Antiquity of Advaita Vedanta (was Re: An Open Letter to All)

Ashish Chandra ramkisno at HOTMAIL.COM
Wed May 17 19:56:30 CDT 2000

>From: Rajiv Malhotra <rajiv.malhotra at WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
>Madhyamika does deny an absolute AS CONCEPTUSALIZED. An unconceptualizable
>non-'thing' cannot be imagined, spoken about, explained etc. Hence the
>famous silence of the Buddha.

Does Advaita talk of a conceptual pAramArthika state? And that is the only
reality that there is. What does Madhyamika's "unconceptualized" absolute
amount to then, if that is what you meant?

>Upon doing that, one calls it empty of this false conception. The other
>calls it full of what remains, which is unconceptualizable.
>The Vedanta risk is to reify (conceptualize) the absolute, which by
>definition means giving it form. The moment you conceptualize it, it is a
>representation in mind and hence not absolute. The tao you can think of is
>not the tao. Hence the trap some fall into. Both methods have this risk.

We talk of energy pervading the entire material world. Yet, no one has seen
it and still everyone insists that it exists.

I hope you don't mind but I am having some trouble with the
"conceptualizing" part. While it certainly might be too abstruse a thing to
simplify, I understand Shunyata better when it is defined as per the
four-fold negation and then whetever remains is not absolute => nihilism.
Logically, I find it hard to understand how one can say that an absolute is
the presence of nothing and absence of everything.

Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at

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