Svabhavika Bhedabheda
| Part of a series on |
| Philosophy |
|---|
 |
| Part of a series on | |
| Hindu philosophy | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Orthodox | |
|
|
|
| Heterodox | |
|
|
|
| Part of a series on |
| Vaishnavism |
|---|
 |
Svābhāvika Bhedābheda, also known as Dvaitādvaita[1] and as Bhinnābhinna,[2] is the philosophical doctrine of "natural identity-in-difference"[1] or "natural difference cum-non-difference."[3] It was propagated by the medieval Vedānta scholars Nimbarkacharya and Srinivasacharya, as an explication of bhedābheda, difference and non-difference of Atman and Brahman.
Philosophy
[edit]Svābhāvika Bhedābheda is an interpretation and harmonisation of the Upanishads, the Bhagavad Gītā, and the Brahma Sūtras, integrating both dualistic and non-dualistic interpretations of these texts. The doctrine of Svābhāvika Bhedābheda is primarily elaborated in the works of Nimbārka and Srinivasacharya, particularly Nimbarka's Vedānta pārijāta saurabha and Vedānta Kaustubha, commentaries on the Brahma Sūtras.
Svābhāvika Bhedābheda discern three foundational elements of reality:
- Brahman, which is the metaphysical ultimate reality;[4] the controller.[3]
- Chit, representing the Jivātman, which is the sentient, individual soul;[4] the enjoyer.[3]
- Achit, which is the non-sentient universe;[4] the object to be enjoyed.[3]
Svābhāvika Bhedābheda holds that the individual soul (jīva) and the non-sentient universe (jagat) are both distinct from and identical to Brahman, the ultimate reality, depending on the perspective. Brahman alone is svatantra tattva (independent reality), while the activities and existence of the other two realities depend on Brahman are regarded as paratantra tattva (dependent reality).[5]
According to Gupta, in this approach the relation between Atman and Brahman is "svābhāvika or natural, not brought about by any external agency, and therefore it cannot be dispensed with. An adventitious relation can be finished away by removing the cause or agency which has brought it, but what is inherent or more appropriately natural cannot be taken away."[6][7]
Brahman pervades the entire universe and is immanent in all beings, yet individual souls and the non-sentient universe retain their individuality.[8] The non-sentient universe is not considered an illusion (māyā), but a real manifestation of Brahman's power.[9]
The philosophy draws on metaphors like the sun and its rays, fire and its sparks, to demonstrate the natural, inherent connection between Brahman and its manifestations. In their teachings, Nimbarka and Shrinivasa emphasize the devotional aspect of the relationship between the soul and Brahman, often framing the divine as Kṛṣṇa and the individual soul in the role of the devotee. Bhakti (devotion) plays a central role in realizing the nature of Brahman and the soul's relationship with it.
Brahman
[edit]It regards Brahman as the universal soul, both transcendent and immanent, referred to by various names such as Śrī Kṛṣṇa, Viṣnu, Vāsudeva, Purushottama, Nārāyaņa, Paramatman, Bhagawan and so on.[10][11][12][13] Similarly, Nimbārkācārya, in his Vedanta Kamadhenu Daśaślokī, refers to Śrī Kṛṣṇa alongside his consort Rādhā.[14][15][16]
Brahman is the supreme being, the source of all auspicious qualities, and possesses unfathomable attributes. It is omnipresent, omniscient, the lord of all, and greater than all.[17] None can be equal to or superior to Brahman. He is the creator, cause of creation, maintenance and destruction of the universe.[10][18]
In Svabhavika Bhedābheda, Brahman is saguṇa (with qualities). Therefore, he interprets scriptural passages that describe Brahman as nirguṇa (without qualities) differently as he argues that nirguṇa, when applied to Brahman, signifies the absence of inauspicious qualities, rather than the complete negation of all attributes.[19] Similarly, terms like nirākāra (formless) are understood to denote the absence of an undesirable or inauspicious form. It upheld the view that Śrī Kṛṣṇa possesses all auspicious attributes and that relative qualities such as virtue and vice, or auspiciousness and inauspiciousness, do not affect him.[20][21][22]
Material cause and efficient cause
[edit]In the Svabhāvika Bhedābheda view, Brahman is seen as both the efficient and material cause of the universe.[7][23] Brahman serves as the material cause of the universe by transforming His inherent powers from subtle to gross forms. These powers, known as Parā and Apara, Although these as a power, different from the possessor of powers, yet it is non-different from Brahman, because of having no existence and activity apart from the possessor.The relationship between these powers and Brahman can be understood through the concepts of śakti and śaktimān—power and the powerful. At the moment of creation, these latent powers manifest into tangible forms, giving rise to various effects.[23]
Brahman is also the efficient cause, as He connects individual selves with the outcomes of their actions. This connection is elucidated through the understanding that individual selves often struggle to recall the impressions of past lives due to the continuous cycle of actions and their results. Brahman facilitates their experience of these fruits by providing the necessary instruments and knowledge. By stating that He imparts knowledge, Svābhāvika Bhedābhedin implies that without such understanding, individuals cannot discern between positive and negative outcomes; thus, they would be unable to experience happiness or sorrow in response to events. Consequently, Brahman equips individuals with knowledge to enable them to fully engage with and enjoy the results of their actions.[24][25]
Creation
[edit]In the scriptures, Brahman is referred to as Āptakāma, meaning "one whose desires are fully realized."[26][27] This raises the question: what purpose does Brahman, who lacks unfulfilled desires, have in creating the universe?[28]
To address this, the Svābhāvika Bhedābhedin school refers to the concept of lila (divine play), as expounded by Bādarāyaṇa in the Brahma Sūtras, particularly the aphorism "lokavat tu lila kaivalyam", which translates to "creation is merely a sport for Brahman."[29][30] Here, the term lila denotes an activity performed spontaneously and joyfully, much like a playful act that requires no effort or intent. As described, lila is characterized as an effortless, joyful expression, unlike a deliberate, self-conscious exertion. In line with this idea, Svābhāvika Bhedābhedin holds that the creation of the universe is a lila of Brahman—a natural and unmotivated expression of divine bliss.[31]
This analogy is further illustrated by comparing Brahman to a sovereign king, who, despite having all his desires fulfilled, occasionally engages in playful activities purely out of exuberance and joy.[29] Just as a person overflowing with happiness may dance or sing without any specific purpose, so too does Brahman create the universe as a spontaneous expression of bliss, without any underlying motive or goal.[31]
However, this leads to another question: if creation is a lila, does that imply it is devoid of any significance or guiding principle? In response, it is clarified that while creation is a lila, it is still governed by a sense of order and justice. Brahman creates the universe in such a way that beings may reap the consequences of their actions. Brahman remains impartial, akin to a cloud that pours rain equally everywhere; the variance in the crops is determined by the nature of the soil and seeds, not by the cloud itself.[32][33]
Another question that arises concerns the origin of the first creation: how was the nature of the first creation determined? The response is that creation is without any beginning and endless, and thus, the notion of a "first" creation is irrelevant in this context.[32][34]
Relation to other schools of Vedānta
[edit]Svabhāvika Bhedābheda shares similarities with other Bhedābheda schools but also differs in key respects.
Unlike Advaita Vedānta, which posits an absolute non-duality and sees the world and individual souls as illusory, Svabhāvika Bhedābheda holds that both the world and souls are real and intrinsically related to Brahman, though distinct.
Like Ramanuja's Viśiṣṭādvaita, Svabhāvika Bhedābheda sees the world and souls as real and dependent on Brahman. However, Svabhāvika Bhedābheda emphasizes the natural co-existence of both unity and difference, whereas Viśiṣṭādvaita focuses on the qualified non-duality, where the world and souls are attributes of Brahman.
In contrast to Madhva's Dvaita Vedānta, which posits a strict dualism between the soul, world, and God, Svabhāvika Bhedābheda maintains a balance between difference and non-difference, holding that the relationship is naturally dual yet unified.
Influence
[edit]Though less widely known than other Vedānta schools, Svābhāvika Bhedābheda has had a lasting influence, particularly within certain Vaiṣṇava traditions. Shrinivasacharya’s contributions to the development of this doctrine are central, and it has influenced later Vedāntic thought by offering a middle path between strict dualism and non-dualism.
The doctrine also plays a role in ritual practices and devotional theology, where the relationship between the worshiper and the divine is seen as both intimate and distinct, reflecting the natural duality and unity between God and the individual.
References
[edit]- ^ a b Goodding 2012, p. 104.
- ^ Gupta 2000, p. 55.
- ^ a b c d Gupta 2000, p. 54.
- ^ a b c Radhakrishnan 2011, p. 78.
- ^ Dasgupta 1988, p. 405,406.
- ^ Gupta 2000, p. 53,54.
- ^ a b Dasgupta 1988, p. 406.
- ^ Dasgupta 1988, p. 403.
- ^ Dasgupta 1988, p. 404.
- ^ a b Gupta 2000, p. 29.
- ^ Agrawal 2013, p. 98.
- ^ Dasgupta 1988, p. 405.
- ^ Bhandarkar 2014, p. 65.
- ^ Ramnarace 2014, p. 191.
- ^ Bhandarkar 2014, p. 64.
- ^ Agrawal 2013, p. 92.
- ^ Bose 2004, p. 8.
- ^ Bose 2004, p. 23.
- ^ "Śaraṇaṁ prapadye : proceedings of the seminar on Śaraṇāgati | WorldCat.org". search.worldcat.org. p. 98. Retrieved 2024-09-12.
- ^ Gupta 2000, p. 32.
- ^ Bose 2004, p. 522,523.
- ^ Ramnarace 2014, p. 172.
- ^ a b Bhandarkar 2014, p. 63.
- ^ Gupta 2000, p. 30.
- ^ Bose 2004, p. 24,25.
- ^ www.wisdomlib.org (2019-03-23). "Aptakama, Āptakāma, Apta-kama: 5 definitions". www.wisdomlib.org. Retrieved 2024-09-18.
- ^ Chakrabarti, Kisor Kumar (1999-01-01). Classical Indian Philosophy of Mind: The Nyāya Dualist Tradition. SUNY Press. ISBN 978-0-7914-4171-8.
- ^ Gupta 2000, p. 33.
- ^ a b Bose 2004, p. 318.
- ^ Radhakrishnan 2011, p. 362.
- ^ a b Gupta 2000, p. 34.
- ^ a b Gupta 2000, p. 37.
- ^ Bose 2004, p. 319,320.
- ^ Bose 2004, p. 320,321.
Bibliography
[edit]- Dasgupta, Surendranath (1988). A history of Indian philosophy. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. ISBN 978-81-208-0408-1.
- Goodding, Robert (2012). "Bhedbheda". In Cush, Denise; Robinson, Catherine; York, Michael (eds.). Encyclopedia of Hinduism. Routledge.
- Gupta, Tripta (2000). Vedānta-Kaustubha, a study (in English and Sanskrit). Delhi: Sanjay Prakashan. ISBN 978-81-7453-043-1.
- Radhakrishnan, Sarvepalli (2011). The Brahma Sutra: The Philosophy Of Spiritual Life. Literary Licensing, LLC. ISBN 978-1-258-00753-9.
- Ramnarace, Vijay (2014). Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa's Vedāntic Debut: Chronology & Rationalisation in the Nimbārka Sampradāya (PDF) (PhD thesis). University of Edinburgh.
- Bose, Roma (2004). Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha of Nimbārka and Vedānta-kaustubha of Śrīnivāsa: commentaries on the Brahma-sutras; English translation. New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers. ISBN 978-81-215-1121-6.
- Agrawal, Madan Mohan (2013). Encyclopedia of Indian philosophies, Bhedābheda and Dvaitādvaita systems. Encyclopedia of Indian philosophies / general ed.: Karl H. Potter. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. ISBN 978-81-208-3637-2.
- Bhandarkar, R. G. (2014). Vaisnavism, Saivism and Minor Religious Systems (Routledge Revivals). Routledge. ISBN 978-1-317-58933-4.