An Interesting article - any response?
Charles A. Hillig
chillig at JETLINK.NET
Wed Dec 4 09:19:36 CST 1996
> Let us give names to the various states in the advaitic framework
>1.The Dream-state: This is state of dreams which we experience
>when we sleep ("Svapnaavastha")
>2. The waking state: The state of the world we experience when we are
>awake, i.e. the world we see around ; the birds, the trees etc.
>3. Absolute state: the state of the Advaitic Brahman, i.e. the state
> of the frozen consciousness of the Advaitic Brahman.
> Dream state is unreal visavis the Waking state and the latter
>unreal visavis the Absolute state-this is the thesis of Advaita.
> Let us analyse the dream-state. We see several objects in our
>dreams. Granting for a minute they are all unreal, what causes them?
Any attempt to seek a time-based, linear "causality" ignores the fact
that cause and effect are, quintessentially, the same thing because they
"both" arise simultaneously.
>In the waking state we see several objects and the impressions are
>formed in the mind and they reappear in the dreams perhaps jumbled
>up arbitrarily. In other words the variety that is there in the
>waking state accounts for the variety in the dream. Let us even grant
>that the waking - state is unreal visavis the absolute -state of
>advaita. What accounts for the variety seen in the waking state?
>Even accepting the alleged unreality of dream-objects, we can account
>for its variety invoking the variety seen in the waking-state.
>However we cannot invoke anything to explain away the variety in the
>waking state, because their is no variety in the absolute state of
>the advaitic brahman which is "akhanda", "nirguna",etc. Even if the
>advaitic stand-point of unreality of this world is accepted, the
>variety in the waking-state cannot be explained in their own
>frame-work. Thus using the method of "reductio-ad-absurdum" ,we
>see that the entire edifice on which advaita is built crumbles.
>Conclusion: the world is real. Jeeva can never be the same as
However, just because I see an intense movie during the waking state
and then dream about that movie at night, it still doesn't mean that the
movie is "real" or that the characters and action really, in fact, occurred.
The variety of dream-objects manifesting as part of the dream was,
seemingly, only triggered by the illusory variety of objects that appeared
as the movie on the screen.
But didn't the screen, itself, still remain seamless, undivided, and whole?
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list