bears fruit upon that person’s death. Adrishta
has lent itself to extensive commentary in the
Mimamsa literature. It is intangible and ineffable,
but also the instrument through which Vedic rites
come to fruition.
In Vaisheshika, the term is sometimes synony-
mous with adharma, the equally invisible negative
karmic accrual. In a larger sense in Vaisheshika,
adrishta is the unknown quality of things and of the
soul; it brings about the cosmic order and arranges
for souls according to their merits and demerits.
Further reading: Arthur B. Keith, The Karma-Mimamsa
(London: Oxford University Press, 1921); S. N. Klos-
termaier and K. Klaus, A Survey of Hinduism (Albany:
State University of New York Press, 1989); Karl H.
Potter, Indian Metaphysics and Epistemology: The Tradi-
tion of Nyaya-Vaisesika Up to Gangesa (Delhi: Motilal
Banarsidass, 1977).
advaita
Advaita (non-dual, from the root dvi, or two) is
a term used to describe the unitary philosophies
and religious movements in India. Rather than a
definition of these schools of thought as unitary
or monist, the negative description is generally
used. Advaita is usually translated as “non-dual.”
Duality would imply that there is more than one
reality; non-duality implies that there is nowhere
a second to the one reality.
A number of philosophies in Indian tradition
are conventionally called advaita. Their character-
istics vary considerably. Best known is “absolute
advaita,” formulated by the Vedanta founder
SHANKARA, in which the individual self, and all
apparently separate selves, are understood to be
nothing but the ultimate Self, that is, non-dual
with it; there are no distinctions between selves. A
further aspect of Shankara’s advaita system is that
the world is false or MAYA, illusion. Only the one
BRAHMAN is true.
The views of RAMANUJA and VALLABHA are also
technically referred to as advaita or non-dualistic,
as both their systems maintain that individual
selves are nothing but the ultimate Self. However,
they both also include qualifying language to
show that they do not hold Shankara’s absolute
view. In their understanding, the highest Self or
brahman is God and therefore has certain inherent
characteristics that distinguish it from any other
self. No individual self can possess the power and
supremacy of the divinity; in fact, both Ramanuja
and Vallabha see the individual selves as being
distinct from each other. Similarly, Ramanuja and
Vallabha qualify their advaita belief that the world
or universe is in fact nothing but the divinity:
from another perspective the world is different
from the divinity.
Many other Vedantins similarly could be
called advaita with these sorts of reservations.
They sometimes use terms like Dvaitadvaita (non-
dualist and dualist) or BHEDABHEDA (both different
and non-different). Philosophically they are quite
similar to Ramanuja and Vallabha.
Finally, most TANTRIC philosophical systems are
also termed advaita or non-dual. In these cases,
the individual self is understood as being precisely
brahman, God or Goddess, with no reservations.
The power inherent in the divinity is understood
to belong to any individual, at the highest level
of realization. The world too is understood to be
non-dual with the divinity.Further reading: M. M. Agarwal, The Philosophy of Nim-
barka (Varanasi: Chaukhamba Surbharati Prakashan,
1983); Surendranath Dasgupta, A History of Indian Phi-
losophy, 5 vols. (New Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1975);
Julius J. Lipner, The Face of Truth: A Study of Mean
and Metaphysics in the Vedantic Theology of Ramanuja
(Houndmills: Macmillan, 1986); Unmesha Mishra,
Nimbarka School of Vedanta (Allahabad: Tirabhukti,
1966); G. V. Tagare, Brahma-vada Doctrine of Sri Val-
labhacarya (New Delhi: D. K. Printworld, 1998); Swami
Tapasyananda, Bhakti Schools of Vedanta (Lives and
Philosophies of Ramanuja, Nimbarka, Madhva, Vallabha
and Chaitanya) (Madras: Sri Ramakrishna Math, 1990);
P. B. Vidyarthi, Divine Personality and Human Life inadvaita 9 J