advaita vedanta
Recently Published Documents

This translation contains the preface and the first two chapters from the last book of W. Heisenberg’s disciple Hans-Peter Duerr “Matter does not exist!” The book is devoted to the problem of interpretation of quantum mechanics. The author, G.-P. Duerr, raises the question of the need for a new view of the fundamental issues of physics and philosophy in general, while he turns to the experience of the Indian philosophical tradition, primarily relies on the Advaita Vedanta school. The author focuses on the concepts of “transcendence”, “immanence”, “cognition”, etc. The problematic of this work lies in the field of not only physics, metaphysics and religion, but also psychology, intercultural interaction.

Gaudapada, the grand teacher of Sankara, admits the transcendental reality only. Duality is mere illusion. Gaudapada leads us from gross reality to subtle reality. In meditation also there is a gradual unfolding of subtlety. Sankara deals with both Advaita metaphysics and epistemology. According to him, the source of cognition (pramana is a mental mode (antahkaranavrtti). It removes the ignorance of the object. Brahmakara antahkaranavrtti is the final mental mode. In Advaita epistemology there is a gradual unfolding of mental mode. Sankara advocates three levels of reality- the transcendental reality, empirical reality and apparent reality. All objects, Sankara holds, are real in their own levels of existence. His philosophy teaches us the gradual unfolding of reality.

A postulação dos Upaniṣads do Absoluto Brahman, fundamento ontológico não dual e radicalmente uno, coloca em xeque o status pretensamente substancial da multiplicidade característica do universo empírico (jagat), suspenso na dualidade sujeito-objeto. Como poderia o Uno e Único aparecer como múltiplo, (pretensamente) impregnado da essencialidade do primeiro? É com o intuito de esclarecer esse ponto fundamental que os Upaniṣads introduzem a noção de avidyā ou ignorância. Um dos conceitos heurísticos de maior eficácia epistêmico-soteriológica da história da filosofia indiana, a noção de ignorância é esmiuçada de forma notável em todas as obras comentariais do filósofo da escola Advaita Vedānta Śaṅkarācārya (séc. VIII).

This article explores how two influential 8th-century Indian philosophers, Śaṅkara and Kamalaśīla, treat the threefold scheme of learning, reasoning, and meditation in their spiritual path philosophies. They have differing institutional and ontological commitments: the former, who helped establish Advaita Vedānta as the religious philosophy of an elite Hindu monastic tradition, affirms an unchanging “self” (ātman) identical to the “world-essence” (brahman); the latter, who played a significant role in the development of Buddhist monasticism in Tibet, denies both self and essence. Yet, they share a concern with questions of truth and the means by which someone could gain access to it, such as what, if anything, meditation contributes to knowledge and its acquisition. By exploring their answers to this and related questions, including how discursive and conceptual practices like learning, reasoning, and meditation could generate nonconceptual knowledge or knowledge of the nonconceptual, this essay shows the difficulty of separating “philosophical” problems of truth from those related to self-transformation or “spirituality,” as Michel Foucault defines the terms. It also reassesses, as a framework for comparison, the well-known contrast between “gradual” and “sudden” approaches to the achievement of liberating knowledge and highlights them as tensions we still struggle to resolve today.

<p>Kitab suci merupakan jalan untuk mempelajari ajaran dari suatu agama. Agama Hindu memiliki kitab suci yang disebut dengan <em>Veda</em>, <em>Veda</em> disini bukan merujuk pada sebuah kitab, namun <em>Veda</em> terdiri dari banyak kitab yang sudah dikelompokkan atau sudah dikodifikasikan. Munculnya fenomena konflik masyarakat Hindu Bali dengan aliran sampradaya mewajibkan kita untuk menggali kembali sistem filsafat yang ada dalam agama Hindu. Istilah <em>Dvaita</em>, <em>Visistadvaita</em>,  dan <em>Advaita</em>, menjadi istilah-istilah yang dikaji lebih mendalam lagi untuk menganalisis aliran yang sesuai dengan filsafat-filsafat tersebut. <em>Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad</em> merupakan salah satu kitab suci yang akan dibahas ajarannya dalam tulisan ini. Paham <em>advaita</em> <em>Vedanta</em> menjiwai <em>Upaniṣad</em> ini, segala sesuatu yang ada merupakan Tuhan, sedangkan yang lainnya bersifat <em>maya</em>. Adapun paham panteisme dan monisme yang ada secara bersamaan dalam <em>Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad</em>. Panteisme berkaitan dengan imanensi sedangkan monisme berkaitan dengan transendensi. Hal ini menunjukkan ajaran dalam <em>Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad</em> erat kaitannya dengan ajaran-ajaran <em>tattwa</em> dalam teks <em>lontar</em> yang ada di Bali, salah satunya yaitu <em>lontar Tattwa Jnana</em> yang dimana memiliki konsep yang serupa dengan yang ada dalam <em>Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad</em>. Yoga merupakan sarana untuk memurnikan sang <em>atman</em> agar dapat bersatu kembali dengan <em>brahman</em>.</p><p> </p>

<p>Humans are social creatures and in social life and have various complex problems. Various problems that exist are very difficult to be solved. Sometimes it is very difficult for humans to focus themselves to find what is really sought in this life so that a thought arises what is the purpose of humans living in this world? In this study Vedanta philosophy is able to answer this question. This study discusses "Human Goals and the Way to Achieving It According to Advaita Vedanta". This research is a qualitative research Herneutics then the data will be analyzed using descriptive and interpretative methods.</p><p>This study found that the human goal is to achieve happiness, life and alive is a human goal towards a higher goal. In the teachings of Advaita Vedanta it is emphasized that to achieve the highest goal, namely Brahman itself, there are several ways that humans can take, namely: 1). Understanding Life and alive, 2). Understanding Reincarnation is a way to repair bad karma in previous lives in the hope that human goals will be achieved. 3). The four paths to the ultimate goal are: Karma Yoga, Jnana Yoga, Bhakti Yoga and Raja Yoga.</p><p> </p><p>Manusia adalah mahluk sosial dan dalam kehidupan sosial sudah pasti manusia memiliki berbagai permasalahan yang kompleks. Berbagai permsalahan yang ada sangat sulit untuk diselesaikan oleh sebagian orang bahkan terkadang manusia sangat sulit untuk memfokuskan dirinya untuk mencari sesungguhnya yang dicari dalam kehidupan ini sehingga muncul sebuah pemikiran apakah tujuan manusia hidup di dunia ini? Dalam penelitian ini filsafat Vedanta mampu menjawab pertanyaan ini. Penelitian ini membahas mengenai “Tujuan Manusia Dan Jalan Untuk Mencapainya Menurut Advaita Vedanta”. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian kualitatif Herneutika selanjutnya data akan dianalisis dengan menggunakan metode deskriptif dan interpretatife.</p><p>Penelitian ini menemukan bahwa tujuan manusia adalah mencapai kebahagiaan, hidup dan kehidupan itu adalah merupakan sebuah tujuan manusia menuju sebuah tujuan tertinggi. Dalam ajaran <em>Advaita Vedanta</em> ditekankan bahwa untuk mencapai tujuan tertinggi yaitu Brahman itu sendiri ada beberapa hal jalan yang dapat ditempuh oleh manusia yaitu: 1). Memahami Hidup dan Kehidupan, 2). Memahami Reinkarnasi adalah jalan untuk memperbaiki karma buruk padamasa kehidupanyang terdahulu dengan harapan tujuan manusia akan dapat tercapai. 3). Empat jalan mencapai tujuan tertinggi yaitu: <em>Karma Yoga, Jnana Yoga, Bhakti Yoga</em> dan <em>Raja Yoga.</em></p>

<p>Mayavada (the doctrine of maya) is the Advaitin explanation of how the infinite Brahman is manifested as the finite material world. Brahman is unchanging and perfect; the locus of the changing and imperfect world. This paper has two aims. The first is to show that mayavada affirms the reality of the material world, despite the claims of Paul Deussen and Prabhu Dutt Sharstri to the contrary. To achieve this end a world-affirming mayavada is formulated based on the metaphysics of Swami Vivekananda, Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, and Sri Aurobindo. The second aim is to show that world-affirming mayavada is a plausible metaphysical position which should be taken seriously in contemporary metaphysical debate. To achieve this some pluralist arguments against nondualism are rejected, and it is explained how world-affirming mayavada is preferable to pluralism when accounting for the ontological problems that arise from limitless decomposition and emergence due to quantum entanglement. Hence the conclusion of this paper will be that mayavada is a plausible metaphysical position which affirms the reality of the material world.</p>

<p>Mayavada (the doctrine of maya) is the Advaitin explanation of how the infinite Brahman is manifested as the finite material world. Brahman is unchanging and perfect; the locus of the changing and imperfect world. This paper has two aims. The first is to show that mayavada affirms the reality of the material world, despite the claims of Paul Deussen and Prabhu Dutt Sharstri to the contrary. To achieve this end a world-affirming mayavada is formulated based on the metaphysics of Swami Vivekananda, Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, and Sri Aurobindo. The second aim is to show that world-affirming mayavada is a plausible metaphysical position which should be taken seriously in contemporary metaphysical debate. To achieve this some pluralist arguments against nondualism are rejected, and it is explained how world-affirming mayavada is preferable to pluralism when accounting for the ontological problems that arise from limitless decomposition and emergence due to quantum entanglement. Hence the conclusion of this paper will be that mayavada is a plausible metaphysical position which affirms the reality of the material world.</p>

This comparative study aims at juxtaposition of modern Western naturalistic evolutionism and the mostly similar attitude in the classic Indian philosophy in the shape of Sankhya’s cosmology in the context of their corresponding critiques by contemporary creationists and Advaita-Vedanta. The long and pointed polemics with Sankhya in the Brahmasutrabhasya by Šankaracharya (7th-8th centuries A.D.) is in the focus of this investigation along with numerous references to the Sankhya-karika by Isvarakrsna (5th century A.D.) as the basic text of the philosophical school criticized by its most powerful opponent. Comparing Western and Indian evolutionism reveals some very important differences to such a degree that the Indian species of the genus would be, in the author’s opinion, better identified as not evolutionism in the strict sense but as a “développisme” combining features of evolutionism with those of emanationism. As to Sankhya’s naturalism, it turns to be much more “sophisticated” than that, e.g., of Thomas Huxley or the so-called New Atheists because its “stuff” is more psychological than material. Nevertheless, crucial logical gaps remain the same in both cases (along with an antitheistic “faith” instead of rationalism), while their taking into account by opponents of naturalism offers a challenge for comparative philosophical theology.