Sri Sankara Charitham by Maha Periyava – Similarities with Ramanuja

Similarities with Ramanuja

Ramanuja (रामानुजाचार्य) has similarities with our Acharya to some extent.  In general, Ramanuja has done everything differently from Acharya. When we look at it, only Dvaita (द्वैत – Duality) is exactly opposite to Advaita (अद्वैत – Non-Duality), rather than his Visishtadvaita (विशिष्टाद्वैत – Qualified non-duality).  Still, in the matter of procedures, it was Ramanuja who had done drastically differently, rather than Madhvacharya [मध्वाचार्य].  Similar to that of Acharya, Madhva has also prescribed in his traditional observances [संप्रदाय], things like directly moving to Sanyasa from Brahmacharya [ब्रह्मचर्य – period of unmarried religious studentship], tonsuring, removing the sacred thread, etc.  However, in the traditions laid down by Ramanuja, Sanyasis have the tuft of hair intact and wear the sacred thread too. People who are householders become Sanyasis. If a single staff [एकदण्ड -Eka Danda] is prescribed for us [Sanyasis under the Sankara tradition], they are Tridandin [त्रिदण्डिन्] Sanyasis, having three staves, tied together.  If we point to the fact that to reach the stage of Paramahamsa Sanyasa, [परसहंस सन्न्यास – ascetic of the highest order] various Sastras are prescribed only in our tradition, they say that they are also Parahamsas and that there is evidence in the Sastras for them also to be so.  In all, they do everything different from the path of Acharya.

Both Acharya and Madhva established Matams [मठ].  Ramanuja has not done so.  The seventy four leaders of the order [सिंहासनाधिपति – Simhaasanaadhipati] founded among Vaishnavas is not the same as establishing Matams under the leadership of saints.  It is an arrangement to develop the Sri Vaishnava sect through the household order.

The saints under the traditional order of Acharya will invariably belong to one of the ten types of Sanyas, called, ‘Dasanaami’ [दशनामि].  Madhvacharya has also taken initiation into Sanyas under “Tirta” [तीर्थ], one of the Dasanami.  His Sanyasa name is Ananda Tirta [आनन्द-तीर्थः].  So also it is with Krishna Chaitanya [कृष्णचैतन्यः].  It is said that he took initiation from Kesavabharati and Eswarapuri.  Both Bharati [भारति] and Puri [पुरि] come under Dasanami. Ramakrishna Paramahamsa had also taken initiation from one ‘Puri’ Sanyasi*.

Only Ramanuja had not taken to sainthood under the category of Dasanami.  It is said that in his early days, he went to one Advaiti, Yadava Prakasa, to study the religious treatise on Self [आत्म शास्त्र – Atma Sastra]. It is said that he could not accept the doctrines of that Guru.  But this had taken place prior to his taking sainthood.  (When we look into the books of Advaita, there does not seem to be mention of any Yadava Prakasa).

One Bhaskaracharya has established a school of thought, called, Bhedabhed, (भेदाभेदम् -Dualism and Non-dualism), objecting to the doctrines of Acharya and which was somewhere in between that (Advaita) and Visishtadvaita, established by Ramanuja.  It appears that there was one Yadava Prakasa, who had followed the principles of Bhaskaracharya.  It appears that Bhaskaracharya’s philosophy refuted the philosophy of Acharya, but was closer to the philosophy of Ramanuja which was established much later. The Brahmasutra Bhashya [ब्रह्मसूत्र भाष्य], known to have been written by Bhaskaracharya is not available to us now.  We are able to deduce about his doctrines only from the quotes of others.

Acharya had stressed and established the Varnasrama Dharma [वर्णाश्रम धर्म – Caste order]. When we look at the narratives of the Vaishnava Guru tradition, we get to know that Ramanujacharya had, at times, relaxed them.  But in the commentaries [भाष्यम्] written by Ramanuja, it is seen that he too had emphatically supported the caste order.  However, we also need to pay attention to the stories being told by people following his tradition.  However, like our Acharya, Madhvacharya had strictly prescribed the Varnashrama.

To the question ‘Why Ramanuja did entirely contrary to the path of Acharya? Why Madhvacharya did not do so differently?’, there seems to be one reason.  Ramanuja was the one who had come later to Acharya.  Madhvacharya had only come later to Ramanujacharya.  Each one had created their doctrines, different from that of their predecessor.  Only if we deviate from not only the philosophy but also in the traditions, it would be possible to showcase the people who take to the new order, distinctly to the world.  Is it not that when a new party is established, they also create a new flag, symbol, dress etc., apart from the rules? It is like that.  That is why, it looks like, Ramanuja who came subsequent to Shankara, did differently from the traditions followed by Shankara.  In the same way, Madhva, who came after Ramanuja, might have thought of doing it differently from Ramanuja. We can take it that the different things done by Madhva, restored the path of Sankara; just as when two negatives get together, it becomes positive.

I started with the similarities in the names of Sankara and Ramanuja, and went off telling the differences!  What is (that) similarity?  Ramanuja’s poorvashrama name was Lakshmana.  In Tamizh, he is called as ILaiyaazhwar [இளையாழ்வார்].  The one younger to Rama is Lakshmana. He is Rama’s sibling.  ‘Anujan’ (अनुज) means ‘sibling’.  Therefore, it is one and the same to say ‘Ramanuja’ or ‘Lakshmana’.  Although the poorvashrama name itself did not continue in the fourth stage [तुरीयाश्रम – Tureeyashrama], the sainthood name of Ramanuja had the same meaning [as that of poorvashrama] – just as in the case of Sankara.  That is the similarity.

Who was Lakshmana earlier? He was as Adisesha [आदिशेष:].  Ramanuja is said to be the incarnation of Adisesha.

We say our Acharya is an incarnation of Siva.  Vaishanavas do not claim that their Acharya is an incarnation of Vishnu.  They say their Acharya is Seshaavataar [incarnation of Adisesha].  Madhvas also do not say that Madhva was an incarnation of Vishnu.  They say he is an incarnation of Vayu.  Despite the fact that Vishnu’s job was to take incarnations repeatedly – this is how it is.

Another similarity between Ramanuja and Shankara that occurs, is in a relationship.  If Acharya’s Guru, Govinda Bhagavatpadal was an incarnation of Patanjali, that Patanjali was an incarnation of Adisesha!  Sri Vaishnavites say that Ramanuja is the same Adisesha’s incarnation!

Another great similarity between our Bhagavatpada and Ramanujacharya is that the birth anniversary of both falls on the same day.  We celebrate the birth anniversary with reference to Panchami (janma tithi).  They celebrate it based on Thiruvathirai (Ramanuja’s birth star). However, we observe that both the birth anniversaries mostly occur on the same day.

I wanted say that the name Ramanuja is a synonym to his own name in the poorvashrama.

Madhva’s poorvashrama name was Vasudeva.  He later became Ananda Tirtha.  After becoming an ascetic, he had one more name – Poornaprajna [पूर्ण-प्रज्ञः].  The name well known to the world is Madhva.  There is no connection between the name Vasudeva and his Sanyasa names.  The person who had Gowraanga [गौराङ्गः] as his name in the earlier stage of life, became Krishna Chaitanya later.  There is no connection between these two names also.  (Laughing) Krishna was diametrically opposite to Gowraanga!  Gowraanga means a person who is very fair; Krishna means black, Karuppannasamy [கருப்பண்ணசாமி]!

This way, the meaning of Ramanuja’s poorvashrama and tureeyashrama names are same, somewhat similar to that of Shankara.

It is only for Acharya that both are same, even in the exact words.

Thus, among those who have come in our traditional Guru order, only Govinda Bhagavatpada specifically had a different name during poorvashrama and another after taking sanyasa.  Subsequent to Acharya, beginning with his direct disciples, a different name is certainly being given to the Sanyasis.