TWO DELIGHTFUL CONVERSATIONS ON THE VEDANTA : 1. WITH SUBHAS KUMAR SINHA 2. WITH DEBAPRASAD BHATTACHARYA

Subhas Kumar Sinha : Reality underneath the virtuals ?

Sugata Bose : The virtual is in essence the Real. The Real appears to be the virtual quite mysteriously, the process classically called Maya, but essentially the appearance being an appearance is by definition and in actuality a myth. There is but One and it appears as manifold reality or, should we put it this way, manifold relativistic phenomena. This universe in reality and in essence is verily Brahman. @Subhas Kumar Sinha

Subhas Kumar Sinha : There may be very many relative feelings /appearances but there should be one absolute truth.

Sugata Bose : You are right, Subhas Babu, but when I say relativity, I mean the summation of all that is there to phenomena whose ultimate and substantial essence is Brahman, the one absolute Truth in which there is neither limitation nor attribute, neither condition nor binding, the One which transcends the trinity of space, time and causality and abides ever-free, the Vast Void which is the resolution of multiplicity, the Infinity which is the Zero.

Subhas Kumar Sinha : What I feel that absolute is which we can not feel/experience but when manifested in Maya(like energy transformed in to various activities ie light,sound,velocity etc) we feel it we live with it. I am just sharing my feelings.

Sugata Bose : Here you are falling into the Vedantic pitfall of attributing reality to your phenomenal self which the Vedanta totally denies, holding it as an ever-shifting simmering appearance with nothing substantial to it except the Absolute Brahman which is the Witness to all of phenomena and partakes not in it. This shadowy world of feelings, perceptions and sensations the Vedanta categorically denies as being but an appearance with no subjectivity to it in so far as such perceptions are concerned and merely having baseless shifting objectivity to it in the world of multiplicity. Hence, the perceiver being not admitted as being existentially real, such relative perceptions by it are not given any credence to in Advaita Vedanta. Its verdict on the whole affair is but this : When one realises Brahman, phenomena disappear for good and all that remains is the existential residuum that is 'Tat' (That) or Brahman, to attribute the nameless one with a name for linguistic convenience. All doubts are dispelled in realisation and all knots of the heart, so to say, as the Bhagavad Geeta puts it, are cut asunder, and the Self (Atman) shines in uninhibited splendour. न तत्र सूर्यो भाति न चन्द्रतारकं
नेमा विद्युतो भान्ति कुतोऽयमग्निः।
तमेव भान्तमनुभाति सर्वं
तस्य भासा सर्वमिदं विभाति॥१५॥ @Subhas Kumar Sinha

****

Debaprasad Bhattacharya : Isn't the situation prevailing His Will? How much freedom does one have to turn one's mind to Him?

Sugata Bose : Well, that is the standpoint of dualism, Debaprasad Babu. There the Omnipotence governs human destiny and charts out each action. But from the standpoint of non-dualism such assumptions are entirely irrelevant for it categorically denies the existence of phenomena and all that it entails as so much myth or a mysterious dream of ignorance, inexplicable on account of it being insubstantial. In the absence of an absolute reference frame within the realm of relativity, there is no valid explanation as to anything in phenomena and all attempted explanations are assumptions for human convenience that lack credible rational basis in the ultimate sense of the term. Thus, renunciation of relativity is the only way out in one's attempt to transcend, if at all possible, the dual frame and arrive at an understanding of life and reality from beyond the featured plane. But the problem cannot thus be solved as well for, the moment space-time-causality disappear in the Absolute which is the Vast Void in relative terms or the fullness of the Whole, to put it the other way round, the Will disappears too and so does divine dispensation. Hence, the dynamics of Maya lose meaning entirely and there is no more any need to establish or substantiate that which is essentially hollow. The Vedantist, thus, is appreciative of the dualist's belaboured attempts to establish over phenomena the suzerainty of his Personal God which he sees as a handy tool to deal with everyday reality but cannot quite subscribe to it from his comprehension of core consciousness as being transcendent and non-participant in this mythical phenomena. Advaita Vedanta is, thus, indulgent towards all forms of dualism and qualified non-dualism which still remains dualism of sorts, without compromising on its essential stand that all these systems are fundamentally flawed in their assumptions, hypotheses and rationalisation thereof. The Advaitist maintains that there is no way by which phenomena may be explained and its causal relations established in law as governed by a Cosmic Deity and he quits the discussion calling Maya 'anirvachaniya' (indefinable). To him the universe and its divine dispenser are non-real and, therefore, he does not feel the compulsion to explain phenomena the dualist's way. @Debaprasad Bhattacharya

Debaprasad Bhattacharya : While I fully accept your beautiful explanation, I also recall Thakur's words like 'even a leaf doesn't move without His Will', 'practice of Jnana Yoga is difficult', 'on the one hand you say So'ham and on the other, you scream when a thorn pricks' and so on. These words seem to be very practical in our day to day life, in the relative universe, one may say. Isn't it extremely difficult to transcend this relativity? But you are right, one must endeavour, otherwise one remains where he/she is. Thanks a lot. Best wishes.

Sugata Bose : Yes, so it is that the great Master who we behold as the Lord and final arbiter of our terrestrial destiny decrees and we may humbly bow down to His Will, as you initially put it. There is a great joy in such submission, too, for, the dual trappings notwithstanding, the Lord's infinite compassion and, in the final analysis, boundless love make even great sages forgo dissolution into Brahman and retain ever-so-slight a distinction with the Supreme Soul to savour the divine ambrosia, yet, holding onto Self-awareness, nonetheless. For love of God at the highest level, sages say, is consonant with Self-realisation and ever so sweetening an experience for the soul that its sheer bliss the devotee cannot forsake even unto repose in the Absolute Self. The relative reality of such bliss-savouring notwithstanding, the Real remains, nonetheless, transcendent and is unaffected by all such interplay of the forces of the Divine within the realm of relativity. Interestingly, though, M had questioned the Master once as to the possibility of absolute uninterrupted blissfulness within Maya and the Master had negated such possibility, for within Maya everything is eventually fractured by the trinity of space-time-causality and is, therefore, not eternal or uninterrupted at that. The Vaishnav schools of dualism hold the eternal Krishna and His eternal devotee sporting in Golak Vrindavan eternally and, although, it is a very intoxicating and even temporarily uplifting idea for the aspirant, it, however, is fundamentally flawed in its assumptions of an arbitrary Personal God and his eternal personal associates sporting in an eternal transcendental realm. So far as the Divine Will is concerned, it cannot be expressed except through the realm of the senses which is fraught with primal error of dual perception with no base to stand on. Hence, even this Divine Will cannot be accepted as the ultimate nor can the Personal God, despite our conditioned preference for it, be deemed the supreme. Words confound but deep thought tending to realisation gets an inkling of the Real which is ultimately comprehended in what is termed 'Aparokshaanubhuti' or the immediate realisation, that is, unconditioned comprehension devoid of relative reference frame. For practical purposes, though, it is fruitful for the while to ascend the ladder of relativity through the use of dualistic props and supports but then such a process will be long and winding and with no certitude of eventual resolution unto the Absolute. However, we are commoners by hypnotic constant assertion and, so, choose to repose faith in a make-believe-theology with no rational basis or philosophical basis at that. Our humdrum terrestrial existence requires the fulfilment of a plethora of desires whose fulfilment if truly attempted would lead to social chaos which would be the very antithesis of what society is structured for, order and collective well-being. Hence, out of this social necessity, human ingenuity has manufactured religion, rituals, laws, modes, mores and manners and even what one may term 'social religion' with its ethics and morality and justice and righteousness. Sharp divisions have arisen between good and evil, right and wrong, fairness and foulness, with divisions sharpening and blurring in alternate bands in the spectrum of time and terrestrial evolution. These have been attributed to the Divine Will by sages and thinkers and debunked too by other scholars and savants who have reposed no faith in theological assumptions. The protagonists of duality have averred that the Personal God may be apprehended by the clarified vision bereft of all material contamination and have affirmed that their faith in their God is not an assumption but a verified and verifiable fact of spiritual experience. One such supernal soul was Ramakrishna Paramahamsa who soul the veritable laboratory for the testing of all the affirmations of all the religions of the world down the ages and whose realisations thereof we cannot disregard simply as so much gibberish fr his life testifies to a higher order of spiritual enlightenment where all the streams of spiritual thinking have met and coalesced into a vast confluence of the soul. Still, we must be rationally sound and cannot throw caution to the winds in our reasonableness when comprehending that which is supposedly the essence of all, the Absolute, if at all there be such an ultimate reality, the sceptic would quip in. Realisation then, Debaprasad Babu, is at the heart of the matter and the only resolver of such an enigma as the sensory universe is and we may choose to play schoolboy games at interpretation of phenomena without realising that this truth eludes language, formulation, reason and all the 'dual throng'. The Real laughs as Relativity plots its downfall and Relativity clings to the Real even though they are parallels that never meet, and such is Maya, Debaprasad Babu.

****
Written by Sugata Bose in response to the comments of Subhas Kumar Sinha and Debaprasad Bhattacharya