05-20-2005, 09:12 PM
It was mentioned by Carl that Sri Aurobindo pours scorn on Mayavad (or advaita)
Well, Sri Aurobindo doesn't deny the Nirguna Brahman (being-absolute) or even formless Nirvana (void or shunya). He clearly mentions that both these experiences can be had by the yogi. What he disagrees with is the making the Nirguna Brahman or formless Nirvana the highest ideal or goal of ones life.
If Nirguna or Nirvana are the true goal of life then why did we even land up in our present state. Why did the highest Nirguna even deign to come down to the our present level? It could as well have stayed in its exalted state. In Advaita this question is handled by the use of superposition, that Nirguna never really is deformed/distorted/converted into the saguna multiplicity that we find ourselves in. It always remains in its pristine glory. The forms, appearances, etc arise in 'Maya' and are apparently real only till higher lights of knowledge are not turned on.
Advaita is a very careful philosophy and handles this point very well. Basically it shows that within the structure of Advaita such questions are meaningless, and therefore there is no need to give an answer. But one is still left with the nagging feeling, if Nirguna Brahman is the true highest goal, then why did the descent from that highest state ever happen, even in Maya?
Sri Aurobindo was primarily a Shakta, although he was inspired towards spirituality by a Krishna experience. He says that creation is not an error. Creator Mother shakti is not just an enchantress like Maya. And it is not the primary goal of the creation to try to run directly towards the root, the Nirguna Brahman. He says that it is important to do yoga and have the experience of the absolute , in that sense he doesn't reject advaita at all. He considers it necessary step. Only difference he makes is that Shakti is trying to evolve the world with the purpose of bringing the divine down to the lowest levels and fill them with divine. He compares evolution of life as a way for Shakti to bring down some of divine down into the material plane too. He says this work of Shakti is ongoing. And true goal of human life is to bring down divine to the lowest of levels and make those levels divine too. His objection is to the practice of many yogis of leaving the world and merging in the absolute. He says, it is important to know the absolute by experience. But a merger with the absolute is not what Shakti's goal in creation is.
So Sri Aurobindo is very much into evolution. Although not exactly of Darwin's variety of survival of the fittest. But an evolution guided by a 'conscious will' of the Para-Shakti.
P.S. Also his difference with traditional advaita is not in content but in the supposed goals for human life. Traditional Advaita holds mukti and merger in Nirguna as the highest goal. Sri aurobindo thinks the human ideal shouldn't just be mukti and merger in absolute, but to be in the world and bring divine into the world.
Well, Sri Aurobindo doesn't deny the Nirguna Brahman (being-absolute) or even formless Nirvana (void or shunya). He clearly mentions that both these experiences can be had by the yogi. What he disagrees with is the making the Nirguna Brahman or formless Nirvana the highest ideal or goal of ones life.
If Nirguna or Nirvana are the true goal of life then why did we even land up in our present state. Why did the highest Nirguna even deign to come down to the our present level? It could as well have stayed in its exalted state. In Advaita this question is handled by the use of superposition, that Nirguna never really is deformed/distorted/converted into the saguna multiplicity that we find ourselves in. It always remains in its pristine glory. The forms, appearances, etc arise in 'Maya' and are apparently real only till higher lights of knowledge are not turned on.
Advaita is a very careful philosophy and handles this point very well. Basically it shows that within the structure of Advaita such questions are meaningless, and therefore there is no need to give an answer. But one is still left with the nagging feeling, if Nirguna Brahman is the true highest goal, then why did the descent from that highest state ever happen, even in Maya?
Sri Aurobindo was primarily a Shakta, although he was inspired towards spirituality by a Krishna experience. He says that creation is not an error. Creator Mother shakti is not just an enchantress like Maya. And it is not the primary goal of the creation to try to run directly towards the root, the Nirguna Brahman. He says that it is important to do yoga and have the experience of the absolute , in that sense he doesn't reject advaita at all. He considers it necessary step. Only difference he makes is that Shakti is trying to evolve the world with the purpose of bringing the divine down to the lowest levels and fill them with divine. He compares evolution of life as a way for Shakti to bring down some of divine down into the material plane too. He says this work of Shakti is ongoing. And true goal of human life is to bring down divine to the lowest of levels and make those levels divine too. His objection is to the practice of many yogis of leaving the world and merging in the absolute. He says, it is important to know the absolute by experience. But a merger with the absolute is not what Shakti's goal in creation is.
So Sri Aurobindo is very much into evolution. Although not exactly of Darwin's variety of survival of the fittest. But an evolution guided by a 'conscious will' of the Para-Shakti.
P.S. Also his difference with traditional advaita is not in content but in the supposed goals for human life. Traditional Advaita holds mukti and merger in Nirguna as the highest goal. Sri aurobindo thinks the human ideal shouldn't just be mukti and merger in absolute, but to be in the world and bring divine into the world.