DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.636#0049
Philosophical Brahmanism. 37
It is by reason, then, of association with Illusion or Ignor-
ance (made up of the three Qualities), that the Supreme Spirit
(Paramatman) enshrined in the personal God, and the living
spirit (jivatman) enshrined in the heart of man, believe in
their own individuality, mistaking it and the surrounding
world for realities, just as a rope in a dark night might be
mistaken for a snake. The moment that the personalized
spirit sets itself free from the power of Illusion or Ignorance,
its identity and that of the whole phenomenal universe with
the one impersonal Spirit, Atman ( = Paramatman, Brahma),
is re-established. Strange to say, this Illusion or Ignorance is
held to have an eternal existence equally with the one eternal
Brahma1, though, owing to the fact that such existence is
unreal, and the whole evolved world unreal too, it follows
that nothing really existent is left but Brahma. In other
words, all that really exists is identical with Brahma.
In fact, the more evidently physical and metaphysical
speculations are opposed to common sense, the more favour
do they find with some Hindu thinkers. Common sense
tells an Englishman that he really exists himself, and that
everything he sees around him really exists also. He cannot
abandon these two primary convictions. Not so the Hindu
Vedantist. Dualism is his bugbear, and common sense,
when it maintains any kind of real duality, either the separate
independent existence of a man's own Spirit and of God's
Spirit or of spirit and matter, is guilty of gross deception.
And yet, after all, when the Vedantist theory, as held at
present, is closely examined, it turns out to be virtually as
dualistic, in regard to spirit and matter, as the Sankhya;
the only difference being that the source of the material
world (Prakriti or Maya) in the Sankhya is held to have
a real eternal existence instead of a merely illusory eternal
1 Maya-cid-yogo 'nadih, 'the union of (fid and Maya, is from all
eternity.' See Professor Gough's articles on the Philosophy of the
Upanishads.
It is by reason, then, of association with Illusion or Ignor-
ance (made up of the three Qualities), that the Supreme Spirit
(Paramatman) enshrined in the personal God, and the living
spirit (jivatman) enshrined in the heart of man, believe in
their own individuality, mistaking it and the surrounding
world for realities, just as a rope in a dark night might be
mistaken for a snake. The moment that the personalized
spirit sets itself free from the power of Illusion or Ignorance,
its identity and that of the whole phenomenal universe with
the one impersonal Spirit, Atman ( = Paramatman, Brahma),
is re-established. Strange to say, this Illusion or Ignorance is
held to have an eternal existence equally with the one eternal
Brahma1, though, owing to the fact that such existence is
unreal, and the whole evolved world unreal too, it follows
that nothing really existent is left but Brahma. In other
words, all that really exists is identical with Brahma.
In fact, the more evidently physical and metaphysical
speculations are opposed to common sense, the more favour
do they find with some Hindu thinkers. Common sense
tells an Englishman that he really exists himself, and that
everything he sees around him really exists also. He cannot
abandon these two primary convictions. Not so the Hindu
Vedantist. Dualism is his bugbear, and common sense,
when it maintains any kind of real duality, either the separate
independent existence of a man's own Spirit and of God's
Spirit or of spirit and matter, is guilty of gross deception.
And yet, after all, when the Vedantist theory, as held at
present, is closely examined, it turns out to be virtually as
dualistic, in regard to spirit and matter, as the Sankhya;
the only difference being that the source of the material
world (Prakriti or Maya) in the Sankhya is held to have
a real eternal existence instead of a merely illusory eternal
1 Maya-cid-yogo 'nadih, 'the union of (fid and Maya, is from all
eternity.' See Professor Gough's articles on the Philosophy of the
Upanishads.