AdiShankara's Advaitism was most probably weaved up as a political narrative to wean away the then decadent Hinduism from Puranic idolatory & into philosophical existentialism. Advaita, shorn of dialectics, to a common man makes idol worship redundant. And once dependence on avatars to ameliorate human problems evaporates, humans start acting (karma) responsibly -with due consideration to cause & effect. And responsible behaviour by humans adds civility to any society.
Challenging ideas and ways of re-envisioning, the revolution in quantum physics, vis-à-vis Advaita Vedanta.
@sonaliranade captures the paranoia with her signature blend of irony and insight expressed in an unblinking vision of the truth about challenging ideas and ways of re-envisioning, the revolution in quantum physics, vis-à-vis Advaita Vedanta.
A brilliant essay that is arresting and unique, faithfully and objectively explains the concepts behind quantum mechanics in clear and accessible language the average layperson can understand.
Vedanta says “brahman only exists”, therefore when vedantins say the world doesn’t exist, it means that it doesn’t exist outside of brahman.
When they say the world is an illusion and doesn’t exist outside the self…the self here means bramhan and not the individual self as we understand it.
Anyway, for.a better understanding of the topic and a comparative study of vedanta and western phenomenology (heideggger et al) read Prof Bina Gupta’s “The Disinterested Witness”
An excerpt from Umar Quinn's book, How Foreign beliefs caused the decline of Muslim Civilization concerning the origin of brahaminism.
(The Ṣabian’s) doctrine about Al-Rabb (the Lord and Creator) is that He only has attributes of negation or of possession, or that which is considered a combination of both.[103] They are the ones al Khalīl (Allah’s beloved) Ibrāhīm ['alayhis-salām] was sent to. Ja’d adopted this from the Ṣabian philosophers. Likewise is the case of Abū Naṣr al Fārābī, he entered Ḥarrān and took the completion of his philosophy from the Ṣabian philosophers. Also, as Al Imām Aḥmad mentioned, Jahm (78-128 h.) took this from the Samniyyah — some philosophers of India who negated everything except for what is physically sensed— when he debated with them.
Ibn al Qayyim [raḥimahullah] even mentions that the basis of the Eastern religions branching out of ancient Brahmanism (i.e. Hinduism & Vedic religions) is from the polytheistic strand of Ṣabianism. He says: The origin of this way (i.e. Brahmanism) comes from the polytheistic Ṣabians who were the people of Abraham that he debated with about the falsity of polytheism, shattering their argument with his knowledge and breaking their deities with his hands, so much so that they sought to burn him alive.
To understand this better Adi Shankaracharya as you have interpreted it isn’t enough. Shaivism especially Monistic Shaivism of the Kashmir school especially focuses in detail on the step by step devolution of Infinite Consciousness down to triads of (observer, object, observation) thence to a congealed mind and thence to mental patterns and reflexes as well as sense and perception. The upward journey back to recognizing yourself as Infinite consciousness is also described. This school is called “Pratibhijna” or recognizing the Self within. A superb example of commentary and exposition on this can be found in “The Splendor of the Recognition” by Swami Shantananda.
Issues of Quantum Mechanics cannot be understood without a deeper understanding of the triad mentioned earlier and Adi Sankaras approach does not address this. Monistic Shaivism as opposed to Vedanta says everything is in Infinite Consciousness rather than none of this is true it says all of this is true. This allows a much better analysis of the paradox of observation that is implicit in your post. But it’s hard to gon any deeper in the comments. Happy to engage further at nborwankar@gmail.com Nitin.
You might end up writing so, because advita perspective is not understood fully! The queries raised are valid through, but soon as you go deeper into Advaita, beyond Shankaracharya...the outcome is very much logical, simple & intuitive!!
The entire essay is based on the following premise
"the Central thesis of Advaita Vedanta is that the external world that one sees, is an illusion created by one’s own self, through one’s organs of perception, and not real. Later on there were many variations of this theme, some of which consider the external world a manifestation of the Brahman, the universal Consciousness, of which one’s soul or Atma is a part. But in Adi Shankra’s Vedanta, there is no external world; only an illusion created by oneself."
Somehow it is difficult to believe that the world is an illusion created by individual's self. What you see around is a manifestation of Brahman appears to be close to Advaita philosophy as it is understood( at least as I understand it). Ms.Ranade premises her argument that this world is an illusion created by oneself. This seems to be problematic!
Quantum mechanics, on the other hand, in my understanding, removes the duality of observer and observed.
Shankara was saying that the world is not just what the five senses tell you. It may be real from your perception of your sense but you may not perceive several other things.
The quest for spirituality (which is an individual personal quest) was his focus and his focus was on how the left brain as in the ego creates several of these illusions- which are basically the artifact brought about by how we think of things based on our individual egos. Each person adds their own color to whatever they see which is different. It is still real but shaded differently or reality as perceived.
Science has further provided us other clues … there are many cognitive issues with our brains and our brains tend to make up things especially when it gets input that is too fast and overwhelming making our brain take shortcuts and coming up with a probabilistic picture.
Maya is that which is not… I.e an illusion. It is by no means a simulation or Trumanesque situation which is an imposed by other individuals or entities on other individuals or entities. Those would be illusions too just not Shankara’s Maya.
The quantum stuff and Heisenberg uncertainty implications are therefore moot.
Quoting directly from the article, "If that be so, what is your reason for being? Why are you here? What do you do with your life? In Shankara’s exposition, your purpose in life is to pursue knowledge, in order to realize the fact of this illusion, and in doing so, to recognize your essential Brahman, where upon, you attain liberation, and become one with the Universal consciousness, or Brahman, even as you live out your life here, free from all pain and suffering."
Good article. If world is imaginary or illusion how is it that everybody's illusion is same in most of the things we perceive. Nobody has explained how this self with illusion even came to existence
Schrodinger did not understand Schrodinger's equation. It was Max Born who pointed out that psi squared is to be interpreted as the probability of finding an electron in a certain volume.
Knowledge without existence is impossible. Even to deny anything one must exists first. Existence is about ontology, what you are talking is about epistemology. Logic, rationality, scientific experiments are about epistemology. Only way for one to prove existence of self to oneself is by denying worldly reality based on human consciousness [ like in Samadhi] and be with pure consciousness. In Samadhi one is with pure awareness. This is known as knowing by being and possible only in experience of self. Science is about measurements in scientific experiments for a certain hypothesis.
We have illusion of reality as a result of superimposition. [Superimposition is the apparent presentation of attributes of one thing in another thing.]. Advaita Vedanta first makes a case for experience of absolute self based on logic them asks one to experience it to know absolute reality. Absolute reality can only be described based on Neti Neta [ not this, not this] as language fails to capture it.
Sri Adi Shankara used concepts of avarana shakti [covering or hiding truth] and vikshepa shakti [distraction from truth or projection of falsehood] of maya doctrine to explain why we have illusion of absolute reality.
I agree with both Advaita Vedanta and Charvakas that what we experience is reality [perception as only valid means of knowledge], only difference is that one is about absolute reality while other is about relative reality. Unfortunately, in India we neither follow Advaita Vedanta nor Charvakas. But what we have is pure illusion based on rituals, traditions, social hierarchy, false equivalence, no logic/rationally more like inversion of maya doctrine to obfuscate reality.
Ideally in my view we should keep both things [Advaita Vedanta and Charvakas] in mind when we interact with others or for taking policy decisions. If this is the case then India will be moving in the direction of harmony instead chaos. Gods or Devas of Vedas represent a movement of world towards harmony and ordered Cosmos using language of Sat [truth] while Rakshans/ Daityas/Danavas/Asurans do exactly opposite using language of Asat [untruth] to create confusion/chaos.
The difference between a scientist and a realized master is similar to the difference between a dreamer and a waker. A dreamer's wonderment of his scientific exactitude however close the peripheral dream state of consciousness might be, still remains a "psychedelic weave" for the waker.
So we appreciate the hard work put in by Sonali, but definitely not the conclusion.
AdiShankara's Advaitism was most probably weaved up as a political narrative to wean away the then decadent Hinduism from Puranic idolatory & into philosophical existentialism. Advaita, shorn of dialectics, to a common man makes idol worship redundant. And once dependence on avatars to ameliorate human problems evaporates, humans start acting (karma) responsibly -with due consideration to cause & effect. And responsible behaviour by humans adds civility to any society.
Challenging ideas and ways of re-envisioning, the revolution in quantum physics, vis-à-vis Advaita Vedanta.
@sonaliranade captures the paranoia with her signature blend of irony and insight expressed in an unblinking vision of the truth about challenging ideas and ways of re-envisioning, the revolution in quantum physics, vis-à-vis Advaita Vedanta.
A brilliant essay that is arresting and unique, faithfully and objectively explains the concepts behind quantum mechanics in clear and accessible language the average layperson can understand.
Your understanding of vedanta is flawed big time.
Vedanta says “brahman only exists”, therefore when vedantins say the world doesn’t exist, it means that it doesn’t exist outside of brahman.
When they say the world is an illusion and doesn’t exist outside the self…the self here means bramhan and not the individual self as we understand it.
Anyway, for.a better understanding of the topic and a comparative study of vedanta and western phenomenology (heideggger et al) read Prof Bina Gupta’s “The Disinterested Witness”
An excerpt from Umar Quinn's book, How Foreign beliefs caused the decline of Muslim Civilization concerning the origin of brahaminism.
(The Ṣabian’s) doctrine about Al-Rabb (the Lord and Creator) is that He only has attributes of negation or of possession, or that which is considered a combination of both.[103] They are the ones al Khalīl (Allah’s beloved) Ibrāhīm ['alayhis-salām] was sent to. Ja’d adopted this from the Ṣabian philosophers. Likewise is the case of Abū Naṣr al Fārābī, he entered Ḥarrān and took the completion of his philosophy from the Ṣabian philosophers. Also, as Al Imām Aḥmad mentioned, Jahm (78-128 h.) took this from the Samniyyah — some philosophers of India who negated everything except for what is physically sensed— when he debated with them.
Ibn al Qayyim [raḥimahullah] even mentions that the basis of the Eastern religions branching out of ancient Brahmanism (i.e. Hinduism & Vedic religions) is from the polytheistic strand of Ṣabianism. He says: The origin of this way (i.e. Brahmanism) comes from the polytheistic Ṣabians who were the people of Abraham that he debated with about the falsity of polytheism, shattering their argument with his knowledge and breaking their deities with his hands, so much so that they sought to burn him alive.
To understand this better Adi Shankaracharya as you have interpreted it isn’t enough. Shaivism especially Monistic Shaivism of the Kashmir school especially focuses in detail on the step by step devolution of Infinite Consciousness down to triads of (observer, object, observation) thence to a congealed mind and thence to mental patterns and reflexes as well as sense and perception. The upward journey back to recognizing yourself as Infinite consciousness is also described. This school is called “Pratibhijna” or recognizing the Self within. A superb example of commentary and exposition on this can be found in “The Splendor of the Recognition” by Swami Shantananda.
Issues of Quantum Mechanics cannot be understood without a deeper understanding of the triad mentioned earlier and Adi Sankaras approach does not address this. Monistic Shaivism as opposed to Vedanta says everything is in Infinite Consciousness rather than none of this is true it says all of this is true. This allows a much better analysis of the paradox of observation that is implicit in your post. But it’s hard to gon any deeper in the comments. Happy to engage further at nborwankar@gmail.com Nitin.
You might end up writing so, because advita perspective is not understood fully! The queries raised are valid through, but soon as you go deeper into Advaita, beyond Shankaracharya...the outcome is very much logical, simple & intuitive!!
Hello Sonaliji - about illusions, illusions can be broken with light/knowledge.
Insights happen beyond time and space! Similarly cells communicate instantly. So one can see and distinguish between illusion and reality.
If Vedanta is a belief system, you may subscribe or reject.
Ultimately what matters is your reality and your understanding!
The entire essay is based on the following premise
"the Central thesis of Advaita Vedanta is that the external world that one sees, is an illusion created by one’s own self, through one’s organs of perception, and not real. Later on there were many variations of this theme, some of which consider the external world a manifestation of the Brahman, the universal Consciousness, of which one’s soul or Atma is a part. But in Adi Shankra’s Vedanta, there is no external world; only an illusion created by oneself."
Somehow it is difficult to believe that the world is an illusion created by individual's self. What you see around is a manifestation of Brahman appears to be close to Advaita philosophy as it is understood( at least as I understand it). Ms.Ranade premises her argument that this world is an illusion created by oneself. This seems to be problematic!
Quantum mechanics, on the other hand, in my understanding, removes the duality of observer and observed.
An interesting essay all the same.
Are you making an assumption that mind = subject? or mind = instrument of knowledge?
Shankara was saying that the world is not just what the five senses tell you. It may be real from your perception of your sense but you may not perceive several other things.
The quest for spirituality (which is an individual personal quest) was his focus and his focus was on how the left brain as in the ego creates several of these illusions- which are basically the artifact brought about by how we think of things based on our individual egos. Each person adds their own color to whatever they see which is different. It is still real but shaded differently or reality as perceived.
Science has further provided us other clues … there are many cognitive issues with our brains and our brains tend to make up things especially when it gets input that is too fast and overwhelming making our brain take shortcuts and coming up with a probabilistic picture.
Maya is that which is not… I.e an illusion. It is by no means a simulation or Trumanesque situation which is an imposed by other individuals or entities on other individuals or entities. Those would be illusions too just not Shankara’s Maya.
The quantum stuff and Heisenberg uncertainty implications are therefore moot.
Quoting directly from the article, "If that be so, what is your reason for being? Why are you here? What do you do with your life? In Shankara’s exposition, your purpose in life is to pursue knowledge, in order to realize the fact of this illusion, and in doing so, to recognize your essential Brahman, where upon, you attain liberation, and become one with the Universal consciousness, or Brahman, even as you live out your life here, free from all pain and suffering."
Dear Sonali, you will get your answers if you explore both wahadatul-wujood and wahadatus-shuhuud
Good article. If world is imaginary or illusion how is it that everybody's illusion is same in most of the things we perceive. Nobody has explained how this self with illusion even came to existence
Schrodinger did not understand Schrodinger's equation. It was Max Born who pointed out that psi squared is to be interpreted as the probability of finding an electron in a certain volume.
Knowledge without existence is impossible. Even to deny anything one must exists first. Existence is about ontology, what you are talking is about epistemology. Logic, rationality, scientific experiments are about epistemology. Only way for one to prove existence of self to oneself is by denying worldly reality based on human consciousness [ like in Samadhi] and be with pure consciousness. In Samadhi one is with pure awareness. This is known as knowing by being and possible only in experience of self. Science is about measurements in scientific experiments for a certain hypothesis.
We have illusion of reality as a result of superimposition. [Superimposition is the apparent presentation of attributes of one thing in another thing.]. Advaita Vedanta first makes a case for experience of absolute self based on logic them asks one to experience it to know absolute reality. Absolute reality can only be described based on Neti Neta [ not this, not this] as language fails to capture it.
Sri Adi Shankara used concepts of avarana shakti [covering or hiding truth] and vikshepa shakti [distraction from truth or projection of falsehood] of maya doctrine to explain why we have illusion of absolute reality.
I agree with both Advaita Vedanta and Charvakas that what we experience is reality [perception as only valid means of knowledge], only difference is that one is about absolute reality while other is about relative reality. Unfortunately, in India we neither follow Advaita Vedanta nor Charvakas. But what we have is pure illusion based on rituals, traditions, social hierarchy, false equivalence, no logic/rationally more like inversion of maya doctrine to obfuscate reality.
Ideally in my view we should keep both things [Advaita Vedanta and Charvakas] in mind when we interact with others or for taking policy decisions. If this is the case then India will be moving in the direction of harmony instead chaos. Gods or Devas of Vedas represent a movement of world towards harmony and ordered Cosmos using language of Sat [truth] while Rakshans/ Daityas/Danavas/Asurans do exactly opposite using language of Asat [untruth] to create confusion/chaos.
The difference between a scientist and a realized master is similar to the difference between a dreamer and a waker. A dreamer's wonderment of his scientific exactitude however close the peripheral dream state of consciousness might be, still remains a "psychedelic weave" for the waker.
So we appreciate the hard work put in by Sonali, but definitely not the conclusion.
Better luck next time Sonali Ranade...!!