Dvaita/Advaita Controversy
This concerns two important terms when dealing with Indian (India-Vedic) philosophy and religion. Those words are dvaita and advaita. Please not that the root is dvi. The root is not advi. What happens is that if there are adjustments to the root, then different or similar meanings are derived. When the prefix a is put before a root then we have the opposite meaning in most cases. Such that
dvi = two
but
a+dvi or advi means not two but one which is the opposite of two
द्वि dvi num. a. (Nom. du. द्वौ m., द्वे f., द्वे n.) Two, both
द्वैतम् dvaitam [द्विधा इतं द्वितं तस्य भावः स्वार्थे अण्] 1 Duality. -2 Dualism in philosophy, the assertion of two distinct principles, such as the maintenance of the doctrine that, spirit and matter, Brahman and the Universe, or the Individual and the Supreme Soul, are different from each other;
अद्वैत advaita a. [न. ब.] 1 Not dual; of one or uniform nature, equable, unchanging; ˚तं सुखदुःखयोः U.1.39. -2 Matchless, peerless, sole, only, unique. -तम् [न. त.] 1 Non-duality, identity; especially that of Brahman with the universe or with the soul, or of soul and matter; See अद्वय also. -2 The supreme or highest truth or Brahman itself. -3 N. of an Upaniṣad; अद्वैतेन solely, without any duplicity.
In India from the beginning of time, there was contention because those who proposes that duality is essential and those who feel that it is not so, that instead unity is essential
There is also confusion because in some usage dvaita does not mean a condition of origins but rather only a contrast of environmental conditions, like for instance heat and cold. To sort it one has to check the context of the particular writer or speaker.
Meanings of Sanskrit words above were derived from * V. S. Apte's The Practical Sanskrit-English dictionary.
-
I very much appreciate the direct and simple apprehension (head-on) of this controversy, this philosophical discrepancy between these two main doctrines of Vedic India.
However, in the modern setting, especially outside of India, my position is that it has the most relevance for Brahmanically inclined practitioners, especially those who have a strong previous life presence in that context of practice in India.
I’d say that this friction is a relationship that is similar to the one that exists in other belief systems such as the Abrahamic religious systems, where the main descending branches have been at odds since their advent, and to a great extent are principally the two most dueling modern religious symptoms. It is human nature to be contrarian and to vy for specialness and superiority.
As for the dvaita and advaita concepts, I don’t see them as mutually exclusive. At this point in time, my approach is that it is a schism that has a minor relevancy to yoga practice since it doesn’t translate into deeper purification. And, for that reason, better assessment of these systems can only truly happen for individual practitioners upon reaching corresponding or higher realms of existence and advancement.
