If advaita stands, all other systems(including dvaita) fall

[Anand Hudli]

              Gummuluru Murthy wrote:
>
> On a related note, I read recently in Shri Swami Satchidananda Sarasvati's
> book "The Method of Vedanta" (page 43) "The Absolute can only be revealed
> through false attribution followed by retraction". Does it mean "If you
> do not experience the maaya, you cannot experience the Absolute ?"
>
>

    The Absolute is something that is beyong the grasp of the mind and
  words. This is said in the shruti, and I think everyone agrees about
  this. Also, everyone here agrees that the mahaavaakyas such as
  ahaM brahmaasmi, tat tvam asi, etc. are all sentences which reveal
  Brahman. But as someone once pointed out on this list and as VidyaaraNya
  observes in his Panchadashii, just repeating these sentences over and
  over or knowing them only intellectually will not produce the experience
  of Brahman. What is required is a systematic discipline that leads one
  to Brahman. I simply cannot agree with the opinion that one has to give
  up all disciplines and thought in order to attain Brahman. Truth is not
  a pathless land according to Vedaanta. What the Vedas and Vedaanta show
  is an effective and practical way of reaching the goal.

  In Mathematics, there is a notion of an existential proof and
  an "effective proof." An existential proof merely shows that a certain
  mathematical object exists under certain conditions. But it does _not_
  show how to _find_ that object or construct that object. The effective
  proof shows not only that the object exists but also shows how to
  _find_ it. Naturally mathematicians are more interested in effective
  proofs rather than existential ones.

  Truth is one but the path to truth is also one according to Vedaanta.
  Shankara and Sureshvara are emphatic about this. They do not say that
  Brahman can be realized independently of the upanishhads. Sureshvara
  says in his sambandha vaartika that Brahman can be realized _only_
  through sentences such as tat tvam asi of the upanishhads. Now, there
  may be an objection from those who say "Truth is one but  paths are
  many." This objection is easily met by saying that paths may be many
  but a path other than Vedaanta will either give an "existential proof"
  of Truth and not the "effective proof" of truth, or the path may give
  an effective way of putting you on the right track to Brahman. For
  example, the theistic religions do not mislead you away from Brahman. They
  only take you so far down the road and then stop short of Brahman. An
  intellectual understanding of Vedaanta or advaita is like an existential
  proof. It only assures you that there is Brahman and it is identical
  with your Atman. But it will not be the same as experiencing Brahman.
  I am not saying an intellectual understanding of advaita is of no use
  either. It helps to build up a firm conviction for pursuing further
  procedures.

  Vedanta is not an armchair philosophy which contains speculations about
  the Absolute. The whole of the Vedas is meant ultimately for attaining
  mokshha. The approach taken is to effectively lead the seeker from grosser
  and lower reality to a subtler and higher reality. This is done by
  the method of adhyaaropa/apavaada or the method of false attribution/
  retraction. There is no doubt that maayaa must be transcended in order
  to realize Brahman. But we are caught in maayaa. We will only be deluding
  ourselves if we deny this or we are already Brahman-realized, in which
  case we don't need the Vedas. The Vedas are meant for people who _want_
  to realize Brahman, not for those who are already so realized. The
  argument that there is no liberation and no bondage, etc., will be
  convincing once Brahman is realized, not before. Again, someone may
  say, "I am already realized. I dont have to strive for realization."
  If that is so, then this person should ask himself/herself, "If I am
  already realized, then am I experiencing the eternal Bliss that is
  Brahman?" This is the acid test. If the answer is no, the person cannot
  be realized.

  Whatever Vedic procedure that we undertake will
  be in the realm of maayaa, but will help us transcend maayaa. This is
  adhyaaropa. Lest we become attached to the Vedic procedure and its
  results, Vedaanta shows us that they are sublated ultimately. This is
  apavaada. There is a tremendous amount of argument over the Bheda-shruti
  (passages which speak of Brahman as separate from jiiva) and abheda
  shruti (passages which speak of Brahman and jiiva as one) between
  advaitins and other schools which accept some kind of bheda or other.
  The conflict can be resolved by understanding that the bheda shruti's
   are adhyaaropa and the abheda shruti's are the apavaada.

  The gist of what I am trying to say is that the method of adhyaaropa/
  apavaada (false attribution/sublation) is an effective way of realizing
  Brahman.


> Regards
> Gummuluru Murthy
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Adau ante ca yan nAsti vartamAnepi tat tathA !
>                                 GaudapAda in Mandukya kArika
> What did not exist at the beginning and what is not going to exist at the
>  end is as good as non-existent even in the present.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>


  Anand