Bhedashrutis is a text that declare that difference (or bheda) between Brahman and non-Brahman. Bhedashrutis are found in Upanishads, and are contrasted with Abhedashrutis, texts that declare abheda (non-dualism) between Brahman and non-Brahman. An example is found in the Mundaka Upanishad (III.1.1) – ‘two birds, companions (that are) always united, cling to the self-same tree. Of these two, the one eats the sweet fruit and the other looks on without eating.
Vedanta teaches that scripture is the source of knowledge of
Brahman. Text (shruti and shabda), one of the ‘valid means of knowledge’ (pramana).
All the shrutis, regarded as authoritative, are by definition coherent in every
respect, so the exegete must harmonize passages that seem to contradict each
other. In this case, the requirement was to reconcile Bhedashrutis with
Abhedashrutis. The three schools of Advaita, Visishtadvaita and Dvaita attempt
this harmonization in different ways.
For Advaita, Abhedashruti are mahavakyas (grand statements)
that determine the ultimate meaning of Veda. Bhedashrutis are sublated or overridden
by Abhedashrutis. Adi Shankaracharya states – some scriptural passages refer to
the highest Self and the individual soul as distinct entities… In other places,
again, the two are spoken of as non-different. As difference and non-difference
are equally vouched for by the scriptures, acceptance of absolute
non-difference would render all those texts which speak of difference futile.
We, therefore, look on the relation of the highest Self and the soul as analogous
to that of the snake and its coils. Viewed as a whole, the snake is one,
non-different, while an element of difference appears if we view it with regard
to its coils, hood, erect posture, and so on.’
Bhedashrutis need transformation by Abhedashrutis, as they
are anuvadaka, in need of restatement (Thibaut, aankara, II.pp.172-73).
For Visishtadvaita, there is no contradiction between the
two sets of shrutis. Ramanuja states – the texts declaring the essential
distinction and separation of non-sentient matter, sentient beings, and Bhagavan,
and those declaring Him to be the cause and the world to be the effect, and
cause and effect to be identical, do not in any way conflict with other texts
declaring that matter and souls form the body of Bhagavan (Thibaut, Ramanuja p.144).
For Dvaita, Abhedashrutis contradict experience and are open
to reinterpretation by the Bhedashrutis. The reverse cannot be true without
contradiction (Pereira, pp. 128, 132.)