Visnutattvavinirnaya of Anandatirtha: A Critical Evaluation

Email

Whatsapp

Facebook

Pinterest

Twitter

Copy link

Anandatirtha known as Madhvacarya is the exponent of Dvaita philosophy. He has written many small treatises explaining the principles of dualism. These works are known as Dasaprakaranas. Among them Visnutattvavinirnaya is an important work dealing with the Supreme God Narayana – His divine qualities, divine body, His all-pervading nature and also His Sarvottamatva. According to Madhvacarya, Sri Visnu is Supreme God, Master of all. Individual souls are entirely different from the Supreme, and they are servants. So they can never become one. The book Visnutattvavinirnaya thus occupies a high position among the literature dealing with dualism.

Dr. P. Sasikala, Selection Grade Lecturer in Vedanta in D.B. College, Sasthamcotta, studied the work critically and on the basis of her experience gained by such study, prepared a thesis for her Ph.D. degree. I have no hesitation to say that Dr. Sasikala has done a commendable job by her criticism and her observation on the principles of dualism. Sri Sankara, Sri Madhvacarya and Sri Ramanuja are the exponents of various systems of philosophy on the basis of scriptures.

Now her thesis goes to the press for publication. I am sure the thesis will be a guide to the future researchers who are interested in studying and understanding Anandatirtha’s principles of dualism. I hope the researchers and other scholars in the field of Indian philosophy will welcome the work. I wish Dr. Sasikala all success.

Preface

The contribution of South India to the treasure of Indian philosophy, especially Vedanta philosophy, is remarkable. The three main systems of Vedanta have their origin in the southern states. Advaita which chronologically comes first was systematized by the great teacher Sri Sankaracarya who was a native of Kerala. Sri. Ramanujacarya of Tamilanadu made Visistadvaita into a philosophical system. Anandatirtha or Madhvacarya, the propounder of the Dvaita system of thought was a native of Karnataka. Among these systems Sankara’s philosophy acquired world-wide popularity. Whereas the other two were confined to certain areas of the country. The Dvaita system of thought could not attain a notable place in the scholarly minds of Kerala as the Advaita system did. It may be due to the great popularity of the Advaita philosophy. While a large number of studies have been done in Advaita, the studies in Dvaita are comparatively less in number. This work is the result of a humble attempt to understand the doctrines of Dvaita philosophy in the light of one of the works of Anandatirtha, the great propounder and teacher of the system. The Dvaita philosophy is exclusively the contribution of Karnataka.

Being a student of Advaita I was much interested, when I went through Madhva’s work Visnutattvavinirnaya which is a critique of Sankara’s philosophy. This work of Madhva contains a brilliant criticism of Sankara’s interpretation of the Upanisadic passages. I hope this study on Madhva’s work will be useful to the students of Vedanta.

This work has entitled me to the award of Ph.D. Degree from Sri Sankaracarya University of Sanskrit, Kalady. My teacher and guide, (Late) Dr. Poovattoor Ramakrishna Pillai, former Principal, D.B. College, Sasthamcotta and former Campus Director of the Regional Centre, Sri Sankaracarya University of Sanskrit, Thiruvananthapuram, has always encouraged me to publish the thesis. He was the guiding spirit behind my success. I express my everlasting indebtedness to him. I owe my sincere thanks to Professor R. Vasudevan Potti, Former Dean of the Faculty of Indian Metaphysics, Sri Sankaracarya University of Sanskrit, Kalady, who spared his valuable time to write a foreword to this book and the help rendered to me always.

I express my deep sense of gratitude to Smt. C. Chandramathy, Professor. Dept of English (Rtd.), Devaswom Board College, Sasthamcotta, for patiently going through this work and giving valuable suggestions.

I am grateful to Sri Sankaracarya University of Sanskrit, Kalady, for providing me the facilities for this research work and giving me sanction to publish the thesis. I am also thankful to Dr. P. Chithambaran, Professor and Head of the Department of Vedanta, Sri Sankaracarya University of Sanskrit, for his help and valuable suggestions.

My thanks are due to all those who inspired me with advice and assistance in the course of this work.

I owe special thanks to Sukrtindra Oriental Research Institute, Kochi, for including this work in their Indological Series.