(B12)- Similarity does not mean identity!

[Quick links]

 

 

 

 

 

Many of us often make the mistake of jumping to conclude identity, based on similarity between two things. If two things are similar, that does not mean that they are identical. A cow has 4 legs and so also a dog. That does not make cow and dog same! 

 

The Vijnyaana Vadi Buddhists see the similarity between the dream world and our wakeful world and jump to the conclusion that since dream world is nonexistent, our wakeful world also does not exist! The brahma supporters reject this reasoning. Let us see how.

 

The Brahma supporters say: 

 

“Just because two things are similar, does not make them identical. We agree that there is some similarity between the world we experience in our dreams and the world we perceive in our wakeful state. But that does not make them same. You can’t give that as a reason to justify your claim that world does not exist. 

 

Though there are similarities, the objects perceived in a dream and those perceived when we are awake have a major difference. The dream objects are based on our past memories. Our past memories of objects appear as dream objects. So, when we come out of sleep, these dream objects also vanish. Not so in our wakeful experiences. Our perceptions in wakeful experiences correspond to some objects and not memories. These objects don’t vanish even if we don’t perceive them. They are still perceived by someone else. We ourselves would perceive them some other time. So, these perceptions are driven by external objects and are not merely mentally created. 

 

When someone says ‘I don’t see my son today, who was with me all along’ he is referring to the memory of a person and the actual person. They are not same. Memory is based on some past perception. And perceptions are initially driven by external objects. What you see in a dream is just a memory of prior perception and what you see in wakeful state is the perception of the real object. They are not same and hence you can’t conclude that dream experiences and wakeful experiences are same.” 

 

 

The great Advaita philosopher Sankara forcefully rejects the comparison of wakeful and dream experiences. He refuses to accept that comparison as the basis for concluding the unreality of the world. But what puzzles me is the fact that Gaudapada, Sankara’s Grand Guru uses the same comparison, to conclude the unreality of the world! 

 

Probably, I am treading on a controversial subject. But I find it difficult to see how Sankara can contradict his own predecessor who almost argued like the Vijnyana Vadis in his well-known composition on Mandukya Upanishad, namely Mandukya Kaarika. In chapter 2 of that composition, Gaudapada argues beautifully to show how our wakeful experiences are no different from our dream experiences. That earned him the wrath of other Vedic scholars in his own camp who branded him as a Buddhist in disguise. On the other hand, the Buddhists accused him of plagiarizing their ideas! It is a controversial subject. My own reading is that Gaudapada was trying to show how these Vijnyana Vadis wrongly understood what Buddha said. Well, that is yet another topic for discussion for some other time. 

 

The Brahma supporters fight tooth and nail to put down their Buddhist opponents. They ridicule their theories as illogical and contrary to our day-to-day experiences. They continue their attack. 

 

The Brahma supporters further point out: 

 

“You say that there is no soul which is independent of body and mind and which is a witness to whatever goes on in the body and mind. You also say that it is the ‘mental images’ that are carried forward from birth to birth are what cause our perceptions. In that case, where are these ‘images’ that you are talking about, stored? According to your own theory, they have to be carried forward from birth to birth. If you bring up another new concept called ‘ego consciousness’ which acts as a repository for these ‘carried forward images across births’, then you are contradicting your own theory which says that everything perishes every moment! 

 

But if you accept our concept of soul which acts as a witness, which is beyond body and mind, which remains unchanged across births, then that soul can carry forward the perceptions. And unlike the body/mind, the soul is not perishable. It exists all the time - past, present and future. 

 

Now, some others in your group talk about Nihilism. They say that neither the body nor the mind, nor any object ever exists! Every thing is non existent or Shoonya! That is something we refuse to discuss about. It does not make any sense to discuss about such things since all our discussions are based on what we perceive. If there is nothing, then there is no meaning in discussing about such topics. 

 

My friends, let me tell you something. Either your preceptor Buddha himself lacked clarity about his own views or he had intentionally confused you people 😉” 

 

That is a nasty personal attack. But that is how the debate goes. Let us continue in the next episode. 

 

Start            Previous          Next

 

A series on ancient Indian composition Brahma Sutra. © Dr. King, Swami Satyapriya 2020-21