365bet娱乐

The people of India are always unified together with an inner spirit of oneness, even though they belong to different backgrounds in geography, language, caste, community and religious beliefs. This idea of oneness has been accepted by all social and cultural reformers of the modern periods also for re-organizing the social harmony of the nation. In almost all systems of Indian philosophy, an under-current of this non-dual element can be seen, even though they emerged from divergent socio-cultural traditions. This notion is visible in Buddhist, Vedic and 膧gamic schools of philosophies. Yog膩c膩ra and 惭腻诲丑测补尘颈办补 schools of Buddhism are deeply rooted in non-dualistic thoughts, even though they are away from the Vedic ideology of 膧tmav膩da. Except Dvaita of Madhva, all other Ved膩ntic schools bear some elements of Advaita. Reaching the zenith of the Vedic non-dualism, 艢补峁卥补谤补鈥檚 Advaita explains everything in accordance with the non-dual principle of Brahman. The non-dualistic thoughts of T膩ntric and 膧gamic traditions are seen arriving the peak point when they culminate in 笔谤补迟测补产丑颈箩帽腻 philosophy of Kashmir.

The forgoing chapters show that the notion of non-dualism, which might have come from Vedic or 膧gamic or Buddhist or from other traditions, has been prevalent in Indian psyche and has influenced and inspired the Indian society and streams of thoughts from very early period. Among the Indian thought systems, 笔谤补迟测补产丑颈箩帽腻 and Advaita 痴别诲腻苍迟补 are two non-dualistic philosophies originated from the two distant corners of India, Kashmir and Kerala, having distinct socio-cultural and traditional backgrounds. The 艢iv膩dvaya or 笔谤补迟测补产丑颈箩帽腻 philosophy has developed its non-dual thought from the 艢补颈惫腻驳补尘补蝉 and Advaita 痴别诲腻苍迟补 has developed the same from the Vedas and 鲍辫补苍颈峁�a诲蝉. One is 膧gam膩nta and the other is 痴别诲腻苍迟补. Both these philosophies, emerged from different traditions, bear notable similarities in their concepts. Both present the ultimate degree of non-duality which forms the undercurrent of the whole universe. The ultimate goal of both is nothing but the realization of the ultimate non-dual principle.

Kashmir 艢补颈惫颈蝉尘 is the essence of the 膧驳补尘补蝉 like Svacchanda and 惭补濒颈苍墨惫颈箩补测补. Teachers like Vasugupta and 厂辞尘腻苍补苍诲补 laid the foundation to this philosophy churning the 膧驳补尘补蝉. Utpala and Abhinavagupta systematized this by giving a logical and concrete form and made it an all-inclusive non-dual system. The 笔谤补迟测补产丑颈箩帽腻 system can be viewed as the culmination of the earlier 艢补颈惫补 systems of Kashmir like Krama, Kula and Spanda. This system explains everything in accordance with the concept of non-dual ultimate reality, 艢颈惫补. The entire universe is the manifestation of 艢颈惫补, who is not different from his 艢补办迟颈.

The 痴别诲腻苍迟补 philosophy of 鲍辫补苍颈峁�a诲蝉 also is a culmination of divergent thoughts spread in Vedic literature which is originated in a complex socio-cultural set up. Gou岣峚p膩da paved a clear way of Advaita 痴别诲腻苍迟补 by negating the duality and stating that the reality is non-dual. Following Gou岣峚p膩da, 艢补峁卥补谤补 systematized the Advaita 痴别诲腻苍迟补 by logical deliberations, reflected in his Prasth膩natrayabh膩峁�yas and numerous 笔谤补办补谤补峁嘺 texts, and established the non-duality of Brahman. Besides their original source, both systems have borrowed ideas from other orthodox and heterodox systems like 厂腻峁卥丑测补 and Buddhism while entering into intellectual encounters with them.

Both systems similarly accept that there is only one real being and it is conscious in nature and in fact, all individual selves are identical with the Supreme Being. On the entity of the visible world, both systems bear some differences. 笔谤补迟测补产丑颈箩帽腻 holds that the universe is real as it is only the manifestation of 艢颈惫补, the Supreme. The universe is considered as the form of the ultimate reality itself. At the same time Advaita of 艢补峁卥补谤补 conceives this universe as 惭颈迟丑测腻, an illusory principle. In spite of this difference both agree that this world and its experience are due to 惭腻测腻. Both accept that the universe is created by 莫艣惫补谤补, the conscious principle, even though this 莫艣惫补谤补 in Advaita is also covered by 惭腻测腻.

In the process of creation, in the structure and components of the universe, both systems tolerate resemblances. Depending on the same 厂补迟办腻谤测补惫腻诲补, both systems developed two similar theories of ontology, 膧bh膩sav膩da and 痴颈惫补谤迟补惫腻诲补. Although there are some points of disparity, they share several common concepts about the individual self, his gross and subtle bodies, different states of experience, the identity with the ultimate self, etc. The importance given to the experience in the transcendental level leads both systems to the same spiritualistic heights.

Both systems equally accept the non-dual and conscious nature of the ultimate self and the realization of the same is regarded as the highest goal of life. Ultimate realities of both systems, who share several same synonyms like 笔补谤补尘别艣惫补谤补, 艢颈惫补 and 笔补谤补尘腻迟尘补, possess several common features like absoluteness, eternity, perfection, self-illumination, omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence, blissfulness, indeterminateness and 惭腻测腻t墨tatva. Both agree in the matter that the qualified Gods like Brahma and 痴颈峁ａ箛耻 are under the coverage of 惭腻测腻.

In the concept of 惭腻测腻 also, both 笔谤补迟测补产丑颈箩帽腻 and Advaita hold similarities. To both 惭腻测腻 is the power of God, cause of the world, cause of bondage and sufferings. It is also considered as ignorance and as having powers for concealing, projection or manifestation and for delusion. For both the annihilation of this 惭腻测腻 is the way to liberation.

In the case of liberation also both system meet in several similar points. For both the liberation is the self-realization or self-recognition through the annihilation of ignorance. So the importance of knowledge in the process of liberation is same. The nature of the liberated self also is almost same. In the methods of liberation also there are semblances. Reducing the physical practices, both step up in the same order to mental contemplative level and gradually arrive at the same level of transcendental experience. Thus avoiding the scriptural differences in some technical terms and some traditional practices, the undercurrent of the goal of life and the way to the same is almost same in both systems.

Some findings and observations

-) Even though emerged from different backgrounds Advaita of 艢补峁卥补谤补 and 笔谤补迟测补产丑颈箩帽腻 philosophy bear amazing similarities in concepts, which are discussed in detail in the thesis.

-) With the patronage and support of the social power structure, Advaita could become more popular than 笔谤补迟测补产丑颈箩帽腻, especially in the educated class, which is discussed in the thesis.

-) It is observed in the thesis that 骋补耻岣峚辫腻诲补 and 艢补峁卥补谤补 have developed their own unique philosophy even though they have depended upon the earlier Vedic literature and likewise Utpala and Abhinavagupta have developed their own unique philosophy even though they have depended upon earlier 膧gamic literature.

-) It is observed in the thesis that both systems have developed their philosophical speculations from the intellectual encounters carried out with other systems like Buddhism.

-) The concepts of both systems are compared by taking the dependable points from the primary sources.

-) A comprehensive glossary of technical terms used in common and in particular sense is given separately.

-) In both systems, a progression from religious concepts to philosophical speculations can be obviously seen.

-) Regarding the nature of universe, 惭腻测腻, ultimate reality, God, Individual self, liberation and the importance of knowledge, the similarity between 笔谤补迟测补产丑颈箩帽腻 and 艢补峁卥补谤补鈥檚 Advaita have been specially studied.

-) Both accept 惭腻测腻 as the power of 莫艣惫补谤补 and as the cause for the visible universe and worldly sufferings.

-) Both systems give more importance to the knowledge and direct experience in the path of self-realization. For both, the Knowledge or the Experience itself is the liberation.