Question

[anand hudli]

> What is motive behind calling something as "not-two" instead of "one"?
>
> Is it improper to use advaitam and monism interchangeably?


 advaita is based on the upanishhads as Shankara himself affirms in
 his works. The method of Vedanta(upanishads) is what is called
 adhyaaropa-apavaada-vaada.  adhyaaropa means superimposition of
 unreal attributes on the Brahman, and apavaada means the sublation
 of such superimpositions. When all superimpositions are sublated
 what remains is Brahman.

 It is to be noted that the sequence is
 superimpostion *followed* by the subsequent sublation. So there
 cannot be realization of Brahman *without* going through this
 sequence, according to Vedanta. On the other hand, if we say
 Brahman is One, then this description does not indicate the
 sublation of superimpositions clearly. That is why the system
 is called advaita, indicating that we should go from "two" or
 duality (plurality) to "not-duality" or non-duality."

 Of course, all this talk of procedures, going, coming, etc. is
 meaningless  once we reach the nondual state. In fact, any talk
 is meaningless there. That is why shriidakshhiNaamuurti has no
 instruction to offer other than silence!

 Anand