Absolute, the

If you are familiar with Indian philosophy, you probably know about the Absolute.

It's the paramatma (as against, in some schools, jeevatma), it's that (as against this), it's the universal (as against the specific).

It's sat, chit and ananda - being, awareness and bliss.

It's Nirgunam, Niranjanam, Sanathanam, Niketanam, Nitya, Shuddha, Buddha, Mukta, Nirmala Swarupinam (attributeless, pure, final abode, eternal, unsullied, enlightened, free and embodiment of sacredness.)

It's ekam, eva, advitiam. One, only one, and not two.

My Oxford companion says.

The absolute is not conditioned by, relative to or dependent on anything else. It simply is.

It's unitary, spiritual and self-knowing.

It contrasts - like I did in the second sentence - the Absolute with the Individual.

But, I guess at one level the differences don't exist. Tat vam asi. (That thou art) Ayam atma Brahma. (The individual and the Absolute are verily the same)

And

Puurnnam-Adah Puurnnam-Idam Puurnnaat-Purnnam-Udacyate
Puurnnashya Puurnnam-Aadaaya Puurnnam-Eva-Avashissyate


To western philosophy, the idea - or at least the word - seems to have come a little too late. It was introduced by Schelling and Hegel.

Absolute idealists such as Josiah Royce, an American philosopher who came to philosophy via history; and FH Bradley, a British philosopher heavily influenced by German philosophers such as - yeah -  Schelling and Hegel


No comments:

Post a Comment