Union of matter and soul is responsible for generation of an object. Every idea that finds place in world has its foundation in matter and spirit. The idea of world unity which is the crying need of the modern world should. if it wants to tale a concrete shape, at first finds its expression in philosophy and then in matter. hence we speak of world unity we must find out the philosophical base for it. Then the idea may be worked out into a reality yatra visva bhabetyaka Nidam.
Philosophers of India had always longed to Know about the entire creation and also about one's own self who I am, what I am, where from I came and to whom or where shall I go back. In this ceaseless quest to know the destiny of man, he at long last arrived at the conclusion that Brahman was the source of his origin and it was He who would embrace him on completion of the iron round destiny. Sri Vyas Deva. The great sage and seer of ancient times wrote a treatise called Bramhasutra wherein he outlined this idea as answer to that quest. This branch of knowledge is known as Vedanta Darshan.
Vyas's Brahmasutra was accepted as the conclusive answer to man's eternal question about the source of life, matter as well as life beyond. He composed his sutras in a very brief manner giving ample scope for interpretation of the sutras (gist) according to ones own realization and revelation. Different branches of Vedanta Darshan eventually emerged and gave rise to different schools of religions and philosophical thoughts.
There are five main school of the Vedanta viz. Sankara's Kavaladaitavada or Strict Monism, Ramanuja's Vishisthadvaitavada or Qualified Monism, Nimvarka's Dvaitadvaitavada or dualism-Monism, Madhva's Dvaitavada or Dualism" and VaVallabha's Suddhadvaitavada or Pure Monism." The main question here is as to the relation between unity and plurality God and world : whether there is a relation of absolute non-difference (Abhada) or absolute difference (Veda) or both (Bheadabheda) between them. Briefly according to Sankar, Brahman is alone true, the world is false, so that the latter is absolutely non-different from the former. According to Ramanuja the world is real like Brahman and both non-different. and different from it, but here the stress is more on non-different. According to Vallabhava, the world is real but non-different from Brahman.
Tye system of nimbarka is akin to that of Ramanuja. Still it has been given a separate place and ranked as one of the five main schools of the Vedanta because of its new approach to the fundamental philosophical question of the relation between the one and many. God and the world. Nimbarka insists on taking both Bheda or Difference and Abheda or Non-Difference between the two to be Equally and simultaneously true. This may sound self contradictory. But Nimbarka’s brief yet entirely logical explanation dispels the doubt. He takes his stand on the Cause-Effect or Whole-Part Relation. Thecause effect relation is neither a relation of pure. The clay jar the effect, for example, has a peculiar nature and form as a jar and special functions, like fetching water, etc. not found in the lump of clay the cause as such. Again the effect is also non-different from the cause because it being a modification of the cause is nothing but cause. The clay jar, for example, is non different from the lump of clay for it is, after all nothing but clay and depends on it for its very origin and existence.
The cause, on its side, is different from the effect because it is not fully exhausted in it but something over and above. The lump of clay, for example, different from the clay jar, because it is not only the jar but a hundred other things like clay plates etc. still the cause is non-different from the effect because it is the effect so far as it goes and permeates it through and through. the lump of clay. for example, is non-different from the clay jar because after all, both are equally clay. Thus the cause effect or whole – part relation is one of the identity in difference.
In the same manner, the Universe of souls and matter is different from Brahman, as its attributes (viz. impurity, grossness, finitude, etc.) and activities (viz. selfish works etc) are quite different from the attributes (viz. purity. omnipresence) and activities (viz. creation etc.) of Brahman. But the Universe is also non-different of Brahman are because they as modification Brahman of in essence. Again, Brahman is different from the Universe because it is but one among its infinite powers and elements and Brahman as a whole is not exhausted in a single world Brahman is no less non-different from the world. Because it permeates the world, through and through as its cause.;
Thus according to Nimbarka, Bheda or difference means (i) Difference in attributes and activities from the stand point of the effect (ii) Transacendence over the effect from the stan dpoint of the cause
Abheda or Non-difference means (i) Non-difference in the essence, from the stand point of the effect (ii) Immanence in the effect, from the stand point of the cause
If we understand difference in this sense of transcendence and immanence, no contradiction will be involved in taking both of them to be equally real, natural and compatible. Here non-difference does not mean absolute identity like the complete merging of a drop of water into the ocean it simply implies sameness of essence and the immanence Brahman in the world. And difference does not mean absolute separateness o distinction like that between a man and a table, but it only implies the difference of forms attributes and, activities and, activities the transcendence of Brahman over the world. This is Nimvarka's famous Svabhavik Bhedabheda vada or Doctrine of Natural Difference and Non-Difference between God and the Universe. Thus according to Dr. Tadhakrishna, "From the philosophical stand point. Nimbarka can well claim to have contributed something new to the history of philosophical speculation as regards the vexed question to the relation between the one and the man. In some other respects, too, Nimbarka's solution regards the fundamental problems of philosophy are really praise-worthy, especially his doctrine of power (Sakti Vada) which enables him to unravel many a knotty and seemingly insoluble problem of philosophy.â€
Philosophers of India had always longed to Know about the entire creation and also about one's own self who I am, what I am, where from I came and to whom or where shall I go back. In this ceaseless quest to know the destiny of man, he at long last arrived at the conclusion that Brahman was the source of his origin and it was He who would embrace him on completion of the iron round destiny. Sri Vyas Deva. The great sage and seer of ancient times wrote a treatise called Bramhasutra wherein he outlined this idea as answer to that quest. This branch of knowledge is known as Vedanta Darshan.
Vyas's Brahmasutra was accepted as the conclusive answer to man's eternal question about the source of life, matter as well as life beyond. He composed his sutras in a very brief manner giving ample scope for interpretation of the sutras (gist) according to ones own realization and revelation. Different branches of Vedanta Darshan eventually emerged and gave rise to different schools of religions and philosophical thoughts.
There are five main school of the Vedanta viz. Sankara's Kavaladaitavada or Strict Monism, Ramanuja's Vishisthadvaitavada or Qualified Monism, Nimvarka's Dvaitadvaitavada or dualism-Monism, Madhva's Dvaitavada or Dualism" and VaVallabha's Suddhadvaitavada or Pure Monism." The main question here is as to the relation between unity and plurality God and world : whether there is a relation of absolute non-difference (Abhada) or absolute difference (Veda) or both (Bheadabheda) between them. Briefly according to Sankar, Brahman is alone true, the world is false, so that the latter is absolutely non-different from the former. According to Ramanuja the world is real like Brahman and both non-different. and different from it, but here the stress is more on non-different. According to Vallabhava, the world is real but non-different from Brahman.
Tye system of nimbarka is akin to that of Ramanuja. Still it has been given a separate place and ranked as one of the five main schools of the Vedanta because of its new approach to the fundamental philosophical question of the relation between the one and many. God and the world. Nimbarka insists on taking both Bheda or Difference and Abheda or Non-Difference between the two to be Equally and simultaneously true. This may sound self contradictory. But Nimbarka’s brief yet entirely logical explanation dispels the doubt. He takes his stand on the Cause-Effect or Whole-Part Relation. Thecause effect relation is neither a relation of pure. The clay jar the effect, for example, has a peculiar nature and form as a jar and special functions, like fetching water, etc. not found in the lump of clay the cause as such. Again the effect is also non-different from the cause because it being a modification of the cause is nothing but cause. The clay jar, for example, is non different from the lump of clay for it is, after all nothing but clay and depends on it for its very origin and existence.
The cause, on its side, is different from the effect because it is not fully exhausted in it but something over and above. The lump of clay, for example, different from the clay jar, because it is not only the jar but a hundred other things like clay plates etc. still the cause is non-different from the effect because it is the effect so far as it goes and permeates it through and through. the lump of clay. for example, is non-different from the clay jar because after all, both are equally clay. Thus the cause effect or whole – part relation is one of the identity in difference.
In the same manner, the Universe of souls and matter is different from Brahman, as its attributes (viz. impurity, grossness, finitude, etc.) and activities (viz. selfish works etc) are quite different from the attributes (viz. purity. omnipresence) and activities (viz. creation etc.) of Brahman. But the Universe is also non-different of Brahman are because they as modification Brahman of in essence. Again, Brahman is different from the Universe because it is but one among its infinite powers and elements and Brahman as a whole is not exhausted in a single world Brahman is no less non-different from the world. Because it permeates the world, through and through as its cause.;
Thus according to Nimbarka, Bheda or difference means (i) Difference in attributes and activities from the stand point of the effect (ii) Transacendence over the effect from the stan dpoint of the cause
Abheda or Non-difference means (i) Non-difference in the essence, from the stand point of the effect (ii) Immanence in the effect, from the stand point of the cause
If we understand difference in this sense of transcendence and immanence, no contradiction will be involved in taking both of them to be equally real, natural and compatible. Here non-difference does not mean absolute identity like the complete merging of a drop of water into the ocean it simply implies sameness of essence and the immanence Brahman in the world. And difference does not mean absolute separateness o distinction like that between a man and a table, but it only implies the difference of forms attributes and, activities and, activities the transcendence of Brahman over the world. This is Nimvarka's famous Svabhavik Bhedabheda vada or Doctrine of Natural Difference and Non-Difference between God and the Universe. Thus according to Dr. Tadhakrishna, "From the philosophical stand point. Nimbarka can well claim to have contributed something new to the history of philosophical speculation as regards the vexed question to the relation between the one and the man. In some other respects, too, Nimbarka's solution regards the fundamental problems of philosophy are really praise-worthy, especially his doctrine of power (Sakti Vada) which enables him to unravel many a knotty and seemingly insoluble problem of philosophy.â€
Prof. (Dr.) Mukherjee
0 comments:
Post a Comment