Show Posts
8851
The teachings of Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi / Re: A-U-M - Awakening to Reality - Gaudapada's Karikas on the Mandukya Upanishad:
« on: May 31, 2016, 10:42:15 AM »
The texts on creation of the world should be regarded similarly.
The other example that Sankara uses is that of 'cooking food'. The point is that whatever is being prepared
may not be edible initially e.g.rice grains. So, when we say 'I am cooking food', it is a figurative expression,
being cognizant of the fact that, by the end of cooking, it will be edible. Thus, for example, when the
scriptures speak of the 'difference' between the Jiva and Brahman, it is figurative only - this position is not
different from what we believe already. It is done in the knowledge that the later teaching will show their
identity.
Nevertheless, Gaudapada maintains that the 'bottom line' teaching of the scriptures is that there has
never been any creation. Accordingly, before attacking the notions of creation using logic, Gaudapada
wants to show that the scriptures themselves also support what he is about to say.
He begins (K 3.23) by pointing out that, on the face of it, there seem to be statements in the scriptures
for both sides, namely some that state there is a real creation and some which say that it is only apparent.
Most of the Upanishads seem to have something to say, often going into elaborate details as to sequence
and mechanism. Consequently, we have the situation where the Dvaitins (dualists) claim that creation is
real, whereas the Advaitins say that it is apparent only, like the worlds we create in our dreams. Of course,
we (Advaitins) may acknowledge that some scriptures do seem to say that creation is real but we can argue
that it is part of the Adhyaropa apavada - teaching device.
contd.,
Arunachala Siva.
The other example that Sankara uses is that of 'cooking food'. The point is that whatever is being prepared
may not be edible initially e.g.rice grains. So, when we say 'I am cooking food', it is a figurative expression,
being cognizant of the fact that, by the end of cooking, it will be edible. Thus, for example, when the
scriptures speak of the 'difference' between the Jiva and Brahman, it is figurative only - this position is not
different from what we believe already. It is done in the knowledge that the later teaching will show their
identity.
Nevertheless, Gaudapada maintains that the 'bottom line' teaching of the scriptures is that there has
never been any creation. Accordingly, before attacking the notions of creation using logic, Gaudapada
wants to show that the scriptures themselves also support what he is about to say.
He begins (K 3.23) by pointing out that, on the face of it, there seem to be statements in the scriptures
for both sides, namely some that state there is a real creation and some which say that it is only apparent.
Most of the Upanishads seem to have something to say, often going into elaborate details as to sequence
and mechanism. Consequently, we have the situation where the Dvaitins (dualists) claim that creation is
real, whereas the Advaitins say that it is apparent only, like the worlds we create in our dreams. Of course,
we (Advaitins) may acknowledge that some scriptures do seem to say that creation is real but we can argue
that it is part of the Adhyaropa apavada - teaching device.
contd.,
Arunachala Siva.