What if your direct experience contradicts a Vedic text — which do you trust? Madhvacharya’s answer is unambiguous: never falsify your experience. This is Part 1 of a tripartite series on Madhvacharya’s Tattvavada school of Vedanta, hosted by ethnographer Dr. Sarita Sheshagiri in conversation with Dr. V. Srinidhi — physician, IIM Bangalore PhD in public policy, and 20-year trained shastric scholar.
The session begins with a foundational epistemological question: modern qualitative research tools produce “colourful cutouts and coffee table catalogues” rather than rigorous insight. Can the tools of knowledge (Pramanas) from the Indian tradition — particularly Pratyaksha (direct perception), Anumana (inference), and Agama (scriptural testimony) — offer a more rigorous framework?
Madhvacharya’s Tattvavada holds that direct inner experience (anubhava) is paramount — if the apparent meaning of a Vedic passage contradicts lived experience, that meaning must be wrong, not the experience. This radical epistemological stance underpins the entire Dvaita Vedanta framework and has far-reaching implications for how we know anything at all.

About the Speaker:
Dr. V. Srinidhi — Scholar of Saṃskṛta and Dvaita Vedānta, with over 20 years of traditional studies; holds an MBBS from Bangalore Medical College and a PhD from IIM Bangalore; a member of the founding team of Pūrṇapramati; formerly Faculty of Public Health; currently Professor by Research of Indian Knowledge Systems at DESPU, and Deputy Director of Aitareya Śodha Prakāśana Pīṭha, Śrī Bhaṇḍārakeri Maṭha.

Moderator:
Dr. Sarita Seshagiri – Ethnographer and UX researcher with a PhD from NUS, specializing in human-computer interaction and social technology; visiting faculty at IIIT Bangalore.