Dvaitadvaita Vedanta

Bādarāyaṇa, Ṭaṅka Brahmānandin Ātreya, Dramiḍa, Bhartṛprapañca, Nimbārka, Śrīnivāsa and Yādavaprakāśa are considered as early proponents of Dvaitādvaita Vedānta.

Their philosophical contributions are known primarily through quotations and references found in the works of later thinkers such as Śaṅkara, Bhāskara, Sureśvara, Yāmuna and Rāmānuja.

[4][5][6] Ṭanka Brahmanandin Atreya (Sanskrit: टङ्क ब्रह्मानन्दिन आत्रेय, टङ्काचार्य, romanized: Ṭaṅka Brahmānandin Ātreya, Ṭaṅkācharya ; c. 6th century[7]) also known as Tankacharya was the composer of the Vākya commentary on the Chāndogya Upaniṣad and thus known as the Vākyakāra.

[9]Ṭaṅka rejects explicitly the doctrine that God's body is a mere pedagogic fiction and must therefore have affirmed to some extent the reality of the world.

[18] The philosophy draws on metaphors like the sun and its rays, fire and its sparks, to demonstrate the natural, inherent connection between Brahman and its manifestations.

It regards Brahman as the universal soul, both transcendent and immanent, referred to by various names such as Śrī Kṛṣṇa, Viṣnu, Vāsudeva, Purushottama, Nārāyaņa, Paramatman, Bhagawan and so on.

This connection is elucidated through the understanding that individual selves often struggle to recall the impressions of past lives due to the continuous cycle of actions and their results.

By stating that He imparts knowledge, Svābhāvika Bhedābhedin implies that without such understanding, individuals cannot discern between positive and negative outcomes; thus, they would be unable to experience happiness or sorrow in response to events.

In line with this idea, Svābhāvika Bhedābhedin holds that the creation of the universe is a lila of Brahman—a natural and unmotivated expression of divine bliss.

[40] This analogy is further illustrated by comparing Brahman to a sovereign king, who, despite having all his desires fulfilled, occasionally engages in playful activities purely out of exuberance and joy.

[38] Just as a person overflowing with happiness may dance or sing without any specific purpose, so too does Brahman create the universe as a spontaneous expression of bliss, without any underlying motive or goal.

[41][43] Jivatman is different from physical body, sense organs, mind, prāṇa and Buddhi, all of these are dependent on Individual soul and serve as instrument in such actions as seeing, hearing and so on.

[51][3] It is also pointed out that as there is non-difference between jiva and Brahman, then it would be liable to undergo the sorrows and happiness of individual selves entangled in various births and thus would incur the fault of doing what is not beneficial to It.

However, Svabhāvika Bhedābheda emphasizes the natural co-existence of both unity and difference, whereas Viśiṣṭādvaita focuses on the qualified non-duality, where the world and souls are attributes of Brahman.

In contrast to Madhva's Dvaita Vedānta, which posits a strict dualism between the soul, world, and God, Svabhāvika Bhedābheda maintains a balance between difference and non-difference, holding that the relationship is naturally dual yet unified.

Shrinivasacharya's contributions to the development of this doctrine are central, and it has influenced later Vedāntic thought by offering a middle path between strict dualism and non-dualism.

The doctrine also plays a role in ritual practices and devotional theology, where the relationship between the worshiper and the divine is seen as both intimate and distinct, reflecting the natural duality and unity between God and the individual.