Guest guest Posted January 20, 2004 Report Share Posted January 20, 2004 Namaste, This may interest you, and it is related to the Maya discussion. As I said yesterday, I am reading some new books on Indian philosophy, such as 'The Philosophy of the Upanishads' by S.C. Chakravarti (1935). His point was that the doctrine of maya has done a lot of damage to the reputation of Indian philosophy and of India in general, by making the Vedantins (especially Advaitins) look as though they were mere dreamers divorced from reality. You already know my opinion, namely, that the doctrine that 'consciousness is everything' and 'objects are therefore illusions insofar as they are perceived as distinct from consciousness', does no such thing. Everything in the preceding sentence is entirely compatible with science and with the so-called reality of daily life. Nevertheless, it is revealing to hear this Indian scholar (circa 1935) defending his 'people' (using wrong arguments in my opinion) by denying that the Upanishads have anything to do with maya as 'illusion'. Please remember that this was before independence, and try to put yourself in his position. He was claiming that the doctrine of maya was effectively being used as a political weapon to denigrate India. I would say that it is the *distortion* of the doctrine of maya that was being so used (and perhaps still is). "The above-quoted writer [the early 20th century British Indologist Gough], with great shrewdness, found out that by laying stress upon the theory of Maya, and by establishing it to be the essence of the philosophy of the Upanishads, it could easily be demonstrated that the Indian thinkers were only a set of dreamers, blind to the actualities of existence, and devoid of appreciation for what is good and true in life." (p. 163 op. cit.) I'll bet Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan also felt such uncomfortable pressure to make Vedanta look 'realistic', especially since he spent a lot of time at Oxford, with hard-headed 20th century realists and materialists! It shows in his 'Indian Philosophy'. Hari Om! Benjamin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 20, 2004 Report Share Posted January 20, 2004 --- Benjamin <orion777ben wrote: > > Namaste, > > This may interest you, and it is related to the Maya discussion. As > I said yesterday, I am reading some new books on Indian philosophy, > such as 'The Philosophy of the Upanishads' by S.C. Chakravarti > (1935). His point was that the doctrine of maya has done a lot of > damage to the reputation of Indian philosophy and of India in > general, by making the Vedantins (especially Advaitins) look as > though they were mere dreamers divorced from reality. Benjamin all I can say is whoever his guy is, he is out of his mind. He might as well blame the 'Sun' for all ill-will in the society! The guys are bruing the libraries saying that all Brahmanical books, meaning veda-s, are responsible for writings on 'Shivaji' or problems in society. We have Ravana-s then and we have Ravana-s now. They forget it was Vivekananada, who wipped the people to awakeing from slavary, is an Advaitin! Sankara who travelled bare-footed across the nation wiping out all meaningless karma-s, rituals and sacrificies in the name of religion is the master of advaita doctrin. Hari OM! Sadananda ===== What you have is His gift to you and what you do with what you have is your gift to Him - Swami Chinmayananda. Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes http://hotjobs.sweepstakes./signingbonus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 20, 2004 Report Share Posted January 20, 2004 Namaste, >Benjamin all I can say is whoever his guy is, he is out of his mind. >He might as well blame the 'Sun' for all ill-will in the society! Yes, Sadaji, you are quite right. He is wrong. But my point is that such arguments have apparently influenced many people and helped to hurt the reputation of Advaitins, Vedantins and maybe even Indians in general (land of snake charmers, etc.). It is unfair, but probably true to a significant extent. I think that many people shy away from the maya doctrine because of ridicule such as this. To say that 'the world is unreal' sounds to many people too much like smoking something illegal! (I hope that was funny.) Anyhow, you and I both agree that this misunderstanding of illusion has nothing to do with Advaita. But if it sounds that way to others, we should be aware of this fact. The solution, in my opinion, is to realize that the statement 'all is consciousness' in no way contradicts science. Science is supposed to be based only on observations, and all observations are by definition within consciousness. Therefore, Advaita cannot contradict science. However, the hypothesis of a material world external to consciousness is totally unfounded and represents a mere theology, despite the fact that many scientists simply assume it. Also, it now seems to contradict the observations of quantum mechanics... Hari Om! Benjamin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 20, 2004 Report Share Posted January 20, 2004 --- Benjamin <orion777ben wrote: > The solution, in my opinion, is to realize that the statement 'all is > consciousness' in no way contradicts science. Science is supposed to > be based only on observations, and all observations are by definition > within consciousness. Therefore, Advaita cannot contradict science. > However, the hypothesis of a material world external to consciousness > is totally unfounded and represents a mere theology, despite the fact > that many scientists simply assume it. Also, it now seems to > contradict the observations of quantum mechanics... > > Hari Om! > Benjamin Benjamin - Just to put you on the smoking gun or frying pan I am posting the last paragraph of yours in the vAdAvali list since that list is little quiet for now and you are also member of that list. When I made those statements we had lot of dvaitins who claim to be scientists flooded with their posts that my statements were unscientific and unvedic too! They fail to recognize the problem of indeterminacy of the world since it violates their basic fundamental assumption that the world is real. Once you make an asumption and built theories on it, I guess you have to justify it. For them it is absolutely real since we experience it. Hari OM! Sadananda ===== What you have is His gift to you and what you do with what you have is your gift to Him - Swami Chinmayananda. Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes http://hotjobs.sweepstakes./signingbonus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 20, 2004 Report Share Posted January 20, 2004 Namaste, >Benjamin - Just to put you on the smoking gun or frying pan >I am posting the last paragraph of yours in the vAdAvali list >since that list is little quiet for now and you are also member >of that list. OK, Sadaji. No good deed goes unpunished... :-) I will obey and do some battle with the formidable Sri Jay, until I can stand the pain no longer. (About 10 minutes) By the way, my last message on 'Maya as political weapon' has not yet made it to the mirror, which can be confusing, but it does not matter in my case. I just want list members to realize that the mirror site can sometimes act funny, and to check the page from time to time. Hari Om! Benjamin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 20, 2004 Report Share Posted January 20, 2004 With my apologies to the maestros - The concept, what Sadananda-Ji and others have expressed in the recent posts is quite to clear elucidation of maayaa. This has been wonderfully expressed or rather summarized in the "shvetaashvatara upaniShada" maayaa.m tu prakR^iti.m vidyaatnmaayin.m ca maeshvaram || 4.10 || Thus, realizing this - j~naatvaa deva.m mucyate sarvapaaShaiH || 2.15 || To me the simplest definition of "maayaa" therefore becomes as follows: maa - (meaning) "not" yaa – (meaning) "that trikaala abaadhita satya (puruShaa)." In a way the word "maayaa" itself admits being not the reality of truth. Thus realizing the futility of attachment to maaya (falsehood) can lead to moksha through this knowledge. Therefore non-attachment is highly recommended and practiced. In any scientific experiments remaining attached to incorrect ideas, hypothesis brings the progress to screeching halt. That is why advita comes closest to science. Just few of my thought with apologies for interjecting. Regards, Dr. Yadu advaitin, kuntimaddi sadananda <kuntimaddisada> wrote: > > --- Benjamin <orion777ben> wrote: > > > The solution, in my opinion, is to realize that the statement 'all is > > consciousness' in no way contradicts science. Science is supposed to > > be based only on observations, and all observations are by definition > > within consciousness. Therefore, Advaita cannot contradict science. > > However, the hypothesis of a material world external to consciousness > > is totally unfounded and represents a mere theology, despite the fact > > that many scientists simply assume it. Also, it now seems to > > contradict the observations of quantum mechanics... > > > > Hari Om! > > Benjamin > > > Benjamin - Just to put you on the smoking gun or frying pan I am posting > the last paragraph of yours in the vAdAvali list since that list is > little quiet for now and you are also member of that list. When I made > those statements we had lot of dvaitins who claim to be scientists > flooded with their posts that my statements were unscientific and > unvedic too! They fail to recognize the problem of indeterminacy of the > world since it violates their basic fundamental assumption that the > world is real. Once you make an asumption and built theories on it, I > guess you have to justify it. For them it is absolutely real since we > experience it. > > Hari OM! > Sadananda > > > > > > ===== > What you have is His gift to you and what you do with what you have is your gift to Him - Swami Chinmayananda. > > > > Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes > http://hotjobs.sweepstakes./signingbonus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.