At the February 15th Kīrtan Party, I will try to explain that India has a few different philosophies. Philosophies of “0″, “1”, “2”, and “1&2.”
— Intro —
Buddha created the philosophy of “0.”
Śaṅkara created the philosophy of “1.”
Madhva created the philosophy of “2.”
Caitanya created the philosophy of “1&2”
— Zero and One —
Buddha’s philosophy of “0”: He realized that everything causes pain and suffering, so his solution was to become nothing, 0.
Śankara’s philosophy of “1”: He realized that everything is made of the same stuff: Brahman. So everything is 1.
The problem with both of these is that they are unrealistic. They don’t describe the world that we actually live in. We live in a world that is certainly not 0, and also isn’t 1. We live in a world were there are infinite different people, places and things.
Buddhas philosophy is more unrealistic and illogical that Śankara’s, because there is no way to explain how or why nothing could turn into everything. This weakness is main reason why Śankara’s philosophy almost completely drove Buddhism out of india in the 8th century. Another reason India eventually rejected Buddhism is that its Philosophy of 0 completely contradicts India’s oldest philosophical and religious foundations: the Veda.
Still, Śankara’s philosophy has to try to explain how one thing becomes everything. This is very difficult for him to do, because he tied his philosophy in to the Veda by defining the one thing as Brahman: pure, flawless awareness – consciousness itself, without limitation by form and characteristics.
His followers mainly proposed two solutions: (1) The theory of “division,” (2) the theory of “reflection.” I’ll explain the two theories visually, by using their analogies of a pot dividing the sky, and a lake reflecting the sun. Then I will explain why these analogies are totally unrealistic.
Trying to address this, some followers of the Philosophy of 1 said, “yes, its unrealistic. The Brahman because illusioned by un-real things, and all the things in the world are just unreal illusions.” This is called the “Philosophy of Illusion” (māyā-vāda). However it has its own problems: (1) Its unrealistic to suggest that illusion (māyā) is more powerful than pure, flawless awareness (brahman). (2) It’s not a “Philosophy of 1” anymore, now there are 2 fundamental things: awareness (brahman) and illusion (māyā).
— Philosophy of 2 —
Madhva answered the weaknesses in the Philosophy of 1 by creating the Philosophy of 2, and showing how it is much more faithful to the whole Veda (the Philosophy of 1 only picks quotes from the Veda here and there).
The Philosophy of 2 says that Brahman (awareness) comes from a sentient being (Paramātmā). Illusion (Māyā) can affect little particles of awareness (individual Ātmā), but cannot affect the source of awareness, (Paramātmā). It is called the Philosophy of 2 because there are two real entities, Ātmā and Paramātmā. Both of them have infinite qualities and energies. Brahman is the main energy of both Ārmā and Paramātmā. Māyā is an energy of Paramātmā.
What we learned last month about Vyāsa’s realization does support the philosophy of 2 much more than it supports the philosophy of 1. I’ll explain this.
— Philosophy of 1 & 2 —
Other philosophers pointed out that the “Dualism” of the Veda established by the Philosophy of 2 doesn’t contradict the “Nondualism” (“Oneness”) that the Philosophy of 1 wanted to establish. The Paramātmā is the one root of everything. Everything is made of the same single substance, Brahman. Everything shares the same qualities as the Paramātmā, yet is dependent upon Paramātmā.
The first philosopher to begin pointing this out came before Mādhva, Rāmānuja. Later, Nimbarka pointed it out, and Śrī Caitanya’s follower, Śrī Jīva also made it clear that Śrī Caitanya embraced this same point of view.
So, the philosophies of India have evolved to show that the original foundation of Vedic philosophy is most clearly and reasonably understood from the perspective of the Philosophy of “1&2”, called by several names, like: viśiṣtādvaita, dvaitādvaita, and bhedābheda.
Tagged:
Advaita,
dualism,
eastern philosophy,
indian philosophy,
nondualism