History of the Dvaita School of Vedānta and Its Literature: From the Earliest Beginnings to Our Own Times

Front Cover
Motilal Banarsidass Publ., 2000 - Dvaita (Vedanta) - 654 pages
This study offers a panoramic view of the creative, expository, interpretive, dialectic, polemical, didactic and devotional phases of Dvaita philosophy, and its literature with a clear chronological setting of literary, historical and epigraphic materials. Written in lucid style it presents a vigorous and sparkling historical exposition of the mighty currents of Realistic Theism, originating in the Vedic and post-Vedic sources of Madhva philosophy finding their culmination in the Dvaita Vedanta of Madhvacarya, and the long line of his great commentators and followers, over a period of seven centuries from the thirteenth century onwards.

What people are saying - Write a review

User Review - Flag as inappropriate

Undoubtedly the best book on Dvaita Philosophy, stating from its founder Madhva and his works, his early commentators, to Sri Jayatirtha, Sri Vyasaraya, Sri Vadiraja, Sri Raghavendra and others to name a few. He has given a brief introduction of all their works and highlighted their salient points. As all the original works of the system is in Sanskrit and that too in a scholarly style, it is difficult even a the Sanskrit beginners to comprehend these works in their original form.
The book is indeed a treasure house of information and is a must read for all students of Dvaita Philosophy. I can hardly think of an equivalent to this work in any other Indian system that has such an elaborate study done on its savants and literature. A great service indeed by a Great Teacher to Indian Philosophy.
K. Subodh Bhat

User Review - Flag as inappropriate

All learned followers of Sri Madwacharya & Sri Raghavendra Guru may go through this elaborate and detailed description of this Dvaita Vedanta of Madhvacharya and get knowledge.


Common terms and phrases

Popular passages

Page 5 - 'Monotheism is inevitable with any true conception of God. The Supreme can only be one. We cannot have two Supreme and unlimited beings." — Radhakrishnan, I. Phil. 1, p. 90. cendental monism of the Upanisads lies, according to Madhva, not in an acosmistic monism of the type of
Page 270 - the Visistädvaita philosophy was not a source of perennial inspiration for the development of ever newer shades of thought" and that "the logical and dialectical thinkers of this school were decidedly inferior to the prominent thinkers of the Samkara and the
Page 167 - Upanifad" (Introd. p. xxxv-vi. op. cit). Dr. Mahadevan has not been so outspoken. He merely opines that "the rival view has been there since a long time" (how long, he does not say); but the earliest to advocate it, so far as we can trace, were not the Advaitins.
Page xxii - school completely into the shade. As Dasgupta says, "the logical and dialectical thinkers of the Visistadvaita were decidedly inferior to the prominent thinkers of the Sarhkara and the Madhva school. There is hardly anyone in the whole history of the development of the
Page 284 - etc. and runs after roundabout meanings and distant echoes resulting from the primary meanings ! But such roundabout explanations cannot be accepted as the proper, legitimate or straightforward meaning of the proposition. Such farfetched meanings extracted from the first sense of the words, cannot be the import of a proposition, as pointed out by the
Page 49 - The Gita does not assert anywhere that Brahman is the only reality and all else that appears is false and unreal. The word Maya, is no doubt, used there, in three passages ; but its meaning is not what
Page 284 - points out, exceptions restrict the scope of general principles : I The Nirguna texts are general statements and the Saguna texts are exceptions. The latter have, therefore, the right of overriding the former and laying down the law as to the sense in which they can be restrictively interpreted. This is based on the well-known principle of interpretation
Page 283 - Such a valuable truth cannot, therefore, be simply set aside. There is no force in the argument that the Nirguna texts depend on the Saguna and require their help only to the extent of requiring a "bare existence" (svarüpa-mätram) of the thing to be divested of attributes and nothing more
Page 74 - and the Upanisads from that point of view and with that object. That is perhaps why it appears to Thibaut that "the only sectarian feature of his commentary is that he identifies Brahman with Visnu; but, this in no way affects the interpretations put on the Sutras and the Upanisads.
Page 146 - on M. Vij. and Jayatirtha's com. on Td (end). 2. Cf. "Moreover, it ignores the previously postulated "That" which by its terms, eliminates non-being. The poet, here, unquestionably entangles himself in sham profundity." Bloomfield, Religion of the Veda, 1908, p. 238. 3. Vide

Bibliographic information