Advaita and Spinoza's ethics

[Guest guest]

Greetings Gregji:

 

I briefly glanced through several sites with discussions on Spinoza's ethics.

The information all the sites are quite extensive on Spinoza's philosophy.

Let me give my understanding below (I didn't read it thoroughly and

consequntely my statements have potential limitations)

 

First, the all the postulates and the conclusions are equivalent to the

Shankara's statement at the Paramarthika (absolute) level of awareness -

'Sarvam Brahma Mayam,' and 'Brahmaiva Satyam.' Paramarthika level of awareness

is not constrained by time. Everything is nothing but Brahman. Brahman is the

Ultimate Truth and nothing but the Truth. For a realized person, there is

neither 'Karma' nor freewill and he merges with all happenings without

separation. You in me is the me in you! There are no questions and we are not

looking for answers and God, world, nature, you and me are the same!

 

Then what is that which separates Advaita and Spinoza? Advaita tries to

explain Vyavaharika (relative) level of awareness. The Vyavaharika level of

awareness accounts for the presence of time. The intellect defines notions of

measurement of human behavior across individuals and time. Human personality

can be separated into two parts: that which is permanent and that which is

transient. SELF represents the permanent personality and ego characterizes the

transient personality. Consequently ego is bounded by the body-mind-

intellect paradigm. Shankara argued that due to ignorance we identify ego as

our personality forgetting our true identity. He further emphasized the

importance of removal of our ignorance by gaining wisdom. To gain wisdom,

Shankara stresses self efforts (sadhana) and for logical consistency, law of

Karma became necessary.

 

Intellectual models and explanations can never be satisfactory because the

understanding vary by person according to level of knowledge, traditions and

beliefs and most important faith. This may explain why those who do not have

‘faith' in the ‘Law of Karma' have problems with Advaita on the discussions on

Sadhana (self efforts). Spinoza's ethics does not discuss about the

Vyavaharika level of awareness.

 

Now also see why Advaita philosophy is more appealing than Spinoza's ethical

laws. Let us try to distinguish between the society that follows Advaita

philosophy and Spinoza's ethical laws.

 

The followers of Advaita have to follow dharmic with ahimsa. They get reward

for good actions and punishment for evil actions. The society can maintain law

and order because everyone is responsible for their actions.

 

Those who follow Spinoza's ethical laws believe that God is responsible for

everything. Then how do we maintain law and order in such a society? It is

difficult to conceptualize the nature of the society if everyone believes that

God is responsible for everything. Life can become simplified or highly

complicated! Spinoza will argue that God is responsible for both the

simplification and the complication of our life!

 

The bottom line is that any explanation of unknown ‘Truth' requires

assumptions that are acceptable to everyone. However, every assumption is

questionable! This may explain why the sages and saints of Upanishads rightly

said - Truth can only be experienced and can never be explained. Absolute

comprehension of Truth is beyond the intellect. Relative comprehension of

Truth is possible and that is subject to acceptance of assumptions.

Consequently, it is accepted by some and rejected by some!

 

Here is another useful link discussing Spinoza's Ethics.

http://frank.mtsu.edu/~rbombard/RB/Spinoza/ethica-front.html

 

===================================================

Terminology of Advaita Vedanta - Some Key Words with Meanings

 

Source: A Dictionary of Advaita Vedanta, by Swami Harshananda, Ramakrishna

Math, Bangalore, India. (This is an excellent reference book for everyone

interested in Advaita). This is available through Ramakrishna Mission

Publications. To explain Advaita Vedanta, these words are useful but they

are neither necessary nor sufficient! These terms are specifically chosen to

indicate a brief outline of Vedantic Philosophy.

 

Advaita

 

Advaita means non-dual, one without the second. Specifically, it refers to the

Vedantic philosophy advanced by Sankara. According to Sankara, Brahman the

Absolute is the only reality. Advaita denies the permanent existence of the

world and individual souls.

 

Brahman

Also Atman is described as pure consciousness (also known as sat, cit,

ananda).

 

Jiva

The living being in the state of bondage and undergoing transmigration.

According to Vedanta, the jiva is a reflection of the pure consciousness

through buddhi, the intellect. The bondage is caused by ajnana or ignorance

and jiva can get liberation through jnana or spiritual knowledge.

 

Vrtti

They are the waves constantly arise in the mind and are obstacles to yoga or

perfect concentration on the Atman or Self. They can be directed toward Atman

through Sadhana in the course of time.

 

Sadhana

Sadhana represents the means of spiritual enlightenment and the four sadhanas

are Viveka (discrimination), vairagya (renunciation), samadi-satka (the group

of six spiritual attributes), and mumukstutva (desire for liberation).

 

Viveka

Discrimination between real and the unreal.

 

Vairagya

Vairagya represents the spirit of a detachment mostly to the objects of

pleasure.

 

Samadi-satka

Samadi-satka consists of sama (tranquillity), dama (self-control) uparati

(cessation of external organs from the pursuit of sense-objects), titiksa

(endurance), samadhana (concentration), and sraddha (faith).

 

Mumuksutva

The desire for liberation and is the most important among the four sadhanas.

 

Sankalpa

Represents the general aspects of the functioning of manas, a resolve of the

type, ‘I will do this,' ‘I shall have it,' etc. In Hindu religious rituals,

sankalpa is the statement of the purpose and mode of performance of a ritual.

 

Yoga

Yoga is the mode of sadhana to keep the mind from vrtti (thouht waves). The

word ‘yoga' derived from the root yuj has two senses: Samadhi or

superconscious experience through concentration of the mind; yoking or uniting

the individual self with God.

 

Nirguna and Saguna

Guna means quality or attribute and Nirguna means without quality or

attribute. In Advaita Vedanta, the Brahman, the Absolute has no gunas

(qualities or attributes). The dualistic and theistic schools accept the

Brahman with Saguna or full of divine attributes.

 

Nirvikalpaka and Savikalpaka

Vikalpa means distinction between ‘me,' the Brahman and the world.

Nirvikalpaka means without distinctions.

Savikalpaka means the persistence of the distinction between ‘me,' and

‘Brahman' and the world.

 

Samadhi

The total absorption in the object of concentration. In Vedanta the object is

the unity of Atman with Brahman. Samadhi is of two kinds: savikalpaka and

nirvikalpaka. In the savikalpaka samadhi the consciousness of one's own

personality as distinct from Brahman, persists, however declined it may be. In

the nirvikalpaka state, however, all awareness of multiplicity including that

of oneself as distinct from Brahman is completely dissolved.

 

Mukti, Mohsa, Kaivalya or Nirvana

The state of freedom or liberation from all bonds due to ajnana (ignorance) or

maya (illusory power). It is characterized by bliss and cessation of rebirths.

 

Brief Outline of Vedantic Philosophy of Human Life

 

The goal of Vedanta is to help the jiva (human life) to attain mukti. Jiva's

bondage starts with the vrtti (waves of thoughts in the mind). For example,

when the Jiva sees a banana, the first identification is nirvikalpaka vrtti.

The mind registers banana as a fruit from the nature and it starts with the

thought process. When the thought process reaches the state of savikalpaka

vritti, banana is seen with distinct attributes such as good banana, bad

banana, rotten banana, big banana, small banana etc. The decision to eat

and/or taste the banana represents the sankalpa state. At this state mind

bubbles with thought waves. How to rid of these thought waves? We need to

discipline the mind to detach its thoughts on banana and this disciplining

process is Yoga. Yoga becomes necessary to get rid of the sankalpa and to

reprogram the mind to deny the influence of vrtti. Sadhanas are the essential

components of Yoga (Karma, Bhakti and Jnana) and the practice of Yoga helps us

to reach the state of Samadhi and ultimately achieve mukti.

[Guest guest]

Namaste

 

I felt the same way too after reading the post from Patrick. That Spinoza's

words seemed to be at the Paramarthika level of reality. And Ram-ji's

exposition on the need of law and order (Dharma) is truly great. For a

moment, I thought I was confused. Cheers to Ram-ji for saving me....Hahaha

:-) Txs.

 

Om Shanti

Kathi

>

> Ram Chandran [sMTP:chandran]

> Monday, January 17, 2000 1:32 PM

> Advaitin List

> Advaita and Spinoza's ethics

>

> Ram Chandran <chandran

>

> Greetings Gregji:

>

> I briefly glanced through several sites with discussions on Spinoza's

> ethics.

> The information all the sites are quite extensive on Spinoza's philosophy.

>

> Let me give my understanding below (I didn't read it thoroughly and

> consequntely my statements have potential limitations)

>

[Guest guest]

Greetings,

 

Would anyone famliar with Western philosophical traditions point to

sources where there is discussion of dream-states, deep sleep state, and

after-life, and their coherent ralationship to the waking state?

 

Regards,

 

S.

 

 

 

----Original Message Follows----

Greg Goode <goode

advaitin

advaitin , Advaitin List <advaitin >

Re: Advaita and Spinoza's ethics

Mon, 17 Jan 2000 13:23:42 -0500

 

 

____

Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

[Guest guest]

Thank you Ramji,

 

These comments on Spinoza should be very helpful for anyone interested in

Spinoza, and who finds his/herself balancing Western-philosopical with

advaitic approaches on the spiritual path! You point to one very important

problem that manifests itself in many traditions: the tension that can

arise between an *absolute* level of being or understanding or theory, and

the very *relative*, day-to-day, person-to-person need for legal, moral,

and helpful conduct. Different traditions have different answers to this

issue, but sooner or later, every approach that talks about ultimate

matters must confront this. Thank you for pointing this out.

 

Regards,

 

--Greg

 

At 12:32 AM 1/17/00 -0500, Ram Chandran wrote:

>Ram Chandran <chandran

>

>Greetings Gregji:

>

>I briefly glanced through several sites with discussions on Spinoza's

ethics.

>The information all the sites are quite extensive on Spinoza's philosophy.

>Let me give my understanding below (I didn't read it thoroughly and

>consequntely my statements have potential limitations)

 

....

>The followers of Advaita have to follow dharmic with ahimsa. They get reward

>for good actions and punishment for evil actions. The society can maintain

law

>and order because everyone is responsible for their actions.

>

>Those who follow Spinoza's ethical laws believe that God is responsible for

>everything. Then how do we maintain law and order in such a society? It is

>difficult to conceptualize the nature of the society if everyone believes

that

>God is responsible for everything. Life can become simplified or highly

>complicated! Spinoza will argue that God is responsible for both the

>simplification and the complication of our life!

>

>The bottom line is that any explanation of unknown ‘Truth' requires

>assumptions that are acceptable to everyone. However, every assumption is

>questionable! This may explain why the sages and saints of Upanishads rightly

>said - Truth can only be experienced and can never be explained. Absolute

>comprehension of Truth is beyond the intellect. Relative comprehension of

>Truth is possible and that is subject to acceptance of assumptions.

>Consequently, it is accepted by some and rejected by some!

[Guest guest]

Dear Sunder,

 

I presume you mean taken from the Western traditions? The best source I

have ever seen is *not* in the Western traditions, but is an appendix in

Vol. 4 of the Upanishads, edition by Swami Nikhilananda.

 

In the Western traditions, you might check out the scholarly works on

reincarnation by Ian Stevenson of the University of Virginia. Here's a

book description from amazon.com on his book, _Where Reincarnation and

Biology Intersect_:

 

Book Description: _Where Reincarnation and Biology Intersect_:

================

Children who claim to remember a previous life have been found in many

parts of the world, particularly in the Buddhist and Hindu countries of

South Asia, among the Shiite peoples of Lebanon and Turkey, the tribes of

West Africa, and the American northwest. Stevenson has collected over 2,600

reported cases of past-life memories of which 65 detailed reports have been

published. Specific information from the children's memories has been

collected and matched with the data of their former identity, family,

residence, and manner of death. Birthmarks or other physiological

manifestations have been found to relate to experiences of the remembered

past life, particularly violent death. Writing as a specialist in

psychiatry and as a world-renowned scientific investigator of reported

paranormal events, Stevenson asks us to suspend our Western tendencies to

disbelieve in "reincarnation" and consider the reality of the burgeoning

record of cases now available. This book summarizes Stevenson's findings

which are presented in full in the multi-volume work entitled.

Reincarnation and Biology: A Contribution to the Etiology of Birthmarks and

Birth Defects, also published by Praeger.

 

About the Author

IAN STEVENSON is Carlson Professor of Psychiatry and Director of the

Division of Personality Studies at the Health Sciences Center, University

of Virginia.

 

Regards,

 

--Greg

 

 

At 01:35 PM 1/17/00 EST, Sunder Hattangadi wrote:

>"Sunder Hattangadi" <sunderh

>

>Greetings,

>

> Would anyone famliar with Western philosophical traditions point to

>sources where there is discussion of dream-states, deep sleep state, and

>after-life, and their coherent ralationship to the waking state?