Ontology - the nature of Being Advaita Vedanta

1 ontology - nature of being

1.1 levels of reality, truths
1.2 3 states of consciousness , turiya
1.3 identity of atman , brahman
1.4 empirical reality - illusion , ignorance

1.4.1 causality
1.4.2 māyā (illusion)
1.4.3 avidya (ignorance)

ontology - nature of being


the swan important motif in advaita. symbolises 2 things: first, swan called hamsah in sanskrit (which becomes hamso if first letter in next word /h/). upon repeating hamso indefinitely, becomes so-aham, meaning, . second, swan lives in lake feathers not soiled water, liberated advaitin lives in world not soiled maya.


levels of reality, truths

the classical advaita vedanta explains reality , in experienced world same brahman. advaitins, there unity in multiplicity, , there no dual hierarchy of creator , created universe. objects, experiences, matter, consciousness, awareness, in advaita philosophy not property nature of 1 fundamental reality brahman. premise, advaita school states ontological effort must presuppose knowing self, , effort needs explain empirical experiences such projected reality while 1 dreams during sleep, , observed multiplicity of living beings. advaita positing theory of 3 levels of reality, theory of 2 truths, , developing , integrating these ideas theory of errors (anirvacaniya khyati).

shankara proposes 3 levels of reality, using sublation ontological criterion:

pāramārthika (paramartha, absolute), reality metaphysically true , ontologically accurate. state of experiencing absolutely real , both other reality levels can resolved . reality highest, can t sublated (assimilated) other.
vyāvahārika (vyavahara), or samvriti-saya, consisting of empirical or pragmatical reality. ever changing on time, empirically true @ given time , context not metaphysically true. our world of experience, phenomenal world handle every day when awake . level in both jiva (living creatures or individual souls) , iswara true; here, material world true incomplete reality , sublatable.
prāthibhāsika (pratibhasika, apparent reality, unreality), reality based on imagination alone . level of experience in mind constructs own reality. well-known examples of pratibhasika imaginary reality such roaring of lion fabricated in dreams during 1 s sleep, , perception of rope in dark being snake.

advaita vedanta acknowledges , admits empirical perspective there numerous distinctions. states , each reality has multiple perspectives, both absolute , relative. these valid , true in respective contexts, states advaita, respective particular perspectives. absolute , relative truths explanation, advaitins call 2 truths doctrine. john grimes, professor of indian religions specializing on vedanta, explains advaita doctrine example of light , darkness. sun s perspective, neither rises nor sets, there no darkness, , light . perspective of person on earth, sun rise , set, there both light , darkness, not light , there relative shades of light , darkness. both valid realities , truths, given perspectives. yet, contradictory. true 1 point of view, states grimes, not another. advaita vedanta, not mean there 2 truths , 2 realities, means same 1 reality , 1 truth explained or experienced 2 different perspectives.

as developed these theories, advaita vedanta scholars influenced ideas nyaya, samkhya , yoga schools of hindu philosophy. these theories have not enjoyed universal consensus among advaitins, , various competing ontological interpretations have flowered within advaita tradition.

three states of consciousness , turiya

advaita posits 3 states of consciousness, namely waking (jagrat), dreaming (svapna), deep sleep (suṣupti), empirically experienced human beings, , correspond 3 bodies doctrine:

advaita posits fourth state of turiya, describe pure consciousness, background underlies , transcends these 3 common states of consciousness. turiya state of liberation, states advaita school, 1 experiences infinite (ananta) , non-different (advaita/abheda), free dualistic experience, state in ajativada, non-origination, apprehended. according candradhara sarma, turiya state foundational self realized, measureless, neither cause nor effect, prevading, without suffering, blissful, changeless, self-luminous, real, immanent in things , transcendent. have experienced turiya stage of self-consciousness have reached pure awareness of own non-dual self 1 , everything, them knowledge, knower, known becomes one, jivanmukta.

advaita traces foundation of ontological theory in more ancient sanskrit texts. example, chapters 8.7 through 8.12 of chandogya upanishad discuss 4 states of consciousness awake, dream-filled sleep, deep sleep, , beyond deep sleep. 1 of earliest mentions of turiya, in hindu scriptures, occurs in verse 5.14.3 of brihadaranyaka upanishad. idea discussed in other upanishads.

identity of atman , brahman

according advaita vedanta, atman identical brahman. expressed in mahavakya tat tvam asi , thou that. there common ground, viz. consciousness, individual , brahman. each soul, in advaita view, non-different infinite. according shankara, atman , brahman seem different @ empirical level of reality, difference unreal, , @ highest level of reality identical.

moksha attained realizing identity of atman , brahman, complete understanding of 1 s real nature brahman in life. stated advaita scholars, such shankara, as:

empirical reality - illusion , ignorance

according advaita vedanta, brahman sole reality. status of phenomenal world important question in advaita vedanta, , different solutions have been proposed. perception of phenomenal world real explained maya (constantly changing reality) , avidya ( ignorance ). other brahman, else, including universe, material objects , individuals, ever-changing , therefore maya. brahman paramarthika satyam, absolute truth , , true self, pure consciousness, reality (sat), since untinged difference, mark of ignorance, , since 1 thing not sublatable .

causality

all schools of vedanta subscribe theory of satkāryavāda, means effect pre-existent in cause. there different views on causal relationship , nature of empirical world perspective of metaphysical brahman. brahma sutras, ancient vedantins, sub-schools of vedanta, samkhya school of hindu philosophy, support parinamavada, idea world real transformation (parinama) of brahman.

scholars disagree on whether adi shankara , advaita system explained causality through vivarta. according andrew nicholson, instead of parinama-vada, competing causality theory vivartavada, says world, merely unreal manifestation (vivarta) of brahman. vivartavada states although brahman appears undergo transformation, in fact no real change takes place. myriad of beings unreal manifestation, real being brahman, ultimate reality unborn, unchanging, , entirely without parts . advocates of illusive, unreal transformation based causality theory, states nicholson, have been advaitins, followers of shankara. although world can described conventionally real , adds nicholson, advaitins claim of brahman’s effects must acknowledged unreal before individual self can liberated .

however, other scholars such hajime nakamura , paul hacker disagree. hacker , others state adi shankara did not advocate vivartavada, , explanations remote connotation of illusion . according these scholars, 13th century scholar prakasatman gave definition vivarta, , prakasatman s theory misunderstood adi shankara s position. andrew nicholson concurs hacker , other scholars, adding vivarta-vada isn t shankara s theory, shankara s ideas appear closer parinama-vada, , vivarta explanation emerged gradually in advaita subschool later.

according eliot deutsch, advaita vedanta states standpoint of brahman-experience , brahman itself, there no creation in absolute sense, empirically observed creation relative , mere transformation of 1 state another, states provisional , cause-effect driven modification.

māyā (illusion)

the doctrine of maya used explain empirical reality in advaita. jiva, when conditioned human mind, subjected experiences of subjective nature, states vedanta school, leads misunderstand maya , interpret sole , final reality. advaitins assert perceived world, including people , other existence, not appears . māyā, assert, manifests , perpetuates sense of false duality or divisional plurality. empirical manifestation real changing, obfuscates true nature of metaphysical reality never changing. advaita school holds liberation unfettered realization , understanding of unchanging reality , truths – self, self (soul) in oneself same self in , self in (brahman).

in advaita vedanta philosophy, there 2 realities: vyavaharika (empirical reality) , paramarthika (absolute, spiritual reality). māyā empirical reality entangles consciousness. māyā has power create bondage empirical world, preventing unveiling of true, unitary self—the cosmic spirit known brahman. theory of māyā expounded , explained adi shankara. competing theistic dvaita scholars contested shankara s theory, , stated shankara did not offer theory of relationship between brahman , māyā. later advaita scholar prakasatman addressed this, explaining, maya , brahman constitute entire universe, 2 kinds of interwoven threads create fabric. maya manifestation of world, whereas brahman, supports maya, cause of world.

brahman sole metaphysical truth in advaita vedanta, māyā true in epistemological , empirical sense; however, māyā not metaphysical , spiritual truth. spiritual truth truth forever, while empirical truth true now. complete knowledge of true reality includes knowing both vyavaharika (empirical) , paramarthika (spiritual), māyā , brahman. goal of spiritual enlightenment, state advaitins, realize brahman, realize unity , oneness of reality.

avidya (ignorance)

due ignorance (avidyā), brahman perceived material world , objects (nama rupa vikara). according shankara, brahman in reality attributeless , formless. brahman, highest truth , (reality), not change; our ignorance gives appearance of change. due avidyā, true identity forgotten, , material reality, manifests @ various levels, mistaken , true reality.

the notion of avidyā , relationship brahman creates crucial philosophical issue within advaita vedanta thought: how can avidyā appear in brahman, since brahman pure consciousness? sengaku mayeda writes, in commentary , translation of adi shankara s upadesasahasri:

certainly crucial problem sankara left followers of avidyā. if concept logically analysed, lead vedanta philosophy toward dualism or nihilism , uproot fundamental position.

to advaitins, human beings, in state of unawareness , ignorance of universal self, see i-ness different being in others, act out of impulse, fears, cravings, malice, division, confusion, anxiety, passions, , sense of distinctiveness.

subsequent advaitins gave various explanations, various advaita schools arose.

cite error: there <ref group=web> tags on page, references not show without {{reflist|group=web}} template (see page).

cite error: there <ref group=note> tags on page, references not show without {{reflist|group=note}} template (see page).