Posts Tagged ‘Shuddha’
Monday, June 21st, 2010
Shad Darshan – Vedanta philosophies (contd.):
Swaminarayan philosophy – Brahm
Brahm, Akshar, or Aksharbrahm: Part III
Two aspects of Brahm The scriptures also describe two aspects of Brahm, namely, sagun and nirgun. The sagun and nirgun aspects of Brahm are the special divine powers or potentials of the original form of Brahm. The original eternal form of Brahm is the manifest visible human form of Brahm. The distinction of sagun and nirgun applies only to Akshar, Brahm, or Aksharbrahm. Purushottam is beyond and transcendental to both of them.
Sagun aspect or form of Brahm is extremely large, vaster than the vastest objects combined in the creation. Compared to the vastness of Brahm, infinite number of brahmands (universes) appears to be like dots or mere atoms (anu) compared to each of his pore or a hair follicle (roma). It is not that those brahmands shrunk in their sizes but because of the extreme vastness of Brahm that multiple brahmands appear to be extremely small.
Nirgun aspect or form of Brahm is extremely subtle, subtler than even subtlest object in the creation. It is subtler than even an atom, subtler than even an ordinary space, because it is cause of them. In his nirgun form, Brahm is pure (shuddha), bright (prakāsheyukta), non-associating (asangi), and non-attaching, non-sticky, or non-interacting (nirlepa) with maya and its effects. These are nirgun qualities of Brahm.
Two forms of Brahm
The scriptures have also described two swarups of Aksharbrahm. Swarups are divine forms of onself. These two forms are: Impersonal and Personal. Swarups are like two physical states or forms of the same entity that differs in several of his properties, like different physical states of matter or different physical forms of carbon. But the ontological element (tattva) of both these forms is the same confusing the philosophers. This is the reason why nirākārvādi philosophers (believers of formless or impersonal Brahm) differ from the sākārvādi philosophers (believers of personal Brahm or God). Both forms have been described in the scriptures, but philosophers and their followers couldn’t believe both opposite and contradictory characteristics in the same entity so they gave them preferential treatment and propone one particular form. Shri Swaminarayan (1781-1830) could easily grasp that reality explained to the world.
Having these two contradictory forms of one entity is rather difficult to understand and perceive meaningfully and intellectually. It is like the wave-particle duality of matter, the most puzzling phenomenon in the universe, in which a particle behaves like a wave and wave behaves like a particle. But, it is the widely accepted and proved fact, which can be explained by the quantum mechanics fathered by Werner Karl Heisenberg (1901-1976) by first publishing his theory of uncertainty in 1927.
The same thing is true about Brahm. Shri Swaminarayan explains that, Brahm is nirakar in the sense that it has no māyik trigunātmik ākār or form; instead it has divine Sachchidanand form. Brahm is never described in the scripture as an abstract entity. Brahm is sakar in the sense that he is like a person or personality but in divine sense. Brahm is not like a person having mayik or worldly characteristics, such as, gender difference, aging, external signs of maturity, internal signs of organ systems, personality characteristics, traits, temperaments, behavioral patterns, mood changes, etc.
Brahm serves Parabrahm Purushottam – the Supreme Being, in a two-fold manner.
In his impersonal (amurta) form, he is like the light (prakāshrup) – limitless, and formless (nirākār). Impersonal form is known as ekarasa (homogenous), chaitanya (consciousness), and chidakash (divine-space as against ordinary space). In this form, he is also known as divya (divine) tejomaya (light-like), and Brahm-mahol (abode), and serves God by being God’s supreme divine abode that supports or sustains countless brahmands, akshar-muktas (liberated souls), and Parabrahm (God).
In his personified (murta) form, Aksharbrahm always remains at the service of Parabrahm (God) as His humble servant and never goes away from His eyesight or vision even for a fraction of a second.
Though Purushottam (God) is present everywhere (omnipresent) in His creation, by His inner guiding (antaryāmi), inspiring (prerak), and controlling (niyantā) power, as much as He is present in His Aksharbrahm, He is not present in Prakruti-Purush, Pradhan-Purush, Mahattattva, Virat Narayan, Brahmā, Marichi-like Prajāpati, Kashyap-like Prajāpati, and devatas like Indra, as well as, in Human Beings, animals, birds, insects, plants, and others, respectively. This is known as tāratamya presence of God in His creation.
Purushottam is the cause of Aksharbrahm and Aksharbrahm is the cause of creation. From tiny portion of space (ansh or amsha) of Aksharbrahm Mahapurush is born, which initiates and activates Mahamaya to create countless pairs of Pradhān and Purush. From each pair of Pradhan and Purush, a Virat-Purush (the essence of brahmand), Mahattattva (primordial matter of brahmand), and the whole brahmand (universe) is created. The whole creation is described in detail in Purans and other scriptures of Hinduism.
This Brahmdham or Akshardham, as the abode of Purushottam, is transcendental and beyond even the space-time. The space-time curvature stops there or folds over itself, so that the time (kāl) or the multidimensional and multidirectional space (desh) doesn’t reach there. Universe is limited by the space-time, so that, the nature (maya), and even deeds or actions (karma) doesn’t reach there. Only the souls (jiv or ātmā) free from their three kinds of worldly bodies reach their after becoming brahm-like (brahmrup). Without developing, cultivating, or attaining Brahm-bhāv, (Brahmanization), that is, without becoming brahm-like (brahmrup) even souls cannot reach there and by developing Brahm-bhav even without dying soul enjoys the same bliss and happiness of Brahm and Parabrahm on this very Earth.
Tags:abode, abstract, actions, aging, ākār, akshar, akshar-muktas, Aksharbrahm, Akshardhām, amsha, amurta, animals, ansh, Antaryāmi, anu, asangi, aspects, ātmā, atoms, behavioral patterns, birds, bliss, Brahm, Brahm-bhāv, Brahm-like, Brahm-mahol, Brahmā, brahmand, brahmands, Brahmanization, Brahmdhām, brahmrup, bright, cause, chaitanya, characteristics, Chidākāsh, consciousness, contradictory, controlling, Creation, Darshan, deeds, Desh, devatās, divine, divine-space, divya, duality, Earth, effects, ekarasa, entity, form, formless, forms, gender difference, God, guiding, hair follicle, happiness, Heisenberg, Hinduism, homogenous, human, Human Beings, impersonal, Indra, insects, inspiring, jiv, Kal, Karma, Kashyap-like, liberated, limitless, Mahāmāyā, Mahapurush, Mahattattva, manifest, Marichi-like, matter, maturity, maya, mayik, mood changes, multidimensional, multidirectional, murta, Nature, nirākār, nirākārvādi, nirgun, nirlepa, niyantā, non-associating, non-attaching, non-interacting, non-sticky, omnipresent, ontological element, organ systems, Parabrahm, particle, person, Personal, Personality, personified, phenomenon, Philosophy, physical states, plants, pore, Pradhān, Pradhan-Purush, Prajāpati, prakāsheyukta, prakāshrup, Prakruti-Purush, preferential, prerak, primordial, properties, Purāns, pure, Purush, Purushottam, quantum mechanics, roma, Sachchidanand, sagun, sākār, sākārvādi, Scriptures, servant, Shad Darshan, Shri, Shuddha, souls, space, space-time, Supreme Being, Swaminarayan, swarups, Tāratamya, Tattva, tejomaya, temperaments, time, traits, transcendental, trigunātmik, universe, universes, Vedānta, Virat Narayan, Virat-Purush, visible, wave, wave-particle, worldly
Posted in Brahm - Part III, Hinduism - Philosophies, Navya Vishishtadvaita, Shad Darshan – Vedanta philosophies | Comments Closed
Saturday, June 19th, 2010
Shad Darshan – Vedanta philosophies (contd.):
Swaminarayan philosophy – Brahm
Brahm, Akshar, or Aksharbrahm: Part I
After discussing the three distinct ontological elements, namely, jiv, ishwar, and maya, Swaminarayan philosophy discusses two more and the most important ontologically distinct entities or elements (tattvas), which are transcendental to all the three including maya (amāyik) and cannot be convinced, determined, or inferred just by guessing, arguing, or discussing; but only by experiencing personally by association with the Brahmanized Sant or by meditation (samādhi). These are: Brahm and Parabrahm.
1. Brahm, Akshar, or Aksharbrahm:
Brahm is, one and the only one (ekam and advitiyam), eternal (nitya), and penultimate reality. It is transcendental to all other realities, yet it is subordinate to the topmost, the Ultimate, and the Supreme Reality called Parabrahm. Brahm is the abode (dham) of Parabrahm Purushottam Narayan. Brahm is characterized as Sachchidanand (truth-, conscious or chaitanya-, and bliss- full) Brahm. As an abode it is also known as Brahm-mahol, Brahmdhām, or Akshardhām. As the topmost devotee (bhakta) and the humblest servant of God, as a role model for other devotees, or as a divine personified reality (tattva) the same abode of Purushottam (God) is known, in Vedas, Upanishads, and in Prasthantrayi, as Akshar, Brahm, or Aksharbrahm. It is known as param chaitanya (transcendental consciousness), satya-rup (true), gnan-rup (form of knowledge), anant (infinite), amāp (immeasurable) and adho-urdhva pramān-rahit (overall or all-around limitless). In Taittiriya Upanishad Brahm is described as, “Satyam (truth), Gnānam (knowledge), Anantam (infinite) Brahm.” (Taittiriya Upanishad: 2.1) It is shuddha (pure – without any impurities of maya), akhand (whole, undivided, and indivisible), avinashi (indestructible), vikār-rahit (without any deformity or changes) and without any characteristics (gunas) of maya. It is extremely cool and bright. This extremely cool (mahāshital), pleasant (sukhmaya), extremely bright (atishay tejomaya), infinite (anant), and limitless or beyond any limits (apār) luminescent light (tej) of Aksharbrahm is known as Chidākāsh. It is sarvādhār (all-supporter), sarva-vyāpak (all-penetrating), divine and characteristically most distinct (vilakshan) from other mayik elements. It is this abode of God, known as Akshardham, in which Purushottam (God) resides Himself forever, in His vyatirek (distinct from Brahm and other realities) and anvay (indistinct from Brahm and other realities as their essence or antaryāmi) forms.
The existence of Brahm and Parabrahm, according to Hinduism, is undeniable. Until the clarification by Shri Swaminarayan, the words Brahm and Parabrahm had become synonymous or having similar meanings. But if one studies the scriptural sayings very minutely one would immediately know that Brahm and Parabrahm are not the same but two different entities. In the scriptures, Brahm is described as the overall cause of countless brahmands or multiverse. He does that according to God’s wish. Parabrahm is described as the cause, essence, or soul of Brahm, Dham, Brahmdham, or His abode. Parabrahm is described as the ultimate cause of His creation. He does it by means of His four other realities, namely, Brahm, maya, ishwar, and jiv. The scriptures have never described anywhere Brahm as the cause or source of Parabrahm. “Mama yonir mahad Brahm, tasmin garbham dadhāmyaham | Sambhavaha sarva bhutanam, tato bhavati Bharat ||” (Bhagwad Gita: 14.3) Meaning, “My major pathway or source of creation or origin is through Brahm, in which, I place (dadhāmi) the seed or germ of the cosmos from which all beings are created or born, O, son of Bharat.” Because of the transcendental, subtle, all-pervasive, and infinite nature and description of Brahm, it can be easily misunderstood that Brahm could possibly be Parabrahm, but in the scriptures Brahm is never ever described to be transcendental to Parabrahm or to be the essence and master of Parabrahm.
Tags:abode, adho-urdhva, advitiyam, akhand, akshar, Aksharbrahm, Akshardhām, all-penetrating, all-supporter, amāp, amāyik, anant, Anantam, anvay, apār, atishay, avinashi, bhakta, Brahm, Brahm-mahol, brahmands, brahmanized, Brahmdhām, bright, chaitanya, Chidākāsh, cool, Creation, dadhāmi, Darshan, devotee, dham, distinct, divine, ekam, elements, eternal, gnan-rup, Gnānam, gunas, indestructible, indivisible, infinite, Ishwar, jiv, knowledge, light, limitless, luminescent, mahāshital, maya, mayik, meditation, Narayan, nitya, Parabrahm, Param, penultimate, Philosophy, pleasant, pramān-rahit, Prasthantrayi, Purushottam, Reality, Sachchidanand, samādhi, Sant, sarva vyāpak, sarvādhār, satya-rup, Satyam, Shad Darshan, Shri, Shuddha, sukhmaya, Supreme Reality, Swaminarayan, Taittiriya, Tattva, tattvas, Tej, tejomaya, transcendental, Truth, ultimate, undivided, Upanishad, Upanishads, Vedānta, Vedas, vikār-rahit, vilakshan, vyatirek, whole
Posted in Brahm - Part I, Hinduism - Philosophies, Navya Vishishtadvaita, Shad Darshan – Vedanta philosophies | Comments Closed
Wednesday, June 9th, 2010
Shad Darshan – Vedanta philosophies (contd.):
Dvaita philosophy (contd.)
Shuddha Dvait philosophy of Madhavacharya (contd.):
Madhavacharya categorizes unreleased or non-liberated souls into three more or less fixed categories (intrinsic or inherent gradation called “jiva-traividhya”) depending upon their knowledge, power, and bliss. They are: Mukti-yogya (qualified for liberation), Nitya-sansāri (not qualified for the liberation and forever remain in the cycle of rebirth), and Tamo-yogya (condemned to Hell and never get liberated). The idea was to explain plurality of souls and the co-existence of good and evil living entities in the world. Madhavacharya describes the same kinds of intrinsic differences among the liberated souls also, namely, devas (sarva-prakāsh), rishis (antah-prakāsh), and naras (bahir-prakāsh). This kind of ideology (swarup-tāratamya) was unique and not fully supported by the basic Vedic Hindu philosophy of Prasthan Trayi.
It was different than the special titles assigned to some souls by Ramanujacharya, and was not accepted by traditional Hindu philosophers. All souls deserve salvation or liberation limited to their knowledge, behavior, and efforts. Another understanding of Dvaita philosophy which did not get wide acceptance in the mainstream Hinduism was ill-defined or poorly understood “Tāratamya” or “devatā-tārātamya”, meaning, hierarchy among subordinate or minor gods (devatās). According to Madhavacharya’s philosophy, as it is in Ramanujacharya’s philosophy, Vishnu is considered as the Supreme God and Laxmi (the female deity) as His eternal consort. Vishnu is considered as the cause of all Avatars or incarnations of God. Thus, Vaishnavism is also continued in Madhavacharya’s philosophy. In Madhavacharya’s philosophy, Vishnu and Laxmi are placed at the higher level than the level of Brahmā, Shiv, and Vayu god but, with that, other demigods, such as, Surya, Chandra, Indra, Varun, etc. were also placed at different hierarchically lower levels. This was also less acceptable for the Hinduism of that period. According to Madhavacharya all souls, although ontologically identical, are different in potential. Demigods or devas are not of God category so they are of jiv category but according to devata-taratamya they are of different hierarchical levels – higher than ordinary souls of all living beings. One important concept introduced by Madhavacharya was, to maintain the supremacy of God and to maintain the hierarchy; Vishnu was paced at the highest level being completely divine having no worldly body. Vishnu as Shri Hari is considered as sarvottama (the Supreme Being). Laxmi was placed at just a little lower level categorizing her as akshar (imperishable) having indestructible (aprākrut) body as against the mundane (prākrut) bodies of other entities like Brahmā, demigods or devas, and jivas that are destructible or kshar (perishable). This was the indirect or unintentional beginning of separation of Akshar, the penultimate element from God, the ultimate element, but no one could realize it at that time.
Basically, except some minor differences, Madhavacharya accepts the basic understanding of Vaishnava philosophy of Ramanujacharya and also stresses more on Bhakti (devotion) or worshiping. The followers of Ramanujacharya worship Vishnu as Narayan, Sriman Narayan, or Shri Lakshmi-Narayan (it is a one word used for Narayan Himself only, with Lakshmi residing in His heart), whereas the followers of Madhavacharya worship Vishnu as Krishna, Bāla-Gopāla (young Krishna), Bāl-Gopāl-Krishna, Venugopala Krishna or Radha-Krishna (it is also a one word used for Krishna Himself only, with Radha residing in His heart). Until Madhavacharya’s period God was worshiped alone. Shiv, Vishnu, Pārvati (Devi), and Lakshmi were worshiped by themselves alone. Madhavacharya started worshiping Krishna alone and later on worshiping Krishna with his choicest bhakta Arjun was started. Initially, during the Madhavacharya’s period conjugal love (premlakshanā bhakti) in worshiping Krishna with Radha was not fully developed, it was added later on and by the time of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu it had reached to a higher level. Thus, Vishnu’s worship as a young innocent Krishna was turned into fully Krishna’s worship with Radha by a devotee showing an utmost love that only spouse can show towards her partner by Chaitanya’s period.
In Madhavacharya’s period Karmis (those who believe more in Karmas), Gnānis (those who just believe more in tattva-gnan or just philosophy), and Māyāvādis (those who believed in impersonal God) were all freely respected along with truly devotees who as well believe in utmost devotion (bhakti). In Hinduism, devotion (bhakti) is always placed higher than the philosophical knowledge only. Knowing philosophy only without having the devotion attached to it has no value. Also merely blind devotion without knowing whom one worships is also of no value. Hinduism believes in both, the philosophical knowledge of the Truth and the utmost devotion (bhakti) to the Supreme God. Madhavacharya’s period also marks the beginning of worshiping Krishna (the latest and greatest form or incarnation of Purushottam – God) as the principal object of worship from worshiping Vishnu (Narayan) as the principal object of worship in Ramanujacharya’s period.
Madhavacharya maintains that Brahm referred to God (Vishnu) by saying “Brahmashabdashcha vaishnaveva”, thus identifying Brahm with God. That period was unifying Brahm with God or unifying Shaivism with Vaishnavism or rather tending towards replacing Brahm with God. One can see that in the story of Lord “Ananteshwara.” Lord Vishnu, during the period of incarnation as Parashurāma, stayed and enshrined in the Shivalinga and being known as Ananteshwara. The place is known as Shivarupya or Shivalli (Udupi). Although Madhavacharya’s philosophy (Dvaita) was strongly against or exactly opposite of Shankaracharya’s philosophy (Advaita), he himself worshiped Shivalinga as Vishnu in the form of Ananteshwara. Also he respected or rather highly regarded Brāhmins irrespective of their worship to Lord Shiva or Lord Vishnu. At the same time, Madhavacharya goes one step further in separating Vishnu from other deities, establishing further the monotheistic nature of Hinduism. According to him Vishnu is the Supreme God and the primary object of worship, whereas, other deities are subordinate to him. Thus, he translates Hinduism from polytheism to monotheism and adds one more distinction between deities (Devas) or so-called demigods and God proper reestablishing or revitalizing the supremacy of God. The important contribution of Dvaita philosophy of Madhavacharya to Hinduism is that Atma and Brahm (also known as Vishnu or God) are eternally and ontologically two different realities, one is subordinate to the supreme other, respectively – a big and daring separation, at that time, from the Advaita philosophy of Shankaracharya and still maintain unity between Shaivism and Vaishnavism. This is the beauty of Hinduism. Brahm and Parabrahm (God) were still considered a one and the same reality in that period. Brahm was tried to be concealed away by promoting Parabrahm (God). In essence, according to Dvaita philosophy of Madhavacharya, there exist three clear-cut fundamental eternal realities, soul, Nature (universe), and God quite distinct from each other and not the part and parcel (ansh-anshi) of each other. The distinction between God and Brahm was still left-off for the future. Both were used synonymously.
Tags:Advaita, akshar, Ananteshwara, ansh-anshi, antah-prakāsh, ātmā, Avatars, bahir-prakāsh, Bāl-Gopāl-Krishna, Bāla-Gopāla, bhakti, body, Brahm, Brahmā, Brahmins, Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, Chandra, consort, cycle of rebirth, Darshan, deities, deity, demigods, devas, devatā-tārātamya, devatās, Devi, devotion, divine, Dvait, Dvaita, element, eternal, Gnānis, God, Hari, Hell, hierarchy, Hindu, Hinduism, Imperishable, incarnations, Indra, jiva-traividhya, jivas, Karmas, Karmis, Krishna, kshar, Lakshmi, Lakshmi-Narayan, Laxmi, liberation, Madhavacharya, Māyāvādis, Monotheism, Mukti-yogya, naras, Narayan, Nitya-sansāri, Parashurāma, Pārvati, penultimate, perishable, philosophies, Philosophy, polytheism, Prasthan Trayi, premlakshanā bhakti, Rādhā, Radha-Krishna, Ramanujacharya, Rishis, sarva-prakāsh, sarvottama, Shad Darshan, Shaivism, Shankaracharya, Shiv, Shivalinga, Shivalli, Shivarupya, Shri, Shuddha, souls, Sriman Narayan, Supreme God, Surya, swarup-tāratamya, Tamo-yogya, Tāratamya, tattva-gnan, Truth, Udupi, ultimate, Vaishnava, Vaishnavism, Varun, Vāyu, Vedānta, Vedic, Venugopala Krishna, Vishnu, worldly, worshiping
Posted in Dvaita philosophy (contd.), Hinduism - Philosophies, Shad Darshan – Vedanta philosophies | Comments Closed
Tuesday, June 8th, 2010
Shad Darshan – Vedanta philosophies (contd.):
Dvaita philosophy
Shuddha Dvait philosophy of Madhavacharya:
Dvait (also known as Shuddha Dvait or Pure Dualism) philosophy was given by Madhavacharya (Madhvacharya, or Madhva) (1238-1317). Just as Advaita is different than Monism, Dvaita is different than Dualism. Dualism defines about two independent already opposite realities, such as, mind and body, good and evil, physical and spiritual, whereas Dvaita philosophy defines two, characteristically look-alike but ontologically quite distinct, eternal realities, namely, soul and God (also known as the super-soul), maintaining the Supremacy of God. The distinction between soul and God which was not proposed in Advaita and not clearly defined in Vishishtadvait philosophy was explained clearly by Madhavacharya. Madhavacharya removed the paradoxical (vishishta) part of Ramanujacharya’s philosophy of having similarity but difference between the soul and God. Madhavacharya stressed of having a strict ontological (tāttvik) distinction between God, called Vishnu (also known as Krishna or Hari), and the individual souls. Because of this, his philosophy is also known as Shuddha Dvaita Vāda (Pure Dualism). He propounded that, this duality of soul and God is maintained even after the liberation of souls which was not cleared or stressed in the Vishishtadvait philosophy of Ramanujacharya. In the book Mayavada-shata-dusani (Tattva Muktavali), it is said that, the Absolute Truth is the Supreme Personality, full of transcendental attributes and not the attributeless impersonal Brahm. Madhavacharya describes five major differences in realities: 1. Major ontological difference between God and jiv. 2. The ontological difference between God and maya. 3. The ontological difference between maya and jiv. 4. The difference, meaning separation or individuality, between one jiv and another jiv. 5. Individuality between different forms of maya.
According to Dvaita philosophy souls are eternal and are not created by God, yet, like maya or other fundamental realities they are not independent but are dependent on the Supreme God for their existence. Souls are many and uncountable. How come the individual souls which are mingled with Maya (māyān + veshtita = mayanveshtita, meaning, enveloped or completely covered with maya) can be of the same level of the Supreme God which is ever transcendental to maya and also to whom maya even cannot touch. Maya, though revocably but strongly, binds the souls but cannot bind God, it cannot even touch God. Moreover, by having salvation or liberation of one soul all souls do not get liberation. Madhavacharya strongly says to those who believes that they are Brahm (Aham Brahmāsmi), “Yadi nāma paro na bhaveta (bhavetsa) Harihi, kathamasya vashe jagadetadabhutaha | Yadi nāma na tasya vashe sakalam kathameva tu nityasukham na bhavetaha || 5 ||” (Ref: Shrimad Ānandatirtha (Madhavacharya) bhagavatpād āchārya virachitam “Dvādasha Stotra”, Stotra: 3, Shlok: 5) Meaning, “If you feel that there is no God, then how, in what way, and who controls the universe (jagat). If you feel that you are Brahm (God) – the controller of everything, then how come you do not always enjoy the eternal happiness?”
Tags:Absolute Truth, āchārya, Advaita, Ānandatirtha, bhagavatpād, body, Brahm, Darshan, Dualism, Dvādasha, Dvait, Dvaita, eternal, evil, God, good, Hari, jagat, jiv, Krishna, liberation, Madhavacharya, Madhva, Madhvacharya, maya, māyān, mayanveshtita, Mayavada-shata-dusani, mind, Monism, Personality, philosophies, Philosophy, physical, Pure Dualism, Ramanujacharya, realities, salvation, Shad Darshan, Shlok, Shrimad, Shuddha, soul, spiritual, Stotra, super-soul, Supreme, Tattva Muktavali, tāttvik, transcendental, universe, Vāda, Vedānta, veshtita, virachitam, Vishishta, Vishishtadvait, Vishnu
Posted in Dvaita philosophy, Hinduism - Philosophies, Shad Darshan – Vedanta philosophies | Comments Closed
