Pranam *Dualism*, in religion <https://www.britannica.com/topic/religion>, the doctrine <https://www.britannica.com/topic/doctrine> that the world (or reality) consists of two basic, opposed, and irreducible principles that account for all that exists. It has played an important role in the history of thought <https://www.britannica.com/topic/thought> and of religion.
*Nature and significance* In religion, dualism means the belief in two supreme opposed powers or gods, or sets of divine or demonic beings, that caused the world to exist. It may conveniently be contrasted with monism <https://www.britannica.com/topic/pluralism-philosophy>, which sees the world as consisting of one principle such as mind <https://www.britannica.com/topic/mind> (spirit) or matter; with monotheism <https://www.britannica.com/topic/monotheism>; or with various pluralisms <https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pluralisms> and polytheisms <https://www.britannica.com/topic/polytheism>, which see a multiplicity of principles or powers at work. As is indicated below, however, the situation is not always clear and simple, a matter of one or two or many, for there are monotheistic, monistic, and polytheistic religions with dualistic aspects. Various distinctions may be discerned in the types of dualism in general. In the first place, dualism may be either absolute or relative. In a radical or absolute dualism, the two principles are held to exist from eternity; for example, in the Iranian dualisms, Zoroastrianism <https://www.britannica.com/topic/Zoroastrianism> and Manichaeism <https://www.britannica.com/topic/Manichaeism>, both the bright and beneficent and the sinister <https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sinister> and destructive principles are from eternity. In a mitigated <https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mitigated> or relative dualism, one of the two principles may be derived from, or presuppose, the other as a basis; for example, the Bogomils <https://www.britannica.com/topic/Bogomils>, a medieval <https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/medieval> heretical Christian group, held that the Devil <https://www.britannica.com/topic/devil> is a fallen angel who came from God and was the creator of the human body <https://www.britannica.com/science/human-body>, into which he managed by trickery to have God infuse a soul <https://www.britannica.com/topic/soul-religion-and-philosophy>. Here the Devil is a subordinate being and not coeternal with God, the absolute eternal being. This, then, is clearly a qualified, not a radical, dualism. Both radical and mitigated types of dualism are found among different groups of the late medieval Cathari <https://www.britannica.com/topic/Cathari>, a Christian heretical movement <https://www.britannica.com/science/motion-mechanics> closely related to the Bogomils. Another and perhaps more important distinction is that between dialectical and eschatological dualism. Dialectical dualism involves an eternal dialectic <https://www.britannica.com/topic/dialectic-logic>, or tension, of two opposed principles, such as, in Western culture <https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/culture>, the One <https://www.britannica.com/topic/monism-philosophy>and the many <https://www.britannica.com/topic/pluralism-philosophy>, or Idea and matter (or space, called by Plato <https://www.britannica.com/biography/Plato> “the receptacle”), and, in Indian culture, *maya <https://www.britannica.com/topic/maya-Indian-philosophy>* (the illusory world of sense experience and multiplicity) and *atman <https://www.britannica.com/topic/atman>*-*brahman <https://www.britannica.com/topic/brahman-Hindu-concept>* (the essential identity of self <https://www.britannica.com/topic/self> and ultimate reality). Dialectical dualism ordinarily implies a cyclical <https://www.britannica.com/topic/cyclicism>, or eternally repetitive, view of history. Eschatological <https://www.britannica.com/topic/eschatology> dualism—i.e., a dualism concerned with the ultimate destiny of humanity and the world, how things will be in the “last” times—on the other hand, conceives of a final resolution of the present dualistic state of things, in which evil will be eliminated at the end of a linear history constituted <https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/constituted> of a series of unrepeatable events instead of a cyclical, repetitive one. The ancient Iranian religions, Zoroastrianism <https://www.britannica.com/topic/Zoroastrianism> and Manichaeism <https://www.britannica.com/topic/Manichaeism>, and gnosticism <https://www.britannica.com/topic/gnosticism>—a religio-philosophical movement influential in the Hellenistic <https://www.britannica.com/event/Hellenistic-Age> world—provide examples of eschatological dualism. A type of thought, such as Platonism <https://www.britannica.com/topic/Platonism>, that insists on a profound harmony in the cosmos, is thus more radically dualistic, because of its irreducibly dialectical character, than Zoroastrianism and Manichaeism, with their emphasis on the cosmic struggle between two antithetical <https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/antithetical> principles (good and evil). Midway between these extremes is gnostic dualism, which has an ontology <https://www.britannica.com/topic/ontology-metaphysics> (or theory of being) of an Orphic <https://www.britannica.com/art/Orphism>-Platonic type (*see below* Among ancient civilizations and peoples <https://www.britannica.com/topic/dualism-religion/Historical-varieties-of-religious-dualism#ref38185>) but which also affirms the final disappearance and annihilation of evil with the eventual destruction of the material world—and thus comprises <https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/comprises> both dialectical and eschatological dualism. In philosophy <https://www.britannica.com/topic/philosophy>, dualism is often identified with the doctrine of transcendence <https://www.britannica.com/topic/transcendentalism-philosophy>—that there is a separate realm or being above and beyond the world—as opposed to monism, which holds that the ultimate principle is inside the world (immanent). In the disciplines <https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/disciplines> concerned with the study of religions, however, religious dualism refers not to the distinction or separation of God and the world but to the doctrine of two basic principles, a doctrine that, moreover, may easily be compatible with a form of monism (e.g., Orphism or the Advaita <https://www.britannica.com/topic/Advaita-school-of-Hindu-philosophy> school of Vedanta <https://www.britannica.com/topic/Vedanta>) that makes the opposition between the One and the many absolute and sees in multiplicity merely a fragmentation (or illusory obliteration) of the One. Madhvācārya was born in Pajaka <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pajaka> near Udupi <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Udupi>, a coastal district in the present day Indian state of Karnataka <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karnataka> Traditionally it is believed that Naddantillaya (Sanskrit: Madhyageha, Madhyamandira) was the name of his father and Vedavati was Madhvācārya's mother. Born in a Tulu <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulu_language> speaking Brahmin <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahmin> household, he was named Vāsudeva. Later he became famous by the names Purnaprajna, Anandatirtha and Madhvacarya (or just Madhva). Pūrnaprajña was the name given to him at the time of his initiation into *sannyasa <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sannyasa>* (renunciation), as a teenager The name conferred on him when he became the head of his monastery was "Ānanda Tīrtha" All three of his later names are found in his works.Madhvācārya or Madhva are names most commonly found in Madhvacharya established a *matha* (monastery) dedicated to Dvaita philosophy, and this became the sanctuary for a series of Dvaita scholars such as Jayatirtha <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jayatirtha>, Sripadaraja <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sripadaraja>, Vyasatirtha <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vyasatirtha>, Vadiraja Tirtha <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vadiraja_Tirtha>, Raghuttama Tirtha <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raghuttama_Tirtha>, Raghavendra Tirtha <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raghavendra_Tirtha> and Satyanatha Tirtha <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satyanatha_Tirtha> who followed in the footsteps of Madhva.[ <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madhvacharya#cite_note-FOOTNOTEDehsen1999118-17> Vayu <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vayu> three avatars Madhva, Bhima, Hanuman <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanuman> along with Vedavyasa and Lord Vishnu are depicted in this portrait. In several of his texts, state Sarma and other scholars, "Madhvacharya proclaims himself to be the third avatar <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avatar> or incarnation of Vayu <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vayu>, wind god, the son of Vishnu <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vishnu>". Madhvacharya is said to have quoted some verses from his unique recensions of scriptures. Also, he is said to have quoted many unique books like Kamatha Sruti. The interpretation of Balittha Sukta by Madhvacharya and his followers to prove that Madhvacharya was an incarnation of Vayu is considered highly unique by standard commentaries on them *like Sayana <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sayana> and Horace Hayman Wilson <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horace_Hayman_Wilson>.* Thirty seven Dvaita texts <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Works_of_Madhvacharya> are attributed to Madhvacharya Of these, thirteen are bhasya <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhasya> (review and commentary) on earliest Principal Upanishads a *Madhva-bhasya* on the foundational text of Vedanta school of Hinduism – Brahma Sutras <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahma_Sutras>, another *Gita-bhasya* on Bhagavad Gita <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhagavad_Gita>, a commentary on forty hymns of the Rigveda <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rigveda>, a review of the Mahabharata <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahabharata> in poetic style, a commentary called *Bhagavata-tatparya-nirnaya* on Bhagavata Purana <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhagavata_Purana>. Apart from these, Madhva is also attributed for authoring many stotras <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stotra>, poems and texts on bhakti <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhakti> of Vishnu and his avatars <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avatar>. Madhva's philosophy: The premises and foundations of Dvaita Vedanta <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dvaita_Vedanta>, also known as *Dvaitavada* and *Tattvavada*, are credited to Madhvaharya. His philosophy championed unqualified dualism Madhva's work is classically placed in contrast with monist ideas of Shankara <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adi_Shankara>'s Advaita Vedanta <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advaita_Vedanta> and Ramanuja <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramanuja>'s Vishishtadvaita Vedanta <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vishishtadvaita>. Madhva calls epistemology <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemology> as *Anu pramana*. It accepts three *pramānas <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pram%C4%81na>*, that is three facts or three correct means of knowledge, in contrast to one of Charvaka <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charvaka> and six of Advaita schools of Hindu philosophies:[33] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madhvacharya#cite_note-34>[34] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madhvacharya#cite_note-35> - *Pratyaksha <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pratyaksha>* (प्रत्यक्ष) means perception. It is of two types in Dvaita and other Hindu schools: external and internal. External perception is described as that arising from the interaction of five senses and worldly objects, while internal perception is described as that of inner sense, the mind.[35] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madhvacharya#cite_note-36>[36] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madhvacharya#cite_note-kpmat-37> - *Anumāna <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anumana>* (अनुमान) means inference. It is described as reaching a new conclusion and truth from one or more observations and previous truths by applying reason.[37] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madhvacharya#cite_note-38> Observing smoke and inferring fire is an example of *Anumana*. This method of inference consists of three parts: *pratijna* (hypothesis), *hetu* (a reason), and *drshtanta* (examples).[38] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madhvacharya#cite_note-jl4647-39>[39] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madhvacharya#cite_note-40> - *Śabda <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%9A%C3%A1bda>* (शब्द) means relying on word, testimony of past or present reliable experts.[32] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madhvacharya#cite_note-eliottjag-33>[40] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madhvacharya#cite_note-dpsb-41> It is also known as Agama <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agama_(Hinduism)> in Madhva's Dvaita tradition, and incorporates all the Vedas <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vedas>. Hiriyanna explains *Sabda-pramana* as a concept which means reliable expert testimony. The schools of Hinduism which consider it epistemically valid suggest that a human being needs to know numerous facts, and with the limited time and energy available, he can learn only a fraction of those facts and truths directly.[41] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madhvacharya#cite_note-mhir-42> Madhva and his followers introduced *kevala-pramaana* as the "knowledge of an object as it is", separate from *anu-pramana* described above. Madhva's Dvaita school holds that Vishnu as a God, who is also Hari <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hari>, Krishna <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krishna>, Vasudeva <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasudeva> and Narayana <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narayana>, can only be known through the proper *samanvaya* (connection) and *pramana* of the Vedic scriptural teachings. Vishnu, according to Madhvacharya, is not the creator of the Vedas, but the teacher of the Vedas. Madhva's school of thought assert, knowledge is intrinsically valid, and the knower and the known are independently real. Both the ritual part (*karma-kanda*, Mimamsa) and the knowledge part (*jnana-kanda*, Upanishadic Vedanta) in the Vedas, asserted Madhvacharya, are equally valid and interconnected whole. As asserted by the Mimamsa <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mimamsa> school of Hindu philosophy, Madhvacharya held that the Vedas <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vedas> are author-less, and that their truth is in all of its parts (i.e. the *saṃhitas* <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samhita>, *brāhmaņas* <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahmana>, *āraņyakās* <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aranyaka> and *upanișads* <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upanishad>)... The metaphysical <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphysics> reality is plural, stated Madhvacharya.[7] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madhvacharya#cite_note-FOOTNOTEStoker2011-7> There are primarily two *tattvas <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tattva>* or categories of reality — *svatantra tattva* (independent reality) and *asvatantra tattva* (dependent reality) Ishvara <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ishvara> (as God Vishnu or Krishna) is the cause of the universe and the only independent reality, in Madhvacharya's view. The created universe is the dependent reality, cnsisting of *Jīva <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jiva>* (individual souls) and *Jada* (matter, material things) Individual souls are plural, different and distinct realities. *Jīva*s are sentient and matter is non-sentient, according to Madhvacharya. Madhva further enumerates the difference between dependent and independent reality as a fivefold division (*pancha-bheda*) between God, souls and material things. These differences are: (1) Between material things; (2) Between material thing and soul; (3) Between material thing and God; (4) Between souls; and (5) Between soul and God. This difference is neither temporary nor merely practical; it is an invariable and natural property of everything. Madhva calls it *Taratamya* (gradation in pluralism*). There is no object like another, according to Madhvacharya. There is no soul like another.* *All souls are unique, reflected in individual personalities*. *The sea is full; the tank is full; a pot is full; everything is full, yet each fullness is different, asserted Madhvacharya*.{ In a nutshell, Paramatma soul and Jeevatma souls are all diffrentiated as variables by Madhvar. Then automatically, there is no manifestations at all. Then there are creations and any one could have created all. If so brahmam is accepted but deviateed far away from Vedas , as a Buddism, Jainism, Islam and the Chrisytianity. It can be a different kind of Atheism, accepting God and accepting the distinctions bewtween the true and allother false existeces, as true, all-togetner}. According to Madhvacharya, even in liberation (moksha <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moksha>), the bliss is different for each person based on each's degree of knowledge and spiritual perfection. This liberation according to him, is only achievable with grace of God Vishnu. Madhva conceptualised Brahman <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahman> as a being who enjoys His own bliss, while the entire universe evolves through a *nebulous chaos.* He manifests, every now and then, *to help* the evolution process. The four primary manifestation of Him as the Brahman are, according to Madhva, Vasudeva <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasudeva>, Pradyumna <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pradyumna>, Aniruddha <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aniruddha> and Sankarasana, which are respectively responsible for the redemptive, creative, sustaining and destructive aspects in the universe. { the visishtadvaitham taken in}. His secondary manifestations are many, and all manifestations are at par with each other*, it is the same infinite no matter how He manifests * Brahman is the creator of the universe, perfect in knowledge, perfect in knowing, perfect in its power, and distinct from souls, distinct from matter.(??) For liberation, mere intellectual conceptualization of Brahman as creator is not enough, the individual soul must feel attraction, love, attachment and devotional surrender to Him, and only His grace leads to redemption and liberation, according to Madhva. *The Vishnu as Brahman concept of Madhvacharya is a concept similar to God in major world religions*. His writings led some early colonial-era Indologists <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indologist> such as George Abraham Grierson <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Abraham_Grierson> to suggest the 13th-century Madhva was influenced by Christianity <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity>, but later scholarship has rejected this theory. Evil and suffering in the world, according to Madhvacharya, originates in man, and not God. Every *Jiva <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jiva>* (individual soul) is the agent of actions, not *Jada* (matter), and not *Ishvara* (God). While Madhva asserts each individual self is the *Kartritva* (real agency), the self is not an absolutely independent agent to him. This is because, states Madhva, the soul is influenced by sensory organs, one's physical body and such material things which he calls as gifts of God Man has free will, but is influenced by his innate nature, inclinations and past karma <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karma>. Madhvacharya asserts, *Yathecchasi tatha kuru*, which Sharma translates and explains as "one has the right to choose between right and wrong, a choice each individual makes out of his own responsibility and his own risk".Moral laws and ethics exist, according to Madhva, and are necessary for the grace of God and for liberation.Madhvacharya was a fierce critic of competing Vedanta schools, and other schools of Indian philosophies such as Buddhism <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism> and Jainism <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jainism> He wrote up arguments against twenty one ancient and medieval era Indian scholars to help establish the foundations of his own school of thought. Madhvacharya was fiercest critic of Advaita <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advaita> Vedanta, accusing Shankara and Advaitins for example, *as "deceitful demons*" teaching Buddhism under the cover of Vedanta. Madhvacharya disagreed with aspects of Ramanuja <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramanuja>'s Vishishtadvaita. Vishishtadvaita school, a realist system of thought like Madhvacharya's Dvaita school, also asserts that Jiva (human souls) and Brahman (as Vishnu) are different, a difference that is never transcended. God Vishnu alone is independent, all other gods and beings are dependent on Him, according to both Madhvacharya and Ramanuja. However, in contrast to Madhvacharya's vies, Vishishtadvaita school asserts "qualified non-dualism", that souls share the same essential nature of Brahman, and that there is a universal sameness in the quality and degree of bliss possible for human souls, and every soul can reach the bliss state of God Himself. While the older school of Vishishtadvaita asserted "qualitative monism and quantitative pluralism of souls", states Sharma, Madhvacharya asserted both "qualitative and quantitative pluralism of souls". Madhvacharya was misperceived and misrepresented by both Christian missionaries and Hindu writers during the colonial era scholarship. The similarities in the primacy of one God, dualism and distinction between man and God, devotion to God, the son of God as the intermediary, predestination, the role of grace in salvation, as well as the similarities in the legends of miracles in Christianity <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity> and Madhvacharya's Dvaita tradition fed these stories. Among Christian writers, GA Grierson creatively asserted that Madhva's ideas evidently were "borrowed from Christianity, quite possibly promulgated as a rival to the central doctrine of that faith". Among Hindu writers, according to Sarma, SC Vasu creatively translated Madhvacharya's works to identify Madhvacharya with Christ, rather than compare their ideas.There are also assumptions Madhva was influenced by Islam <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam>. The *Madhvavijaya* tells about Madhva meeting the Sultan of Delhi <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delhi_Sultanate> and saying to him in fluent Persian that both worship the same one God of the universe, and that he spreads the faith in God.] The sultan is said to have been so impressed by this that he wanted give half of the empire to Madhva, which he refused] However, the indologist and religious scholar Helmuth von Glasenapp <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helmuth_von_Glasenapp> assumes that monotheism <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindu_views_on_monotheism> can also be derived from the Indian intellectual world, and that there is no reason supporting the theory that Madhva's views on afterlife were influenced by Muslim or Christian impulses. KR IRS 7522 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Thatha_Patty" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CAL5XZoqg75y-w-cuNiMwRNF_Fa%3D_-CafaiJ4_%3DjsthembGBjkg%40mail.gmail.com.
