advaita-siddhi 12 (Objection by opponent)

Anand Hudli anandhudli at HOTMAIL.COM
Tue Feb 29 13:10:01 CST 2000

On Tue, 29 Feb 2000 14:48:38 +0530, H.B.Dave <hbd at DDIT.ERNET.IN> wrote:

>Anand Hudli wrote:

>>  I have heard this objection from some of my MAdhva friends. In reply,
>>  we may say that the analogy of dream and waking states to the waking
>>  state and Brahman (the fourth) cannot be carried too far. Every
>>  analogy has certain limitations that we need to be aware of. We
>>  remember the fact that we dreamed in the waking state because the
>>  act of dreaming is an "event" in the time frame of the waking state.
>>  That is why we admit the fact of having dreamed, although we do
>>  not have to admit the reality of content of the dream.
>>  But in the fourth or turIya state of Brahman, even Time vanishes. There
>>  can be NO events. So there cannot even be an indication of the fact that
>>  a "dream" occurred.
>I would not be so sure about Time (refering to the last few lines
>I think saying that Time does not exists does not mean that the events
>represented by the Time do not exist. The indication that a "dream"
>occurred as a past event in Turiya, is there as a "being".

 It depends on how you define Time and Event. If Time is defined
 as a scheme of measure for the drama of "sR^ishhTi-sthiti-laya" (creation,
 preservation or existence, and destruction), then certainly such a
 measure does not exist. For example, such time may be expressed in
 seconds, minutes, hours, etc. And an event  occurs in an interval of Time.
 But if you equate Time to the substratum of everything, all events,
 etc., and same as "Being" then yes, Time exists. It is just another name
 for Brahman!

> Our trouble
>is that we are having this discussion while still in the "dream". Can we
>percieve in a "dream" how does it feel like to have no "dream-Time"? I
>think only answer can be self-experience, (a strict Advaitin would say
>there is no experience, because experience presupposes Dvaita,
>experiencer, experienced and experience). I would not be able to discuss
>that! (yato vacho nivartante ...).

 No, what we are doing is examining the mere  plausibility of
 the non-dream (turIya) state while being in the dream state. If
 there is an objection to the effect that such a non-dream and non-dual
 state is logically impossible, we have to show the plausibility of
 such a state. Certainly, we cannot assert the such a state can be
 proved in purely argumentative fashion. The shruti assures us (mANDUkya
 upanishhad, for example) assures that such a state exists.


bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam

Archives :
Help     : Email to listmaster at
Options  : To leave the list send a mail to
           listserv at with
           SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L in the body.

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list