From a purely philosophical stand point, is there any any difference between Shuddhadvaita and Advaita Philosphy? If yes, can anyone please point me the changes between 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. Any help here to understand would be grateful.

  • Also visit this
    – Pandya
    Sep 8 '16 at 10:05

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.

  • Do you know what the philosophical difference is between Shuddhadvaita and Visishtadvaita? Vallabha Sampradyam certainly has differences in terms of the nature of devotion (Madhurya Bhakti vs. Saranagati) and the object of devotion (Krishna vs. Vishnu), but are there any philosophical differences concerning the nature of Jivatma and Paramatma, the nature of the world, etc.? May 26 '15 at 12:29
  • Agree that there is difference in methods of devotion, but my question is more from philosophical standpoint. I couldn't find the difference as both Jivatma and Paramatma merges here too to one.
    – abhishek
    May 27 '15 at 4:41
  • As I said in my answer, they reject Sankara's vivarta vada and see the world as real. They also see see the mystical union with Krishna as the highest spiritual goal and not the merging with Brahman...pretty different philosophical standpoints... May 27 '15 at 8:00
  • @KeshavSrinivasan yes I think there are differences. A proper answer with references will take more space that a comment field. May 27 '15 at 8:03
  • I have edited my answer and added another source. I would also encourage you to read the articles on Hinduism Today as 1 was an interview with a devotee of the Rudra sect and he goes into quite a lot of detail as to their philosophical views and differences from Sankara. May 27 '15 at 10:25

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .