How does worship by Mâdhvas differ from other Vaishnava worship?

According to Sri Madhvâchârya, Vishnu is "worshippable by all (other) deities, and by everyone, to their best ability." Thus, in common with other Vaishnava traditions, Mâdhvas worship other deities only as iconic representatives of the Lord, and not as independently authoritative figures. However, Mâdhvas believe that all deities except for Vishnu's eternal consort Lakshmi, are amukta-jîvas (un-liberated souls) performing service to Him. Tattvavâda also does not acknowledge that worship of other claimed deities or prophets, besides those authorized by shâstra, is useful.

Mâdhvas have a "târatamya" or divine hierarchy of deities after Vishnu, which is derived from shâstra sources, and said hierarchy is very important in considerations of worship, since each lesser deity is worshipped as the iconic representative of the next higher one, with the idea being that all worship is ultimately meant for Vishnu only. Thus, Mâdhvas acknowledge a hierarchy of worth among deities other than Vishnu, and say that each lesser deity is akin to an image in a mirror, of the one higher. This concept of images captures both the notion of difference (since the object and its image are not identical) and an hierarchy of worth (since the image is never of the same worth as the object), and is what causes Tattvavâda to also be referred to as Bimba-pratibimba-vâda (doctrine of object and image, as mentioned previously).

Worship according to Srimad Achârya's tradition also differs from certain other kinds of worship, since the icons or images used for worship are considered to be completely distinct from the Deity who is the actual object of worship. The icon is an adhishThâna, or location symbol, while the Deity is invoked for purposes of worship. Tattvavâda emphasizes that it is important to understand the difference between the adhishThâna (Image) and the âvâhita (invoked Diety), and to keep it in mind at all times -- one should never worship the icon itself as the Lord, as that would be violative of jaDa-Îshvara-bheda, one of the five kinds of difference.

According to Srimad Ananda Tîrtha, icons are of two kinds: "chala-pratimâ" or "moving icon," and "achala pratimâ" or "non-moving icon." The "chala" icons are one's elders, Gurus, other deities besides Vishnu, etc., while the "achala" icons are statues, statuettes, pictures, sâligramas etc., that may also be used as icons for worship. Of the two kinds of icons, the "chala" have a naturally higher rank than the "achala" -- therefore, service to elders, one's Gurus, etc., when performed as worship of the Lord, is of greater importance than the worship of stationary symbols. However, at all times, it is important to be aware that the object or person to whom one offers service or respect, is not the Lord Himself, nor is authoritative independently of Him, but is merely His icon.

A detailed account of worship at the Krishna temple in Udupi can be seen here.

What is the Tattvavâda concept of moksha?

Under Tattvavâda, the soul upon liberation does not lose his distinct identity, which is different from Vishnu, nor does he become equal to Him in any respect. While the mukta does become free of all suffering, his enjoyment is not of the same caliber as His, nor does said mukta become independent of Him.

The mukta experiences the joy which is his own nature, in mukti; whereas in daily life, joy derives from the contact of senses with sense-objects, joy in mukti is due to the jîva's own immutable nature. And because such joy is the jîva's own nature, it does not fluctuate or end, and it is not mixed with pain. Since the nature of the jîva is different from that of Îshvara, his joy is also of a different nature than His, even upon mukti. Even the joy which is intrinsic to the nature of the jîva can only be realised due to the grace of the Supreme being.

Why does Tattvavâda deny jîvan-mukti?

Because a mukta, or liberated person, should not even be physically present in the material universe, unlike the un-liberated. A person who is living in the world cannot be said to be free of sorrow born of material contact, and also cannot be said to experience the joy of his own nature at all times. The very act of living in a gross material body entails things such as eating, sleeping, pleasure and pain, etc., which cannot be accepted in a mukta.

What is the concept of scripture, according to Tattvavâda?

The apowrusheya-âgamas, or unauthored scriptures, are the primary sources of all knowledge of the atîndriya (extra-sensory) entities. Only those powrusheya-âgamas or authored scriptures that closely adhere to the former have value as explanatory sources of knowledge about the atîndriya. Independent powrusheya texts are considered to bring ignorance and delusion, if used to learn about the atîndriya.

In common with other schools of Vaishnavism, Tattvavâda considers the prasthâna-traya (the triad of the Brahma-Sûtra, the Bhagavad Gita, and the Vedas and Upanishads) to be canonical texts. Srimad Ananda Tîrtha however denies claims that part of the Vedas, the so-called "karma-kâNDa" or "mantra" portions, are of no use as scripture, and claims that even those parts are only meant to educate us about Hari. His school, following his lead, also does not accept that any part of the Vedas teach anything but the truth, and says that arbitration of apowrusheya texts, as "true-saying" and "false-saying" is impermissible logically and spiritually. All canonical texts must be considered, and a coherent meaning found without imposing one's own biases upon the evidence obtained.

A comparison of Tattvavâda's treatment of scripture with the monists' can be seen here.

Here is a detailed disquisition upon the BaLitthA Sûkta of the Rg Veda.

Who are some of the leading scholars of Tattvavâda?

Historically, there have been many great scholars and saints in the tradition of Srimad Âchârya. Some of them are:

Sri Vâdirâja Tîrtha -- is considered the senior-most scholar of Tattvavâda after Srimad Ananda Tîrtha himself; his works include the Yukti-Mallikâ, the RukmiNîsha-Vijaya, etc., and a number of well-known stotras; he has also translated Srimad Âchârya's Mahâbhârata-tâtparya-nirNaya into Kannada, and has composed a number of devotional songs in that language.

Sri Jayatîrtha -- has written commentaries on a number of Srimad Âchârya's works, and is known for his extremely pleasing style of writing and argument; his work, the Nyâya-Sudhâ, which is an exposition of Shrîman Madhvâchârya's Anu-Vyâkhyâna commentary on the Brahma-Sûtra, is an outstanding example of his scholarship, and is certainly one of the greatest works in Vedanta.

Sri Purandara Dâsa -- is widely renowned as the father of Carnatic music; is less widely known as the founder of the Hari-Dâsa tradition, that seeks to propagate the doctrine of Tattvavâda through music, in a language that ordinary people can understand. A contemporary of Sri Vâdirâja Tîrtha and Sri Vyâsa Tîrtha, he is regarded by Mâdhvas as an outstanding scholar and devotee.

Sri Vyâsa Tîrtha -- wrote further commentaries on the works of Sri Jayatîrtha and Srimad Ananda Tîrtha; is known for his extra-ordinary ability to run any opponent down by force of argument; he ranks as one of the most renowned polemical scholars of Vedanta.

Sri Raghavendra Tîrtha -- is widely known today, thanks to his excellent reputation for providing succor in times of major crises. Although he ranks as one of the greatest scholars of Tattvavâda, he is better known and worshipped by millions, as an infallible source of support when one is faced with dire circumstances.

What are the Mâdhva institutions of the present day?

The most important one is probably the temple of Krishna at Udupi, in south-western Karnataka, India. There are eight maTha-s, called the Udupi-ashhTa-maTha-s, that are dedicated to serving Krishna, at Udupi and elsewhere. Besides these, there are several other important maThas, like the Uttarâdi MaTha (which is claimed to be the institution of Sri Jayatîrtha), and the MaThas of Sri Vyâsa Tîrtha and Sri Raghavendra Tîrtha, known by their names.

Where can I get more information?

One place to look would be the Dvaita Home Page (address given at the top of this document), which, although not nearly as complete or exhaustive as its supporters would like, still offers some information. In particular, it has some biographical information about Srimad Ananda Tîrtha and some other scholars of his school, and some bibliographical information as well. Besides these, a number of books have been written in English, especially by B. N. Krishnamurti Sharma, of which one, The History of the Dvaita School of Vedanta and its Literature, Motilal Banarsidass, 1981, is considered quite broad-based, if not completely authoritative. Another work by Dr. Sharma that may be of some interest is 'Madhva's teachings in his own words'.

How can I add <> to the Dvaita Home Page?

If some new material is to be added to the page, and the suggestion is not merely a correction of an error in existing material, then it is requested that you please post your proposed addition to the Dvaita list/digest so that the same can be reviewed by other prospective readers of the website, and their comments obtained. This is a peer-review process that has been adhered to for quite some time now, and has the added benefit of enriching the list/digest as well. If the material proposed to be added is not your own, then copyright concerns may have to be addressed.

I'm having some trouble with the Dvaita List; or: I have this specific query or request concerning the List.

Please see the List/Digest Help File, address given above.

Appendix A: terms commonly used in Tattvavâda.

General terms:

pramâNa ["yathârthaM pramâNam.h"] -- something that describes as-is, is called a pramâNa. This can be of two types:
kevala-pramâNa ["yathârtha-GYânaM kevalam.h"] -- knowledge of something as-is, is called kevala-pramâNa.

anu-pramâNa ["tat-sâdhanaM anu-pramâNam.h"] -- the source of the previous, is called an anu-pramâNa, which can be of three types:

pratyaksha ["vishayân.h prati-sthitaM hi aksham.h"] - flawless interaction between a sense of perception (like sight), and an object or entity in its domain, is called pratyaksha.

anumâna ["tarkaH adushhTaH"] -- inference without flaw constitutes logic. Flaws of inference are described below.

âgama ["adushhTa vâkya"] -- sentences, or bodies of sentences (texts) without flaw, are called âgama.

pramâtâ ["pramâvân.h pramâtâ"] -- a person in whom pramâ exists, is the pramâtâ.

prameya ["pramâvishayaH prameyaH"] -- the subject of pramâ is the prameya.

pramâ ["yathârthaGYânaM pramâ"] -- knowledge of something as-is is called pramâ.

hetu -- antecedent, in an inference.

sâdhya -- consequence, likewise.

upa-jîvya -- anu-pramâNa by which hetu is known.

upa-jîvaka -- anu-pramâNa fed by, or created by, sâdhya.

Error terms.

Semantic errors (shabda-doshha):
virodha ["yogyatâviraho virodhaH"] -- This can loosely be translated as 'opposition,' and the definition reads loosely as: "Lack of ability is opposition." What the definition means to say is that if a statement runs counter to one already accepted, and is unable to force its own way, then it must be rejected, for being opposed to a known fact.

asangati ["âkâN^kshâviraho asangatiH"] -- This can be translated as 'irrelevance,' and the definition reads: "Lack of fulfillment of expectation is irrelevance." In a discussion, if a reply given, a point raised, or a statement made, is not in accordance with the expectation that it be pertinent to the matter under discussion, then it is irrelevant.

nyûnatâ ["vivakshitâ.asaMpûrtirnyûnatâ"] -- This can read as 'nullity,' with the definition reading loosely as: "Non-satisfaction of the claim constitutes nullity." In a discussion, if someone makes a claim, and later gives evidence that does not support the claim in full, then such evidence suffers from nullity, with respect to the claim. Another type is where a definition given does not cover all cases of the objects or entities to be defined.

âdhikyam : ["saN^gatâvadhikatvamâdhikyam.h"] -- This can be translated as 'superfluity,' and the definition as: "An excess over what is relevant, constitutes superfluity." In a discussion, if someone takes the meaning or definition of something to cover more than what it should, then such is superfluous. Another type is where a definition given covers more than the object, entity, or set to be defined.

Logical errors (tarka-doshha):
âtmâshraya : This can loosely be translated as "assuming the consequence," in some cases. More generally, however, if something "rests on itself," in the sense that an object or entity is stated to have a property such as presence within itself, support of itself, etc., then this flaw exists. A standard example is "sva-skandha-ârohaNa" or "mounting one's own shoulder."

anyonyâshraya : Loosely, "mutual reliance." If a statement is proved by another, and the latter by the former, then this error exists.

chakrakâshraya : "circular reliance," a.k.a. circular reasoning. A more general case of the above; if instead of two, we have 'n' number of disputed statements, that are tied in a circle so that each one proves the next, then circular reasoning is shown.

anavasthâ : Infinite regress. If the proof of a statement requires an assumption, and proof of that assumption requires another, and proof of that still another, and so on, then infinite regress is said to occur.

pramâ-hâna : "neglect of evidence," as in, when a statement neglects to take into account the fact that it is in opposition to accepted evidence. This itself has various forms: shruta-hâna (neglect of Shruti), dR^ishhTa-hâna (neglect of pratyaksha), etc.

kalpanâ-gaurava : "Respect for imagination." If a statement must be assumed without proof, so that an inference based upon it may be accepted, then the inference is subject to the respect that has been accorded to one's imagination, and is unacceptable. Economy in assumptions is a virtue.

upajîvya-virodha : "Opposition to upajîvya." If an inference is made where the consequence runs counter to the source of knowledge by which the antecedent is known, then the inference is considered incorrect, for opposing the source of its own antecedent, and the error made is known as upajîvya virodha; as has already been noted, 'upajîvya' is the name given to the anu-pramâNa from which the antecedent is known.

apa-siddhânta : "Invalid thesis." If a doctrine or a proponent puts forth a claim earlier in an argument, but subsequently attempts to defend a contrary position (i.e., a claim different from the previous), then the apa-siddhAnta-doshha -- the error of an invalid thesis -- is said to occur.

Appendix B: Disclaimer and restrictions

N. A. P. S. Rao <napsraoATdvaita.net>"
Shrisha Rao <shraoATdvaita.in>

The above people would like to thank Dr. D. Prahladacharya, Vice Chancellor, Rashtriya Samskrta Vidyapeetha, Tirupati, and former Director, Poornapragna Samshodhana Mandiram, Bangalore, for kindly taking the time to review and correct an earlier version of this FAQ. However, any residual errors that remain are their responsibility.

The above people have tried their best to ensure that their descriptions conform to the doctrine of Srimad Ananda Tîrtha most exactly. However, it is possible that owing to inadvertence or even inadequacy of understanding on their part, there are errors in this document. If so, your forgiveness is requested.

This FAQ is copyrighted and may be freely used for non-commercial purposes. However, to use it in for-profit endeavors requires specific permission to be obtained by sending mail to infoATdvaita.net; use without permission is covered in the U.S. under the No Electronic Theft Act, 1997, and similar laws in other countries. In addition, this document may NOT be reposted to any UseNet newsgroup other than the one(s) to which it is sent by its maintainers. If you think it is appropriate to another newsgroup and would like to post it there, please request permission first. Any such re-posting of this FAQ must be only for the whole document, including this section.

Your comments about this FAQ

Created November 7, 1995; last updated March 26, 2023