|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the other is explained away simply as a version of the other. Either the material or the spiritual gets lost. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the second series, the unexpected juxtaposition of the Jainas (33-36), Saivas (37-41) and Pañcaratra Vaisnavas (42-45) can be explained as the portrayal in series of three increasingly successful efforts to explain how the nonconscious is caused by the conscious. In the Jaina position, matter is dependent upon the Jaina dialectic of many-sidedness (syadvada)and takes multiple forms in dependence on that dialectic; in Saivism, there is a conscious lord who is the efficient but not substantial cause of the world; in Pañcaratra, there is a conscious lord who is both the efficient and the substantial cause of the world, though the latter only in a series of evolved forms. All three are superior to the preceding Samkhya, Vaisesika and Buddhist positions, because they recognize the real dependence of a real world on a real conscious principle. Only in Advaita, however, is the pure and simple causality of Brahman as pure consciousness adequately recognized. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The two series of errors which comprise UMS II.2 therefore constitute a topography of error, from its larger to its more subtle and less egregious forms. The systems have been scripted so as to play their parts in the drama of the Advaita Text, as foils to the truth Advaita finds in the upanisads. Though the arguments against each are declared to proceed without reference to the upanisads, the presentation from the start surrounds the adversaries with the presuppositions and conclusions of Advaita's scripturally based thinking.
68 The Advaitins take into account all their competitors' views, writing them up so as to confirm the view of an already convinced Advaita audience that there really is no other way to see the world than Advaita's way.69 Although a simple analysis of the correctness of the Advaita reading of the upanisads might suffice for a narration of Advaita's truth, censure of conflicting views must also be considered a legitimate addition to that narrative, added to confirm the Advaitin's faith in Advaita. Liberation depends on knowledge of the real, and efforts must be made to make sure that seekers are not misled by superficially pleasing positions. UMS II.2 thus serves an intracommunity, pedagogical purpose; it is |
|
|
|
|
|