The International Journal of Indian Psychology: Volume: 01 | Issue: 04 No.

2 | ISSN 2348-5396

Concept of Space: Sri Madhavacarya

Dr. Uma Sharma*
INTRODUCTION:-
Sri MadhavaCarya (1238-1317) was the Founder of the Dvaita System which is one of
the three principle schools of vedanta. After the system of Sankaracarya and Ramanujacarya he
had been well established. The reasons which led him to establish doctrinal differences and
ideological dissatisfy faction with contemporary trends and schools of thought within and
without Hindusim and Particulary with the time. Madhva could not agree with Ramanujacarya
on many Point of Theistic Loctrine. Madhva called his system “Tattvavada (Realism) It is
described by vidyaranyainhissarvadarsansarigraha as “Purnaprajnadarsana.” Purnaajana and
Anandatirtha are other names of Madhavecarya. There are so many concept sides by the
Madhavacarya but hare we discuss the theory of space of Madhavacarya.
THEORY OF SPACE BY MADHAVACARYA
The Hindu theory of Mahaparlaya which can be given in the Rigveda presupposes an
absolute theory of time and space accord ding to which they have a being in themselves apart
from the thing in space and even in time. Space and Time must exhypothesi be infinite. It we
deny we faced logical difficulty of conceiving a boundary to limit space and time. We must re
cognize more space and more time beyond them and this will lead to a regress. In Nyayamrta.(1)

""AÌ XoemoZmpñV' BXmZtH$mbmoZmpñV' BË`ñ` ì`mhVËdmV²XoeH$mb`mo … n[aÀNo>X[ZénU`m{n V`moann[aÀN>oX {g{Õ…&

XoeH$mb`mo…ñdmonmYm¡ {Z{fYo {damoYoZ, A{damoYm` {ZfoYmonm{YV`mXoeH$mbÝVa`moamdí`H$Ëdmƒ Ÿ&''

Here there is no debut that conception of infinite space and Time also has its difficult of
involving the contradiction of a completed infinite. But Madhava thought with its most
serviceable concept of svarupavisesas overcomes this difficulty and makes it possible to held that
space and time have infinite potential divisibility and have existence in themselves through
visesas.(2) The concept of space as Avyakrtakasa in madha vas Philosophy must be recognized to
be a remarkable advance in vedantic thought, it we consider Thibaut‟s comment in vol-II page –
3-

Assistant Professor, Nalini Arts College, SP University, VVN, Anand, India

© 2014 [Link] July-September 2014 156 | P a g e

The International Journal of Indian Psychology: Volume: 01 | Issue: 04 No. 2 | ISSN 2348-5396

-of his translation of Sankara‟s BrhamasutraBhasya that “ the Vedanta‟s do not clearly
distinguish between empty space and an exceedingly fine matter filling all space which, how
even attenuate is yet one of the elements and as such belongs to the same cite gory as air, fire,
water and earth.” Madhava very much aware of a necessary distinction (3)

""^yV_ß`{gV§ {Xì`Ñ¥{ï>JmoMa_odVw Ÿ&

CËnÚVo, Aì`mH¥$V§ {h JJZ§ gm{jJmoMa_² Ÿ&
àXoe B{V {dko`§ {ZË`§ ZmoËnÚVo {h VV² Ÿ&''
and its scientific significance(4)
""AdH$me_m̧ ømH$me … H$W_wËnÚVo @Ý`Wm ?
He therefore holds that space and time are distinct entities, intuited by saksi and that they
are not merely forms of intuition” as in kantian thought. Otherwise they could not intuited.(5)
""JJZ§ gm{jJmoMa§ àXoe B{V {dko`_² Ÿ&''
The Madhav views of space and Time is much ahead of the other Indian Schools it is also
modern in same point of view. with the doctrine of saksi and VisesasMadhava hold possibilities
for the future fometaphyiscs. Space is termed “Avyakrtakasa” by Madhava as distinguished from
“ Bhutakasa”. The former is eternal and uncreated and the latter is a product of matter. This
twofold classification of Akasa is a special feature of Madhava‟s Philosophy. It is tersely termed
as “Akasadvaitam” by Jaytirtha and Vysatirtha.(6)
The Nyaya – vaisesikas hold that there is one eternal ubiquitous space (Vibhu) which is
not open to perception but is only inferred from the spatial characteristics of proximity,
remoteness, etc. But spatial properties and relations like distance, size etc. can be perceived
directly through touch, sight etc. The Mimasakas hold similar views. Some Naiyayikas regard
space as perceived by the visual sense. Jayatirthadismises this as impossible on the Nyayaviews
that space is colorless. Nor can space be left to be entirely inferred through sound as even the
congenitally deaf have a perception of space.
Madhav‟s theory of the intuitive perception of space and time has received assent from
many modern European thinkers.
SCIENTIFIC VIEW OF SPACE
The ordinary scientific view of space is what makes movement possible. The idea of
possible movement is formed by abstraction from the experience of movement. This is
circuitous. Madhava says that we cannot understand movement as such without being already
conscious of space. Space explains movement. He therefore suggests that space must be accepted

© 2014 [Link] July-September 2014 157 | P a g e

The International Journal of Indian Psychology: Volume: 01 | Issue: 04 No. 2 | ISSN 2348-5396

as a reality given by direct perception, not of the ordinary senses but of saksi which is specially
fitted to sense the super sensuous. No memory of movement is therefore, necessary to establish
space inferentially and mentally as some of the older Naiyayikas thought and some modern,
philosophers do.
Madhava‟s definition of space as distinguished from ether is true to its essential nature of
providing room for bodies to exit.
""AdH$me_m̧ ømH$me …''(7)
This is explained by Vyastritha as "AdH$me àXËd_²'. This is supported by a passage from
the Bhagavataquoated by Madhava. He holds that space and time are infinitely divisible into
father spaces and further parts of time each such part being held to be a “ natural” part of it and
not merely conditioned by Upadhis. For Upadhis according to Madhava are not so much the
causes of distinction (^oXH$maH$m…) as „pointers‟ (kmnH$m…) thereof.

""AdH$me_m̧ ømH$me… H$W_ËnÚVo @Ý`Wm Ÿ&

`ÚZmH$meVmnydª qH$ _yV©{Z{~‹S>§ OJV² Ÿ? Ÿ&&''(8)
He shows that it is logically in conceivable that space is created.
We cannot conceive of the antecedent non-existence of space anywhere it space is to be
created. Production also needs a material stuff and there is no such stuff out of which space could
be created. If Prakrti is that stuff the question could be repeated in respect of it as to why it
should alone be uncreated. If the reply is that production of Prakrti from stuff is inconceivable
the same thing could be said of space also. Madhava pleads strongly that space must be accepted
as an uncreated and eternal substance a view which receives striking support from the remarks of
Herbert Spencer. If space is created is must have been previously nonexistent. The non-
existence of space is absolutely inconceivable then necessarily, its creation is absolutely
inconceivable.”(9)
CONCLUSION
Above all discussion we can conclude that as a vedantin believing in the
Brhmakaranatvavada of the entire universe Madhava want to reconcile the essential uncreated
nature of space with the vedantic axiom that everything in the universe is in some sense created
by Brhaman by interpreting the creation of eternal substance like space and time in a
pickwickian sense of “Paradhinavisesapti” (namYrZ{deofm{á)(10)Here we can see that in that sense

© 2014 [Link] July-September 2014 158 | P a g e

The International Journal of Indian Psychology: Volume: 01 | Issue: 04 No. 2 | ISSN 2348-5396

Madhava has been the only vedantic Acharya who had the right insight in to the metaphysical
significance of the principle of samanvaya enunciated by the Sutrakara.
He explains the references to actual creation of Akasa in Upanisadic cosmology as
referring only Bhutakasa and this is the reason why he has admitted two kinds of Akasa in his
system.

REFERENCES

1. B.N.K Sharma :- Philosophy of Sri Madhavacaryamotilal Banarsidass Ltd. Delhi. P. 114,

ibid :- p. 114
2. B.N.k Sharma :- Brhams sutras and Their principal commen taries (Vol - II)
Bharatiyavidya Bhavan, Bombay 1971,1978- p. 126, Op. Cit :- (ii. 3.1)
3. ibid :- All the above publised as collective works of Madhavacarga and eidted by T.R.
Krishna charya Nir Nayasagar press, Bombay,
4. Madhavacarya :- Anuvyakyana (ii. 3.1)
5. Vyasatirtha :- Nyayamrta (1.5) N.S. press, Bombay – 1910, ibid

© 2014 [Link] July-September 2014 159 | P a g e