distinction between appearance and ultimate reality brought Ramanuja onto
epistemological grounds. Shankara had epistemologized ontology, changing the
veil of illusion from world substance to insubstantial ignorance. Shankara
argued that ultimate reality is unqualified and in the normal human sense
unknowable. Ramanuja asserted instead that all knowledge is real and all
arguments are qualified. Ramanuja used the principle of the self-validity of
knowledge, which originated with Prabhakara Mimamsa, and had been ap-
propriated from that declining school by the Advaita. But whereas the Ad-
vaitins recognized the existence of objects of knowledge, at least on the level
of worldly appearance, Ramanuja held that knowledge is self-valid in a much
more absolute sense. (Raju, 1985: 440; Isayeva, 1993: 245–246). Inner expe-
riences, even dreams and illusions, are self-valid, insofar as they are pragmati-
cally significant for the practical goals of life. And the practical goal is direct
contact with Brahman, which is everywhere; there is no world of illusions
distinct from the Absolute. This extreme epistemology became the hallmark of
the Ramanuja school. To put it ontologically: consciousness is intentional,
always carrying with it an object. Consciousness always thus involves plurality;
and although such differentiating consciousness cannot be the Absolute sub-
stance but only an attribute of it, the differentiatedness of world experience is
not to be denigrated as unreal. As the contemporary Advaita stars Shri Harsha
and Chitsukha moved toward the dialectical dissolution of the empirical world,
Ramanuja was moving in the opposite direction.
The conflict of Shaivas against Vaishnavas in south India was the outer
framework within which these philosophical moves were set in motion.
Ramanuja’s creativity came from close-hand conflict with the sophisticated
Advaita philosophy in which he was trained. The occasion for his split from
this tradition was provided by his family network contact with a burgeoning
Vaishnava movement at just the time when it was ready to become organiza-
tionally institutionalized. This in turn provided a base and a demand for
philosophical rationalization to match Shankara’s organization.
Advaita and Vishishtadvaita as yet had explored only a relatively small
range of ontological positions possible for monotheism. The emergence of full-
fledged dualism came next. Madhva (1197–1276?), leader of the second great
Vaishnava movement, built his career through an even more extreme break
from the Advaitas. Born near the southern headquarters of the Shankaras, at
Shringeri in Mysore, Madhva was educated in Shankaraite maths but broke
away into theism. Traveling through India, Madhva became a religious leader,
working alleged miracles, meeting rival philosophers in the north, and stirring
up waves of political battles, persecutions, and counter-persecutions in the
south with the Shankarites. Madhva formulated a Calvinist-sounding theology
of salvation by grace: God remains separate from the lowly worshipper, and
External and Internal Politics: India • 265