PHILO = Apreço + SOPHIA = Compreensão

Version imprimable de cet article Version imprimable

Accueil > Oriente > Dyczkowski : Vedantin’s way

Dyczkowski : Vedantin’s way

vendredi 9 mars 2018

The Vedāntin’s way is a path of renunciation founded on? dispassion (vairāgya) born of discrimination (viveka) between the absolutely real? and the provisionally relative. It is only when all attachment, and, ultimately, perception and thought of the illusory world? of phenomena?—Māyā?—have been abandoned, that the true nature? of the absolute? is realised to be as it really is, that is, free of all phenomenality. The realisation of the true nature of the relative accompanies the realisation of the absolute. [39] It is to realise that the world never existed, just as it does not at present, nor ever will. It is just a magic show.

One could say that in this approach the field of consciousness? is increasingly restricted to exclude the ‘unreal’ and focus on the real. It is the Way of Transcendence, and we progress along it by denying all ultimate significance to the transitory. The doctrine is one of world denial. Thus Gaudapāda, Sankara’s teacher, says :

Constantly reflecting that everything is full of misery, (sarvam duhkham) one should withdraw the mind? from the pleasures nurtured by desire. Recalling constantly that the birthless Brahman? is all things?, one no longer perceives creation.

The Advaitic path leads to a freedom ‘from’. Desire is denied because it individualises attention, dispersing it among the objects of desire which are defined as impure matter? and ultimately unreal as opposed to the absolute, which is spirit and reality itself. Freedom is ignorance? of ‘matter-unreality’ ; conversely, ignorance of the spirit is equivalent to knowledge? of matter. These correspond to :

A) A knowledge of qualities and conditions through acts of determining knowledge (vikalpa).

B) A direct experience (sākşātkāra) of the unqualified (nirguna) free of determinate perception (nirvikalpa).

Case A implies a contrast between subject and object?, which is unreal or illusory ; case B implies the disappearance of the subject-object distinction by denying the reality of the object, and thus expresses the real state of affairs. A and B are not really opposites because A is unreal ; consequently the contrast between A and B comes under category A and so is illusory. In other words, our spiritual ignorance (avidyā) consists of the false conception that there is a real relationship between the finite and the infinite. Herein we find the philosophical justification for an attitude of detachment. The relationless absolute is realised by the elimination of the finite. (p. 38-39)

Voir en ligne : MARK DYCZKOWSKI