--> Skip to main content


Asmarathya, a Vedantin, is mentioned in Brahmasutra (I-2, 29; I-4.20) as holding a bheda-abheda (difference-cum-non-difference) view. Badarayana in the first chapter of his Brahmasutra has given the opinion of his predecessors on the relationship between the jiva (individual self) and the Brahman (cosmic self). The opinions of Audolomi, Asmarathya, and Kasakrtsna are given in that section. These people hold the opinion that the individual self is different, different and non-different, and non-different respectively. They cite Vedic passages in support of their view. Badarayana, who explains the Vedic passages and tries to resolve the internal contradictions therein, quotes the opinions of the earlier scholars either in support of this view or to criticize their views to establish his own. In the section on individual self he quotes the opinions of the aforesaid three scholars. Audulomi and Asmarathya are quoted first and Kasakrtsna after them. But Kasakrtsna seems to be an author on Mimamsa as well and grammarian Patanjali gives an example as Kasakrtsni Mimamsa.

The relation of the individual self and Brahman is said by Asmarathya to be difference-cum-non-difference. If the self were completely different from Brahman, then the scriptural statement, that by knowing Brahman everything can be known (eka-vijnanena sarvam-vijnanam), will become meaningless. At the same time, the self is different from Brahman. This relation resembles that of the body and its parts of that of sparks to the fire. He holds thus the theory of a relation like that between a body and its parts (anga-angi-samyukta-bheda-vada).

Asmarathya interprets the scriptural texts declaring the location (pradesha-matra) for Brahman (Chandogya Upanishad V.18, 2) and says that God, though all-pervasive, assumes the restricted form and resides in locations like the heart for the sake of the devotees (Brahmasutra, I-2, 29).