Hinduism Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for followers of the Hindu religion and those interested in learning more about Hinduism. It only takes a minute to sign up.
Sign up to join this community
From a purely philosophical standpoint, is there any any difference between Shuddhadvaita and Advaita philosophy? If yes, can anyone please point me to the changes between the two philosophies and references to them?
I have already searched a couple of forums including stackexchange and couldn't find what I was looking for.
Shuddha-advaita is a school of Vaishnavism. The sect is known as Rudra or Rudza. It was founded by Vallabha (first half 16th century). It differs from the Advaita school followed today primarily known through Adi Sankara's teachings.
Hinduism Today magazine (July 2008 issue and available here - http://www.hinduismtoday.com/) states:
This valuable summary is drawn from The Sri-Krsna Temple at Udupi, by B. N. Hebbar, who notes that “all five schools [of Vaishnavism] are theistic and realistic reactions to the absolutistic idealism of Shankara’s Advaita Vedanta…. The first two are South Indian and follow the aishvarya bhakti-marga (Master-servant relationship between the Lord and His devotee), while the latter three [including the Rudra sect] are North Indian and adhere to the madhurya bhakti-marga (Lover-beloved relationship between the Lord and His devotee). Also, while the Lakshmi-Narayana concept predominates South Indian Vaishnavism, the Radha-Krishna element pervades the three North Indian Vaishnava sects.
Basically, being a Vaishnavite, Vallabha sees the universe as real and rejects the concept of Maya (or Vivarta Vada, apparent manifestation) of Sankara. Although Vallabha admits of spiritual union with Brahman, being a Vaishnava sect, it sees the love of Krishna and the mystical union with Krishna as the highest spiritual goal.
There are two articles in Hinduism Today. On their website do a search for 'shuddhadvaita'. There is also a 1 page summary of Vallabha and the Rudra sect in The Spiritual Heritage of India by Swami Prabhavananda. You might also try a Wikipedia search on 'Vallabha' although the info here is historical and not philosophical.
There is another very good source I remembered. Swami Vireswarananda's translation of the Brahma-Sutras Sri Bhasya has an excellent and long introduction (80 pages) where he goes into the different commentators (Sankara, Ramanuja, Madhva, Nimbarka, Vallabha, Bhaskara) differences in their specific interpretations of Brahman, the Soul, and release from this world and how each commentator uses specific Sutras to support their individual positions. I do not know of a softcopy on the internet.
Shuddhadvaita Siddhant says that Advaita Siddhanta is not sufficiently non-dual. It also says that Maya is real and hence the universe is also real. According to Sankara , Avidya or ignorance makes Brahman appear as the world. Brahman has not actually changed and become the world but it appears to be so. This theory of Sankara is called Vivarta-vada. Shuddhadvaita Vedanta considers the world to be real and says that Brahman Himself has manifested as the universe but has not changed in any way. This theory is called Avikrta-parinama-vada.
The starting point of his (Sri Vallabcharya) philosophy, however, is not the systems associated with these teachers, but that of Sankara, which he considers to be not sufficiently non-dual or Advaitic. To explain the manifestation of the Non-dual Satcidananda as the world, Sankara he points out, has to invoke Maya. Maya must either be a power within Brahman or it must be external to Him. If it is within Him, it must be attributively related to Him, which will make Brahman a qualified entity (Savisesa). The thesis that Brahman is Nirvisesa (attributeless impersonality) will then have to be given up, and Sankara’s system will be basically indistinguishable from the other systems of Vedanta. If Maya is not within Brahman it will be something outside Him, in which case Maya will be just like the Prakrti of the Sankhyas, an independent substrate of evolution. Dualism will be the result. So Vallabha criticizes the Advaitic doctrines of Sankara as a kind of ‘Sankhya in disguise’ and propounds his theory of Advaita which he calls Suddhadvaita in contra-distinction to Sankara’s Advaita, which he designates as Kevaladvaita or Nirvisesadvaita.
The term Suddhadvaita means pure Non-dualism, purity consisting in that it does not accept Maya, a principle of illusion that has necessarily got to be conceived as outside Brahman. For Brahman, who is Satchidananda, is truth unalloyed, and therefore can be no touch of illusion or falsity in Him. Maya can therefore be only His real power, producing real effects and not false appearances. This eschewal of Maya, as a principle or category of falsity, either internal or extraneous to Brahman, is the most important feature of Suddhadvaita. According to the system, the term Maya means the real power if it is conceived as within Him. If on the other hand it is conceived as outside of Him, it becomes a dual category of falsity compromising the doctrine of non-duality.
Bhakti Schools of Vedanta by Swami Tapasyananda
