Posts Tagged ‘abstract’

Darshan (Philosophy) XXVI

Saturday, June 26th, 2010

Shad Darshan – Vedanta philosophies (contd.):

Swaminarayan philosophy – Parabrahm

Parabrahm, Purushottam, or Narayan: Part IV

For the human form of God, there are also two kinds of understandings prevailing: Paroksh bhāv and Pratyaksh bhāvParoksh (para + aksha) means beyond our vision or eyesight, when He does not remain in front of our eyes. Paroksh bhav means the feelings created in common people’s mind that God has left this world bared without His protective presence, when God leaves this ordinary human form and goes back to His abode. Some even have feeling that “their God” has come last and no God will come or appear now or afterwards. Pratyaksh (prati + aksha = in front of our eyes) means the feelings created in learned person’s mind that God never leaves this world unattended and He is always present in this world to guide us. Pratyaksh bhav means the feeling of God right in front of our eyes, not even a slightest distance away from our eyes. Paroksh form of God means the form, revelation, or manifestation of God that has previously happened on this earth. Pratyaksh form of God means the present form of God in our own time for our own sake of fulfillment of our wishes, bliss and happiness, and ultimately our liberation. Shri Krishna Bhagwan in Bhagvad Gita says that, “Yadā yadā hi dharmasya glanir bhavati bhārata, abhyutthānam adharmasya tadātmanam shrujāmi aham ||” (Bhagvad Gita: 4.7) Meaning, “Whenever there is a decline in religious practices, O Arjun (the descendent of King Bharat), I by myself manifest in this world and outroot the evil.” God or God-realized sant is always present on this earth to reestablish and revitalize the transcendental religious practices (Sanātan or Ekāntik Dharma) and to liberate the souls (jiv) that are following the said religious practices. The feeling of God present right in front of our eyes is very important in worshiping.

The form of God is very difficult to understand, but we have to trust the words of the scriptures – the words of God Himself. We can say that, God on Earth and God in His abode are like difficult-to-understand yet unhesitatingly accepted wave-particle duality or uncertainty principle of the science. We, as an inexperienced people, have to believe it. In Hinduism, sakar and nirakar forms are described mainly for Brahm only. Whenever nirakar form is described in the scriptures it is in reference to Brahm only. In Hinduism, God is always described as sakar. He is omnipotent or all-powerful. He can take any form whatever He wants, as many as He wants, and as many times as He wants. If He says He will appear and He may not. If He says that He wouldn’t and He may appear. Obviously, we do not have any control over that and we cannot put any limitations over that too. God is independent. He can do whatever He wants. “Hari, chāhe jo kare so hoye,” meaning, whatever God does it happens. Sometimes it looks like we have the control over His form. When God takes the form or avatar, it doesn’t mean He transforms Himself to that form but He “appears” to us in that form. He never changes His original form, nor does He leave His abode. In Hinduism, sakar forms of God (avatars) are described parallel to the evolution of living beings on Earth. Initial avatars are described in animal forms, such as, Matsya (the fish), Kurma (the tortoise), and Varah (the boar). All latest forms or avatars are in human forms to show the similarity or likeness with us, such as, Vaman, Parashuram, Ram, Krishna, and Buddha. If, we had a form different than human, then God also would have taken that different form for our salvation. Thus, the human form of God is most closely related to us. Now, what does sakar mean in Hinduism? Sakar means human like but divine form with all His divinity and without any of the worldly attributes of the body, such as, aging, gender difference, changes of maturity, personality traits, psychological problems, etc. God is never described as nirakar or even as an abstract entity. God has definite but an absolute form.

Though, in spiritual language He is transcendental to us, in worldly language, He is a reality like us, so His messengers or representatives are also like us. His language is like our language. His way of communication is like our way of communication. He can listen to our prayers. He can feel our pain. He can fulfill our wishes. He can accept our services and worship. This is all because He is like human beings, but He is not human being. He is divine being. He is master and we are His servants. He is boss and we are His subordinates. He is king and we are His subjects.

Darshan (Philosophy) IV

Friday, May 14th, 2010

Shad Darshan – Vedanta philosophies:

Advaita philosophy

Kevala Advaita philosophy of Adi Shankaracharya

Many sub-philosophies have been developed under the heading of Vedanta (Uttara Mimamsa) philosophy – the philosophies based on Prasthan Trayi, since the beginning of the Common Era. Out of them one is the Advait Vedanta philosophy of Shankaracharya.

Advait philosophy of Shankaracharya:

Advait philosophy is given by Adi Shankaracharya (788 CE-821 CE?). “Advait” means “not two” or “non dual”. The word “Advait” doesn’t mean “one”. It is different than Monism, because Monism is defined little differently. As against Sankhya philosophy, the Advaita philosophy believes that Purush (soul) and Prakruti (nature) are one and same as Brahm. It is because of Maya, avidyā, or agnān (ignorance or illusion) that they look different. According to this philosophy, there exists only one reality called Brahm. “Sarvam khalv idam brahm” (Chhāndogya Upanishad: 3.14.1) Meaning, “All that we see in the world is Brahm.” Everything, what we see, feel, observe, and experience is revelation of attributeless “nirgun,” formless “nirakar” Brahm. The real meaning of nirgun, nirakar is “without any worldly trigunatmak form”. This material world is merely an illusion or untrue, meaning, it is destructible, changeable but not the permanent truth. The root cause of all the ignorance, called “Avidyā” or “Maya”, is the belief that this material world is real or the truth. The ultimate liberation comes when one establishes unity of one’s individual soul with the universal soul or Brahm by solidifying one’s knowledge (gyan) that, “Aham Brahmāsmi” (Brahadaranyaka Upanishad: 1.4.10) meaning, “I am Brahm” and “Tat tvam asi” (Chhandogya Upanishad: 6.8.7) meaning, “You are that (Brahm).” It is true that one can identify one’s soul with Brahm, because both are described to be having similar characteristics in the scriptures. When Shankaracharya said everything is Brahm, he meant it. He had a vision to see everything as Brahm or filled with Brahm, just as a scientist sees everything as well organized structures made just of atoms or quarks. Just as everything in the nature is quarks or atoms in the eyes of scientists, everything was Brahm in the eyes of Shankaracharya. If we see this object is mine and that is yours, this object is prettier and that object is ugly, if we have partiality for some and impartiality for others then we haven’t reach that stage. According to the Advait philosophy of Shankaracharya, soul is Brahm, the Nature or Prakruti (the Creation) is Brahm, and the Creator of the Creation is also Brahm. In that way Advait philosophy is a kind of Monism. Advaitists believe that the whole universe is evolved from Brahm or God. For some these changes in Brahm are real, while, for others these changes or differentiations in Brahm are only apparent or superficial and not real. Advaitists believe that individual souls are created by Maya, in reality they are one with the Brahm. The removal of the veil of ignorance (Maya) makes this truth clear – the state being known as “Jivanmukti” (the living freedom). Shankaracharya’s path is generally known as the Path of Knowledge or “Gyān or Gnān Mārg.” In Vedanta philosophy there was no worshiping of Brahm, but still worshiping of God was there. God was considered Brahm. In Shankaracharya’s period, most of his followers were Brahmins and Brahmins were “shaivites” or “shaivas” meaning they worshiped Shiv (Shankar or Mahesh) as the Supreme Being or God. Shankaracharya himself was the devotee and firm believer of Shiv. So he continued that practice. In Rigved, the word Rudra is used for Shiva. Rudra is described as the last son of Brahmā. (Kurma Puran: 1.10.21,22; Linga Puran: 1.41,42,43; Shiva Puran: 7.1.12. 31, 32; Bhagwat Puran: 3.12.6-10; Skanda Puran: 5.1.2. 24-26; Mahabharat: 1.60.1-4) The same Rudra is described to be born of Prajāpati in the previous kalpa (eon or age of universe). Currently, Vedanta and Shankaracharya’s philosophy has mostly become synonymous.

There is also somewhat different philosophy than the Vedanta philosophy of Shankaracharya, which is known as “Shushka (sushka) Vedanta.”  Shushka means dry, baseless, or bijless (nirbij, bij means seed or the essence). The followers of Shushka Vedanta or modern Vedantis, unlike followers of Vedanta philosophy of Shankaracharya, do not believe in or worship (bhakti) any God at all nor do they believe in many of His divine forms, and His abode, thinking that after becoming one with the Brahm, one need not worship or bow down to any God. They become so arrogant that they no longer have fear committing any seen. They do not even believe in any scripture-described moral or do’s and don’ts called “Vidhinishedh”. They only believe in nirakar nirgun Brahm, which itself has assumed the form of all mobile and immobile objects. Shushka Vedantis forget the controversy created by their own belief that along with jiv and all mobile and immobile objects of the universe Brahm also has to undergo births and deaths. Their own liberation thus is refuted by their own beliefs. Shushka Vedantis are those who think themselves as Brahm having still harboring lust, anger, greed, infatuation, jealousy, ego, etc and without even having attained the highest status of Brahm. They forget that Shankaracharya had truly attained the highest brahmanized state, he himself had become one with the Brahm, and he was surely and meaningfully seeing the whole creation as one, before saying the same to the others. So, Shankaracharya’s Advait Vedanta theory is widely accepted but the kind of understanding that is seen in Sushka Vedanta is largely condemned by the main stream Hinduism. Just by saying, “I am Brahm” or believing to be Brahm one cannot be like Brahm, by completely knowing about Brahm from the scriptures also one cannot be like Brahm, but by achieving or cultivating all the qualities of Brahm one can be like Brahm. Shankaracharya had truly become one with the Brahm.

If one tries to understand the form of God through Advaita Vedanta philosophy only, then God is realized as formless or abstract (nirākār) because of His description as nirgun (without any worldly mayik qualities or attributes), sarva-vyāpak (all-pervading), and sarva-kāran (cause of all). But not as having the “eternally forever divine form” (sadā divya sākār) as opposed to the any worldly form with which God’s form cannot be compared. Secondly we cannot realize that divine form of God that listens to us, talks to us, watch us, answers to our prayers, forgives us, gives us pleasure and joy, and accepts our services and devotion (navadhā bhakti). How God can talk and listen to us person-to-person, if He is not in person and we are in person and if He is formless and we are having form? If He can take any form in Nature, He sure can take the human form.