--- In [email protected], "Richard J. Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > John wrote: > > As an extension of Chopra's analogy, we can say > > that if one has not reached cosmic consciousness, > > then the phenomenal world is an illusion or Maya > > due to the effects of the gunas. > > > The point I was trying to make, John, is that if > Purusha, the Transcendental Person, is part and > parcel of the relative world of prakriti and subject > to the three gunas, then, according to Shankara, > the highest God, Creator Brahm, is just an illusion > - a result of Maya, thus not real. >>
You are mistaken, the creator brahm is not the highest god. Mahalakshmi is. OffWorld <If God is an > illusion and not real, then there is no Transcendental > Person in the absolute sense. You must admit that this > is a significant conundrum and probably the reason why > all the Upanishadic commentators ascribed to either > dualism, quasi-dulaism, or qualified dualsism - > Ramanuja, Madhva, Vallaba, Nimbarka, and Chaitanya, > instead of adwaita. While all these acharyas were > transcendentalists, they did not agree with Shankara > concerning the Absolute nature of the Purusha. In > fact, as pointed out by Vaj, the notion that Brahman > is an unmanifest and impersonal Absolute without > attributes is almost pure Middle Way Buddhism > (Madyamika). It is very difficult to relate on a > personal level to a non-person and at the same time > call that person God, who is obviously a Person, > by definition, according to the Upanishads. >
