Vedanta

Vedanta (/vɪˈdɑːntə/; Sanskrit: वेदा त, IAST:

Vedānta; also Uttara Mīmāṃsā) is one of
the six (āstika) schools of Hindu
philosophy. Literally meaning "end of the
Vedas", Vedanta reflects ideas that
emerged from, or were aligned with, the
speculations and philosophies contained
in the Upanishads, specifically, knowledge
and liberation. Vedanta contains many
sub-traditions on basis of a common
textual connection called the
Prasthanatrayi: the Upanishads, the Brahma
Sutras and the Bhagavad Gita.

All Vedanta schools, in their deliberations,

concern themselves with, but differ in their
views regarding, ontology, soteriology and
epistemology.[1][2] The main traditions of
Vedanta are:[3]

1. Bhedabheda (difference and non-

difference), as early as the 7th
century CE,[4] or even the 4th century
CE.[5] Some scholars are inclined to
consider it as a "tradition" rather than
a school of Vedanta.[4]
 Dvaitādvaita or
Svabhavikabhedabheda (dualistic
non-dualism), founded by
Nimbarka[6] in the 7th century
CE[7][8]
Achintya Bheda Abheda
(inconceivable one-ness and
difference), founded by
Chaitanya Mahaprabhu (1486–
1534 CE),[9] propagated by
Gaudiya Vaishnava
2. Advaita (monistic), most prominent
Gaudapada (~500 CE)[10] and Adi
Shankaracharya (8th century CE)[11]
 3. Vishishtadvaita (qualified monism),
prominent scholars are Nathamuni,
Yāmuna and Ramanuja (1017–1137
CE)
4. Dvaita (dualism), founded by
Madhvacharya (1199–1278 CE)
5. Suddhadvaita (purely non-dual),
founded by Vallabha[6] (1479–1531
CE)

Modern developments in Vedanta include

Neo-Vedanta,[12][13][14] and the growth of
the Swaminarayan Sampradaya.[15] All of
these schools, except Advaita Vedanta
and Neo-Vedanta, are related to
Vaishavism and emphasize devotion,
regarding Vishnu or Krishna or a related
manifestation, to be the highest
Reality.[16][17] While Advaita Vedanta
attracted considerable attention in the
West due to the influence of Hindu
modernists like Swami Vivekananda, most
of the other Vedanta traditions are seen as
discourses articulating a form of Vaishnav
theology.[18]

Etymology and nomenclature

The word Vedanta is made of two words :

Veda (वेद) - refers to the four sacred

vedic texts.
 Anta (अंत) - this word means "End".

The word Vedanta literally means the end

of the Vedas and originally referred to the
Upanishads.[19][20] Vedanta is concerned
with the jñānakāṇḍa or knowledge section
of the vedas which is called the
Upanishads.[21][22] The denotation of
Vedanta subsequently widened to include
the various philosophical traditions based
on to the Prasthanatrayi.[19][23]

The Upanishads may be regarded as the

end of Vedas in different senses:[24]

1. These were the last literary products

of the Vedic period.
 2. These mark the culmination of Vedic
thought.
3. These were taught and debated last,
in the Brahmacharya (student)
stage.[19][25]

Vedanta is one of the six orthodox (āstika)

schools of Indian philosophy.[20] It is also
called Uttara Mīmāṃsā, which means the
'latter enquiry' or 'higher enquiry'; and is
often contrasted with Pūrva Mīmāṃsā, the
'former enquiry' or 'primary enquiry'. Pūrva
Mīmāṃsā deals with the karmakāṇḍa or
ritualistic section (the Samhita and
Brahmanas) in the Vedas.[26][27][a]
Vedanta philosophy

Common features …

Despite their differences, all schools of

Vedanta share some common features:

Vedanta is the pursuit of knowledge into

the Brahman and the Ātman.[29]
The Upanishads, the Bhagavad Gita and
the Brahma Sutras constitute the basis
of Vedanta, providing reliable sources of
knowledge (Sruti Śabda in Pramana);[30]
Brahman, c.q. Ishvara (God), exists as
the unchanging material cause and
instrumental cause of the world. The
only exception here is that Dvaita
Vedanta does not hold Brahman to be
the material cause, but only the efficient
cause.[31]
The self (Ātman/Jiva) is the agent of its
own acts (karma) and the recipient of
the consequences of these actions.[32]
Belief in rebirth and the desirability of
release from the cycle of rebirths,
(mokṣa).[32]
Rejection of Buddhism and Jainism and
conclusions of the other Vedic schools
(Nyaya, Vaisheshika, Samkhya, Yoga,
and, to some extent, the Purva
Mimamsa.)[32]
Prasthanatrayi (the Three Sources) …

The Upanishads, the Bhagavad Gita and the

Brahma Sutras constitute the basis of
Vedanta. All schools of Vedanta propound
their philosophy by interpreting these
texts, collectively called the Prasthanatrayi,
literally, three sources.[21][33]

1. The Upanishads,[b] or Śruti prasthāna;

considered the Sruti, the "heard" (and
repeated) foundation of Vedanta.
2. The Brahma Sutras, or Nyaya
prasthana / Yukti prasthana;
considered the reason-based
foundation of Vedanta.
 3. The Bhagavad Gita, or Smriti
prasthāna; considered the Smriti
(remembered tradition) foundation of
Vedanta.

The Brahma Sutras attempted to

synthesize the teachings of the
Upanishads. The diversity in the teaching
of the Upanishads necessitated the
systematization of these teachings. This
was likely done in many ways in ancient
India, but the only surviving version of this
synthesis is the Brahma Sutras of
Badarayana.[21]

All major Vedantic teachers, including

Shankara, Bhaskara, Ramanuja, Nimbarka,
Vallabha, and Madhva have composed
commentaries not only on the Upanishads
and Brahma Sutras, but also on the
Bhagavad Gita. The Bhagavad Gita, due to
its syncretism of Samkhya, Yoga, and
Upanishadic thought, has played a major
role in Vedantic thought.[35]

Metaphysics …

Vedanta philosophies discuss three

fundamental metaphysical categories and
the relations between the three.[21][36]

1. Brahman or Ishvara: the ultimate

reality[37]
 2. Ātman or Jivātman: the individual
soul, self[38]
3. Prakriti/Jagat:[6] the empirical world,
ever-changing physical universe, body
and matter[39]
Brahman / Ishvara – Conceptions of the
Supreme Reality …

Shankara, in formulating Advaita, talks of

two conceptions of Brahman: The higher
Brahman as undifferentiated Being, and a
lower Brahman endowed with qualities as
the creator of the universe.[40]

Parā or Higher Brahman: The

undifferentiated, absolute, infinite,
 transcendental, supra-relational
Brahman beyond all thought and speech
is defined as parā Brahman, nirviśeṣa
Brahman or nirguṇa Brahman and is the
Absolute of metaphysics.
Aparā or Lower Brahman: The Brahman
with qualities defined as aparā Brahman
or saguṇa Brahman. The saguṇa
Brahman is endowed with attributes and
represents the personal God of religion.

Ramanuja, in formulating Vishishtadvaita

Vedanta, rejects nirguṇa – that the
undifferentiated Absolute is inconceivable
– and adopts a theistic interpretation of
the Upanishads, accepts Brahman as
Ishvara, the personal God who is the seat
of all auspicious attributes, as the One
reality. The God of Vishishtadvaita is
accessible to the devotee, yet remains the
Absolute, with differentiated attributes.[41]

Madhva, in expounding Dvaita philosophy,

maintains that Vishnu is the supreme God,
thus identifying the Brahman, or absolute
reality, of the Upanishads with a personal
god, as Ramanuja had done before
him.[42][43] Nimbarka, in his dvaitadvata
philosophy, accepted the Brahman both as
nirguṇa and as saguṇa. Vallabha, in his
shuddhadvaita philosophy, not only
accepts the triple ontological essence of
the Brahman, but also His manifestation as
personal God (Ishvara), as matter and as
individual souls.[44]

Relation between Brahman and Jiva /

Atman …

The schools of Vedanta differ in their

conception of the relation they see
between Ātman / Jivātman and Brahman /
Ishvara:[45]

According to Advaita Vedanta, Ātman is

identical with Brahman and there is no
difference.[46]
According to Vishishtadvaita, Jīvātman
is different from Ishvara, though
eternally connected with Him as His
mode.[47] The oneness of the Supreme
Reality is understood in the sense of an
organic unity (vishistaikya). Brahman /
Ishvara alone, as organically related to
all Jīvātman and the material universe is
the one Ultimate Reality.[48]
According to Dvaita, the Jīvātman is
totally and always different from
Brahman / Ishvara.[49]
According to Shuddhadvaita (pure
monism), the Jīvātman and Brahman are
identical; both, along with the changing
empirically-observed universe being
Krishna.[50]
Epistemology in Dvaita and Vishishtadvaita Vedanta.
Advaita and some other Vedanta schools recognize
six epistemic means.

Epistemology …

Pramana …

Pramāṇa (Sanskrit: माण) literally means

"proof", "that which is the means of valid
knowledge".[51] It refers to epistemology in
Indian philosophies, and encompasses the
study of reliable and valid means by which
human beings gain accurate, true
knowledge.[52] The focus of Pramana is
the manner in which correct knowledge
can be acquired, how one knows or does
not know, and to what extent knowledge
pertinent about someone or something
can be acquired.[53] Ancient and medieval
Indian texts identify six[c] pramanas as
correct means of accurate knowledge and
truths:[54]

1. Pratyakṣa (perception)
2. Anumāṇa (inference)
3. Upamāṇa (comparison and analogy)
 4. Arthāpatti (postulation, derivation
from circumstances)
5. Anupalabdi (non-perception,
negative/cognitive proof)
. Śabda (scriptural testimony/ verbal
testimony of past or present reliable
experts).

The different schools of Vedanta have

historically disagreed as to which of the
six are epistemologically valid. For
example, while Advaita Vedanta accepts
all six pramanas,[55] Vishishtadvaita and
Dvaita accept only three pramanas
(perception, inference and testimony).[56]
Advaita considers Pratyakṣa (perception)
as the most reliable source of knowledge,
and Śabda, the scriptural evidence, is
considered secondary except for matters
related to Brahman, where it is the only
evidence.[57][d] In Vishistadvaita and
Dvaita, Śabda, the scriptural testimony, is
considered the most authentic means of
knowledge instead.[58]

Theories of cause and effect …

All schools of Vedanta subscribe to the

theory of Satkāryavāda,[4] which means
that the effect is pre-existent in the cause.
But there are two different views on the
status of the "effect", that is, the world.
Most schools of Vedanta, as well as
Samkhya, support Parinamavada, the idea
that the world is a real transformation
(parinama) of Brahman.[59] According to
Nicholson (2010, p. 27), "the Brahma
Sutras espouse the realist Parinamavada
position, which appears to have been the
view most common among early
Vedantins". In contrast to Badarayana, Adi
Shankara and Advaita Vedantists hold a
different view, Vivartavada, which says that
the effect, the world, is merely an unreal
(vivarta) transformation of its cause,
Brahman.[e]
Overview of the main schools
of Vedanta

Shankaracharya

The Upanishads present an associative

philosophical inquiry in the form of
identifying various doctrines and then
presenting arguments for or against them.
They form the basic texts and Vedanta
interprets them through rigorous
philosophical exegesis to defend the point
of view of their specific sampradaya.[60][61]
Varying interpretations of the Upanishads
and their synthesis, the Brahma Sutras, led
to the development of different schools of
Vedanta over time.

According to Gavin Flood, while Advaita

Vedanta is the "most famous" school of
Vedanta, and "often, mistakenly, taken to
be the only represntative of Vedantic
thought,"[1] and Shankara a Saivite,[62]
"Vedanta is essentially a Vaisnava
theological articulation,"[63] a discourse
broadly within the parameters of
Vaisnavism."[62] Within the Vaishnava
traditions four sampradays have special
status,[2] while different scholars have
classified the Vedanta schools ranging
from three to six[19][45][6][64][3][f] as
prominent ones.[g]

1. Bhedabheda, as early as the 7th

century CE,[4] or even the 4th century
CE.[5] Some scholars are inclined to
consider it as a "tradition" rather than
a school of Vedanta.[4]
Dvaitādvaita or
Svabhavikabhedabheda
(Vaishnava), founded by
 Nimbarka[6] in the 7th century
CE[7][8]
Achintya Bheda Abheda
(Vaishnava), founded by
Chaitanya Mahaprabhu (1486–
1534 CE),[9] propagated by
Gaudiya Vaishnava
2. Advaita (monistic), many scholars of
which most prominent are
Gaudapada (~500 CE)[10] and Adi
Shankaracharya (8th century CE)[11]
3. Vishishtadvaita (Vaishnava),
prominent scholars are Nathamuni,
Yāmuna and Ramanuja (1017–1137
CE)
 4. Dvaita (Vaishnava), founded by
Madhvacharya (1199–1278 CE)
5. Suddhadvaita (Vaishnava), founded
by Vallabha[6] (1479–1531 CE)
. Akshar-Purushottam Darshan, based
on the teachings of Swaminarayan
(1781-1830 CE) and propagated most
nottably by BAPS[66][67][68][69]

Bhedabheda (difference and non-

difference)
…

Bhedābheda means "difference and non-

difference" and is more a tradition than a
school of Vedanta. The schools of this
tradition emphasize that the individual self
(Jīvatman) is both different and not
different from Brahman.[4] Notable figures
in this school are Bhartriprapancha,
Nimbārka (7th century)[7][8] who founded
the Dvaitadvaita school, Bhāskara (8th–
9th century), Ramanuja's teacher
Yādavaprakāśa, Caitanya (1486–1534)
who founded the Achintya Bheda Abheda
school, and Vijñānabhikṣu (16th
century).[70][h]

Dvaitādvaita …
Nimbarkacharya's icon at Ukhra, West Bengal

Nimbārka (7th century)[7][8] sometimes

identified with Bhāskara,[71] propounded
Dvaitādvaita.[72] Brahman (God), souls
(chit) and matter or the universe (achit) are
considered as three equally real and co-
eternal realities. Brahman is the controller
(niyanta), the soul is the enjoyer (bhokta),
and the material universe is the object
enjoyed (bhogya). The Brahman is Krishna,
the ultimate cause who is omniscient,
omnipotent, all-pervading Being. He is the
efficient cause of the universe because, as
Lord of Karma and internal ruler of souls,
He brings about creation so that the souls
can reap the consequences of their karma.
God is considered to be the material cause
of the universe because creation was a
manifestation of His powers of soul (chit)
and matter (achit); creation is a
transformation (parinama) of God's
powers. He can be realized only through a
constant effort to merge oneself with His
nature through meditation and devotion.
[72]

Achintya-Bheda-Abheda …
Chaitanya Mahaprabhu

Chaitanya Mahaprabhu (1486 – 1533) was

the prime exponent of Achintya-Bheda-
Abheda.[73] In Sanskrit achintya means
'inconceivable'.[74] Achintya-Bheda-Abheda
represents the philosophy of
"inconceivable difference in non-
difference",[75] in relation to the non-dual
reality of Brahman-Atman which it calls
(Krishna), svayam bhagavan.[76] The notion
of "inconceivability" (acintyatva) is used to
reconcile apparently contradictory notions
in Upanishadic teachings. This school
asserts that Krishna is Bhagavan of the
bhakti yogins, the Brahman of the jnana
yogins, and has a divine potency that is
inconceivable. He is all-pervading and thus
in all parts of the universe (non-
difference), yet he is inconceivably more
(difference). This school is at the
foundation of the Gaudiya Vaishnava
religious tradition.[75]

Advaita Vedanta (non-dualism) …

Advaita Vedanta (IAST Advaita Vedānta;
Sanskrit: अ ै त वेदा त), propounded by
Gaudapada (7th century) and Adi
Shankara (8th century), espouses non-
dualism and monism. Brahman is held to
be the sole unchanging metaphysical
reality and identical to the individual
Atman.[43] The physical world, on the other
hand, is always-changing empirical
Maya.[77][i] The absolute and infinite Atman-
Brahman is realized by a process of
negating everything relative, finite,
empirical and changing.[78]

The school accepts no duality, no limited

individual souls (Atman / Jivatman), and
no separate unlimited cosmic soul. All
souls and their existence across space
and time are considered to be the same
oneness. [79] Spiritual liberation in Advaita
is the full comprehension and realization
of oneness, that one's unchanging Atman
(soul) is the same as the Atman in
everyone else, as well as being identical to
Brahman.[80]

Vishishtadvaita (qualified non-

dualism)
…
Ramanujacharya depicted with Vaishnava Tilaka and
Vishnu statue.

Vishishtadvaita, propounded by Ramanuja

(11–12th century), asserts that Jivatman
(human souls) and Brahman (as Vishnu)
are different, a difference that is never
transcended.[81][82] With this qualification,
Ramanuja also affirmed monism by saying
that there is unity of all souls and that the
individual soul has the potential to realize
identity with the Brahman.[83]
Vishishtadvaita, like Advaita, is a non-
dualistic school of Vedanta in a qualified
way, and both begin by assuming that all
souls can hope for and achieve the state
of blissful liberation.[84] On the relation
between the Brahman and the world of
matter (Prakriti), Vishishtadvaita states
both are two different absolutes, both
metaphysically true and real, neither is
false or illusive, and that saguna Brahman
with attributes is also real.[85] Ramanuja
states that God, like man, has both soul
and body, and the world of matter is the
glory of God's body.[86] The path to
Brahman (Vishnu), according to Ramanuja,
is devotion to godliness and constant
remembrance of the beauty and love of
the personal god (bhakti of saguna
Brahman).[87]

Dvaita (dualism) …

Madhvacharya

Dvaita, propounded by Madhvacharya

(13th century), is based on the premise of
dualism. Atman (soul) and Brahman (as
Vishnu) are understood as two completely
different entities.[88] Brahman is the creator
of the universe, perfect in knowledge,
perfect in knowing, perfect in its power,
and distinct from souls, distinct from
matter.[89] [j] In Dvaita Vedanta, an
individual soul must feel attraction, love,
attachment and complete devotional
surrender to Vishnu for salvation, and it is
only His grace that leads to redemption
and salvation.[92] Madhva believed that
some souls are eternally doomed and
damned, a view not found in Advaita and
Vishishtadvaita Vedanta.[93] While the
Vishishtadvaita Vedanta asserted
"qualitative monism and quantitative
pluralism of souls", Madhva asserted both
"qualitative and quantitative pluralism of
souls".[94]

Shuddhādvaita (pure nondualism) …

Vallabhacharya

Shuddhadvaita (pure non-dualism),

propounded by Vallabhacharya (1479–
1531 CE), states that the entire universe is
real and is subtly Brahman only in the form
of Krishna.[50] Vallabhacharya agreed with
Advaita Vedanta's ontology, but
emphasized that prakriti (empirical world,
body) is not separate from the Brahman,
but just another manifestation of the
latter.[50] Everything, everyone, everywhere
– soul and body, living and non-living, jiva
and matter – is the eternal Krishna.[95] The
way to Krishna, in this school, is bhakti.
Vallabha opposed renunciation of monistic
sannyasa as ineffective and advocates the
path of devotion (bhakti) rather than
knowledge (jnana). The goal of bhakti is to
turn away from ego, self-centered-ness
and deception, and to turn towards the
eternal Krishna in everything continually
offering freedom from samsara.[50]

History
The history of Vedanta can be divided into
two periods: one prior to the composition
of the Brahma Sutras and the other
encompassing the schools that developed
after the Brahma Sutras were written.

Before the Brahma Sutras (before

the 5th century)
…

Little is known[96] of schools of Vedanta

existing before the composition of the
Brahma Sutras (400–450 CE).[97][5][k] It is
clear that Badarayana, the writer of
Brahma Sutras, was not the first person to
systematize the teachings of the
Upanishads, as he quotes six Vedantic
teachers before him – Ashmarathya,
Badari, Audulomi, Kashakrtsna, Karsnajini
and Atreya.[99][100] References to other
early Vedanta teachers – Brahmadatta,
Sundara, Pandaya, Tanka and
Dravidacharya – are found in secondary
literature of later periods.[101] The works of
these ancient teachers have not survived,
but based on the quotes attributed to them
in later literature, Sharma postulates that
Ashmarathya and Audulomi were
Bhedabheda scholars, Kashakrtsna and
Brahmadatta were Advaita scholars, while
Tanka and Dravidacharya were either
Advaita or Vishistadvaita scholars.[100]

Brahma Sutras (completed in the

5th century)
…

Badarayana summarized and interpreted

teachings of the Upanishads in the Brahma
Sutras, also called the Vedanta Sutra,[102][l]
possibly "written from a Bhedābheda
Vedāntic viewpoint."[4] Badarayana
summarized the teachings of the classical
Upanishads[103][104][m] and refuted the rival
philosophical schools in ancient
India.Nicholson 2010, p. 26 The Brahma
Sutras laid the basis for the development
of Vedanta philosophy.[105]

Though attributed to Badarayana, the

Brahma Sutras were likely composed by
multiple authors over the course of
hundreds of years.[5] The estimates on
when the Brahma Sutras were complete
vary,[106][107] with Nakamura in 1989 and
Nicholson in his 2013 review stating, that
they were most likely compiled in the
present form around 400–450 CE.[97][n]
Isaeva suggests they were complete and
in current form by 200 CE,[108] while
Nakamura states that "the great part of the
Sutra must have been in existence much
earlier than that."[107]

The book is composed of four chapters,

each divided into four-quarters or
sections.[21] These sutras attempt to
synthesize the diverse teachings of the
Upanishads. However, the cryptic nature of
aphorisms of the Brahma Sutras have
required exegetical commentaries.[109]
These commentaries have resulted in the
formation of numerous Vedanta schools,
each interpreting the texts in its own way
and producing its own commentary.[110]

Between the Brahma Sutras and Adi …

Shankara (5th–8th centuries)

Little with specificity is known of the

period between the Brahma Sutras (5th
century CE) and Adi Shankara (8th century
CE).[96][11] Only two writings of this period
have survived: the Vākyapadīya, written by
Bhartṛhari (second half 5th century,[111])
and the Kārikā written by Gaudapada (early
6th[11] or 7th century[96] CE).

Shankara mentions 99 different

predecessors of his school in his
commentaries.[112] A number of important
early Vedanta thinkers have been listed in
the Siddhitraya by Yamunācārya (c. 1050),
the Vedārthasamgraha by Rāmānuja (c.
1050–1157), and the Yatīndramatadīpikā
by Śrīnivāsa Dāsa.[96] At least fourteen
thinkers are known to have existed
between the composition of the Brahma
Sutras and Shankara's lifetime.[o]

A noted scholar of this period was

Bhartriprapancha. Bhartriprapancha
maintained that the Brahman is one and
there is unity, but that this unity has
varieties. Scholars see Bhartriprapancha
as an early philosopher in the line who
teach the tenet of Bhedabheda.[21]

Gaudapada, Adi Shankara (Advaita

Vedanta) (6th–9th centuries)
…
Influenced by Buddhism, Advaita vedanta
departs from the bhedabheda-philosophy,
instead postulating the identity of Atman
with the Whole (Brahman),

Gaudapada …

Gaudapada (c. 6th century CE),[113] was

the teacher or a more distant predecessor
of Govindapada,[114] the teacher of Adi
Shankara. Shankara is widely considered
as the apostle of Advaita Vedanta.[45]
Gaudapada's treatise, the Kārikā – also
known as the Māṇḍukya Kārikā or the
Āgama Śāstra[115] – is the earliest
surviving complete text on Advaita
Vedanta.[p]

Gaudapada's Kārikā relied on the

Mandukya, Brihadaranyaka and
Chhandogya Upanishads.[119] In the Kārikā,
Advaita (non-dualism) is established on
rational grounds (upapatti) independent of
scriptural revelation; its arguments are
devoid of all religious, mystical or
scholastic elements. Scholars are divided
on a possible influence of Buddhism on
Gaudapada's philosophy.[q] The fact that
Shankara, in addition to the Brahma Sutras,
the principal Upanishads and the Bhagvad
Gita, wrote an independent commentary
on the Kārikā proves its importance in
Vedāntic literature.[120]

Adi Shankara …

Adi Shankara (788–820), elaborated on

Gaudapada's work and more ancient
scholarship to write detailed
commentaries on the Prasthanatrayi and
the Kārikā. The Mandukya Upanishad and
the Kārikā have been described by
Shankara as containing "the epitome of
the substance of the import of
Vedanta".[120] It was Shankara who
integrated Gaudapada work with the
ancient Brahma Sutras, "and give it a locus
classicus" alongside the realistic strain of
the Brahma Sutras.[121][r] His interpretation,
including works ascribed to him, has
become the normative interpretation of
Advaita Vedanta.[122][s]

A noted contemporary of Shankara was

Maṇḍana Miśra, who regarded Mimamsa
and Vedanta as forming a single system
and advocated their combination known
as Karma-jnana-samuchchaya-vada.[125][t]
The treatise on the differences between
the Vedanta school and the Mimamsa
school was a contribution of Adi Shankara.
Advaita Vedanta rejects rituals in favor of
renunciation, for example.[126]
Early Vaishnavism Vedanta (7th–
9th centuries)
…

Early Vaishnava Vedanta retains the

tradition of bhedabheda, equating
Brahman with Vishnu or Krishna.

Nimbārka and Dvaitādvaita …

Nimbārka (7th century)[7][8] sometimes

identified with Bhāskara,[71] propounded
Dvaitādvaita Bhedābheda.[72]

Bhāskara and Upadhika …

Bhāskara (8th–9th century) also taught

Bhedabheda. In postulating Upadhika, he
considers both identity and difference to
be equally real. As the causal principle,
Brahman is considered non-dual and
formless pure being and intelligence.[127]
The same Brahman, manifest as events,
becomes the world of plurality. Jīva is
Brahman limited by the mind. Matter and
its limitations are considered real, not a
manifestation of ignorance. Bhaskara
advocated bhakti as dhyana (meditation)
directed toward the transcendental
Brahman. He refuted the idea of Maya and
denied the possibility of liberation in bodily
existence.[128]
Vaishnavism Bhakti Vedanta (12th– …

16th centuries)

The Bhakti movement of late medieval

Hinduism started in the 7th-century, but
rapidly expanded after the 12th-
century.[129] It was supported by the
Puranic literature such as the Bhagavata
Purana, poetic works, as well as many
scholarly bhasyas and
samhitas.[130][131][132]

This period saw the growth of Vashnavism

Sampradayas (denominations or
communities) under the influence of
scholars such as Ramanujacharya,
Vedanta Desika, Madhvacharya and
Vallabhacharya.[133] Bhakti poets or
teachers such as Manavala Mamunigal,
Namdev, Ramananda, Surdas, Tulsidas,
Eknath, Tyagaraja, Chaitanya Mahaprabhu
and many others influenced the expansion
of Vaishnavism.[134] These Vaishnavism
sampradaya founders challenged the then
dominant Shankara's doctrines of Advaita
Vedanta, particularly Ramanuja in the 12th
century, Vedanta Desika and Madhva in
the 13th, building their theology on the
devotional tradition of the Alvars (Shri
Vaishnavas),[135] and Vallabhacharya in the
16th century.
In North and Eastern India, Vaishnavism
gave rise to various late Medieval
movements: Ramananda in the 14th
century, Sankaradeva in the 15th and
Vallabha and Chaitanya in the 16th
century.

Ramanuja (Vishishtadvaita Vedanta)

(11th–12th centuries) …

Rāmānuja (1017–1137 CE) was the most

influential philosopher in the
Vishishtadvaita tradition. As the
philosophical architect of Vishishtadvaita,
he taught qualified non-dualism.[136]
Ramanuja's teacher, Yadava Prakasha,
followed the Advaita monastic tradition.
Tradition has it that Ramanuja disagreed
with Yadava and Advaita Vedanta, and
instead followed Nathamuni and Yāmuna.
Ramanuja reconciled the Prasthanatrayi
with the theism and philosophy of the
Vaishnava Alvars poet-saints.[137]
Ramanuja wrote a number of influential
texts, such as a bhasya on the Brahma
Sutras and the Bhagavad Gita, all in
Sanskrit.[138]

Ramanuja presented the epistemological

and soteriological importance of bhakti, or
the devotion to a personal God (Vishnu in
Ramanuja's case) as a means to spiritual
liberation. His theories assert that there
exists a plurality and distinction between
Atman (souls) and Brahman
(metaphysical, ultimate reality), while he
also affirmed that there is unity of all souls
and that the individual soul has the
potential to realize identity with the
Brahman.[83] Vishishtadvaiata provides the
philosophical basis of Sri Vaishnavism.[139]

Ramanuja was influential in integrating

Bhakti, the devotional worship, into
Vedanta premises.[140]

Madhva (Dvaita Vedanta)(13th–14th

centuries) …
Dvaita Vedanta was propounded by
Madhvacharya (1238–1317 CE).[u] He
presented the opposite interpretation of
Shankara in his Dvaita, or dualistic
system.[143] In contrast to Shankara's non-
dualism and Ramanuja's qualified non-
dualism, he championed unqualified
dualism. Madhva wrote commentaries on
the chief Upanishads, the Bhagavad Gita
and the Brahma Sutra.[144]

Madhva started his Vedic studies at age

seven, joined an Advaita Vedanta
monastery in Dwarka (Gujarat),[145] studied
under guru Achyutrapreksha,[146]
frequently disagreed with him, left the
Advaita monastery, and founded
Dvaita.[147] Madhva and his followers
Jayatirtha and Vyasatirtha, were critical of
all competing Hindu philosophies, Jainism
and Buddhism,[148] but particularly intense
in their criticism of Advaita Vedanta and
Adi Shankara.[149]

Dvaita Vedanta is theistic and it identifies

Brahman with Narayana, or more
specifically Vishnu, in a manner similar to
Ramanuja's Vishishtadvaita Vedanta. But it
is more explicitly pluralistic.[150] Madhva's
emphasis for difference between soul and
Brahman was so pronounced that he
taught there were differences (1) between
material things; (2) between material
things and souls; (3) between material
things and God; (4) between souls; and (5)
between souls and God.[151] He also
advocated for a difference in degrees in
the possession of knowledge. He also
advocated for differences in the enjoyment
of bliss even in the case of liberated souls,
a doctrine found in no other system of
Indian philosophy.[150]

Chaitanya Mahaprabhu (Achintya Bheda

Abheda) (16th century) …

Achintya Bheda Abheda (Vaishnava),

founded by Chaitanya Mahaprabhu (1486–
1534 CE),[9] was propagated by Gaudiya
Vaishnava. Historically, it was Chaitanya
Mahaprabhu who founded congregational
chanting of holy names of Krishna in the
early 16th century after becoming a
sannyasi.[152]

Modern times (19th century –

present)
…

Swaminarayan and Akshar-

Purushottam Darshan (19th century) …

The Akshar-Purushottam Darshan, which

is philosophically related to Ramanuja's
Vishishtadvaita,[153][69][154][v] was founded
in 1801 by Swaminarayan (1781-1830 CE),
and is contemporarily most notably
propagated by BAPS.[155] Due to the
commentarial work of Bhadreshdas
Swami, the Akshar-Purushottam teachings
were recognized as a distinct school of
Vedanta by the Shri Kashi Vidvat Parishad
in 2017[66][67] and by members of the 17th
World Sanskrit Conference in
2018.[66][w][68] Swami Paramtattvadas
describes the Akshar-Purushottam
teachings as "a distinct school of thought
within the larger expanse of classical
Vedanta,"[156] presenting the Akshar-
Purushottam teachings as a seventh
school of Vedanta.[157]

Neo-Vedanta (19th century) …

Neo-Vedanta, variously called as "Hindu
modernism", "neo-Hinduism", and "neo-
Advaita", is a term that denotes some
novel interpretations of Hinduism that
developed in the 19th century,[158]
presumably as a reaction to the colonial
British rule.[159] King (2002, pp. 129–135)
writes that these notions accorded the
Hindu nationalists an opportunity to
attempt the construction of a nationalist
ideology to help unite the Hindus to fight
colonial oppression. Western orientalists,
in their search for its "essence", attempted
to formulate a notion of "Hinduism" based
on a single interpretation of Vedanta as a
unified body of religious praxis.[160] This
was contra-factual as, historically,
Hinduism and Vedanta had always
accepted a diversity of traditions. King
(1999, pp. 133–136) asserts that the neo-
Vedantic theory of "overarching tolerance
and acceptance" was used by the Hindu
reformers, together with the ideas of
Universalism and Perennialism, to
challenge the polemic dogmatism of
Judaeo-Christian-Islamic missionaries
against the Hindus.

The neo-Vedantins argued that the six

orthodox schools of Hindu philosophy
were perspectives on a single truth, all
valid and complementary to each
other.[161] Halbfass (2007, p. 307) sees
these interpretations as incorporating
western ideas[162] into traditional systems,
especially Advaita Vedanta.[163] It is the
modern form of Advaita Vedanta, states
King (1999, p. 135), the neo-Vedantists
subsumed the Buddhist philosophies as
part of the Vedanta tradition[x] and then
argued that all the world religions are
same "non-dualistic position as the
philosophia perennis", ignoring the
differences within and outside of
Hinduism.[165] According to Gier (2000,
p. 140), neo-Vedanta is Advaita Vedanta
which accepts universal realism:
 Ramakrishna, Vivekananda and
Aurobindo have been labeled
neo-Vedantists (the latter called
it realistic Advaita), a view of
Vedanta that rejects the
Advaitins' idea that the world is
illusory. As Aurobindo phrased
it, philosophers need to move
from 'universal illusionism' to
'universal realism', in the strict
philosophical sense of assuming
the world to be fully real.

A major proponent in the popularization of

this Universalist and Perennialist
interpretation of Advaita Vedanta was
Vivekananda,[166] who played a major role
in the revival of Hinduism.[167] He was also
instrumental in the spread of Advaita
Vedanta to the West via the Vedanta
Society, the international arm of the
Ramakrishna Order.[168]

Criticism of Neo-Vedanta label E…

Nicholson (2010, p. 2) writes that the

attempts at integration which came to be
known as neo-Vedanta were evident as
early as between the 12th and the 16th
century−
 ... certain thinkers began to
treat as a single whole the
diverse philosophical teachings
of the Upanishads, epics,
Puranas, and the schools known
retrospectively as the "six
systems" (saddarsana) of
mainstream Hindu
philosophy.[y]

Matilal criticizes Neo-Hinduism as an

oddity developed by West-inspired
Western Indologists and attributes it to the
flawed Western perception of Hinduism in
modern India. In his scathing criticism of
this school of reasoning, Matilal (2002,
pp. 403–404) says:

The so-called 'traditional'

outlook is in fact a construction.
Indian history shows that the
tradition itself was self-
conscious and critical of itself,
sometimes overtly and
sometimes covertly. It was never
free from internal tensions due
to the inequalities that persisted
in a hierarchical society, nor
was it without confrontation
and challenge throughout its
history. Hence Gandhi,
Vivekananda and Tagore were
not simply 'transplants from
Western culture, products
arising solely from
confrontation with the west. ...It
is rather odd that, although the
early Indologists' romantic
dream of discovering a pure
(and probably primitive,
according to some) form of
Hinduism (or Buddhism as the
case may be) now stands
discredited in many quarters;
 concepts like neo-Hinduism are
still bandied about as
substantial ideas or faultless
explanation tools by the
Western 'analytic' historians as
well as the West-inspired
historians of India.

Influence
According to Nakamura (2004, p. 3), the
Vedanta school has had a historic and
central influence on Hinduism:

The prevalence of Vedanta

thought is found not only in
philosophical writings but also
in various forms of (Hindu)
literature, such as the epics,
lyric poetry, drama and so forth.
... the Hindu religious sects, the
common faith of the Indian
populace, looked to Vedanta
philosophy for the theoretical
foundations for their theology.
The influence of Vedanta is
prominent in the sacred
literatures of Hinduism, such as
the various Puranas, Samhitas,
Agamas and Tantras ... [96]
Frithjof Schuon summarizes the influence
of Vedanta on Hinduism as follows:

The Vedanta contained in the

Upanishads, then formulated in
the Brahma Sutra, and finally
commented and explained by
Shankara, is an invaluable key
for discovering the deepest
meaning of all the religious
doctrines and for realizing that
the Sanatana Dharma secretly
penetrates all the forms of
traditional spirituality.[173]
Gavin Flood states,

... the most influential school of

theology in India has been
Vedanta, exerting enormous
influence on all religious
traditions and becoming the
central ideology of the Hindu
renaissance in the nineteenth
century. It has become the
philosophical paradigm of
Hinduism "par excellence".[20]

Hindu traditions …
Vedanta, adopting ideas from other
orthodox (āstika) schools, became the
most prominent school of
Hinduism.[21][174] Vedanta traditions led to
the development of many traditions in
Hinduism.[20][175] Sri Vaishnavism of south
and southeastern India is based on
Ramanuja's Vishishtadvaita Vedanta.[176]
Ramananda led to the Vaishnav Bhakti
Movement in north, east, central and west
India. This movement draws its
philosophical and theistic basis from
Vishishtadvaita. A large number of
devotional Vaishnavism traditions of east
India, north India (particularly the Braj
region), west and central India are based
on various sub-schools of Bhedabheda
Vedanta.[4] Advaita Vedanta influenced
Krishna Vaishnavism in the northeastern
state of Assam.[177] The Madhva school of
Vaishnavism found in coastal Karnataka is
based on Dvaita Vedanta.[149]

Āgamas, the classical literature of

Shaivism, though independent in origin,
show Vedanta association and
premises.[178] Of the 92 Āgamas, ten are
(dvaita) texts, eighteen (bhedabheda), and
sixty-four (advaita) texts.[179] While the
Bhairava Shastras are monistic, Shiva
Shastras are dualistic.[180] Isaeva (1995,
pp. 134–135) finds the link between
Gaudapada's Advaita Vedanta and Kashmir
Shaivism evident and natural. Tirumular,
the Tamil Shaiva Siddhanta scholar,
credited with creating "Vedanta–
Siddhanta" (Advaita Vedanta and Shaiva
Siddhanta synthesis), stated, "becoming
Shiva is the goal of Vedanta and Siddhanta;
all other goals are secondary to it and are
vain."[181]

Shaktism, or traditions where a goddess is

considered identical to Brahman, has
similarly flowered from a syncretism of the
monist premises of Advaita Vedanta and
dualism premises of Samkhya–Yoga
school of Hindu philosophy, sometimes
referred to as Shaktadavaitavada (literally,
the path of nondualistic Shakti).[182]

Influence on Western thinkers …

An exchange of ideas has been taking

place between the western world and Asia
since the late 18th century as a result of
colonization of parts of Asia by Western
powers. This also influenced western
religiosity. The first translation of
Upanishads, published in two parts in 1801
and 1802, significantly influenced Arthur
Schopenhauer, who called them the
consolation of his life.[183] He drew explicit
parallels between his philosophy, as set
out in The World as Will and
Representation,[184] and that of the
Vedanta philosophy as described in the
work of Sir William Jones.[185] Early
translations also appeared in other
European languages.[186] Influenced by
Śaṅkara's concepts of Brahman (God) and
māyā (illusion), Lucian Blaga often used
the concepts marele anonim (the Great
Anonymous) and cenzura transcendentă
(the transcendental censorship) in his
philosophy.[187]

Similarities with Spinoza's philosophy …

German Sanskritist Theodore Goldstücker
was among the early scholars to notice
similarities between the religious
conceptions of the Vedanta and those of
the Dutch Jewish philosopher Baruch
Spinoza, writing that Spinoza's thought
was

... so exact a representation of

the ideas of the Vedanta, that we
might have suspected its
founder to have borrowed the
fundamental principles of his
system from the Hindus, did his
biography not satisfy us that he
 was wholly unacquainted with
their doctrines [...] comparing
the fundamental ideas of both
we should have no difficulty in
proving that, had Spinoza been
a Hindu, his system would in all
probability mark a last phase of
the Vedanta philosophy.[188]

Max Müller noted the striking similarities

between Vedanta and the system of
Spinoza, saying,

The Brahman, as conceived in

the Upanishads and defined by
 Sankara, is clearly the same as
Spinoza's 'Substantia'."[189]

Helena Blavatsky, a founder of the

Theosophical Society, also compared
Spinoza's religious thought to Vedanta,
writing in an unfinished essay,

As to Spinoza's Deity – natura

naturans – conceived in his
attributes simply and alone; and
the same Deity – as natura
naturata or as conceived in the
endless series of modifications
or correlations, the direct
 outflowing results from the
properties of these attributes, it
is the Vedantic Deity pure and
simple.[190]

See also
Badarayana
Monistic idealism
List of teachers of Vedanta
Self-consciousness (Vedanta)
Śāstra pramāṇam in Hinduism

Notes
a. Historically, Vedanta has been called by
 various names. The early names were the
Upanishadic ones (Aupanisada), the
doctrine of the end of the Vedas (Vedanta-
vada), the doctrine of Brahman (Brahma-
vada), and the doctrine that Brahma is the
cause (Brahma-karana-vada).[28]
b. The Upanishads were many in number and
developed in the different schools at
different times and places, some in the
Vedic period and others in the medieval or
modern era (the names of up to 112
Upanishads have been recorded).[34] All
major commentators have considered
twelve to thirteen oldest of these texts as
the Principal Upanishads and as the
foundation of Vedanta.
c. A few Indian scholars such as Vedvyasa
discuss ten; Krtakoti discusses eight; six is
most widely accepted: see Nicholson
(2010, pp. 149–150)
d. Anantanand Rambachan (1991, pp. xii–xiii)
states, "According to these [widely
represented contemporary] studies,
Shankara only accorded a provisional
validity to the knowledge gained by inquiry
into the words of the Śruti (Vedas) and did
not see the latter as the unique source
(pramana) of Brahmajnana. The
affirmations of the Śruti, it is argued, need
to be verified and confirmed by the
knowledge gained through direct
experience (anubhava) and the authority of
the Śruti, therefore, is only secondary."
Sengaku Mayeda (2006, pp. 46–47)
concurs, adding Shankara maintained the
need for objectivity in the process of
gaining knowledge (vastutantra), and
considered subjective opinions
 (purushatantra) and injunctions in Śruti
(codanatantra) as secondary. Mayeda cites
Shankara's explicit statements emphasizing
epistemology (pramana–janya) in section
1.18.133 of Upadesasahasri and section
1.1.4 of Brahmasutra–bhasya.
e. Nicholson (2010, p. 27) writes of Advaita
Vedantin position of cause and effect -
Although Brahman seems to undergo a
transformation, in fact no real change takes
place. The myriad of beings are essentially
unreal, as the only real being is Brahman,
that ultimate reality which is unborn,
unchanging, and entirely without parts.
f. Sivananda also mentions Meykandar and
the Shaiva Siddhanta philosophy.[65]
g. Proponents of other Vedantic schools
continue to write and develop their ideas as
well, although their works are not widely
known outside of smaller circles of
followers in India.
h. According to Nakamura and Dasgupta, the
Brahmasutras reflect a Bhedabheda point
of view,[5] the most influential tradition of
Vedanta before Shankara. Numerous
Indologists, including Surendranath
Dasgupta, Paul hacker, Hajime Nakamura,
and Mysore Hiriyanna, have described
Bhedabheda as the most influential school
of Vedanta before Shankara.[5]
i. Doniger (1986, p. 119) says "that to say that
the universe is an illusion (māyā) is not to
say that it is unreal; it is to say, instead, that
it is not what it seems to be, that it is
something constantly being made. Maya
not only deceives people about the things
they think they know; more basically, it
limits their knowledge."
j. The concept of Brahman in Dvaita Vedanta
is so similar to the monotheistic eternal
God, that some early colonial–era
Indologists such as George Abraham
Grierson suggested Madhva was influenced
by early Christians who migrated to India,
[90] but later scholarship has rejected this
theory.[91]
k. Nicholson (2010, p. 26) considers the
Brahma Sutras as a group of sutras
composed by multiple authors over the
course of hundreds of years. The precise
date is disputed.[98] Nicholson (2010, p. 26)
estimates that the book was composed in
its current form between 400 and 450 CE.
The reference shows BCE, but it´s a typo in
Nicholson´s book
l. The Vedanta–sūtra are known by a variety
of names, including (1) Brahma–sūtra, (2)
Śārīraka–sutra, (3) Bādarāyaṇa–sūtra and
(4) Uttara–mīmāṁsā.
m. Estimates of the date of Bādarāyana's
lifetime differ. Pandey 2000, p. 4
n. Nicholson 2013, p. 26 Quote: "From a
historical perspective, the Brahmasutras
are best understood as a group of sutras
composed by multiple authors over the
course of hundreds of years, most likely
composed in its current form between 400
and 450 BCE." This dating has a typo in
Nicholson's book, it should be read
"between 400 and 450 CE"
o. Bhartŗhari (c. 450–500), Upavarsa (c. 450–
500), Bodhāyana (c. 500), Tanka
(Brahmānandin) (c. 500–550), Dravida (c.
550), Bhartŗprapañca (c. 550),
Śabarasvāmin (c. 550), Bhartŗmitra (c.
550–600), Śrivatsānka (c. 600),
Sundarapāndya (c. 600), Brahmadatta (c.
600–700), Gaudapada (c. 640–690),
Govinda (c. 670–720), Mandanamiśra (c.
670–750)[96]
p. There is ample evidence, however, to
suggest that Advaita was a thriving
tradition by the start of the common era or
even before that. Shankara mentions
99 different predecessors of his
Sampradaya.[112] Scholarship since 1950
suggests that almost all Sannyasa
Upanishads have a strong Advaita Vedanta
outlook.[116] Six Sannyasa Upanishads –
Aruni, Kundika, Kathashruti, Paramahamsa,
Jabala and Brahma – were composed
before the 3rd Century CE, likely in the
centuries before or after the start of the
common era; the Asrama Upanishad is
dated to the 3rd Century.[117] The strong
Advaita Vedanta views in these ancient
Sannyasa Upanishads may be, states
Patrick Olivelle, because major Hindu
monasteries of this period belonged to the
Advaita Vedanta tradition.[118]
q. Scholars like Raju (1992, p. 177), following
the lead of earlier scholars like
Sengupta,[120] believe that Gaudapada co-
opted the Buddhist doctrine that ultimate
reality is pure consciousness (vijñapti-
mātra). Raju (1992, pp. 177–178) states,
"Gaudapada wove [both doctrines] into a
philosophy of the Mandukaya Upanisad,
which was further developed by Shankara."
Nikhilananda (2008, pp. 203–206) states
that the whole purpose of Gaudapada was
to present and demonstrate the ultimate
reality of Atman, an idea denied by
Buddhism. According to Murti (1955,
pp. 114–115), Gaudapada's doctrines are
unlike Buddhism. Gaudapada's influential
text consists of four chapters:
Chapters One, Two, and Three are entirely
 Vedantin and founded on the Upanishads,
with little Buddhist flavor. Chapter Four
uses Buddhist terminology and
incorporates Buddhist doctrines but
Vedanta scholars who followed Gaudapada
through the 17th century, state that both
Murti and Richard King never referenced
nor used Chapter Four, they only quote from
the first three.[10] While there is shared
terminology, the doctrines of Gaudapada
and Buddhism are fundamentally different,
states Murti (1955, pp. 114–115)
r. Nicholson (2010, p. 27) writes: "The
Brahmasutras themselves espouse the
realist Parinamavada position, which
appears to have been the view most
common among early Vedantins."
s. Shankara synthesized the Advaita–vāda
which had previously existed before
him,[123] and, in this synthesis, became the
restorer & defender of an ancient
learning.[124] He was an unequaled
commentator,[124] due to whose efforts and
contributions,[123] Advaita Vedanta
assumed a dominant position within Indian
philosophy.[124]
t. According to Mishra, the sutras, beginning
with the first sutra of Jaimini and ending
with the last sutra of Badarayana, form one
compact shastra.[125]
u. Many sources date him to 1238–1317
period,[141] but some place him over 1199–
1278 CE.[142]
v. Vishishtadvaita roots:
* Supreme Court of India, 1966 AIR 1119,
1966 SCR (3) 242: "Philosophically,
Swaminarayan was a follower of
Ramanuja"[154]
* Hanna H. Kim: "The philosophical
foundation for Swaminarayan
devotionalism is the viśiṣṭādvaita, or
qualified non-dualism, of Rāmānuja (1017–
1137 ce)."[153]
w. "Professor Ashok Aklujkar said [...] Just as
the Kashi Vidvat Parishad acknowledged
Swaminarayan Bhagwan’s Akshar-
Purushottam Darshan as a distinct darshan
in the Vedanta tradition, we are honored to
do the same from the platform of the World
Sanskrit Conference [...] Professor George
Cardona [said] "This is a very important
classical Sanskrit commentary that very
clearly and effectively explains that Akshar
is distinct from Purushottam."[66]
x. Vivekananda, clarifies Richard King, stated,
"I am not a Buddhist, as you have heard,
and yet I am"; but thereafter Vivekananda
explained that "he cannot accept the
Buddhist rejection of a self, but
nevertheless honors the Buddha's
compassion and attitude towards
others".[164]
y. The tendency of "a blurring of philosophical
distinctions" has also been noted by
Burley.[169] Lorenzen locates the origins of a
distinct Hindu identity in the interaction
between Muslims and Hindus,[170] and a
process of "mutual self-definition with a
contrasting Muslim other",[171] which
started well before 1800.[172]
References
1. Flood 1996, p. 239.
2. Flood 1996, p. 133.
3. Dandekar 1987.
4. Nicholson.
5. Nicholson 2010, p. 26.
. Pahlajrai, Prem. "Vedanta: A Comparative
Analysis of Diverse Schools" (PDF). Asian
Languages and Literature. University of
Washington.
7. Malkovsky 2001, p. 118.
. Ramnarace 2014, p. 180.
9. Sivananda 1993, p. 248.
10. Jagannathan 2011.
11. Comans 2000, p. 163.
12. King 1999, p. 135.
13. Flood 1996, p. 258.
14. King 2002, p. 93.
15. Williams 2018.
1 . Sharma 2008, p. 2–10.
17. Cornille 2019.
1 . Flood 1996, pp. 238, 246.
19. Chatterjee & Dutta 2007, pp. 317–318.
20. Flood 1996, pp. 231–232, 238.
21. Hiriyanna 2008, pp. 19, 21–25, 150–152.
22. Koller 2013, pp. 100–106; Sharma 1994,
p. 211
23. Raju 1992, pp. 176–177; Isaeva 1992, p. 35
with footnote 30
24. Raju 1992, pp. 176–177.
25. Scharfe 2002, pp. 58–59, 115–120, 282–
283.
2 . Clooney 2000, pp. 147–158.
27. Jaimini 1999, p. 16, Sutra 30.
2 . King 1995, p. 268 with note 2.
29. Fowler 2002, pp. 34, 66; Flood 1996,
pp. 238–239
30. Fowler 2002, pp. 34, 66.
31. Das 1952; Doniger & Stefon 2015;
Lochtefeld 2000, p. 122; Sheridan 1991,
p. 136
32. Doniger & Stefon 2015.
33. Ranganathan; Grimes 1990, pp. 6–7
34. Dasgupta 2012, pp. 28.
35. Pasricha 2008, p. 95.
3 . Raju 1992, pp. 176–177, 505–506; Fowler
2002, pp. 49–59, 254, 269, 294–295, 345
37. Das 1952; Puligandla 1997, p. 222
3 . Jones & Ryan 2006, p. 51; Johnson 2009,
p. 'see entry for Atman(self)'
39. Lipner 1986, pp. 40–41, 51–56, 144;
Hiriyanna 2008, pp. 23, 78, 158–162
40. Chari 1988, pp. 2, 383.
41. Fowler 2002, p. 317; Chari 1988, pp. 2, 383
42. "Dvaita" . Britannica. Retrieved 2016-08-31.
43. Stoker 2011.
44. Vitsaxis 2009, pp. 100–101.
45. Raju 1992, p. 177.
4 . Raju 1992, p. 177; Stoker 2011
47. Ādidevānanda 2014, pp. 9-10.
4 . Betty 2010, pp. 215–224; Stoker 2011;
Chari 1988, pp. 2, 383
49. Craig 2000, pp. 517–18; Stoker 2011;
Bryant 2007, pp. 361–363
50. Bryant 2007, pp. 479–481.
51. Lochtefeld 2000, pp. 520–521; Chari 1988,
pp. 73–76
52. Lochtefeld 2000, pp. 520–521.
53. Potter 2002, pp. 25–26; Bhawuk 2011,
p. 172
54. Bhawuk 2011, p. 172; Chari 1988, pp. 73–
76; Flood 1996, pp. 225
55. Grimes 2006, p. 238; Puligandla 1997,
p. 228; Clayton 2006, pp. 53–54
5 . Grimes 2006, p. 238.
57. Indich 1995, pp. 65; Gupta 1995, pp. 137–
166
5 . Fowler 2002, p. 304; Puligandla 1997,
pp. 208–211, 237–239; Sharma 2000,
pp. 147–151
59. Nicholson 2010, p. 27.
0. Balasubramanian 2000, pp. xxx–xxxiiii.
1. Deutsch & Dalvi 2004, pp. 95–96.
2. Flood 1996, p. 246.
3. Flood 1996, p. 238.
4. Sivananda 1993, p. 216.
5. Sivananda 1993, p. 217.
 . "HH Mahant Swami Maharaj Inaugurates
the Svāminārāyaṇasiddhāntasudhā and
Announces Parabrahman Svāminārāyaṇa's
Darśana as the Akṣara-Puruṣottama
Darśana" . BAPS Swaminarayan Sanstha.
17 September 2017.
7. "Acclamation by th Sri Kasi Vidvat
Parisad" . BAPS Swaminarayan Sanstha. 31
July 2017.
. Paramtattvadas 2019, p. 40.
9. Williams 2018, p. 38.
70. Nicholson; Sivananda 1993, p. 247
71. "Nimbarka" . Encyclopedia Britannica.
72. Sharma 1994, p. 376.
73. Sivananda 1993, p. 247.
74. Bryant 2007, p. 407; Gupta 2007, pp. 47–52
75. Bryant 2007, pp. 378–380.
7 . Gupta 2016, pp. 44–45.
77. Das 1952; Hiriyanna 2008, pp. 160–161;
Doniger 1986, p. 119
7 . Das 1952.
79. Sharma 2007, pp. 19–40, 53–58, 79–86.
0. Indich 1995, pp. 1–2, 97–102; Etter 2006,
pp. 57–60, 63–65; Perrett 2013, pp. 247–
248
1. "Similarity to Brahman" . The Hindu. 6
January 2020. Retrieved 2020-01-11 – via
www.pressreader.com.
2. Betty 2010, pp. 215–224; Craig 2000,
pp. 517–518
 3. Bartley 2013, pp. 1–2, 9–10, 76–79, 87–98;
Sullivan 2001, p. 239; Doyle 2006, pp. 59–
62
4. Etter 2006, pp. 57–60, 63–65; van Buitenin
2010
5. Schultz 1981, pp. 81–84.
. van Buitenin 2010.
7. Schultz 1981, pp. 81–84; van Buitenin 2010;
Sydnor 2012, pp. 84–87
. Stoker 2011; von Dehsen 1999, p. 118
9. Sharma 1962, pp. 353–354.
90. Kulandran & Hendrik 2004, pp. 177–179.
91. Jones & Ryan 2006, p. 266; Sarma 2000,
pp. 19–21
92. Jones & Ryan 2006, p. 266; Sharma 1962,
pp. 417–424; Sharma 1994, p. 373
 93. Sharma 1994, pp. 374–375; Bryant 2007,
pp. 361–362
94. Sharma 1994, p. 374.
95. Bryant 2007, pp. 479-481.
9 . Nakamura 2004, p. 3.
97. Nakamura 1989, p. 436. "... we can take it
that 400-450 is the period during which the
Brahma-sūtra was compiled in its extant
form."
9 . Lochtefeld 2000, p. 746; Nakamura 1949,
p. 436
99. Balasubramanian 2000, p. xxxiii.
100. Sharma 1996, pp. 124–125.
101. Nakamura 2004, p. 3; Sharma 1996,
pp. 124–125
102. Hiriyanna 2008, pp. 19, 21–25, 151–152;
Sharma 1994, pp. 239–241; Nicholson
2010, p. 26
103. Chatterjee & Dutta 2007, p. 317.
104. Sharma 2009, pp. 239–241.
105. "Historical Development of Indian
Philosophy" . Britannica.
10 . Lochtefeld 2000, p. 746.
107. Nakamura 1949, p. 436.
10 . Isaeva 1992, p. 36 .
109. Hiriyanna 2008, pp. 151–152.
110. Nicholson 2010, pp. 26–27; Mohanty &
Wharton 2011
111. Nakamura 2004, p. 426.
112. Roodurmum 2002, p. .
113. Comans 2000, p. 163; Jagannathan 2011
114. Comans 2000, pp. 2, 163.
115. Sharma 1994, p. 239.
11 . Olivelle 1992, pp. 17–18; Rigopoulos 1998,
pp. 62–63; Phillips 1995, p. 332 with note
68
117. Olivelle 1992, pp. x–xi, 8–18; Sprockhoff
1976, pp. 277–294, 319–377
11 . Olivelle 1992, pp. 17–18.
119. Sharma 1994, p. 239; Nikhilananda 2008,
pp. 203–206; Nakamura 2004, p. 308;
Sharma 1994, p. 239
120. Nikhilananda 2008, pp. 203–206.
121. Sharma 2000, p. 64.
122. Nakamura 2004; Sharma 2000, p. 64
123. Nakamura 2004, p. 678.
124. Nakamura 2004, p. 679.
125. Sharma 1994, pp. 239–241, 372–375.
12 . Raju 1992, p. 175-176.
127. Sharma 1994, p. 340.
12 . Mohanty & Wharton 2011.
129. Smith 1976, pp. 143–156.
130. Schomer & McLeod 1987, pp. 1–5.
131. Gupta & Valpey 2013, pp. 2–10.
132. Bartley 2013, pp. 1–4, 52–53, 79.
133. Beck 2012, p. 6.
134. Jackson 1992; Jackson 1991; Hawley 2015,
pp. 304–310.
135. Bartley 2013, p. 1-4.
13 . Sullivan 2001, p. 239; Schultz 1981, pp. 81–
84; Bartley 2013, pp. 1–2; Carman 1974,
p. 24
137. Olivelle 1992, pp. 10–11, 17–18; Bartley
2013, pp. 1–4, 52–53, 79
13 . Carman 1994, pp. 82–87 with footnotes.
139. Bernard 1947, pp. 9–12; Sydnor 2012,
pp. 0–11, 20–22
140. Fowler 2002, p. 288.
141. Bryant 2007, pp. 12–13, 359–361; Sharma
2000, pp. 77–78
142. Jones & Ryan 2006, p. 266.
143. Bernard 1947, pp. 9–12.
144. Hiriyanna 2008, p. 187.
145. Sheridan 1991, p. 117.
14 . von Dehsen 1999, p. 118.
147. Sharma 2000, pp. 79-80.
14 . Sharma 1962, pp. 128–129, 180–181;
Sharma 1994, pp. 150–151, 372, 433–434;
Sharma 2000, pp. 80–81
149. Sharma 1994, pp. 372–375.
150. Hiriyanna 2008, pp. 188–189.
151. Lochtefeld 2000, p. 396; Stoker 2011
152. Delmonico, Neal (4 April 2004). "Caitanya
Vais.n. avism and the Holy Names" (PDF).
Bhajan Kutir. Retrieved 2017-05-29.
153. Kim 2005.
154. Gajendragadkar 1966.
155. Aksharananddas & Bhadreshdas 2016, p. .
15 . Paramtattvadas 2017, p. 3.
157. Swaminarayan's teachings, p. 40.
15 . King 1999, p. 135; Flood 1996, p. 258; King
2002, p. 93
159. King 1999, pp. 187, 135–142.
1 0. King 2002, p. 118.
1 1. King 1999, p. 137.
1 2. Halbfass 2007, p. 307.
1 3. King 2002, p. 135.
1 4. King 1999, p. 138.
1 5. King 1999, pp. 133–136.
1 . King 2002, pp. 135–142.
1 7. von Dense 1999, p. 191.
1 . Mukerji 1983.
1 9. Burley 2007, p. 34.
170. Lorenzen 2006, p. 24–33.
171. Lorenzen 2006, p. 27.
172. Lorenzen 2006, p. 26–27.
173. Witz 1998, p. 11; Schuon 1975, p. 91
174. Clooney 2000, pp. 96–107.
175. Brooks 1990, pp. 20–22, 77–79; Nakamura
2004, p. 3
17 . Carman & Narayanan 1989, pp. 3–4.
177. Neog 1980, pp. 243–244.
17 . Smith 2003, pp. 126–128; Klostermaier
1984, pp. 177–178
179. Davis 2014, p. 167 note 21; Dyczkowski
1989, pp. 43–44
1 0. Vasugupta 2012, pp. 252, 259; Flood 1996,
pp. 162–167
1 1. Manninezhath 1993, pp. xv, 31.
1 2. McDaniel 2004, pp. 89–91; Brooks 1990,
pp. 35–39; Mahony 1997, p. 274 with note
73
1 3. Renard 2010, pp. 177–178.
1 4. Schopenhauer 1966, p. .
1 5. Jones 1801, p. 164 .
1 . Renard 2010, p. 183-184.
1 7. Iţu 2007.
1 . Goldstucker 1879, p. 32 .
1 9. Muller 2003, p. 123.
190. Blavatsky 1982, pp. 308–310.

Sources

Printed sources …

Ādidevānanda, Swami (2014). Śrī Rāmānuja

GĪTĀ Bhāșya, with Text and English
translation. Chennai: Sri Ramakrishna Math,
Mylapore, Chennai. ISBN 9788178235189.
Aksharananddas, Sadhu; Bhadreshdas,
Sadhu (2016). Swaminarayan's Brahmajnana
as Aksarabrahma-Parabrahma-Darsanam.
Oxford University Press.
doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199463749.003
.0011 . ISBN 9780199086573.
Balasubramanian, R. (2000). "Introduction". In
Chattopadhyana (ed.). History of Science,
Philosophy and Culture in Indian Civilization.
Volume II Part 2: Advaita Vedanta". Delhi:
Centre for Studies in Civilizations.
Bartley, C.J. (2013). The Theology of
Ramanuja : Realism and Religion . Routledge.
ISBN 978-1-136-85306-7.
Beck, Guy L. (2005), "Krishna as Loving
Husband of God", Alternative Krishnas:
Regional and Vernacular Variations on a Hindu
Deity, ISBN 978-0-7914-6415-1
Beck, Guy L. (2012), Alternative Krishnas:
Regional and Vernacular Variations on a Hindu
Deity, State University of New York Press,
ISBN 978-0-7914-8341-1
Bernard, Theos (1947). Hindu Philosophy.
Delhi: Motilal Banarasidass Publishers.
ISBN 978-81-208-1373-1.
Betty, Stafford (2010). "Dvaita, Advaita, and
Viśiṣṭādvaita: Contrasting Views of Mokṣa".
Asian Philosophy. 20 (2): 215–224.
doi:10.1080/09552367.2010.484955 .
S2CID 144372321 .
Bhawuk, D.P.S. (2011). Anthony Marsella
(ed.). Spirituality and Indian Psychology.
Springer. ISBN 978-1-4419-8109-7.
Blavatsky, H.P. (1982). Collected Writings. 13.
Wheaton, IL: Theosophical Publ. House.
ISBN 978-0835602297.
Brahmbhatt, Arun (2016), "The
Swaminarayan Commentarial Tradition", in
Williams, Raymond Brady; Yogi Trivedi (eds.),
Swaminarayan Hinduism: Tradition,
Adaptation, and Identity, Oxford University
Press
Brooks, Douglas Renfrew (1990). The Secret
of the Three Cities. State University of
Chicago Press. ISBN 978-0-22607-569-3.
Bryant, Edwin (2007). Krishna : A Sourcebook.
Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-
0195148923.
Burley, Mikel (2007). Classical Samkhya and
Yoga: An Indian Metaphysics of Experience.
Taylor & Francis.
Carman, John B. (1994). Majesty and
Meekness: A Comparative Study of Contrast
and Harmony in the Concept of God. Wm. B.
Eerdmans Publishing. ISBN 978-
0802806932.
Carman, John B. (1974). The Theology of
Rāmānuja: An essay in inter-religious
understanding. Yale University Press.
ISBN 978-0300015218.
Carman, John; Narayanan, Vasudha (1989).
The Tamil Veda: Pillan's Interpretation of the
Tiruvaymoli . University of Chicago Press.
ISBN 978-0-226-09306-2.
Chari, S. M. Srinivasa (2004) [1988].
Fundamentals of Viśiṣṭādvaita Vedanta
(Corr. ed.). Motilal Banarasidass. ISBN 978-
81-208-0266-7.
Chari, S. M. Srinivasa (1988).
Fundamentals of Viśiṣṭādvaita Vedanta.
Motilal Banarasidass. ISBN 978-81-208-
0266-7. OCLC 463617682 .
Chatterjee, Satischandra; Dutta,
Shirendramohan (2007) [1939]. An
Introduction to Indian Philosophy
(Reprint ed.). Rupa Publications India Pvt.
Limited. ISBN 978-81-291-1195-1.
Clayton, John (2006). Religions, Reasons and
Gods: Essays in Cross-cultural Philosophy of
Religion . Cambridge University Press.
ISBN 978-1-139-45926-6.
Clooney, Francis X. (2000). Ultimate Realities:
A Volume in the Comparative Religious Ideas
Project . State University of New York Press.
ISBN 978-0-79144-775-8.
Comans, Michael (1996). "Śankara and the
Prasankhyanavada". Journal of Indian
Philosophy. 24 (1).
doi:10.1007/bf00219276 .
S2CID 170656129 .
Comans, Michael (2000). The Method of Early
Advaita Vedānta: A Study of Gauḍapāda,
Śaṅkara, Sureśvara, and Padmapāda . Motilal
Banarsidass. ISBN 978-81-208-1722-7.
Cornille, Catherine (2019). "Is all Hindu
theology comparative theology?". Harvard
Theological Review. 112 (1): 126–132.
doi:10.1017/S0017816018000378 .
ISSN 0017-8160 .
Craig, Edward (2000). Concise Routledge
Encyclopedia of Philosophy . Routledge.
ISBN 978-0415223645.
Dandekar, R. (1987), "Vedanta" , MacMillan
Encyclopedia of religion
Das, A.C. (1952). "Brahman and Māyā in
Advaita Metaphysics". Philosophy East and
West. 2 (2): 144–154. doi:10.2307/1397304 .
JSTOR 1397304 .
Dasgupta, Surendranath (2012) [1922]. A
History of Indian Philosophy. Vol. 1,
Philosophy of Buddhist, Jaina and Six
Systems of indian thought (7th Reprint ed.).
Motilal Banarasidas Publishers. ISBN 978-81-
208-0412-8.
Davis, Richard (2014). Ritual in an Oscillating
Universe: Worshipping Siva in Medieval India.
Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-
0691603087.
von Dehsen, Christian (1999). Philosophers
and Religious Leaders . Routledge. ISBN 978-
1573561525.
von Dense, Christian D. (1999). Philosophers
and Religious Leaders. Greenwood Publishing
Group.
Deutsch, Eliot; Dalvi, Rohit (2004). The
Essential Vedanta: A New Source Book of
Advaita Vedanta . World Wisdom, Inc.
ISBN 9780941532525.
Doniger, Doniger (1986). Dreams, Illusion, and
Other Realities . University of Chicago Press.
ISBN 978-0226618555.
Doyle, Sean (2006). Synthesizing the Vedanta:
The Theology of Pierre Johanns, S.J. Peter
Lang. ISBN 978-3-03910-708-7.
Dyczkowski, Mark (1989). The Canon of the
Śaivāgama. Motilal Banarsidass. ISBN 978-
8120805958.
Etter, Christopher (2006). A Study of
Qualitative Non-Pluralism . iUniverse.
ISBN 978-0-595-39312-1.
Flood, Gavin Dennis (1996). An Introduction
to Hinduism . Cambridge University Press.
Fowler, Jeaneane D. (2002). Perspectives of
Reality: An Introduction to the Philosophy of
Hinduism . Sussex Academic Press.
ISBN 978-1-898723-94-3.
Gajendragadkar, P. (1966), Supreme Court of
India: Sastri Yagnapurushadji And ... vs
Muldas Brudardas Vaishya And ... on 14
January, 1966. 1966 AIR 1119, 1966 SCR (3)
242
Gier, Nicholas F. (2000). Spiritual Titanism:
Indian, Chinese, and Western Perspectives .
State University of New York Press.
ISBN 978-0-7914-4528-0.
Gier, Nicholas F. (2012). "Overreaching to be
different: A critique of Rajiv Malhotra's Being
Different". International Journal of Hindu
Studies. 16 (3): 259–285.
doi:10.1007/s11407-012-9127-x . ISSN 1022-
4556 . S2CID 144711827 .
Goldstucker, Theodore (1879). Literary
Remains of the Late Professor Theodore
Goldstucker . London: W. H. Allen & Co.
Goswāmi, S.D. (1976). Readings in Vedic
Literature: The Tradition Speaks for Itself .
ISBN 978-0-912776-88-0.
Grimes, John A. (2006). A Concise Dictionary
of Indian Philosophy: Sanskrit Terms Defined
in English. State University of New York
Press. ISBN 978-0791430675.
Grimes, John A. (1990). The Seven Great
Untenables: Sapta-vidhā Anupapatti . Motilal
Banarsidass. ISBN 978-81-208-0682-5.
Gupta, Bina (1995). Perceiving in Advaita
Vedānta: Epistemological Analysis and
Interpretation . Motilal Banarsidass. pp. 137–
166. ISBN 978-81-208-1296-3.
Gupta, Ravi M. (2016). Caitanya Vaisnava
Philosophy: Tradition, Reason and Devotion.
Routledge. ISBN 978-1-317-17017-4.
Gupta, Ravi M. (2007). Caitanya Vaisnava
Vedanta of Jiva Gosvami's Catursutri tika.
Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-40548-5.
Gupta, Ravi; Valpey, Kenneth (2013). The
Bhagavata Purana: Sacred Text and Living
Tradition . Columbia University Press.
ISBN 978-0-231-14999-0.
Halbfass, Wilhelm (2007). "Research and
reflection: Responses to my respondents. V.
Developments and attitudes in Neo-
Hinduism; Indian religion, past and present
(Responses to Chapters 4 and 5)". In Franco,
Eli; Preisendanz, Karin (eds.). Beyond
Orientalism: the work of Wilhelm Halbfass and
its impact on Indian and cross-cultural
studies. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass
Publishers. ISBN 978-8120831100.
Hawley, John Stratton (2015). A Storm of
Songs: India and the Idea of the Bhakti
Movement. Harvard University Press.
ISBN 978-0674187467.
Hiriyanna, M. (2008) [1948]. The Essentials of
Indian Philosophy (Reprint ed.). Delhi: Motilal
Banarsidass Publishers. ISBN 978-81-208-
1330-4. OCLC 889316366 .
—OR—
Raju, P. T. (1972). The Philosophical Traditions
of India. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh
Press. ISBN 978-0-8229-1105-0.
OCLC 482322 .
Indich, William M. (1995). Consciousness in
Advaita Vedanta . Motilal Banarsidass.
ISBN 978-81-208-1251-2.
Isaeva, N.V. (1992). Shankara and Indian
Philosophy . State University of New York
Press. ISBN 978-0-7914-1281-7.
Isaeva, N.V. (1995). From Early Vedanta to
Kashmir Shaivism: Gaudapada, Bhartrhari, and
Abhinavagupta. State University of New York
Press. ISBN 978-0-7914-2449-0.
Iţu, Mircia (2007). "Marele Anonim şi cenzura
transcendentă la Blaga. Brahman şi māyā la
Śaṅkara" [The Great Anonymous and the
transcendent censorship at Blaga. Brahman
and māyā at Śaṅkara]. Caiete critice (in
Romanian). Bucharest. 6–7 (236–237): 75–
83. ISSN 1220-6350 ..
Jackson, W.J. (1992), "A Life Becomes a
Legend: Sri Tyagaraja as Exemplar", Journal
of the American Academy of Religion, 60 (4):
717–736, doi:10.1093/jaarel/lx.4.717 ,
JSTOR 1465591
Jackson, W.J. (1991), Tyagaraja: Life and
Lyrics, Oxford University Press, USA
Jaimini (1999). Mīmāṃsā Sūtras of Jaimini .
Translated by Mohan Lal Sandal
(Reprint ed.). Motilal Banarsidass. ISBN 978-
81-208-1129-4.
Jones, Constance; Ryan, James D. (2006).
Encyclopedia of Hinduism. Infobase
Publishing.
Johnson, W.J. (2009). A Dictionary of
Hinduism. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-
0198610250.
Jones, Sir William (1801). "On the Philosophy
of the Asiatics" . Asiatic Researches . 4.
pp. 157–173.
Kim, Hanna H. (2005), "Swaminarayan
movement" , MacMillan Encyclopedia of
Religion
King, Richard (1995). Early Advaita Vedānta
and Buddhism: The Mahāyāna Context of the
Gauḍapādīya-kārikā. SUNY Press.
King, Richard (1999). Orientalism and
Religion: Post-Colonial Theory, India and "The
Mystic East". Routledge.
King, Richard (2002). Orientalism and
Religion: Post-Colonial Theory, India and "The
Mystic East". Taylor & Francis e-Library.
Klostermaier, Klaus K. (1984). Mythologies
and Philosophies of Salvation in the Theistic
Traditions of India . Wilfrid Laurier University
Press. ISBN 978-0-88920-158-3.
Koller, John M. (2013). "Shankara". In Meister,
Chad; Copan, Paul (eds.). Routledge
Companion to Philosophy of Religion.
Routledge.
Kulandran, Sabapathy; Hendrik, Kraemer
(2004). Grace in Christianity and Hinduism.
ISBN 978-0227172360.
Lochtefeld, James (2000). The Illustrated
Encyclopedia of Hinduism, Vol. 1: A–M .
Rosen Publishing. ISBN 978-0823931798.
Lipner, Julius J. (1986). The Face of Truth: A
Study of Meaning and Metaphysics in the
Vedantic Theology of Ramanuja. State
University of New York Press. ISBN 978-0-
88706-038-0.
Lorenzen, David N. (2006). Who Invented
Hinduism: Essays on Religion in History .
Yoda Press. ISBN 9788190227261.
Mahony, William (1997). The Artful Universe:
An Introduction to the Vedic Religious
Imagination. State University of New York
Press. ISBN 978-0791435809.
Malkovsky, B. (2001), The Role of Divine
Grace in the Soteriology of Śaṁkarācārya,
BRILL
Manninezhath, Thomas (1993). Harmony of
Religions: Vedānta Siddhānta Samarasam of
Tāyumānavar . Motilal Banarsidass.
ISBN 978-81-208-1001-3.
Matilal, Bimal Krishna (2015) [2002]. Ganeri,
Jonardon (ed.). The Collected Essays of Bimal
Krishna Matilal. 1 (Reprint ed.). New Delhi:
Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-
946094-6.
Matilal, Bimal Krishna (2002). Ganeri,
Jonardon (ed.). The Collected Essays of
Bimal Krishna Matilal. 1. New Delhi:
Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-
564436-4.
Mayeda, Sengaku (2006). A thousand
teachings : the Upadeśasāhasrī of Śaṅkara.
Motilal Banarsidass. ISBN 978-81-208-2771-
4.
McDaniel, June (2004). Offering Flowers,
Feeding Skulls . Oxford University Press.
ISBN 978-0-19-534713-5.
Mukerji, Mādhava Bithika (1983). Neo-
Vedanta and Modernity . Ashutosh Prakashan
Sansthan.
Muller, F. Max (2003). Three Lectures on the
Vedanta Philosophy. Kessinger Publishing.
Murti, T.R.V. (2008) [1955]. The central
philosophy of Buddhism (Reprint ed.).
Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-46118-4.
Murti, T.R.V. (1955). The central
philosophy of Buddhism. London: Allen &
Unwin. OCLC 1070871178 .
Nakamura, Hajime (1990) [1949]. A History of
Early Vedānta Philosophy, Part 1 (Reprint ed.).
Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers Private
Limited. ISBN 978-81-208-0651-1.
Nakamura, Hajime (1989). A History of
Early Vedānta Philosophy, Part 1. Delhi:
Motilal Banarsidass. ISBN 978-81-208-
0651-1. OCLC 963971598 .
Nakamura, Hajime (1949). A History of
Early Vedānta Philosophy. ,
Nakamura, Hajime (2004) [1950]. A History of
Early Vedānta Philosophy. Part 2 (Reprint ed.).
Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers Private
Limited. ISBN 978-8120819634.
Nicholson, Andrew J. (2010). Unifying
Hinduism: Philosophy and Identity in Indian
Intellectual History. Columbia University
Press. ISBN 978-0-231-14987-7.
Nicholson, Andrew J. (2013). Unifying
Hinduism: Philosophy and Identity in Indian
Intellectual History . Columbia University
Press. ISBN 978-0-231-14987-7.
Neog, Maheswar (1980). Early History of the
Vaiṣṇava Faith and Movement in Assam:
Śaṅkaradeva and His Times . Motilal
Banarsidass. ISBN 978-81-208-0007-6.
Nikhilananda, Swami (2008). The Upanishads,
A New Translation. 2. Kolkata: Advaita
Ashrama. ISBN 978-81-7505-302-1.
Olivelle, Patrick (1992). The Samnyasa
Upanisads: Hindu Scriptures on Asceticism
and Renunciation . Oxford University Press.
ISBN 978-0-19-536137-7.
Pandey, S. L. (2000). "Pre-Sankara Advaita".
In Chattopadhyana (ed.). History of Science,
Philosophy and Culture in Indian Civilization.
Volume II Part 2: Advaita Vedanta. Delhi:
Centre for Studies in Civilizations.
Paramtattvadas, Sadhu (2017). An
introduction to Swaminarayan Hindu theology.
Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-107-
15867-2. OCLC 964861190 .
Paramtattvadas, Swami (October–December
2019). "Akshar-Purushottam School of
Vedanta" . Hinduism Today. Himalayan
Academy. Retrieved 2019-11-22.
Pasricha, Ashu (2008). "The Political Thought
of C. Rajagopalachari". Encyclopaedia of
Eminent Thinkers. 15. New Delhi: Concept
Publishing Company. ISBN 9788180694950.
Patel, Iva (2018), "Swaminarayan" , in Jain, P.;
Sherma, R.; Khanna, M. (eds.), Hinduism and
Tribal Religions. Encyclopedia of Indian
Religions, Encyclopedia of Indian Religions,
Springer, Dordrecht, pp. 1–6,
doi:10.1007/978-94-024-1036-5_541-1 ,
ISBN 978-94-024-1036-5
Perrett, Roy W. (2013). Philosophy of Religion:
Indian Philosophy . Routledge. ISBN 978-1-
135-70322-6.
Phillips, Stephen H. (1995). Classical Indian
Metaphysics . Columbia University Press.
ISBN 978-0812692983.
Phillips, Stephen (2000). Perrett, Roy W. (ed.).
Epistemology: Indian Philosophy. 1.
Routledge. ISBN 978-0-8153-3609-9.
Potter, Karl (2002). Presuppositions of India's
Philosophies . Motilal Banarsidass.
ISBN 978-81-208-0779-2.
Puligandla, Ramakrishna (1997).
Fundamentals of Indian Philosophy. New
Delhi: D. K. Printworld (P) Ltd.
Raju, P.T. (1992) [1972]. The Philosophical
Traditions of India (Reprint ed.). Delhi: Motilal
Banarsidass Publishers Private Limited.
Rambachan, A. (1991). Accomplishing the
Accomplished: Vedas as a Source of Valid
Knowledge in Sankara. University of Hawaii
Press. ISBN 978-0-8248-1358-1.
Ramnarace, Vijay (2014), Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa's
Vedāntic Debut: Chronology & Rationalisation
in the Nimbārka Sampradāya (PDF)
Renard, Philip (2010). Non-Dualisme. De
directe bevrijdingsweg. Cothen: Uitgeverij
Juwelenschip.
Rigopoulos, Antonio (1998). Dattatreya: The
Immortal Guru, Yogin, and Avatara. State
University of New York Press. ISBN 978-
0791436967.
Roodurmum, Pulasth Soobah (2002).
Bhāmatī and Vivaraṇa Schools of Advaita
Vedānta: A Critical Approach. Delhi: Motilal
Banarsidass Publishers.
Sarma, Deepak (2005). Epistemologies and
the Limitations of Philosophical Enquiry:
Doctrine in Madhva Vedanta. Routledge.
ISBN 978-0415308052.
Sarma, Deepak (2000). "Is Jesus a Hindu?
S.C. Vasu and Multiple Madhva
Misrepresentations" . Journal of Hindu-
Christian Studies. 13. doi:10.7825/2164-
6279.1228 .
Scharfe, Hartmut (2002). Handbook of
Oriental Studies. Brill. ISBN 978-90-04-12556-
8.
Schomer, Karine; McLeod, W. H., eds. (1987).
The Sants: Studies in a Devotional Tradition of
India. Motilal Banarsidass.
ISBN 9788120802773.
Schopenhauer, Arthur (1966). The World as
Will and Representation, Vol. 1. Translated by
Payne, E.F.J. Dover Publications. ISBN 978-
0486217611.
Schultz, Joseph P. (1981). Judaism and the
Gentile Faiths: Comparative Studies in
Religion . Fairleigh Dickinson University
Press. ISBN 978-0-8386-1707-6.
Schuon, Frithjof (1975). "One of the Great
Lights of the World". In Mahadevan, T.M.P.
(ed.). Spiritual Perspectives, Essays in
Mysticism and Metaphysics. Arnold
Heinemann. ISBN 978-0892530212.
Sharma, Arvind (2007). Advaita Vedānta: An
Introduction . Motilal Banarsidass. ISBN 978-
8120820272.
Sharma, Arvind (2008). Philosophy of religion
and Advaita Vedanta: a comparative study in
religion and reason. Pennsylvania State
University Press. ISBN 978-0271028323.
OCLC 759574543 .
Sharma, Chandradhar (2009) [1960]. A
Critical Summary of Indian Philosophy. Delhi:
Motilal Banarsidass. ISBN 978-81-208-0365-
7. OCLC 884357528 .
Sharma, Chandradhar (1994) [1960]. A
Critical Survey of Indian Philosophy
(Reprint ed.). Motilal Banarsidass. ISBN 978-
81-208-0365-7.
Sharma, Chandradhar (2007) [1996]. The
Advaita Tradition in Indian Philosophy: A Study
of Advaita in Buddhism, Vedānta and
Kāshmīra Shaivism (Rev. ed.). Motilal
Banarsidass. ISBN 978-8120813120.
OCLC 190763026 .
Sharma, Chandradhar (1996). The
Advaita Tradition in Indian Philosophy: A
Study of Advaita in Buddhism, Vedānta
and Kāshmīra Shaivism. Motilal
Banarsidass. ISBN 978-8120813120.
OCLC 1041414621 .
Sharma, B.N. Krishnamurti (2014) [1962].
Philosophy of Śrī Madhvācārya (Reprint ed.).
Motilal Banarsidass. ISBN 978-8120800687.
Sharma, B.N. Krishnamurti (1962).
Philosophy of Śrī Madhvācārya .
Bombay: Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan March.
OCLC 1075020345 .
Sharma, B. N. Krishnamurti (2000). A History
of the Dvaita School of Vedānta and its
Literature (Reprint, 3rd ed.). Motilal
Banarsidass. ISBN 978-8120815759.
OCLC 53463855 .
Sheridan, Daniel (1991). Timm, Jeffrey (ed.).
Texts in Context: Traditional Hermeneutics in
South Asia. State University of New York
Press. ISBN 978-0791407967.
Sivananda, Swami (1993). All About
Hinduism . The Divine Life Society. ISBN 81-
7052-047-9.
Smith, Bardwell L. (1976). Hinduism: New
Essays in the History of Religions . Brill
Archive. ISBN 978-90-04-04495-1.
Smith, David (2003). The Dance of Siva:
Religion, Art and Poetry in South India .
Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-
52865-8.
Sprockhoff, Joachim F. (1976). Samnyasa:
Quellenstudien zur Askese im Hinduismus (in
German). Wiesbaden: Kommissionsverlag
Franz Steiner. ISBN 978-3515019057.
Sullivan, Bruce M. (2001). The A to Z of
Hinduism . Rowman & Littlefield. ISBN 978-0-
8108-4070-6.
Sydnor, Jon Paul (2012). Ramanuja and
Schleiermacher: Toward a Constructive
Comparative Theology . Casemate. ISBN 978-
0227680247.
Vasugupta, J.S. (2012). Śiva Sūtras, Motilal
Banarsidass. ISBN 978-8120804074.
Vitsaxis, Vassilis (2009). Thought and Faith:
Comparative Philosophical and Religious
Concepts in Ancient Greece, India, and
Christianity: The Concept of Divinity: 2.
Somerset Hall Press. ISBN 978-1-935244-05-
9.
Williams, Raymond Brady (2018), Introduction
to Swaminarayan Hinduism, Cambridge
University Press
 Witz, Klaus G. (1998). The Supreme Wisdom
of the Upaniśads: An Introduction. Motilal
Banarsidass. ISBN 978-8120815735.

Web sources …

Mohanty, Jitendra N.; Wharton, Michael

(2011). "Indian philosophy - Historical
development of Indian philosophy" .
Britannica. Retrieved 2016-08-26.
van Buitenin, J.A.B. (2010). "Ramanuja -
Hindu theologian and philosopher" .
Britannica. Retrieved 2016-08-26.
Doniger, Wendy; Stefon, Matt (2015).
"Vedanta, Hindu Philosophy" .
Britannica. Retrieved 2016-08-30.
 Jagannathan, Devanathan (2011).
"Gaudapada" . Internet Encyclopedia of
Philosophy. Retrieved 2016-08-29.
Stoker, Valerie (2011). "Madhva (1238-
1317)" . Internet Encyclopedia of
Philosophy. Retrieved 2016-02-02.
Ranganathan, Shyam. "Hindu
Philosophy" . Internet Encyclopedia of
Philosophy. Retrieved 2016-08-26.
Nicholson, Andrew J. "Bhedabheda
Vedanta" . Internet Encyclopedia of
Philosophy. Retrieved 2016-08-26.

Further reading
Parthasarathy, Swami. "The Eternities" .
Vedanta Treatise.
Deussen, Paul (2007) [1912]. The
System of Vedanta (Reprint ed.).
Smith, Huston (1993). Forgotten Truth:
The Primordial Tradition .
Potter, Karl; Bhattachārya, Sibajiban.
"Vedanta Sutras of Nārāyana Guru".
Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies.
Comparative analysis of commentaries
on Vedanta Sutras.
https://archive.org/download/in.ernet.dl
i.2015.283844/2015.283844.The-
Vedanta.pdf
 Aurobindo, Sri (1972). "The
Upanishads" . Pondicherry: Sri
Aurobindo Ashram. Archived from the
original on 2007-01-04.
Parthasarathy, Swami. Choice
Upanishads.
Vrajaprana, Pravrajika. "A Simple
Introduction" . Vedanta.
"VedantaHub.org" . - Resources to help
with the Study and Practice of Vedanta.

External links
Quotations related to Vedanta at
Wikiquote Media related to Vedanta at
Wikimedia Commons
Retrieved from
"https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?
title=Vedanta&oldid=1018298784"

Last edited 19 days ago by Joshua Jonathan

Content is available under CC BY-SA 3.0 unless

otherwise noted.