PhiloSophia

PHILO = Apreço + SOPHIA = Compreensão

Accueil > Glossário > ignorance

ignorance

samedi 20 avril 2019

l’ignorance? (ajñāna), « cause incitatrice de l’écoulement universel »

Cette ignorance, notons-le, n’est pas personnelle : elle est métaphysique car elle tient à la condition humaine. Elle est cosmique, car c’est parce qu’en manifestant l’univers il occulte lui-même sa pure et parfaite lumière, sa Conscience? immaculée, que le Seigneur Shiva
Śiva
le Seigneur
Śiva e Śakti, Deus e seu Poder, formam uma unidade sem dualidade.
se rend invisible à l’ignorant. Seul le sage, le mystique éclairé par la grâce, retrouve la trace de cette lumière et finalement la contemple en saisissant la véritable nature? des apparences sensibles, dont on pourrait dire qu’elles ne sont qu’ignorance. Le monde?, en somme, apparaîtrait du fait d’une sorte de « tromperie cosmique » que seul le mouvement inverse, de retour à la source, de « re-connaissance? » (pratyabhijñā) de la Réalité, permettrait d’effacer. C’est là ce qu’enseignent (dans une certaine continuité avec l’ancienne conception védique de la māyā, du pouvoir magique d’illusion?) les maîtres de l’école cachemirienne de la Pratyabhijñā et notamment Utpaladeva Utpaladeva
Utp
Utpala
Utpaladeva (« Seigneur du Lotus Bleu ») ou Utpalācārya (Xe siècle), philosophe shivaïte (śaivasiddhānta) du Cachemire, élève de Somānanda et maître de Abhinavagupta.
, dont Abhinavagupta Abhinavagupta
Abhinava
AG
Abh
Abhinavagupta (950-1020), maître du shivaïsme du Cachemire, aussi maître en yoga, tantra, poétique, dramaturgie.
fut le disciple. (SILBURN Silburn Lilian Silburn (1908-1993), indianiste française, spécialiste du shivaïsme du Cachemire, du tantrisme et du bouddhisme. , 2000, p. 38)


Your question is, “Why is there ignorance ?” It presupposes that there is ignorance and it presupposes that there is someone who is ignorant. But if we investigate, we discover that there has never been anybody ignorant and there has never been ignorance. The ignorance is created by the question. When we ask the question, “Why is there ignorance ?” there is the ignorance, right there in the question. It is the very question that muddies the waters and creates the illusion. You were referring to the past, to past ignorance. Ignorance never exists in the present ; it is always in the past or in the future. If you will allow me to go off on a tangent, those of us who like to read Indian Sanskrit texts often find a particular adjective which is applied to ignorance, which is usually translated as “without a beginning,” ignorance which has never had a beginning. I can’t recall the exact Sanskrit word.

If you consider the etymological sense of this adjective there is another possible interpretation which is “ignorance which doesn’t exist in the present,” “ignorance which cannot be found in the present.” I think that is what was meant by the ancient teachers. They didn’t mean that ignorance doesn’t have a beginning, which is meaningless ; they meant that if you look for it you won’t find it. You can only assume that there is ignorance and it is this very assumption that creates it. But if you look for it there is no such thing. (Francis Lucille Lucille Francis Lucille est un disciple de Jean Klein et aussi enseignant de le voie advaita vedanta. )