Digest Number 932

[Guest guest]

Dennis, even as I reject Advaita theory as the basis

for our current discussion, so do I reject Western

philosophy. I just want us to try to understand the

world intellectually. If you want to borrow arguments

from philosophers - Eastern or Western - that's not a

problem - as long as you know how to back up with

reason, the metaphysical supposition.

 

The subjective idealism that I spoke about was neither

from Bradley nor Schopenhauer - it was Sadananda's

view of the world (whatever his actual source might be

- I think it is Advaita). So I'm just disputing his

view of Advaita. The same way if you have your own

understanding of Advaita - let's hear it and we can

try reconciling with reason.

 

Yes, Greg/Frank/Murty and all other who might be

interested, I would like you all to participate to try

to reconcile Advaita with reason.

 

 

 

 

Get email at your own domain with Mail.

http://personal.mail./

[Guest guest]

namaste shri Nandaji,

 

You have asked

> [...]

>

> Yes, Greg/Frank/Murty and all other who might be

> interested, I would like you all to participate to try

> to reconcile Advaita with reason.

>

 

and you have said earlier in reply to Dennis

> Frankly, I cannot find happiness/contentment by simply

> accepting everything is brahman and all this world is

> only maya. Yes, though I accept that the ultimate

> truth is beyond the intellect still when you're trying

> to reach it you can go to a much deeper level using

> the intellect. The deeper you go the nearer you get to

> the truth - or atleast you'll get rid of a lot of

> avidhya.

 

 

My (this jIvA's) interest in advaita is towards this end:

 

advaita vAsanA --> sAdhanA --> cittashuddhi --> moksha

 

Your attemt to reconcile advaita with reason is commendable.

But, I would like to ask: to what end? If you disprove (i.e.,

show advaita cannot stand to reason), then what happens?

If you find proof (that advaita stands to reason and logic

as put forward by human intellect), then what happens?

As you very well know, advaita at the highest is non-duality.

But you see duality in name and form all around. That itself

shows advaita at the highest is beyond reason as we have it

now. If we show that advaita cannot stand to reason, it only

shows that our logic is (and will always be) inadequate and

has not developed (or cannot develop) to a stage to include

non-duality in it. It does not mean that advaita is falliable.

 

The answer, as I see, to your question on Consciousness is:

the relative reality - sat and mithya. The reality at the

highest level - sat- is the Consciousness that I AM. For

that Consciousness, there is no need of an object. All the

objects are subsumed in that Consciousness. The object-

consciousness is a second-order reality - mithya. Mithya

is unreal only at the highest level of reality. At other

(vyavahArika) level, our Consciousness pervades these

objects and gives them reality. A lower level of reality

is the pairs of opposites created by us: I hate this,

I love this, etc. There are jIvAs who consider that

also to be real. So, pholosophically then, we are

going from a lower to a higher level of Truth, the

highest Truth being beyond what one can rationalize

by the human intellect.

 

What I said above is supported by shri shankara's bhAShya

on Br^ihadAraNyaka u. 1.iv.7 where He says the Absolute

undifferentiated brahman (the Consciousness) by itself

differentiates into names and forms (objects of

consciousness in your terminology) and gives them

relative reality.

 

 

Regards

Gummuluru Murthy

---------------------------

[Guest guest]

Namaste Nandaji

 

However I feel that reasoning is an important stage in Advaita Philosophy,

but it is not all of it. Reasoning helps you to reach the stage where you

may see yourself in everything else, but finally the experience is the one

that determines the truth of Advaita. Moreover, Atma is not an object which

I can show you like any other thing. Perception, inference and reasoning

cannot reveal the Atma.

 

Just felt like contributing.

 

Kathi

>

> Nanda Chandran [sMTP:vpcnk]

> Wednesday, April 11, 2001 9:26 PM

> advaitin

> Re: Digest Number 932

>

> Dennis, even as I reject Advaita theory as the basis

> for our current discussion, so do I reject Western

> philosophy. I just want us to try to understand the

> world intellectually. If you want to borrow arguments

> from philosophers - Eastern or Western - that's not a

> problem - as long as you know how to back up with

> reason, the metaphysical supposition.

>

> The subjective idealism that I spoke about was neither

> from Bradley nor Schopenhauer - it was Sadananda's

> view of the world (whatever his actual source might be

> - I think it is Advaita). So I'm just disputing his

> view of Advaita. The same way if you have your own

> understanding of Advaita - let's hear it and we can

> try reconciling with reason.

>

> Yes, Greg/Frank/Murty and all other who might be

> interested, I would like you all to participate to try

> to reconcile Advaita with reason.

>

>

>

>

> Get email at your own domain with Mail.

> <http://personal.mail./>

>

>

> Sponsor

> www.newaydirect.com

> <http://rd./M=190481.1393724.2979175.2/D=egroupmail/S=1700075991:

> N/A=613957/?http://www.newaydirect.com>

> <

> <http://us.adserver./l?M=190481.1393724.2979175.2/D=egroupmail/S=

> 1700075991:N/A=613957/rand=632341403>

>

> Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of

> Atman and Brahman.

> Advaitin List Archives available at:

> <http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/>

> Please Note the New Changes at the Mail Server

> For details, visit: </local/news.html>

> Post message: advaitin

> Subscribe: advaitin-

> Un: advaitin

> URL to Advaitin: <advaitin>

> File folder: <advaitin>

> Link Folder: <advaitin/links>

> Messages Folder: <advaitin/messages>

>

>

>

> Terms of Service

> <>.