity are Mleecha-Sampradayas , which do not believe in Re-birth or Moksha , do not place their thought on The Vedas, Mahabharata, Moola Ramayana , Puranas and Pancharatras. Hence saying Tatvavada is influnced by those religons is entirely incorrect.

very nice to read about pancha beda.
regards

Very nice post on dualistic Madhwa sampradaya. I have read a lot on hinduism and am more interested in this philosphy than advaita philosphy at the moment. Thx and keep up this website!

Hari Sarvottama Vayu Jeevottama
It is very nice to read your explanation about Pancha Bheda. It gives a starting point and invokes lots of interest and devotion to learn/know more and more about our Acharya’s TatvaVada and Granthagalu.
Hari Sarvottama Vayu Jeevottama

Great website and I enjoy the songs very much.

good

Now i got a basic idea about Madhwa sampradaya and sad vishnava sampradaya.Simple words and good meaning embedded in the explanation.
Keep posting more and more. All the best.
Srinath Kashyap

For those who want to understand Dvaita philosophy, please visit http://www.gyanasampat.in – My Guru Sri. T.S. Raghavendran has written lot of books in English on various topics. They are completely in line with Dvaita philosophy. In all, he has written 192 books so far – all in English.
The latest book(s) – 108 Stars in Vedanta Part 1 and Part 2 is an excellent one where he has listed 108 Questions from various topics like Brahmasutras, Gita etc and answered them in detail.
Thought I would share this information with other visitors to this blog.
Note: Gyana Sampat is an non commercial website.

SUDHA NAGARAJ CHITRADURGA
NAMASTE!
i AM VERY PROUD OF MADHWA PHILOSOPHY.M
Y EYES WERE TRULY FILLED WITH TEARS AT THE SIMPLE AND EASY WAY OF EXPLANATION .MAY HARI, VAYU AND GURU BLESS YOU TO SPREAD OUR SIDHANTA EVERY WHERE!
HARE SRINIVASA

Tharthamya:
Regarding no stones, no two pebbles etc being same. We all know that at the core they are all same, they differ only in characteristics.
They are all atoms and at quantum level they all behavie alike. They differ because of the differences in their energy and vibration levels. This is exactly what Vedas speak. The apparent differences are only illusions. Are only a result of sensary limitations. If we had XRay eyes or if our eyes were sensitive enough to perceive most minutest levels of existence then we wil perceive only the quantum level which is uniform in nature and behaves erattically and randomly in everything and anything including human body.
Thus advaita siddhanta is more in consonence with modern physics. And dwita only sees superflous differences and thus sees bheda.
The objective of spiritual practices is to REMOVE BHEDA. And reach a state of equimanity. SUKHEY DUKHEY SAMAKRITVA LABHALABHOU JAYAJAYOU….
so said the LORD.

i an extreamly proud to be associated with dwyta phylosophy which is pragmatic in ints approach and reality of life, it enhances our inner strength to face any kind of situations in life
hare shrinivasa
padmanabha

there can’t be a better than this dwita principle of living

Can you suggest books in English? I am in the Brahma-Madhava-Gaudiya Sampradaya in USA, but I want to learn more about pure Madhavacharya teachings. Also, what is the position of Laxmi-Devi? Is She topmost devotee like Radharani, or the same as Vishnu?
Also, which mantras did Madhavacharya suggest for lay people to chant for japa?
Thank you, I love this blog!!!

All this look so unscientific. If Hari and Vayu were the only two gods, then how come they did not appear in other cultures. If the world is Vasudeva Kutumbakam, how is it that Hari and Vayu gave the privilige of this message only to Madhwas.
Advaitins have the concept of Nirguna Brahman. Brahman or Narayana is formless. Yat Bhavo Tad Bhavati. Each person will perceive the lord in different forms. This has been very clearly stated in Bhagavad Gita itself. In everything that is beautiful, magnificient, excellent, wonderful, etc etc we have to see the lord. Anything exhalting is an aspect of that lord alone. Then why do Madhwas confine his divine glory only to two Gods- Hari and Vayu. Is that not something like constraining the ocean or looking at the beautiful creation through a confined hole?
All these ideas need rethinking.

Na he gnanena sadrusham pavitrmiha vidyate
Ee lokadalli gnanakke samanavada pavitravada mattondu vastuvu illa.
Ee gnana sampadene hege?
UTTARA-TATVAVAADHA.

The earth is so small when compared to the universe. One can easily understand that this unimaginably microscopic, where even some of the galaxies light yet to reach earth even after millions of light years (Kindly see NASA website).
Hence the name, structure of the creator of the universe may not be within the reach of the ordinary human brains.
But for Dwaitha siddhantha of Sri. Lord Madvacharya other examples, quotes, naraka, moksha etc., do not go with the present day scenario.
As a person who needs to be humble, respect fellow beings, submissive to almighty the Chant ‘Hari Sarvotthama’ gives peace of mind and power to further acts.

if u have any problem or any solutions,please write SRIRAMA
THAT WILL GIVE IT IN UR LIFE LOT OF PEACE.THIS MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE

Pulivendala Mohan Rao
Namastathe, the site is informative thankyou

Venkatesh Rajendran,
Your blog is very informative and your seve towards spreading dvaita is commendable.
I have a specific request with you on posting articles on, one of the rare and greatest acharya’s in Madhwa lineage Shri Vijayendra tirtharu. You being from Tamilnadu, must be aware of his holiness.
Shri Vijayendra tirtharu’s contribution towards dvaita is immense. Very few saints under Sanathana Dharma has done intense Ugra Narasimha pooja, among them our acharyaru stands atop. He was the one who established Kashi mutt. There are many konkani speaking madhwa families of South Canara, Goa, Kerala, Konkan areas are affiliated to Kashi mutt.
His Holiness has done pratishtapana of Ugra Narasimha devaru in Moolky near Mangalore. It is believed that, the lord came into the acharya’s dream and told to establish a temple. Something really great and we should be proud about his holiness.
Expecting a series of article from you on his holiness.
Hari Sarvothama, Vayu Jeevothama

Venkatesh,
Thanks for replying to my post.
In between saw your article on Shri Vyasarajaru, a good piece of info on his holiness. But please do a correction on the place of birth. His holiness was born in Bannur near Mysore. Chennapatna is famous for Brahmanya tirtharu(Abburu) and Aprameya swami(Krishna).
Hari Om.

Gravity did not appear to Newton. It neither appeared nor disappeared. It was always there and will be there and will be FELT BY EVERYONE. Not just Newton and other physicists.
But Madhwas argue Hari-Vayu is available to MADHWAS only….nobody else…….Everybody else, including Adi Shankara are Rakshasas……!!!!!!.
Every human being, every being in this world and in every world is HIS (HER) creation. HE (SHE) loves everybody and appears in a form that is most dearest to the seeker. Not just as HARI-VAYU.
HARI is a concept. Hari represents all that is Noble. Virtuous. Good. Beauty. Dharma. While Madhwas may use the word HARI to describe that most profound beautiful fundamental aspect of creation, others use different expressions to describe the same concept. HARI is not a four armed person. That is only a representation of a concept.
How can that glorious truth be confined to just one word HARI, when even sahasranamas are not sufficient to describe that profound reality?
For a person whose awareness is not open to that concept, HARI is four armed vasudeva who should be idolized and worshiped and those who don’t see HARI that way should be condemned.
But Hari is Paramey Vyoman. Unless a person’s awareness is open to that fundamental truth of reality She/He cannot know who is HARI.
Richo akshare parame vyoman yasmin deva adhi vishve nisheduh, Yastanna veda kim richa karishyatiya it tad vidus ta ime samasate. (Rk Veda, 1.164.39)
For a person whose awareness is not open to THAT parame vyoman present deep within and every where, what meaning can the verses of Vedas provide? Such a person only pays a lip service to HARI without understanding who HE (or SHE) is. Such people indulge in mindless arguments and carry on fanatical debates and hair splittings in name of Logic are religion.
Read Bhagavad Gita Verse 3.42 that goes as follows:
indriyani parany ahur
indriyebhyah param manah
manasas tu para buddhir
yo buddheh paratas tu sah
Translation
The working senses are superior to dull matter; mind is higher than the senses; intelligence is still higher than the mind; and he [the soul] is even higher than the intelligence.
HARI transcends LOGIC. He is beyond intellect. So how can any Acharya even attempt to describe HIS glory through intellectual arguments and debates?

Dear Sri Manjunath:
There is some confusion in understanding my analogy that was given. Let me be more clearer the second time. I meant to say that, just as gravitational pull was available to everyone but it was only Newton who understood it and gave it as a principle to the world, similarly, Dwaita the universal truth was also there and is there. But Sri Madwacharyar understood it and gave it to the world. But, if some people choose not to take these principles, then so be it.
I have never heard anyone claim exclusive rights to Hari or Vayu. This is first time I am hearing in your post. Dwaita only says that ‘Hari is Sarvottama and Vayu is Jeevottama’. There is no exclusivity in this.
The ideas of Adwaitis being analogous to Raakshasas comes about because when the Adwaitis’ claim that I am Brahman, then it negates the supremacy of Sri Hari. This is considered an ‘apacharam’ – an act similar to the one by Hiranyakashipu who did not accept the supremacy of Sriman Narayana.
The Dwaitis understand that Hari is supreme and has all great attributes – ‘Anantha Kalya Gunas’ (i.e., everlasting great attributes). Lord Krishna has given a flavour of the above in Vibuti Yogam in Chapter 10 of Bhavad Gita. Unfortunately, it is the Adwaitis who are confused about the nature of Brahman – is it ‘Nirguna Brahman’ or is it ‘Saguna Brahman’? Sometimes, they say this and sometimes they say that. The Dwaitis say it is ‘Anatha Kalyana Guna’ Brahman. So, please do not say that others call the supreme by a different name because it is the Adwaitis who are still confused about Him.
You have quoted the Rig Veda 1.164.39 verse out of context. The verse only implies that the Lord is all pervading. Nowhere it says that the supreme is not that Sri Hari. Sri Madwacharyar only proved that the supreme Lord is Sri Hari. In fact, it is the Adwaitis who go on arguments with others trying to use logic because they give higher weightage to Gyana Yoga and this incomprehensible Nirguna Brahman. The Dwaita gives weightage to Bhakti Yoga. Dwaita gives weightage to Srimad Bhagwatam, the story of great devotees of Maha Vishnu like Prahlada (reborn as Sri Vyasa Rayar, Sri Raghavendra Swamy as mentioned by Sri Raghavendra Swamy himself), Dhruva (reborn as Sri Padarajar). So, in fact, it is Adwaitis who are actually guilty of the very things you accuse the Dwaitis of – i.e., endless argument with others using logic.
I think you have not given a complete translation of Bhagavad Gita 3.42 and have left out the last words that shows the supremacy of Sri Hari. Let me give you the translation – Avyaktat – even greater than prakriti; Yaha – who; Prataha – greater than; Saha Tu – (That) i.e., Sri Mahavishnu only. That means Sri Krishna says that in the end, there is no one greater than Sri Hari. I think you should read Gita 3.43 to get complete idea – Hari is Sarvottama.
You seem to be self contradicting in the next few lines with what you said earlier – when you said that Sri Hari is beyond logic etc. etc. You said earlier that He or She will appear in the form dearest to the seeker. Then you are saying in the later post that how can Sri Madwacharyar describe Sri Hari? Did it occur to you that by your own logic, Sri Madwacharyar could have visualized the supreme as Sri Hari???!!!
Sri Madwacharyar has only proved the following concepts:
Hari is Sarvottama; Vayu is Jivottama; the person praised in the Vedas is Sri Hari only; the Jagat is Sathyam and not some Maya; the bhedas are real; all Atmas are not the same —.
Yes, we Dwaitis understand that the glory of Sri Hari cannot be described because he has ‘Anantha Kalyana Gunas’. So, how can you describe all the glory and greatness of the infinite? It is the Adwaitis who are confused and say sometimes that the Brahman is Nirugana Brahman and then sometimes they say it is Saguna Brahman. If it is Nirguna Brahman then also you cannot describe it because how can you describe something that has no attributes and if it is Saguna Brahman then you are in agreement with Dwaits. So either way, the Adwaitis lose out!!! Think about it. Incidentally, I had read that Sri Madwacharyar had even 1000 meanings for each of the Vishnu Sahasranama names – i.e., one million names – but unfortunately, this text is missing.

Dwaitins just do not understand Advaita. Period. No use arguing on this.
Nahi Nahi Rakshathi dukrin karane.
It is true Advaita is confusing to those who do not have profound experience.
Dwaitins who are bent upon idol worship and worship of forms can never experience the depths of ocean of consciousness which is inexplicable in human language.
Dwaitins think it is confusing because they do not have the experience.
Dwaitins are stuck in forms, howsoever ridiculous it may sound. Forms are creation of human imagination. A human mind that imagines things can imagine anything.
But the real experience comes from Yoga Sadhana and meditation. Only a person who meditates can understand the Advaita truths. For others it is just confusion. Just because it is confusing does not mean it is untrue.
Quantum physics or for that matter any physics is confusing to untrained people. So students who find physics hard may make fun of it or may even criticize it as being confusing. But that does not make physics less scientific or nonsensical. So if Dwaitins want to reject Advaita because it is confusing, then they should realize that the confusion is probably because of their intellectual limitation arising out of lack of proper sadhane.
But by sticking on to an ideology merely because of their faith in Acharya and their guru parampare, they are losing most important element of spiritual experience.
Advaitins do worship gurus but they stress upon personal first hand experience through Sadhane. They do not repeat mumbo jumbo of past gurus and bask in their past glory.
For Dwaitins it is merely book knowledge. Logic and intellectual debates. But spirituality transcends human mind. It is beyond logic. But LOGIC is the hallmark of Dwaitins. They even use Panninis grammar to understand Veda.
But then like the Richo Akshare verse suggests, Vedic knowledge is all about awareness and experience. It is not intellectual about debates or hair splitting logic or blind following of Gurus.
o understand the Vedic truth, one must do Sadhane and understand the truth through personal experience. Not through basking in past gurus and indulging in umpteen superstitious rituals like madi, achara, vichara. Or contemplating on imaginary Vaikunta or reading umpteen puranas.
Yoga Sadhane is paramount. We do not have tradition of Yoga or Meditation in Dwaita fold.

Mr. Manjunath H.S. Rao,
>>>>Our intellectual conceptualization of Lord giving him forms, names, qualities…howsoever beautiful and profound they may be…they are illusory>>>>>
In short, its NirguNa Brahman… As i explained earlier about 10 avataras of Lord Shri Hari which proves the concept of SaguNa brahman of acharya madhwa.
Next, >>>I AM NOTHING…I AM NOTHING BUT DUST…….WHAT IS REALLY THERE INSIDE (AHAM) IS BRAHMASMI>>>
Realization of what? Can you realize 1/0 within yourself? Can you realize beyond universe? Atlast we have a limit which defines the magnitude of a soul. If a saint or a highly acclaimed souls like Acharya madhwa, Raghavendra gurugaLu or let us take Acharya Shankara, can ONLY try for certain extent to know the magnitude of the lord. If we say, they have realized the infinity totally, then these acharyas will be equal to god which is against the nature rule. No one can ever try to get the dimensions of infinity, only infinity can define its dimension!!!!
Hence realization of 1/0 will lead to error which is nothing but Advaita!!!!
>>>>People deluded by ego think they exist as separate entities.<<<>>>But Madhwas argue Hari-Vayu is available to MADHWAS only….nobody else…….Everybody else, including Adi Shankara are Rakshasas……!!!!!!>>>>
This shows your ignorance. Acharya madhwa NEVER told Hari sarvothama applies only to those who accept his dualism, its an universal truth. Heard of Manimantha? Search in scripts, you will find the answer.
>>>>HARI is not a four armed person. That is only a representation of a concept.>>>>
Definition of Representation: An artistic likeness or image.
>>>>For a person whose awareness is not open to that concept, HARI is four armed vasudeva who should be idolized and worshiped and those who don’t see HARI that way should be condemned>>>>
Now i am smelling Islam here…. Is advaita tends towards Islam by not accepting the attributes of the supreme?
>>>>HARI transcends LOGIC. He is beyond intellect. So how can any Acharya even attempt to describe HIS glory through intellectual arguments and debates?>>>>
You say Aham Brahmasmi and now you are contradicting that lord is beyond intellect and Logic. Advaita always equals to confusion.
||Hari Sarvothama , Vayu Jeevothama||

@Manjunath
Dude understand Taratamya first. What’s so unscientific ???

Aham Brahmasmi is not an intellectual concept. It is first hand personal Transcendental Experience of sanyasis and yogis who practice meditation for long term. This experience has been confirmed not just by Hindus but also in several other cultures.
It is the state of Sthitha Prajna.
Yogastha kuru Karmani Sangam Tyaktva Dhananjaya
The oneness with the universe or Advita or Unity consciousness is a state of consciousness described by Shankara is based on Upanishadic truth experienced personally by a seeker. It is not an intellectual concept to be established by rules of debate. Shankara has stressed upon personal experience of Brahman. He has not used panini’s grammar to prove his point. He has condemned bookish learning and intellectual debate.
Nahi Nahi Rakshathi Dukrin Karane…
Even today those who follow Shankara’s path can experience and see God FIRST HAND PERSONALLY. (Ramakrishna Paramahamsa/Vivekananda)
God is not a vague concept that resides in a Vaikunta or Kailasa. GOD is this here reality present everywhere and in everything. Omniscient. Omnipresent. The fundamental truth of existence. Described variously as Paramatma, Paramapurusha, Maha Vishnu.
Even Vishnu Sahasrnama describes only qualities of Vishnu. Except in certain points (probably at the end of each chapter or section) it mentions the names of Krishna, Narayana etc. But bulk of Sahasrnama is only a qualitative description of a fundamental nature of universe.
One can sense Nirguna logic in Vishnu Sahasrnama much more than Saguna logic. At times it appears that Saguna verses are interpolations into a stream of verses that basically describe the fundamental nature of the construction of the universe. Such interpolations sound so much out of place in the free flow of the Sahasranama.
The name Vishnu itself is derived from the word Vishwa or the Universe.
The science in Vedas was misinterpreted by later day theologians to extend the power of dominant classes of the society through the instrumentality of religion.
Anyways I am not here to prove my point based on what is said in puranas. The authenticity of puranas are merely based on beliefs. But it requires scientific bent of mind and personal first hand experience to understand the truth expressed in Vedas and Vishnu Sahasranama.
There is more science in Vedas and Vishnu Sahasrnama than there is religion. Sadly in India people have just forgotten these aspects.
And when somebody asks “realization of what?” there can be absolutely no answer in human language because that realization is realization of divinity itself. Beyond the expression of speech. It is experiential…..
Hari Om

@Manjunath
My comments are based on your posts – copy pasted below.
In the first one – I am referring to just the first line put by you.
———————————————————————————————-
>>Dwaitins just do not understand Advaita. Period. No use arguing on this.
———————————————————————————————-
I have heard of many Advaitins pandits refer the great grantha by Sri. Jayatirtha Swamiji named Nyayasudha to understand what Advaita is. This great grantha details out every philosophy and clearly establishes what is right. So do not say that Dwaitins do not understand Advaita.
And in a different earlier post, you mention the following…
———————————————————————————————-
Advaitins did not create the concept of Aham Brahmasmi. The concept of in-dweller Lord is found in the most ancient Veda. Here is a link to Yajur Veda Mantra Pushpam. This is such a splendid piece of literature. So profound. So beautiful. Find that in-dweller. That is the fundamental truth. That is the fundamental message of Vedas. The message was not a creation of Advaitins.
I request you to take the plain meaning of these verses, without putting interpretations of any of the Acharyas. Just plain reading gives such a profound message.
———————————————————————————————-
You are quoting the veda vakya Aham Brahmasmi – there is no doubt this is valid and true. Since it is veda vakya it is not a creation of anybody – forget advatins. I request you NOT to take the plain meaning – since if you do so there are other veda vakyas which would lose authority. While what you say is one of the meaning – you need to analyse to see if this is the right meaning as per the context. The same is the case with interpretations of nirguna and maya.
I strongly disagree with your view of ignoring the interpretations of the Acharyas. Also, I disagree with your other post where you say that merely doing puja to Sri. Raghavendra swamiji etc wont give one any benefit.
My main intention of this putting this comment – why can we not discuss the philosophy in a clean manner? Would it not benefit if we pick up a topic and put forth our views and the reasons thereof? The philosophies of dvaita, advaita and vishitadvaita vary and having disagreements is likely. Can we introspect the differences and see the consequences?
Is it not logical that the theories be put forth, and objections, as applicable, be sorted out – without making statements that are not necessary or out of context.
It pains to see comments which are not related to the topic of discussion – the ones on the Madhva saints is extremely painful – asking for gathering knowledge due to ignorance is one thing – but making a statement that all this practice is useless is completely a different thing.
I request all involved to think through the comments and do not put in words spontaneously – lets strive to make use of this platform for a reasonable and meaningful debate/discussion to understand the philosophy correctly.
I am not shy or afraid to say that I am a Dvaitin and completely agree with the dvaita philosophy out of reason. However, I shall give enough room for others to participate and put forth their views – let it all be put on a table and be investigated systematically. One has a right to disagree – but I feel it is not right to involve in negative comments on the other party as a result of disagreement. This is what i am calling for.
-Rajesh Rao

@Manjunath
Whoa!!!.. If all elements are the same (According to you and your Advaitha Philosophy) , then why on earth did Mandaleev come out with a periodic table of different elements and their composition.
2 Parts of Hydrogen and 1 Part of Oxygen can make Water which is the universal fact but according to Mr. Manjunath all atoms are the same them 1 part of carbon and 4 parts of Hydrogen should also give you Oxygen not Methane??? right ??? !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!……. some mambo-jumbo philosophy you quote!!!

Sir,
You are once again committing the same mistake Dwaitins have committed for ages.
Using the language of logic and objective sciences to understand something which is very subjective and experiential. The current post modernists have thoroughly rejected the objective world view of science which says that everything can be understood through scientific experimentation, scientific calculations, maths.
Periodic tables are good to understand the diversity in the outer world. No doubt there is diversity in the outer world. Our intellectual capability is limited, so we use tables and calculations to get an understanding of the manifest world.This approach to knowledge is that of a blind man groping around in a dark room. We are accustomed to that and we think that is the only way one can gain knowledge.
But the external diversity exists because of the limitation of our senses.
But beyond the manifest reality is the unmanifest reality. The substratum. Call it Hari, call it Brahman or just use the language of plain post modern physics and call it the Unified Field.
Yathakasha Sthitho Nithyam Vayuhu Sarvathrago Mahan
Thatha Sarvani Bhuthani Mathsanithupadharaya
We cannot, we should not and it is absolutely inappropriate to use the intellectual arguments and debates to understand the mystical experiences of seers. We have to step into the shoes of the seers and Rishis to experience exactly what they experienced in order to understand what they spoke. Otherwise it would be mumbo jumbo. It would be confusing. How can we take the liberty of interpreting the words of mystics when we do not have even an iota of their experience?
Bookish knowledge and interpretation of Vedas and Upanishads based on intellectual understanding is faulty approach.
Shankaracharya explicitly condemned this. Once again I repeat:
Nahi Nahi Rakshathi Dukrin Karane….
To understand the Richo Akshara our awareness should be open to the underlying Parame Vyoman. Then we will understand and realize the truth behind Aham Brahmasmi. It is ridiculous to sit in an arm char, read the shasthras and write commentaries thereon. Whoever it might be.
Upanishadic knowledge was gained in forests. Through Sadhane and Meditation. Even this day people who have undertaken right Sadhane swear that they have had similar experiences. I have personally seen such people. And I myself have felt the inner calmness and peace first hand through Yoga sadhane.
Every chapter in BG is a science of Yoga. That is why I said, mere rituals and lip service will not serve any purpose. If we really admire Rayaru we should follow exactly his path. Not just do Abhisheka to his Brindavana. Treat him like any other scientist. Look at all the sadhane he did under his Guru. How many years of practice he undertook before gaining all the Siddhi powers? His powers can be clearly attributed to Siddhi powers of Yoga marga.
Without doing all that, if we merely look into puranas and place this greatest Siddhi Scientist (Raghavendra Swamigalu) on pedestal and claim that he is this avatar and that avatar, and only worship his image we will be doing greatest injustice to his message. His intention was that everybody should experience God first hand. Even in his last speech he stressed upon overcoming the limitations of the Trigunas- Sattva, Rajas and Tamas. Overcoming these prakrithi doshas does not happen by miracle. It requires practice. Sadhane. Siddhi attainments. Without doing all these, no Madhwa howsoever faithful he may be to the tradition will reach the highest states of consciousness.
Hari is there everywhere. It is for us to discard the illusion of MAYA and experience him first hand. That is the objective of human existence. (Even if you condemn Mayawads, Puranas themselves acknowledge MAYA as the second wife of Mahavishnu. Her power pervades entire creation).
Shankaracharyas tradition prescribes practical steps to reach such highest levels of existence without indulging in mind boggling hair splitting theology.

Yes it is easy. Call him with purest mind. With thoughts absolutely stilled with practice. Having established in Yoga through practice, just seek HIM, you will find HIM everywhere. (This is not my message. This is the message of Bhagavad Gita)
What is necessary is a right technique. What is that technique? Certainly not reading puranas and mindless intellectual debates. Debating is not a way to reach HARI. Only Sadhane is. Only a true Guru can give the right technique.
6 Shasthra galan odidarilla
106 Purana Mugisidarilla
And who is a true Guru? A person who has really experienced the higher reality first hand. But people who have really reached that state may be absolutely lacking in skills of intellectual debates. They speak with pure mysticism. Their words are full of riddles. Many a times confusing to lesser mortals.
It is easy to debate with Sadhus and Sanths and put them down in debates. A true sage who spends most of his life in forests from childhood and has first hand experience of Shri Hari may not be a renowned Sanskrit panditha. It is easy for a sanskrit learned person to defeat even such highly evolved soul in debate by twisting and turning grammar to claim supremacy. But that will not take anyone anywhere.
This seems to have happened to a large extent in spiritual history of India. Now with all the mess created, the words of true Mystics have been reduced to mumbo jumbo. Nowadays nobody even tries to understand them. But all are fanatically blindly loyal to rituals and traditions.
Hari Om.

Dear Sri Manjunath:
This is the first time I am hearing from in my life that our Puranas and Itihasas don’t bring any an atom of personal development. Wow, I really don’t know what to say when I hear such pearls of wisdom!!!!!!!
You are unable to defend even a single point and, now you are saying that one should not debate based on bookish knowledge. You said that unless one has seen or experienced Hari then one should not talk about him. Wow, what a logic? Let me give you an example – I presume that you like in the US. Have you personally seen Barack Obama in the White House? Then how can you say that he is the President of USA? Why don’t you question that he is a Maya created by CNN, FOX News, ABC News, CBS News, NBC News? Because you get your knowledge through a medium which in this case may be TV or internet.
In a similar way, I have experienced Sri Raghavendra Swamy and Sri Vijayeendra Tirthar in my life. They in turn have said that it is Sri Hari who is supreme. Their word is good enough for me. It is very similar to you learn who your great grand parents, great great grand parents are from your parents even though you might not have actually seen your great grand parents or great great grand parents in your life. I trust this analogy will clear your mind.
If you have read the Charitra of Sri Raghavendra Swamy or Sri Vijayeendra Tirthar or Sri Ragottama Tirthar you will see that they had done so many miracles but at the end they were the most humble – they said, “I did not do anything it is the Sri Hari or Sri Moola Ramachandra Murthy etc. etc. who did all this”. That is their greatness.
You have to understand that there are three Pramanas – Pratyaksha (actual perception), anumana (reasoning), agama (scriptural authority). Sri Madwacharyar has proved using these logic that it is Sri Hari who is supreme. His words are good enough for me.
As I have mentioned earlier, once you accept an Acharyar like Sri Raghavendrar or Ragottamar or Vijayeendrar, it becomes their responsibility and burden to take you across the shore. So, yes, one will realize the Sri Hari eventually in due course – i.e., when the Acharyar has molded you and removed all Malas (or dirt) from you.

Shivprasad,
I had enough of your mundane examples to explain spirituality and your personal attacks on me.
Barack Obama has got nothing to do with Shasthras. I would have respected you if you had quoted from Upanishads or Gita or at least Purandara dasaru.
We do not need pramanas to understand Hari. We need experience through practice. Please get this straight.
And I am not here to debate and defend. That is typical Madhwa response. Take up the cudgels and start a fight. This is not a court of law to defend anything. Neither am I a great enlightened person to take the privilege of defending the religion. You have assumed the role of defender of religion yourself. On what authority? I do not know. Sorry to get personal. I am paying back in your own coin.
All I want to say is that without experience one should not condemn any school of thought or verses, especially when those verses are embedded in Vedas. Just because Acharya said something does not mean that you yourself should act as an Acharya by quoting his words.
Once I gain I repeat, without a tradition of proper spiritual practices and a sincere desire to experience Hari in this Janma, Madhwas will not go anywhere merely taking refuge in attainments of past gurus.
Athatho Brahma Jignasa
Without that Jignasa or even respect for that thought, mere debating and putting down others personally will not elevate anybody’s spirituality. Probably that will help them enjoy more of ABC and Barack Obama’s news.
Hari Gurubhyo Namaha

it is just a matter of time that manjunath gets enlightened thru his personal experience and he will appreciate that pancha beda taratamya is for real .
hari sarvotthamma vayu jeevotthama

Advaitis are the most confused lot in Hindurashtra. May Shri Hari bless them with good knowledge.

i have one dought about madwacharya’s first avatara,which is hanuman,according to legend hanuman is son of vayu(pawana putra),but according to madwas he himself is vayu,how is this possible?

my personal experience,dvaita satya,advaita mithya

can we say god in temple is same as priests of that temple?…..
I saw in my personal experience many priests full of bad behavior(durguna,thamasa guna),they are nichaas…..
can these priests be equal in any sense to god,who is kalyana gunapurna,who have no bad guna and paripurna….

This was informative I’d like to learn some more

parabhrama is paripuna,so there is no need of moksha for him,so atma is not parabhrama

Now I will prove vishistaadvaita is alse wrong
1)ACCORDING TO VEDA,parabhrama is paripurna,avanalli yava dosha illa,avanige yava dosha antikollalla,avanige yavudara avashyakate illa….
adare vishistaadvaitadalli,parabhramana yavudo dosha dindha adara(parabharamhana) ondhamsha horage bantu adhe atma anta helthare,edu hege sadhya?
so,vishistaadvaita is also wrong…

Gurubhyunamaha,
We should be great for God for bringing this jeeva in madvamata and try to understand and follow the great philosophy of Srimad Acharyaru. Thanks for refreshing once memories.
Hare Srinivasa

Hi,
This is an awesome blog. is there a book in Tamil that takes us through madhwa philosophy ? Thanks in advance.
-Venkatesh

I am a dvaitin and i am very much intrested in learning dvaita philosophy.I am searching for an learned dvaitin who can clarify my doubts, learned one’s, please provide your information (email id) so that i can contact you.

Respected Sir,could you kindly recognize the hanuman in the above given link and give me the address of the same…
Thank you
PRAMOD.

The way advaita starts itself is questionable. Why does advaita want to prove something as non-existent when it actually exists. If jagath is mithya then shankaracharya is mithya Jagadguru.
Also, after Shankaracharya, who has become famous by following advaita? In dvaita we have Raghavendra Swamy.
Any philosophy should be acceptable in daily life then it should talk about spirituality.

Namaskar to all the Acharyas. 🙏
I request anyone of you to explain me the meaning of Vaayu Puthra.
If Vaayu(Mukya Praana Devaru) is himself Hanuman, then how can he be Vaayu Puthra (son of himself) ??
Please clarify my doubt.
PLEASE🙏
Jai Sri Hari Vaayu Guru Raghavendra🙏
Sri Krishnaarpanamasthu🙏

Hare Srinivasa!!!Sri Gurubhyonamaha, Parama Gurubhyonamaha,..Good Question Ashok, As per taratamya, Sri Vayu devaru comes before Sri Chathurmukha Brahma. And Hanuma is his avatara which can also be seen as in avatara thrayam (Hanuma, Bhima, Madhwa), so Sri Vayu Devaru is in Father position, so Mukhya Prana called as Vayu Putra…hope your doubt got clarified…Hari Sarvottama, Vayujivottama…Hare Namaha…

1) “When Shree Madhvacharya (incarnation of God Vayu) preached Dvaita, did he mean people following Advaita should quit and follow? Is Dvaita for “Realization and liberation”?
2) Did he really mean Advaita is misguiding people by its MAYA vada? My concern is both Shree Sankaracharya and Shree Madhvacharya are believed to be incarnations of God (Lord Shiva, Lord Vayu respectively) So I can’t think of any one lying for any sake. Both the doctrine’s have to be true isn’t it?
3) If both are true considering both the schools of thought address spirituality in different angles and hence approaches differ, still I would have some questions like i) Dvaita Philosophy says “Brahman is not the material cause of universe? Does this mean, Brahman (Parabrahman, Ultimate God) does not create this earth and other planets but only are dependent on him? “If this true then who creates? And also what about Advaita philosophy which says ÒExistence of universe is because of only one real ‘Chaitanya’ that is Brahman?
ii) Dvaita maintains that the distinction between Atman and Brahman is eternal, and union after salvation doesn’t mean that Atman will get merged with Brahman.
My understanding is that “Advaita is conveying the same message but at a higher level” Here is how I interpret:
Advaita never denies the Brahman with form. It accepts both forms and formless (impersonal) Brahman. So when Advaita says “Atman gets
merged/united with Brahman after salvation/liberationÓ it may well mean like following 2 ways
a) Atman the individual soul is freed of cycle of birth and death and is living in Gods planet along with God blessed by him forever, offering transcendental service to the Almighty Lord. This is when Brahman is perceived as with form
b) And when Brahman is thought as of impersonal, the salvation may mean ÒThe individual soul after liberation is like Brahman in terms of nature and quality and hence Atman essentially is like merged with Brahman”. It may not be to state that Atman is equal to Brahman but he becomes like him, or he becomes one in him”. So physically they me be different but conceptually they are same, just one.”
Can I interpret like above..? Is it right?
Answer: Each of the Acharyas is a realized soul. No doubt even though each had ultimately the same experience, they taught according to the time and need of the society. Instead of confusing ourselves with all these, we should select which ever path is suitable to us and engage in spiritual practice. Paths are many, but the goal is same.

Can someone please advice where we come across this shloka? “sumathi viranu meyam subhrakaayam sakhaayam
sukhamaya manapaayam muktiyupaayam vimaayam
nruhaya mahamameyam deyam aamnayageyam
sadayama sada jeyam sri sahayam bhajeyam⁠” Thank you,

Hare Srinivasa,
Namaskaragalu!
We are looking for the photo of Kambalu SRI RAMACHANDRA THEERTHARU .We are the parampara trustee of the Sri Lakshminarayana Devaru devasthana in Lakshminaryana puram villege, Panruti(TK) , Cuddalore Dt, Tamilnadu. If any one can share His photo it willbe great to place in the temple and present during the function on 24 & 25 th Feb 2018.
Please contact me @ and mail details to vraja1963@rediffmail.com. Dhanyawadhagalu.————Raja Rao

I am Madwa but actually do comparitive study in all philosophies including Islam.
I have a Paradox which is not yet solved by any madwa :
Narayana is sarvakarta & Sarvasakta
Suppose one bhaktha asks him to create a stone which is indestructible
Narayana creates one
Another bhaktha asks narayana to destroy stone created as indestructible
Now if Narayana destroys stone He is not sarvakarta
If he cannot destroy stone He is not Sarvasakta
Please solve this logic