4


My dear murugappan,
You have asked me vedantha and siddhantha could differ intheir fundamental philosophy. Also you asked me to clarify the difference with Jainism and Buddhism with saiva siddhantham. I shall answer them now,
 K. Ganesalingam says in his book “Notes on Saiva Siddhanta Philosophy”
“The Vedanta is a dominant Indian philosophical system. There are three influential Vedanta schools. They are Advaita Vedanta of Sankara, Visishdatvaita Vedanta of Ramanujar, and Dvaita Vedanta of Madvar. Generally, Vedanta, in modern days, refers to Sankarar’s Vedanta. According to this system, and even Visishdatvaita, God or Brahmam  is the only reality. Soul is one and it broke away from Brahmam. Maya caused this breaking away. (Maya in Vedanta is different from that in Sidhanta). The world is an illusion and a reflection of Brahmam. The soul takes various forms in various bodies, and joins Brahmam when it gains Gnanam or divine bliss. What is the necessity for the soul to break away from God? If maya is the cause of it, is not maya more powerful than God? If the soul is part of Brahmam, then every man should have the divine qualities. Is he having it? Even if the soul unites with the God at the end, what is the guarantee that it will not break away again? Such questions do not get satisfactory answers. Saiva Siddhanta, therefore, does not accept such vedantic views.    “
 K. Ganesalingam, also states in his book ‘ Notes on Saiva Siddhanta Philosophy’ the fundamental difference of saivism with Buddhist and jain schools. He says   “  Budhist and Jain philosophies adopt sense perception and inference to establish their views. Saiva Siddhnta considers scriptural authority, in addition to them.They do not believe in the existence of God. But Budha and Aruga are worshipped as Gods. Saiva Siddhanta believes in One God who is Siva. Their( Buddhist&jain) concepts regarding soul and liberation are entirely different from those in Siddhantha. Both philosophies believe in karmic theory, but they hold the view that God is not required to make the karma reach the doer. According to Saiva Siddhntha, Karma is an unintelligent entity and requires a higher power, God, to enable it to reach the doer”

This way I am giving you  the fundamental differences between the major schools with saivism. It is not my intention to deal with these issues in my letters. I wish you read about them and the respective schools in their  appropriate major texts.

Next letter I will write you the historical factors that led to the growth of saivism in tamilakam !
Affectionately,
gandhibabu



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

10 My dear murugappan, Received your letter! Well you have asked me about epistemology, existentialism, phenomenology, dasein and the need for hermeneutics in saiva siddhantham,in your last   letter. I shall   will give you the definitions of them and saiva hermeneutics now. 1.Epistemology:   Defined narrowly, epistemology is the study of knowledge and justified belief. As the study of knowledge, epistemology is concerned with the following questions: What are the necessary and sufficient conditions of knowledge? What are its sources? What is its structure, and what are its limits? As the study of justified belief, epistemology aims to answer questions such as: How we are to understand the concept of justification? What makes justified beliefs justified? Is justification internal or external to one's own mind? Understood more broadly, epistemology is about issues having to do with the creation and dissemination of knowledge in particular areas of inqu...
Read more
35 My dear murugappan, THE COMPARISON OF       SYMBOLISM IN FREUDIAN SCHOOLS AND SAIVA SIDDHANTHAM: SIDHANTHA OF SIVAGNANABODHAM: The pati qualities as mentioned in the first two sutras of the Sivagnana bodham are highest qualities. They are analogous to the super ego in psychoanalysis. The pasu has five states of existence, transient knowledge, a transient life and transient thought(memory) as mentioned in the third sutra of sivagnana bodham. The pasu is analogous to ego. Life is bonded with(pasa) and hence contaminated by dirt(mala) and it prevents the acquisition of knowledge. The pati is responsible for the knowledge, but it is destroyed by dirt and hence becomes transient .   The pasa are analogous to the id. In the seventh sutra of sivagnanabodham the pasa and pati antagonism is clearly demonstrated as they never unite. The process or the method of pasu(body) reaching the pati are explained in all the rest of sutras. The p...
Read more
13 Dear murugappan, Study of the unconscious after freud is even more worthwhile when we try to understand it. As my letters to you tries to focus on the Freudian contexts in the siddhantha texts, I felt it is better to dwell   some thing about the subsequent trends in unconscious. This is to make sure that   both Freudian and siddhanthic similarities are only to a limited extent to the actual knowledge of the unconscious! I am giving you the systematic exposition of current trends in the theory of unconscious by Prof.John F. Kihlstrom:University of California, Berkeley Developments in unconscious studies: Unfortunately, just when the concept of the psychological unconscious was getting up steam, the behaviorist revolution hit. Interest in consciousness disappeared virtually overnight, and interest in the psychological unconscious went with it briefly. But   revival of interest in unconscious mental life followed shortly thereafter. The seeds for th...
Read more