2023-06-22 12:07:34 by ambuda-bot
This page has not been fully proofread.
xiv
however, there is the admission of the futility of trying to
express the ineffable.
▼
In the Siddanta-bindu, the ideas in the original work are
elaborated, the refuted views are stated at some length and the
schools holding them named. In this process, the basic ideas of
Advaita-vedanta are clearly enunciated. The explanation of the
first verse is by far the longest forming nearly half the text.
Most of the basic ideas of the advaita are explained here.
The three vädas of post-Şankara thought in this school, viz.,
the Pratibimba-vāda, the Abhāsa-vāda and the Avaccheda-vāda are
explained and reconciled. These will be referred to again a little
later.
The commentary on the eighth verse is also very long and
there is a detailed discussion here of the states of consciousness.
Here also some points of interest are clarified.
To go back to the vadas
The Vādas are mostly analogies to illustrate a point. They
are not reasons which explain why something is happening but
analogies to explain how it can be understood. A phenomenon
with which we are familiar and which the mind has accepted is
chosen and the matter under discussion is shown to be under-
stood like that. To the question why, however, in the ultimate
sense, there is no answer. To say that it is because of Māyā is an
admission that it is unanswerable, because Māyā is itself indefin-
able.
Advaita admits the position and demonstrates that this
is so not because of the system's inability to solve the problem
but because the nature of the problem is such. Therefore
thinking through analogies is a means of enabling the mind to
accept the finding in terms of previously accepted findings.
.
The problem here is to explain how the One, Being,
Brahman appears as many; as the perceived world. The analogy
of the rope seen as a snake illustrates how something can appear
as something other, as something which it is not, in fact. The
discussion of the Khyati vadās, the theories of erroneous percep-
tion, leads to the conclusion that while such perception is a fact
however, there is the admission of the futility of trying to
express the ineffable.
▼
In the Siddanta-bindu, the ideas in the original work are
elaborated, the refuted views are stated at some length and the
schools holding them named. In this process, the basic ideas of
Advaita-vedanta are clearly enunciated. The explanation of the
first verse is by far the longest forming nearly half the text.
Most of the basic ideas of the advaita are explained here.
The three vädas of post-Şankara thought in this school, viz.,
the Pratibimba-vāda, the Abhāsa-vāda and the Avaccheda-vāda are
explained and reconciled. These will be referred to again a little
later.
The commentary on the eighth verse is also very long and
there is a detailed discussion here of the states of consciousness.
Here also some points of interest are clarified.
To go back to the vadas
The Vādas are mostly analogies to illustrate a point. They
are not reasons which explain why something is happening but
analogies to explain how it can be understood. A phenomenon
with which we are familiar and which the mind has accepted is
chosen and the matter under discussion is shown to be under-
stood like that. To the question why, however, in the ultimate
sense, there is no answer. To say that it is because of Māyā is an
admission that it is unanswerable, because Māyā is itself indefin-
able.
Advaita admits the position and demonstrates that this
is so not because of the system's inability to solve the problem
but because the nature of the problem is such. Therefore
thinking through analogies is a means of enabling the mind to
accept the finding in terms of previously accepted findings.
.
The problem here is to explain how the One, Being,
Brahman appears as many; as the perceived world. The analogy
of the rope seen as a snake illustrates how something can appear
as something other, as something which it is not, in fact. The
discussion of the Khyati vadās, the theories of erroneous percep-
tion, leads to the conclusion that while such perception is a fact