Showing posts sorted by relevance for query Pratyabhijna. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query Pratyabhijna. Sort by date Show all posts

Hinduism - ADVAITA





What Is Advaita?

Non-duality or 'not two-ness' is the literal translation.

One of the primary schools of Vedanta, Advaita, advocates a philosophical perspective. 


It is the concept that multiplicity is, in the end, the manifestation of a non-dual reality.

This philosophical stance is sometimes referred to as monism in the West (the belief that reality is one), but the meaning of 'non-duality' in a Hindu context is more nuanced, because it does not involve the postulation of even a single entity, because 'Being' (sat) is said to be beyond all signification, including the postulation of a One.


The non-dual principle of reality underpins the cosmos, yet it is not an entity in the same way that the many objects and entities do.

It is the foundation of their existence.

Furthermore, labeling such schools as monistic is difficult since they often preserve a multi-leveled definition of truth that does not necessitate rejecting the existence of plurality.

The idea is that the ontological substratum that permits such creatures to appear is fundamentally a non-dual principle of being.


The Upanisads include the oldest explicit exposition of non dualist notions, with Brahman as the basic substrate of existence from which the cosmos is believed to originate.

Early Upanisads, such as the Chandogya, compare the connection between Brahman and each individual being's basic self (Atman) to the mixing of salt and water in salty water.

The water tastes like salt that can't be seen, and the difference between the two is undetectable, just as Brahman can't be seen yet permeates the whole cosmos.

'You are That,' the sage concludes (tat-tvam-asi, Chandogya Upanis.ad 6.10.3).

Numerous schools evolved in response to the primary topic of the link between the individual ego and Brahman, the substance of the cosmos, as a result of various efforts to construct a systematic philosophical interpretation of such passages in the Upanisads (veda-anta or 'end of the vedas').


The difference-non-difference school, dualists (who claimed a clear ontological split between the two), qualified non dualists, and non-dualist interpretation were among them.

The Mandukya Karika (also known as the Agamasastra or the Gaudapada Karika) is the earliest unambiguous explanation of Advaitaphilosophy.

It was presumably written about the sixth century of the Common Era.

Sankara, however, is the most well-known Advaita proponent (eighth century CE).


The universe of plurality, according to believers of the Sankarite view, is ultimately nothing more than a magical illusion (Maya).

The specific nature of this illusion was the topic of much debate (and opposing schools' contention), but the general consensus was that maya is unexplainable, being neither completely existing nor non-existent.

The key to grasping this concept is to recognize that there are two degrees of truth for Sankara: ultimate truth (where the non-dual Brahman is the solitary reality) and daily, practical truth (where a variety of diverse things exist).

Maya is a cosmic illusion, but it is not a mental delusion (as in a hallucination or a dream), not least because the concept of an individual self (jivatman) is ultimately illusory from the standpoint of ultimate truth.

The world of waking awareness is not a subjective deception, according to Sankara; it exists and acts on a practical plane of reality.

This universe is unreal in and of itself, but real in the sense that it is identical to Brahman, the source of all existence.

According to Sankara, avidya - metaphysical ignorance – is the root of the universe's seeming manifestation, which is basically our ignorance of the reality that everything is Brahman.

At the individual level, this entails projecting categories or 'adjuncts' derived from previously acquired experiences (including those from prior incarnations) onto the non-dual reality, causing it to look as something it is not.

Sankara utilizes the well-known example of the rope and the snake to convey his point.

In low light, a rope might resemble a snake.

We think we're looking at a snake, but it's only a rope.

We can realize the error that was committed in daylight (that is, with the benefit of knowledge) and no longer project the image of a snake onto the rope.

Similarly, Brahman is the source of all things, but we misinterpret it as distinct objects due to our inability to transcend our ignorance of reality's actual nature.

Sankara's interpretation of Advaita, on the other hand, is far from the sole kind of nondualism found in Hindu traditions.

The Bhagavata Purana (c. eleventh century CE) is centered on the playful figure of Krishna and mixes non-dualistic notions with Vaisnava devotionalism (bhakti).

Non-dualistic philosophies may also be found within the many Saivite movements.

The Pratyabhijna or Recognition School, which is commonly connected with Kashmir but also exists elsewhere, is notable for its clear rejection of Sankara's notion of maya's illumination.

The world is real, according to this school, since it is a vibration (spanda) of Siva's dynamic and creative awareness.

Later works, such as Vasistha's highly poetic Yoga Teachings (Yogavasistha), synthesize themes and concepts from a variety of non-dualist schools (including Buddhist ones), but with a clear orientation towards Vedantic interpretations.

Interest in Sankara's philosophy by various Western Orientalists and Hindu reformers in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries helped to establish non-dualist ideas as important sources. 

Many of the key intellectual figures and gurus of Hinduism in the modern period, including Ramakrishna, his disciple Swami Vivekananda, SarvepalliRadhakrishnan, Ramana Maharshi, Nisargadatta Raj, Sri Aurobindo, and, to a lesser extent, Mahatma Gandhi, advocate non-dualism as a central aspect of their teaching.

Swami Vivekananda, perhaps more than anyone else, was responsible for catching the imagination of Hindus and Westerners alike with his promotion of non-dual ism as Hinduism's basic doctrine and 'spirituality' as the distinguishing quality of Hindu devotion.


~Kiran Atma


See also: 

Atman, Bhakti, Brahman, Buddhism's relationship with Hinduism, Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi,Aurobindo Ghose, Modern and contemporary Hinduism, Kashmiri Saivism, Krishna, Maya, Puranas, Sir Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan,Sri Ramakrishna, Ramana Maharshi,Saivism, Sankara, Siva, Upanisads, Vaisnavism, Vedanta, Swami Vivekananda,Yogavasistha


References And Further reading:

King, Richard. 1999. Indian Philosophy: An Introduction to Hindu and Buddhist Thought. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Ram-Prasad, C. 1991. An Outline of Indian Non-realism: Some Central Arguments of Advaita Metaphysics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Sharma, A. 1993. The Experimental Dimension of Advaita Vedanta. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.




Hinduism - Who Is Trika In Hindu Philosophy?

 

 

The greatest figure in the Trika school was the tenth-century philosopher and aesthetic theorist Abhinavagupta.

The Trika school was a Kashmiri religious community whose members were devotees (bhakta) of the god Shiva; the greatest figure in the Trika school was the tenth-century philosopher and aesthetic theorist Abhinavagupta.

Trika Shaivism is a tantric tradition—that is, a secret, ritual-based religious practice—whose philosophical foundations combine theism and monism.

Theism holds that a divine being is the universe's Supreme Reality, while monism holds that a more abstract principle is the foundation of all reality.

The deity Shiva, who is both Supreme God and the source of emana tions from which the material cosmos is generated, is the single genuine reality for Trika Shaivism.

The process of "recognition" (pratyabhijna), in which one knows that the whole cosmos is nothing but a manifestation of Shiva alone, leads to final soul emancipation (moksha).

Here, one "recognizes" something that has always been true but had been obscured by a misunderstanding up until that point.

More information can be found in Paul Eduardo Muller-1989 Ortega's book, The Triadic Heart of Siva.

Tantra and Shaiva are two other terms for the same thing.

~Kiran Atma


You may also want to read more about Hinduism here.

Be sure to check out my writings on religion here.

Hinduism - Who Was Kshemaraja?

 

(11th c.) Kshemaraja was Abhinavagupta's major follower and a significant figure in the development of Trika Shaivism.

Abhinavagupta was a Kashmiri writer notable for his writings on poetics and aesthetics.

Trika Shaivism claims that the deity Shiva, who is both supreme god and the source of the ema nations that make up the universe's substance, is the only actual reality, according to tantric philosophy.

The process of "recognition" (pratyabhijna), in which one recognizes that the whole cosmos is a manifestation of Shiva alone, leads to final soul emancipation (moksha).

Here, one “recognizes” something that has always been true, but has been concealed by a misunderstanding up until that point.

Kshemaraja continued to work on the Trika school's growth.

The Svacchandatantra is his most renowned work.

Also see tantra.

 


You may also want to read more about Hinduism here.

Be sure to check out my writings on religion here.




Hinduism - What Is Vivartavada In Hindu Philosophy?

     


    What is the Hindu philosophy of Vivartavada?


    The world is described as an illusory transformation of the Ultimate Reality or Realities, according to this philosophical model.

    The Advaita Vedanta philosophical school is known for its vivartavada model.

    The Advaitins believe in a causal model known as satkaryavada, which assumes that effects already exist in their causes and that when they appear, they are simply transformations (parinama) of those causes.

    Milk is transformed into curds, butter, and clarified butter as a classic example.

    Each of these effects was already present in the cause, according to proponents of asatkarya, and emerges from it through a natural transformation of the cause.

    The Advaita school adheres to the philosophical position of monism, which holds that everything is merely different manifestations of a single Ultimate Reality.



    Despite the appearance of difference and diversity in the world, Advaita proponents claim that reality is nondual (advaita), that is, that all things are "actually" nothing but the formless, unqualified Brahman.

    The Advaitins' belief that an effect already exists in its cause is based on the principle that all things in the universe ultimately rely on Brahman as the first cause.

    Simultaneously, the Advaitins refuse to acknowledge that Brahman ever changes because this would negate its eternal and unchanging nature.

    As a result, they talk about a fictitious transmission (vivartavada).

    The Advaitins believe that Brahman never truly changes because it is eternal and thus unchanging; the apparent changes are only illusory, based on human ignorance through shifting superimposition patterns (adhyasa).

    Advaitins are able to maintain Brahman's transcendence while also accounting for (apparent) changes in the phenomenal world in this way.

    Proponents of a different approach, which portrays the perceivable world as an actual trans creation of this unified reality, argue against this stance.


    Proponents of the Samkhya, Vishishthadvaita Vedanta, and Bhedabhada philosophical traditions, who, like Advaitins, believe in satkaryavada, hold this position.




    Each of these three schools thinks that the world as we see it is real, that it is rooted in a single ultimate source, and that this fundamental principle undergoes a genuine metamorphosis through which the universe is born.

    This parinama connection permits these schools to explain the phenomenal world, but in a manner that undermines the transcendence of these initial principles by incorporating them within it.

    Philosophically, they struggle to explain how the sublime might become commonplace, then transcendent again.


    What is the vivartavada view of Advaita Vedanta?

    According to the post-Shankara Advaita advaitins' vivartavada view of Advaita Vedanta, the cosmos is only a "illusory mutation" of Brahman.


    What does Vivarta mean?

    The Sanskrit term vivarta denotes a change in form, a modification, or a changed circumstance. 

    The word vivarta is the root of the phrase vivartavada.

    The Satkaryavada thesis, which states that the cause precedes the consequence, is accepted by all Vedanta schools

    However, there are several points of view about how Brahman gave rise to the material universe. 




    The concept of parinamavada holds that the universe is a genuine (parinama) metamorphosis of Brahman. 


    • The concept of vivartavada holds that the universe is only a fictitious (vivarta) representation of Brahman. 
    • According to Vivartavada, despite the fact that Brahman seems to alter, nothing really changes. 
    • The multitude of creatures are false manifestations because Brahman, the ultimate truth that is unborn, unchanging, and utterly devoid of any parts, is the only true being.


    The Brahma Sutras, early Vedantins, the majority of Vedanta schools, and Samkhya all support parinamavada. 





    According to Nicholson, the Advaitins, who are devotees of Shankara, are the "most conspicuous champions of Vivartavada." 

    The Advaitins say that before the individual ego may be freed, all of Brahman's consequences must eventually be accepted as unreal, despite the fact that the universe can be represented as conventionally real, continues Nicholson.

    However, academics are divided on whether Adi Shankara and his Advaita theory used vivartavada or parinamavada to explain causation. 




    Adi Shankara did not support Vivartavada, according to scholars like Paul Hacker and Hajime Nakamura, and his justifications are "far from any connotation of illusion." They claim that the concept of Vivarta was given by the scholar Prakasatman, and it is Prakasatman's thesis that is sometimes mistaken for Adi Shankara's perspective. 


    According to Andrew Nicholson, who agrees with Hacker and other academics, Shankara's thoughts are more closely related to parinama-vada than the vivarta-vada, and the vivarta explanation most likely developed gradually in the Advaita sub-school later.


    Casual connection is depicted by Vijnanabhiksu as having three terms: effect, variable locus cause, and immutable locus cause. 

    The locus cause cannot be separated from the changing cause and effect and does not originate in them.


    By proposing the theory of Svatantryavada (the "Universal voluntarism"), which maintains that Effect develops from Cause due to the sovereignty of God's Will, the Pratyabhijna philosophy of Somananda disproves the Arambhvada (the "Realistic view" of the Nyaya-Vaisesika), the Parinamavada (the theory of Transformation of the Sankhya-Yoga), and the Vivart.

    Ramanuja recognizes Prakrti as the material cause, but Madhava disputes this claim since a material cause does not necessarily imply control or supervision. 


    Madhava also disagrees with the Vivartavada because it does not acknowledge the need to account for any effects. 


    In his pure non-dualism (Shuddhadvaita) philosophy, Vallabhacharya also opposes "vivartavada" and asserts that Maya (or the "Jagat") is real and is only a power of Brahman who manifests as Jiva and the world of his own volition. 



    In doing so, there is no transformation of Brahman; it still remains only gold. 

    As a result, Shuddhadvaita is also called as "Avikta Parimavda" (Unmodified transformation).


    Frequently Asked Questions



    What does Vivartavada mean?

    The concept of vivartavada holds that the universe is only a fictitious representation of Brahman. 

    According to Vivartavada, despite the fact that Brahman seems to alter, nothing really changes. The multitude of creatures are false manifestations because Brahman, the ultimate truth that is unborn, unchanging, and utterly devoid of any parts, is the only true being.

    What distinguishes Parinamavada from Vivartavada?

    The non-advaitin doctrine of real change is referred to as parinama-vada.

    Vivartavada, the advaita theory of seeming change, is distinct from this. The idea is that the cause really changes into the consequence.



    References And Further Reading:



    • Majumder, B. and Ray, S., 2022. Rajju Sarpa Bhranti-A Metaphysical Analysis of Visual Illusions in Light of Doctrine of Vivarta Vada. Journal of Ayurveda and Integrated Medical Sciences7(5), pp.80-90.
    • Sayanolibavan, M., 2022. The importance attributed to Mandukya Karika in the tradition of Advaida Vedanta.
    • Roodurmum, P.S., 2002. Bhåamatåi and Vivaraòna Schools of Advaita Vedåanta a Critical Approach.
    • Chari, S., 2011. Indian Philosophical Systems: A Critical Review Based on Vedānta Deśika's Paramata-Bhaṅga.
    • Majumder, B. and Ray, S., 2022. Doctrines of Different Philosophical Schools Regarding the Theory of Cause & Effect and Their Validation in Light of Charaka Samhita. Journal of Ayurvedic and Herbal Medicine8(2), pp.94-100.
    • Bhattacharyya, S.P., 2000. Sarvajñātmamuni's contribution to Advaita Vedānta.
    • Brooks, R.W., 1963. Śaṁkara: A Psychological Study.
    • Isaeva, N.V., 2009. Vivartavada.
    • Duquette, J., 2015. Is Sivadvaita Vedanta a Saiddhantika School? Parinamavada in the Brahmamimarrisabhasya. Journal of Hindu Studies8(1), pp.16-43.
    • Chaliha, A., 2017. ON SRIBHASYA-THE BASIC BOOK ON THE THEISTIC VEDANTA. The Philosophical Journal of JB College (Autonomous), Jorhat Assam, India, p.10.
    • Goswami, N., The concept of aventa philosophy of Sankaracharya.
    • Singh, P., 2021. The Problem of Causation: Nagarjuna Vs Hume. Journal Of International Buddhist Studies College (JIBSC)7(1), pp.66-75.
    • Gupta, A.S., 1958. Ramanuja on causality. Philosophy East and West8(3/4), pp.137-148.








    Hinduism - ABHINAVAGUPTA





    (late tenth century) Abhinavagupta was a major thinker in Kashmiri Saivism, and the son of scholar Narasimhagupta, who was his first tutor.


    Abhinavagupta wrote forty-one works, commentaries and independent treatises, on the three main branches of Kashmiri Saivism: Krama, Pratyabhijna, and Trika, as well as aesthetics, poetics, and language theory, becoming the most prominent and influential teacher in Abhinavagupta was the one who systematized the Trika doctrine based on a number of older and often obscure texts, most notably in his masterpiece, the Tantra loka (Light on the Tantras), a massive work in thirty-seven ahnika ('day-times,' i.e. chapters) that takes up twelve volumes in the Kashmir Series of Texts and Studies (1918–38) with Jayaratha's commentary.



    The Tantra loka was summarized by its author in the Tantrasara (Essence of the Tantras), a widely read book that combines yoga, devotion to the Lord, and nondualism (advaita) in such a manner that it is applicable to a variety of systems.


    The Patra trimsika Vivarana is a lengthy commentary on the Tantra Para trimsika's thirty-six pithy stanzas, which elaborates on all elements of Word/speech, whether liturgical, cosmogonic, psychological, epistemological, or metaphysical.

    The Ma lin vijaya Varttika and the Isvara pratyabhijn a Vimarsin on Utpala deva's Pratyabhijn a Karika, both major works in the tradition, are two more commentaries worth noting.



    All of these writings are significant, and Abhinavgupta's impact beyond not just his own school but also Tamil Nadu, where he was even regarded as an incarnation of Siva.


    Not just in the sphere of poetics, with his focus on the primacy of suggestion, but also in the performing arts, particularly theatre, dance, and music, his writings on aesthetics were to be as authoritative and of enduring value.


    Kiran Atma


    You may also want to read more about Hinduism here.

    Be sure to check out my writings on religion here.



    See also: 


    Advaita; Dance; Drama; Kashmiri Saivism; Music; Poetry; Siva; Tantras; Tantrism; Yoga



    Pratyabhijna

     

    (“recognition”) Many distinct schools of tantra, a hidden, ritually defined religious practice, have promoted this doctrine, notably the Kashmiri scholar Abhinavagupta, Trika Shaivism's most prominent figure.

    It claims that the ultimate realization of the Absolute is just a "re-cognition" of one's fundamental oneness with the Divine.

    This oneness has always existed and will never change; the only thing that prevents it from being seen clearly is the obscuring force of incorrect understanding.

    As a result, final union with the Divine occurs not from accomplishing something, but from simply comprehending what has always been the reality.

    This concept clearly reveals the Advaita Vedanta philosophical school's influence, yet with a significant difference.

    The Advaita school adheres to the philosophical viewpoint of monism, which maintains that everything is based on a single abstract ultimate principle, which they name Brahman, and that all things are just particular expressions of that one principle.

    This broad idea is adopted by the "Recognition" school, which views Ultimate Reality theistically as the deity Shiva.

    Shiva is the single genuine reality for Trika Shaivism, who is both supreme deity and the source of the material cosmos.

    More details may be found in Jaideva Singh's Pratya Bhijnanahrdayam, published in 1982.