Śaṅkara admitted that there were several different lines of approach which the mind could take in its advance towards knowledge of the Absolute, before the final leap into the abyss of transcendence.
For him, the full significance of the upanishadic texts could only be seen when they were viewed collectively as constituting an affirmation of the self in various finite forms that had to be corrected and purified of all empirical elements through negation.
But the path that ends with transcendence begins with affirmation. Our experiences in this world imply a positive ground lying behind the world-appearance as its basis and support.
Metaphysical enquiry seeks for ‘Reality’ as the self-existent principle that appears from the standpoint of nescience as the first cause.
It seeks for ‘Knowledge’ as the inmost unchanging Witness present within the human mind and illumining it with its unchanging light while the passing images come and go.
And it seeks for ‘Infinity’ as the principle of beatitude or bliss in which there is no division, duality, limitation or suffering.
The famous Advaitic definition of the Absolute as ‘Being-Consciousness-Bliss’ (sac-cid-ānanda) does not appear in Śaṅkara’s certainly authentic works.
But it is appropriate to deal with Śaṅkara’s doctrine of the Absolute as Bliss here, as the Upanishads do also describe it as ‘Consciousness-Bliss’ (vijñānam-ānandam), and the formula ‘Reality-Knowledge-Bliss’ is already found in Śaṅkara’s direct pupil Sureśvara.
[The formula there is satya-jñānānanda. The transition from the upanishadic ‘jñāna’ to the familiar ‘cit’ of ‘sac-cid-ānanda’ probably occurred long after Śaṅkara’s day. Prakāśātman (? tenth century) still adheres to the upanishadic ‘jñāna’, speaking of ‘satya-jñānānanda’.]
~Alston, Absolute, pp204-207
No comments:
Post a Comment