Author Archives: amartingarcia

About amartingarcia

Surgeon, retired. Student of non-duality and advaita vedanta

Review of article titled ‘A New Approach to Understanding Advaita as Taught by Shankara Bhagavadpada’

Posted on by

(Ramesam asked me to review the following article, with which I complied after much  hesitation. The article is over 40 p. long and quite dense and complicated in parts – in other words, ‘academic’: for specialists only; one could add: cutting the slices so thin, that the substance is practically lost, or forgotten).

Review of  ‘A New Approach to Understanding Advaita as Taught by ´Sa ˙ nkara Bhagavadp¯ada’ – by Ramakrishnan Balasubrahmanian

The first impression, on a quick glance at the beginning of the article, is that the criticisms of the author contained in the article, and addressed to the writings of Swami Satchidanandendra Saraswati (SSS), a recognized sage and scholar, are extensive to the latter’s whole opus, as coming from an uncompromising position concerning the teachings and method of Shankaracharia. Some of the words and expressions used in the article are quasi-litigious (e.g., ‘intellectual arrogance’, ‘vociferously opposes’, ‘pointless’, ‘glaring inconsistency’, ‘making errors’, ‘misconstruing’, ‘twisting’, ‘has invented a new term’, etc.), reminiscent of the theological disputes and diatribes in the European Middle Ages. Evidently, SSS had his followers as well as his detractors, and the same can be said of the author of this article, who belongs to an opposite camp. Occasionally, he shows signs of (partial) approval of his adversary’s (if one can use this term) enunciates; for example: “No doubt SSS’s textual analysis skills are excellent, but the problem I see with SSS’s writings is his obsession with terminology, rather than philosophy. Indeed none of his works are about the philosophy of advaita [!], but are oriented almost exclusively towards contradicting previous commentators of ´Sa˙nkar¯ac¯arya”. And soon after that: “The difference between Padmapada and SSS is that the former is a philosopher, while the latter is a textual analyst”. Concerning these  pervading criticisms of the work of SSS by the author, Ramakrishna Balasubramanian (RB), the reader may judge whether they are excessive, unwarranted, or justified.

The main criticism by the author, in respect of the interpretation of avidya by SSS, is that this is not due to a double superimposition of the self and the non-self, as the latter maintains, but only to a superimposition of a subject, non-self, on the self: “[T]he fundamental error is a superimposition of an observer on the real… and by a reverse process the inner self, which is the witness of everything, is superimposed on the inner-organ”. He calls this reverse act (or process, as he calls it) ‘natural’, since “a superimposition of observer on the self naturally leads to the imagination of objects ‘outside’ and ‘inside’ the observer, just as described by Gaud.ap¯ad¯ac¯arya”. He adds: “The usage of the continuative ‘adhyasya’ in the above passage also clearly indicates that the superimposition of an observer is avidy¯a and is prior to the reverse superimposition”.

Logically prior?, prior in time? Or simultaneous, by mutual implication? Continue reading →

Consciousness and Mythology (or, Consciousness, Nausicaa and Ulysses)

Posted on by

“Mythology is the penultimate truth… Its ‘worlds’ and ‘gods’ are levels of reference and symbolic entities which are neither places nor individuals, but states of mind realizable within you.” — Ananda K. Coomaraswamy

If memories are nothing but thoughts, one after another, in the present moment, where alone they can exist, there is no loss – one feels – if most of them, even all of those which are merely personal, disappear altogether as into a dust-bin of useless personal history, a dark corner or recess of things readily forgotten, unclaimed and uncried for. But there are other thoughts, memories, that resist being forgotten. The deeds and trials of valiant, resourceful and noble Ulysses; the feminine beauty and candor of Nausicaa when she first encountered him; the ten years’ efforts and sufferings of the Aecheans (and the Troyans) seemingly helpless in front of the inexpugnable walls of Troya, which ended finally in the destruction of that legendary city; the prowess of swift Achilles, the prudence of Telemacus and the steadfastness, ingenuity and devotion of Penelope.The battle-field of Kurushketra, both armies arrayed for battle while Arjuna ponders what to do in such a painful dilemma… and so many other great deeds of heroic adventure and courageous example – the word epic describes the meaning of it all – whether fact is mixed with fiction, imaginations from the fertile minds of poets… but still unforgettable. Are these, and many others, not imprinted indelibly in mens’ minds across millenia? Are all these also to be lost for ever, thrown into utter oblivion? Can Consciousness Itself bear to ever be separated from such stupendous, towering events as have remained in the minds of men from time immemorial; in men (or minds) who refuse to forget them as the inheritance to which they lay claim – exploits they.aspire to emulate, even if in a lesser, or symbolical form? Well,  this is the lower realm, the realm of contingency, of men’s passions and narrow vision – of deeds of fallible men, even if they be heroes. Things in this world are error-prone, deceitful and ephemeral. And yet… beauty cannot be removed from the best of human acts, feelings, and aspirations. And Beauty is of the eternal. Is this, are these real questions?   A.M.

Reply:

You are preaching to the choir. The beauty of the book 6 of the Odyssey, the encounter of Ulysses and Nausicaa, the first verses and their enchanting rythm
are forever engraved in my memory since I discovered them at age 15. They emanate directly from the Source, to which we return, and which contains them, and all the heroes and gentle souls they speak of. Nothing gets ever lost. There are many rooms in our Father’s mansion, and there is room for all.  Francis Lucille.