Ignorance – The Cause of Bodily Identification part1
Mon, 02/04/2008 - 20:03 — admin
TEACHER: Yes, this is another contradiction, though not as major as the dilemma of an ignorant God. Shankara attempts to rectify this contradiction by saying that actually, the Supreme Being has not become covered by ignorance, but it simply appears that He has.4 He carries this same concept over to his explanation of the cosmic manifestation, or the world, also. Let me sidetrack for a moment and discuss this point, since it plays an important part in understanding the overall concept.
In parts of his writings Shankara states that the world is a result of ignorance-that the world, with all of its variety and changing forms, has been imposed (like the individual self-consciousness of all the living beings) upon the Absolute Truth due to ignorance.5
He thus employs the concept of ignorance in an attempt to explain both the individual soul and the world of names and forms, but in other writings he declares that ignorance can never arise in the Supreme Self.6 In this way Shankara attempts to avoid the criticism that he has philosophically rendered God a fool. He does this by declaring both the individual self and the world to be illusions, and therefore nonexistent.7 The world is simply an appearance of reality, as is the individual soul.
MICHAEL: Shankara’s denial of the reality of both the world and the jiva is based on his assertion that Brahman is changeless, then?
TEACHER: Yes. The world is full of variety and is constantly changing. Yet the Upanishads declare the Supreme Brahman to be without attributes. They also declare that the cosmic manifestation is Brahman.8 So if Shankara had taken the words of shastra literally, he would have had to admit that indeed Brahman had attributes, names, forms, etc. This would have opened a floodgate of possibilities for a personal Deity, which Shankara had denied in the main body of his teachings. So, to uphold his main doctrine-namely, the impersonality of Brahman-his only choice was to interpret the Upanishads in such a manner that the cosmic manifestation and also the jiva, as we’ve already discussed, were simply illusions. He couldn’t admit that the world was separate from God and had been created by Him, nor that the jivas were separate from God and expansions of Him, because to do this he would have had to admit a reality other than Brahman. Therefore, he declared the jivas to be nonexistent and the world to be false. His statement in this regard is quite famous : Brahma satyam, jagan mithya. “The world is unreal (illusory); Brahman is Truth (real)”.9
Sometimes a person is still addicted to cigarette smoking or meat-eating. If he follows the process of bhakti yoga, then gradually he will be able to give up such habits. It is a question of tasting a higher taste. If a person engages in the process of bhakti yoga, he will gradually begin to taste the higher spiritual happiness, and he will be able to give up all vices naturally. After he gives up such bad habits, then his progress will be very rapid.MICHAEL: Also, if He is all-knowing, or was all-knowing, and somehow became not all-knowing, then this implies a change in His nature. But as you told me yesterday, Shankara places great emphasis on the changeless nature of the Absolute Truth.
Science of Identity Foundation – Siddhaswarupananda
TEACHER: Yes, this is another contradiction, though not as major as the dilemma of an ignorant God. Shankara attempts to rectify this contradiction by saying that actually, the Supreme Being has not become covered by ignorance, but it simply appears that He has.4 He carries this same concept over to his explanation of the cosmic manifestation, or the world, also. Let me sidetrack for a moment and discuss this point, since it plays an important part in understanding the overall concept.
In parts of his writings Shankara states that the world is a result of ignorance-that the world, with all of its variety and changing forms, has been imposed (like the individual self-consciousness of all the living beings) upon the Absolute Truth due to ignorance.5
He thus employs the concept of ignorance in an attempt to explain both the individual soul and the world of names and forms, but in other writings he declares that ignorance can never arise in the Supreme Self.6 In this way Shankara attempts to avoid the criticism that he has philosophically rendered God a fool. He does this by declaring both the individual self and the world to be illusions, and therefore nonexistent.7 The world is simply an appearance of reality, as is the individual soul.
MICHAEL: Shankara’s denial of the reality of both the world and the jiva is based on his assertion that Brahman is changeless, then?
TEACHER: Yes. The world is full of variety and is constantly changing. Yet the Upanishads declare the Supreme Brahman to be without attributes. They also declare that the cosmic manifestation is Brahman.8 So if Shankara had taken the words of shastra literally, he would have had to admit that indeed Brahman had attributes, names, forms, etc. This would have opened a floodgate of possibilities for a personal Deity, which Shankara had denied in the main body of his teachings. So, to uphold his main doctrine-namely, the impersonality of Brahman-his only choice was to interpret the Upanishads in such a manner that the cosmic manifestation and also the jiva, as we’ve already discussed, were simply illusions. He couldn’t admit that the world was separate from God and had been created by Him, nor that the jivas were separate from God and expansions of Him, because to do this he would have had to admit a reality other than Brahman. Therefore, he declared the jivas to be nonexistent and the world to be false. His statement in this regard is quite famous : Brahma satyam, jagan mithya. “The world is unreal (illusory); Brahman is Truth (real)”.9