04-30-2005, 12:31 AM
Continued...
Fundamentals of Advaita:
Budhist philosopher Nagarjuna held that world is illusory and everything is "nothingness" or "sunya". Nagarjuna held that universe, self and everything else is ultimately "void" or sunya. Nagarjuna was a master of dialectics and his arguments were very incisive. Sankara also maintains the ultimate illusoriness of the world, but he makes the crucial difference that even for an illusion to be, there has to be a "real" substratum upon which the illusion is enacted. Typical example is given of the rope and the snake. In a dark room you see a snake and jump around in fear, but when you turn on the lights, you see that the snake was just an illusion created by a rope lying on the floor. When the higher knowledge dawns, such as when lights are turned on, reality of snake is subrated and substituted by the reality of the rope. This subration is an important concept in Sankara's theory. Subration removes the illusory superimposition of snake on the real rope( superimposition is called Adhyasa). Sankara says that as one gains higher and higher spiritual knowledge, so as to turn on more and more lights, reality of the phenomenal world is gradually and successively subrated by a higher and higher reality. If you continue this process, then in a limiting sense (as in calculus) you reach a level of reality which can not be further subrated. He calls this ultimate reality the "Brahman". This ultimate reality is the basis of whole universe. Universe appears to be real not because it is inherently real, but because it is based on "Brahman" which is the only reality. Depending on the level of light/darkness (avidya or maya) different things "appear" to be real, but they can always be subrated by a higher knowledge.
(i) There is only ONE principle of "reality" called Brahman.
(ii) Every other thing that appears to be is called an "appearance".
(iii) Appearances don't have inherent reality, because they can be subrated by a higher knowledge. But they are based on a single REALITY, viz. Brahman.
(iV) Something can't even illusorily appear to be unless it has a real subtratum to enact the illusion.
(v) Brahman is Nirguna or without attributes, Attributes necessarily describe limits of an object and so are limiting.
(vi) But from our viewpoint Nirguna Brahmana can't be comprehended. The closest we can come to describe the Brahman through attributes is called "Saguna Brahman" or Brahman with attributes. These attributes are: SAT, CHIT, ANANDA. Sat means pure existence, Chit means pure consciousness, Ananda means pure bliss. These attributes in their completeness come the closest in describing Brahman which is beyond attributes.
(vii) Individual self or Atman is usually identified with the ego. But ego is no more than an idea of the self. This "idea" can be changed. So ego is just a supposed self, it can be changed, dropped etc. Real self is beyond body, mind and ego. It is the deepest observer in us, the ultimate witness.
(viii)Two objects are distinguished from each other by their attributes. But attributes necessarily imply an observer of those attributes. If the observer inside Ashok is to be distinguished from the observer inside Imtiyaz, then we will have to give these observers distinguishing attributes. But if the observer in ashok has attributes then supposedly ashok can find a way to observe those attributes and then ashok will have a deeper observer inside which is observing this lower observer with attributes. Continue the limiting process and you reach a point where the deepest observer in ashok is left with no attributes. Same with the deepest observer in Imtiyaz or anybody else. Since these deepest observers don't have attributes they can't be distinguished from each other. And here comes the biggest idea of Vedanta.
(ix) There is a SINGLE observer in this universe. It is the deepest observer in all of us. It is our deepest self and it is identical with the self of all.
(x) This deepest self or Atman is unique without a second.
(xi) This Atman is self existent (as a statement such as "I don't exist" is impossible to be made). Therefore this deepest self can be described by "Sat" or existence.
(xii)This Atman is self conscious (Chit) as consciousness is the nature of self.
(xiii) This unique Atman is blissful (Ananda) as there is no second one to be fearful of.
(xiv) So Atman, the deepest self within all has the same limiting attributes as the "Brahman" the ultimate real substratum of the universe.
(xv) Sankara declares that Atman and Brahman are identical. That is deepest self in all of us is same as the basis of whole universe. In common language one may say I and God are no different, but of course this "I" is not the limited ego based I.
(xvi) These last statements are based on sayings from Upanisads such as
"Ayam Atma brahma" => This self (atman) is Brahman.
"Aham brahma asmi" => I am Brahman
"Tat tvam asi" => That thou art
"So aham asmi" => I am that etc.
(xvii) Upanisadic sayings were sayings by sages who had supposedly realized the truth and the uttered them without any qualifications and justifications. Sankara provided the philosophical backing for those sayings.
(xviii) Many sayings of Krishna in Gita such as "This body is a field and there is a knower of the field, and I am the knower of all the fields that there are" are basically saying the same thing and Sankara uses them to support his philosophy.
Fundamentals of Advaita:
Budhist philosopher Nagarjuna held that world is illusory and everything is "nothingness" or "sunya". Nagarjuna held that universe, self and everything else is ultimately "void" or sunya. Nagarjuna was a master of dialectics and his arguments were very incisive. Sankara also maintains the ultimate illusoriness of the world, but he makes the crucial difference that even for an illusion to be, there has to be a "real" substratum upon which the illusion is enacted. Typical example is given of the rope and the snake. In a dark room you see a snake and jump around in fear, but when you turn on the lights, you see that the snake was just an illusion created by a rope lying on the floor. When the higher knowledge dawns, such as when lights are turned on, reality of snake is subrated and substituted by the reality of the rope. This subration is an important concept in Sankara's theory. Subration removes the illusory superimposition of snake on the real rope( superimposition is called Adhyasa). Sankara says that as one gains higher and higher spiritual knowledge, so as to turn on more and more lights, reality of the phenomenal world is gradually and successively subrated by a higher and higher reality. If you continue this process, then in a limiting sense (as in calculus) you reach a level of reality which can not be further subrated. He calls this ultimate reality the "Brahman". This ultimate reality is the basis of whole universe. Universe appears to be real not because it is inherently real, but because it is based on "Brahman" which is the only reality. Depending on the level of light/darkness (avidya or maya) different things "appear" to be real, but they can always be subrated by a higher knowledge.
(i) There is only ONE principle of "reality" called Brahman.
(ii) Every other thing that appears to be is called an "appearance".
(iii) Appearances don't have inherent reality, because they can be subrated by a higher knowledge. But they are based on a single REALITY, viz. Brahman.
(iV) Something can't even illusorily appear to be unless it has a real subtratum to enact the illusion.
(v) Brahman is Nirguna or without attributes, Attributes necessarily describe limits of an object and so are limiting.
(vi) But from our viewpoint Nirguna Brahmana can't be comprehended. The closest we can come to describe the Brahman through attributes is called "Saguna Brahman" or Brahman with attributes. These attributes are: SAT, CHIT, ANANDA. Sat means pure existence, Chit means pure consciousness, Ananda means pure bliss. These attributes in their completeness come the closest in describing Brahman which is beyond attributes.
(vii) Individual self or Atman is usually identified with the ego. But ego is no more than an idea of the self. This "idea" can be changed. So ego is just a supposed self, it can be changed, dropped etc. Real self is beyond body, mind and ego. It is the deepest observer in us, the ultimate witness.
(viii)Two objects are distinguished from each other by their attributes. But attributes necessarily imply an observer of those attributes. If the observer inside Ashok is to be distinguished from the observer inside Imtiyaz, then we will have to give these observers distinguishing attributes. But if the observer in ashok has attributes then supposedly ashok can find a way to observe those attributes and then ashok will have a deeper observer inside which is observing this lower observer with attributes. Continue the limiting process and you reach a point where the deepest observer in ashok is left with no attributes. Same with the deepest observer in Imtiyaz or anybody else. Since these deepest observers don't have attributes they can't be distinguished from each other. And here comes the biggest idea of Vedanta.
(ix) There is a SINGLE observer in this universe. It is the deepest observer in all of us. It is our deepest self and it is identical with the self of all.
(x) This deepest self or Atman is unique without a second.
(xi) This Atman is self existent (as a statement such as "I don't exist" is impossible to be made). Therefore this deepest self can be described by "Sat" or existence.
(xii)This Atman is self conscious (Chit) as consciousness is the nature of self.
(xiii) This unique Atman is blissful (Ananda) as there is no second one to be fearful of.
(xiv) So Atman, the deepest self within all has the same limiting attributes as the "Brahman" the ultimate real substratum of the universe.
(xv) Sankara declares that Atman and Brahman are identical. That is deepest self in all of us is same as the basis of whole universe. In common language one may say I and God are no different, but of course this "I" is not the limited ego based I.
(xvi) These last statements are based on sayings from Upanisads such as
"Ayam Atma brahma" => This self (atman) is Brahman.
"Aham brahma asmi" => I am Brahman
"Tat tvam asi" => That thou art
"So aham asmi" => I am that etc.
(xvii) Upanisadic sayings were sayings by sages who had supposedly realized the truth and the uttered them without any qualifications and justifications. Sankara provided the philosophical backing for those sayings.
(xviii) Many sayings of Krishna in Gita such as "This body is a field and there is a knower of the field, and I am the knower of all the fields that there are" are basically saying the same thing and Sankara uses them to support his philosophy.