Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

A Constructive Survey of Upanishadic Philosophy c7.s1: Madhvaism in the Upanishads

A Constructive Survey of Upanishadic Philosophy c7.s1

Language
English

Madhvaism in the Upanishads

c7.s1.1

the existence of a supreme God, who is the creator, the preserver and the destroyer of the universe, who exists as a personal Being, and as over-lord of all the Souls who are his servants, they have ample justification in passages like the one from the Śvetāśvatara which tells us that "there is a single God who is hidden in all beings, who pervades all, and who is the inner Soul of all Souls" (S. 19. a), as well as those others from the Śvetāśvatara itself which tell us that "beyond this universal God there exists nothing, than whom there is nothing subtler or greater, who stands motionless like a tree in the sky and fills every nook and cranny of the universe" (S. 19. b), or again like that last passage from Śvetāśvatara, which, in the spirit of Xenophanes, tells us that God is all eye and all ear— οὖλος ὅρα, οὖλος δέ νοεῖ, οὖλος δέ τ'ἀκούει

c7.s1.2

—with his face everywhere, his hands and feet everywhere, who creates the beings of the earth and the fowl of the air, and who brings into being both the heaven and the earth (S. 19. c). Such a theory of the sovereignty of the Lord over organic as well as inorganic nature brings in its train a realistic theory of creation which tells us that "all these beings were created from Him; they live and move and have their being in Him; and they are ultimately resolved in Him" (S. 20. a), as well as that all inorganic nature was created by Him, "space being the first to come out of Him, from which later were produced air and fire and water and earth, and the herbs and the trees and the food in the universe" (S. 20. b). We have already seen in our discussion of the theories of cosmogony in an earlier chapter that a realistic account of creation such as is implied in these passages is really an obstacle to those who try to make creation merely an appearance or an illusion, and that therefore these texts support the doctrine of the realistic theory of creation of Madhva as of none else. It is true that Śaṅkara tries to explain the ablative implied in “ yatovā ” or “ tasmādvā ” as being Adhiṣṭhāna-pañchamī, Rāmānuja trying to explain it as merely Upādāna-pañchamī, while Madhva explains it truly as Nimitta-pañchamī. This is as much as to say, that while according to Śaṅkara the Ātman or the Ultimate Reality stands behind the universe as the support and substratum of all creation which merely appears on it, according to Rāmānuja, the Ātman is the material cause of the universe as gold of gold-ornaments or earth of earthen-ware in quite a realistic manner, while according to Madhva, the Ātman or the Supreme Soul is the creator of the universe or the instrumental cause of its unfoldment. Finally, so far as the doctrine of immortality is concerned, a passage like the one from the Chhāndogya which tells us that the worshipper is lifted up to the region of the deity whom he has worshipped in life (S. 21) supports the doctrine of Madhva that absolution consists not in being merged in the Absolute, nor even in being assimilated to Him, but in coming near his presence and participating in his glory so that the devotee may be lifted, according to the requirements of the doctrine of Kramamukti, along with the God whom he has worshipped, to the state of the highest absolution at the end of time.

c7.s1.3

15. Rāmānuja agrees with Madhva in maintaining the utter separateness of the Individual Souls and God, the reality of Creation, as well as to a great extent the doctrine of Immortality; but he differs from him in regarding the Absolute to be of the nature of a Triune Unity,—a sort of a philosophic tripod,—of which Nature, the Individual Souls, and God form the feet. So far, again, as the relation

c7.s1.4

The Triune Absolute of Ramanuja.

c7.s1.5

between the Souls and God is concerned, he disagrees with Madhva in maintaining a qualitative monism, though he agrees with him in maintaining a numerical pluralism. For his doctrine of Triune Unity, Rāmānuja finds ample justification in the passages from the Śvetāśvatara which tell us that there are “three ultimate existences, all of them eternal and all together constituting the Absolute, namely, the powerless unknowing Soul, the powerful knowing God, and the eternal Prakṛti, which exists for the enjoyment of the individual Soul, and from which he receives recompense for his works” (S. 22. a), and yet again that “man need but know the three entities which constitute the Absolute, namely, the enjoyer, the enjoyed, and the mover, and that when a man has known these three, nothing remains to be known” (S. 22. b). Thus we see that the Absolute of Rāmānuja consists of Nature, Soul and God, God being identical with the Absolute considered in his personal aspect, while there is only this difference between them that while God is the theological conception, the Absolute is the philosophical conception, of the Triune Unity. It thus comes about that God is as much the Soul of Nature as he is the Soul of Souls. This is the fundamental platform in the philosophy of Rāmānujācārya, and we shall see what justification he finds for such views in the Upanishads themselves.

Linked texts (2)