Você está na página 1de 43

12/19/05

Shankara*
(788-820 AD)

Commentary on the Vedanta Sutras


(Brahmasutra-Bhashya)

*Sankara, Sancara, Shamkara

Text, 229-250

Background
India & Hinduism

Hinduism

Basic Beliefs
Sacred Literature The Raja Yoga System

Outline of the Text


Self (Atman) & Non-Self -- the problem of superimposition (229-230) The Desire to Know Brahman (230-233)
Knowing

Brahman (230-231) Brahman as the cause of the world (not in text) The relationship between Brahman and Self (Atman) -- identity (231-233)

Critique of Other Philosophical Systems (233-250)

3 Critique of Other Philosophical Systems, contd

Vedanta vs. Samkhya (233-241)


Brahman as the cause of the worlds existence The Vedanta critique of Samkhya metaphysics (the purusha-prakriti theory) The Samkhya critique of Vedantic non-dualism

Vedanta vs. Vaisheshika (atomism) (241-245)

Brahman as the material cause of the world Critique of Vaisheshika atomism Critique of the Vaisheshika theory of categories (Continued on next slide)

3 Critique of Other Philosophical Systems, contd


Vedanta vs. Buddhist Philosophy (245-250) Shankaras non-dualism vs. Buddhist Realism, Idealism, & Voidism -- Editors Comment Critique of Buddhist Realism -- interdependent causation & momentariness Critique of Buddhist Idealism -- consciousness-only Critique of Buddhist Voidism -- emptiness = nothingness (?) General assessment of Buddhist philosophy

Self & Not-Self (subject & object)


The mistake of superimposition How is objectification of the Self possible, since it is not an object of sense perception?

First, Self is not absolutely a non-object. It is the object [reference] of the word I, & it is known to have real (objective) existence through direct intuition (I am) [Descartes: I think; therefore I am]. Second, objectification of things that are not objects of sense perception takes place (e.g., the dark blue color of the ether).

Ignorance (avidya) as opposed to knowledge (vidya) as the basis of superimposition. Examples of ignorant objectification of the Self . The path to knowledge of the Self: study of the Vedanta Sutras.

2. The Desire to Know Brahman

Knowing Brahman
Prerequisites to knowledge of Brahman Knowledge of Brahman as the highest good Is Brahman known or not known?
Brahman (the greatest) [that than which nothing greater can be conceived?] is known to exist & is the universal Self (Atman). Also, the Self is known to exist [because it is impossible for anyone to think I am not? (Descartes again)].

since there are many conflicting views of the nature of the Self (231) & of its relationship with Brahman,
it is necessary to inquire further into the nature of Brahman & of the Self & into the relationship between them (231).
(Why is it necessary?)

2. The Desire to Know Brahman, contd

Brahman as cause of the world


The origin, subsistence, & dissolution of the world must (each) be caused. (Why?) The cause cannot be nonintelligent matter (prakriti), nor atoms, nor non-being, nor the world itself. (Why not?)
(Not in Text)

Brahman (omniscient & omnipotent) is the only possible cause of the worlds origin, subsistence, & dissolution. (Why?)

2. The Desire to Know Brahman, contd

The relationship between Brahman & Self (231-3)


Description of Brahman: eternal, all-knowing, absolutely self-sufficient, ever pure, intelligent, free, pure knowledge, absolute bliss, omnipresent, immutable, non-composite (one), self-illuminating. Description of Self: permanent, unitary, eternally unchanging, present in everything, imperishable, eternally pure & free.

one, i.e., identical,


& knowledge of this identity is moksha (final release & experience of the union of Self & Brahman).

Knowledge & realization of the identity of Atman & Brahman also result in freedom from the transmigratory world (samsara), whereas ignorance (avidya) of the supreme identity binds us to that world.

Tat tvam asi!*


This means That thou art! The That refers to Brahman; the thou refers to the Self (Atman).

*From the Chandogya Upanishad, VI, 8, 7

2. The Desire to Know Brahman, contd

Two experiences of Brahman


Brahman as other than the Self, qualified by limiting conditions (definable characteristics), an object of religious devotion. This view is based on ignorance (avidya). Brahman as one (identical) with the Self, free from all limiting conditions (having no definable qualities or characteristics), not an object of religious devotion [because not other than the Self]. This view is based on knowledge (vidya).

2. The Desire to Know Brahman, contd

How the Self gets confused with the Not-Self


& how the individual soul awakens to its true identity as the universal Self (Atman) through critical thought & reflection
Dream states & waking states
The rope-snake analogy

Critique of Other Philosophical Systems

The orthodox schools

The unorthodox schools

Samkhya & Yoga


Nyaya & Vaisheshika Mimamsa & Vedanta

Buddhism
Jainism Carvaka

(See Text, 233, fn 1)

(Text, 233-241)

Samkhya-Yoga Cosmology
(metaphysical dualism)

Consciousness, Self, Subject (no real interaction) Origin, Subsistence, & Dissolution of Worlds Disruption of Equilibrium -- Intermingling of Gunas

Equilibrium of the Three Gunas (sattva, rajas, tamas)

Matter, Not-Self, Object

Shankaras Cosmology
Non-Dualism (Advaita)

(Rope)

(Snake)

The issues addressed in Shankaras treatment of Samkhya-Yoga philosophy


The

efficient & material causation of the worlds existence How can the pradhana (prakriti) be active or activated? The Samkhya-Yoga critique of Shankaras non-dualism

Causation of the Worlds Existence

Two kinds of causation

Material causation

Efficient causation

The material cause of an entity (e.g., a clay pot) is the matter or substance of which the entity is made or composed or constructed (e.g., clay).

The efficient cause of an entity or event is the active agent that produces the entity or event (e.g., a potter molds clay to form a clay pot).

Shankara & the Samkhya-Yoga philosophers agree that Brahman (purusha) is the efficient cause of the worlds existence. They disagree about the material causation of the world.

The disagreement:

For Shankara,

For Samkhya-Yoga,

Brahman is the material cause of the world. The world is an appearance of Brahman projected from & by Brahman through the power of maya.

the pradhana (prakriti) is the material cause of the world. The world is other than Brahman (purusha), which is the efficient but not the material cause of the world.

Causation of the Worlds Existence

The arguments
Why

& how does Samkhya-Yoga argue that Brahman cannot be the material cause of the world? does Shankara respond to the S-Y position on this matter? How does he argue that Brahman is both the efficient and the material cause of the world?

How

pp. 233-237
Samkhya-Yoga: An effect cannot have qualities different from the qualities of its material cause. The world is non-intelligent (non-conscious), composed of parts, and impure (a mixture of pleasure, pain, & numbness). Brahman (purusha) is intelligent (conscious), one (not composed of parts), and pure (not a mixture of qualities). Therefore, Brahman (purusha) cannot be the material cause of the world. Vedanta (Shankara): (1) Some effects have qualities different from the qualities of their material causes (humans [intelligent, conscious] growing hair & nails; cow dung [nonintelligent, non-living] giving rise to scorpions & similar animals. (2) Originally, there was nothing but Brahman. If the material from which the world is made is other than Brahman, then that material must emerge from Brahman. (3) In fact, the whole world is intelligent (or a manifestation of intelligence).

Causation of the Worlds Existence

Lets go over pp. 237 in detail.

This is the section entitled, (2) The primal cause of the world must be intelligent.

How can the pradhana (prakriti) be active or activated? (237-8)

According to Shankara,
S-Ys dualistic cosmology makes activity & motion (& therefore the existence of the world) impossible.
How does he explain & back up this criticism?

S-Y dualism negates motion.


How can the pradhana be activated by purusha? How does the disequilibrium of the gunas originate? How does the Mahat arise? (237-8) How can the pradhana serve any purposes of purusha? (238) Can (or how can) purusha move the pradhana? (239) The activity of the pradhana is impossible (or unintelligible) on S-Y assumptions (239).

The S-Y critique of Shankaras Non-Dualism (239-240)


Non-Dualism destroys the distinction between sufferer & cause of suffering, between the desiring person & the object desired, between the nondesiring person & the object not desired (the object of aversion). Non-Dualism also makes final release from suffering impossible [because suffering would then belong to the essence of the Self], contrary to Scripture, whereas Dualism makes final release possible [because suffering would then be distinct from the Self].

How does Shankara respond to the S-Y critique of his Non-Dualism? How does he explain the relationship between sufferer & cause of suffering?
All subject-object dualities are phenomenal (apparent) only; they are not really real; there is no duality in the Brahman-Atman. Release from suffering results from the realization that suffering is not really real, & that realization comes with knowledge of Brahman-Atman.

Text, 240-241

Perhaps neither S-Y Dualism nor Shankaras Non-Dualistic Vedanta can do justice to the subject-object distinction.

What do you think?


(See fn 1 on p. 241)

(Text, 241-244)

(I.e., Nyaya-Vaisheshika)

The issues addressed in Shankaras treatment of Nyaya-Vaisheshika atomism


The material causation of the world (Can an intelligent cause produce effects that do not possess intelligence?) Problems

with atomism:

The problem of initial atomic motion The indivisibility & immutability of atoms
The N-V categories of the understanding (substance, quality, motion, generality, particularity, inherence)

(Text, 244-250)

Buddhist Realism (Sautrantika & Vaibhashika) Buddhist Idealism (Yogacara)

Buddhist Voidism (Madhyamaka)

Shankara vs. Buddhist Realism


The chain of interdependent causation - cannot
explain the material & mental aggregations that are governed by the Wheel of Becoming

The Buddhist doctrine of momentariness


undermines the principle of causality (168-9) is inconsistent with the phenomenon of remembrance

11. Birth

12. Aging & Dying

1. Ignorance

Heaven

2. Impulse to Exist

10. Becom- Human Realm ing

3. Demon ConRealm sciousGreed ness Delusion 4. 9. Hatred Hungry MindCling- Animal Ghost Realm Body ing Realm 8. Six 5. Hell Craving Senses 6. 7. Sensations Contact

Shankara vs. Buddhist (Yogacara) Idealism


5 arguments in support of Yogacara idealism (248) Shankaras general response (including rejections of the five arguments for idealism) (248-250)

The external world is given as a phenomenon in consciousness & is experienced as external. The existence of the external world is confirmed by all the standard means of knowledge (pramanas). [See next slide] Although consciousness is always accompanied by an object, there is a distinction between consciousness & object (i.e., they are not identical). Examples of dreams, illusions, & mirages do not prove the truth of idealism. The Yogacara explanation of the variety of ideas implies an infinite regress [see fn 3 on p. 250].

The Standard Means of Knowledge (pramanas):


Perception Inference Verbal testimony (scripture) Comparison (analogy) Postulation Valid non-perception
Fn 1, p. 249

Shankara vs. Buddhist Voidism

Voidism is negated by all of the standard means of knowledge (pramanas).


Text, 250

Shankaras final assessment of Buddhist philosophy

Text, 250

The End

Você também pode gostar