Vedanta Philosophy 1

How does Ramanuja describe Brahman? In this context compare his view with
Sankaras notion of Brahman.
Ramanuja holds that within Brahman there is unconscious matter (acit), as well as finite spirits (cit).
Though cit and acit are substances in themselves, in relation Brahman they become its attributes.
They are the body of Brahman who is there soul. The first, which is the source of all material
objects, is called prakriti and is an eternal reality. Brahman is the controller of prakriti and uses it to
create the world. Just as the soul controls the human body and remains changeless when the body
undergoes change, similarly Brahman is the unchanging controller of all change and can be called
the soul of nature and also the soul of souls.

Ramanuja holds that creation is not illusory i.e. the world created is just as real as Brahman. The
Upanishad does not deny the reality of objects, but of independent objects. Brahman is the only
reality in the universe in the sense that there is no other reality that is independent of it. All material
objects as well as finite souls are real and are contained within Brahman. They are inseparable
from Brahman and are dependent on it for existence. This monism of Ramanuja is called
Visistadvaita which means the unity of Brahman possessed of real parts. This Unity however is not
distinctionless. Brahman is free from external distinctions - heterogenous and homogenous -
because there is nothing, similar or dissimilar, that is external to it. But it does possess internal
differences as it is composed of real and diverse elements like matter and souls.

Brahman may be viewed through two stages -as cause and as effect. During the state of
dissolution, Brahman is the cause with subtle matter and unembodied souls forming its body. The
whole universe lies latent in it. During the state of creation the universe becomes manifest, subtle
matter becomes gross and unembodied souls become embodied according to their karmas. The
former is the causal state of Brahman, while the latter is the effect state. This is in accordance with
the doctrine of satkaryavad which says that effect is contained within the cause. Ramanuja also
argues that Brahman is a qualified and determinate substance. When the Upanishads speak of
Brahman as devoid of qualities they only mean that Brahman has no bad qualities not that it has
no qualities at all. Brahman possesses an infinite number of infinitely good qualities such as
omnipotence, omniscience, benevolence. Therefore, it is not characterless or indeterminate.
Brahman is immanent in the whole world as its inner controller but in its essence it transcends the
world.

Sankaras conception of Brahman is in many ways entirely different. Firstly, Sankaras description
of reality is that which is not sublated by further experience. Ramanuja considers the world to be
just as real as Brahman. For him, the word Maya refers to Brahmans power of creating wonderful
objects. This power of creation is described as magical because it is as wonderful as that of a
magician. Sankara disagrees. According to him, Brahman alone is real and the world is unreal.
Maya is a power of God whereby like a magician he is able to conjure the world of appearance,
which is taken as real by those who are ignorant. The world is a creation of Maya and is thus
illusory.

Secondly, Sankara draws a distinction between Brahman and God. Brahman, reflected in or
conditioned by Maya is what we call Isvara or God. According to Sankara, the moment we try to
make Brahman an object of our thought, it is no longer unconditioned consciousness and we miss
its essential nature. Thus Isvara is known as lower Brahman as contrasted with unconditioned or
higher Brahman. Isvara is the highest appearance we have because our finite thought cannot
grasp Brahman. Isvara only becomes unreal for him who has realised his oneness with Brahman.
So even though Ramanujas description of a qualified Brahman is applicable to Sankaras Isvara, it
cannot be equated with Sankaras conception of Brahman due to the aforementioned distinction.
Vedanta Philosophy 1

Finally, according to Sankara, Brahman is undifferentiated, qualityless and indeterminate. Brahman

is pure consciousness. It transcends all categories and is the unqualified absolute. In contrast,
Ramanuja believes that there is no such thing as undifferentiated pure consciousness. The self is
also not pure consciousness, it is the eternal substratum of consciousness. Ramanuja also
attributes many good qualities to Brahman and considers it devoid of bad qualities not devoid of
qualities as a whole. Brahman is God and he is not a formless identity, but an Individual, a Person
who is qualified by matter and souls that form His body. Ramanuja also holds that individual souls
are real spiritual substances that are pervaded by Brahman and also form its body. In liberation
these souls become similar to God and serve Him realising that they themselves are the body of
Brahman. In contrast to this, Sankara considers the self and Brahman to be identical, and says that
in liberation the self merges with Brahman.