Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
What is the basic difference between Dvaita and Advaita?
Succinct, non-jargony responses would be appreciated. Thanks!
For me it's just a question of how you answer "Where's God?" If it's 'over there' that's dvaita. If it's 'inside me' or 'everywhere' that's advaita.
There are some systems (like mine) that are combinations of both. I don't see it as an either this or that scenario.
Dvaita means dual meaning God and us/creation are two things. This would resemble more Abrahamic religious thinkningWhat is the basic difference between Dvaita and Advaita?
Succinct, non-jargony responses would be appreciated. Thanks!
Dvaita means dual meaning God and us/creation are two things. This would resemble more Abrahamic religious thinkning
Advaita means non-dual meaning God and creation are not-two things but just temporarily appears seperate through illusion (maya).
Dvaita means "duality". Dvaita school believes that God and the individual souls are distinct.
Advaita means "non-dualism“ and refers to the idea that the true self (Atman) is the same as the highest metaphysical Reality (Brahman).
Over-simplification leads to the claim that in Advaita, the soul = God, which may lead critics to the absurd statement that "YOU are God", but atman is just a form of pure consciousness, and Brahman is of the same nature of pure consciousness.
That was my point. There is no fundamental difference. The Abrahamic religions align with dualistic (dvaita) thinking.So how does Dvaita differ from the Abrahamic model? It sounds similar if God and "soul" are separate.
That was my point. There is no fundamental difference. The Abrahamic religions align with dualistic (dvaita) thinking.
Just the prophets are different and so many trappings and cultural things develop over thousands of years. Hinduism is so diverse and complicated.OK. But then is there any essential difference between Dvaita and the Abrahamic religions?
The Abrahamic religions are dvaitic.OK. But then is there any essential difference between Dvaita and the Abrahamic religions?
Dvaita doesn't work with everything being Brahman.So how does this work with ideas of everything being Brahman?
The Abrahamic religions are dvaitic.
Dvaita doesn't work with everything being Brahman.
Concepts:
Reality is a nested hierarchy. There are levels of increasingly "real," subjective reality, ending with one Objective Reality. Dualism diminishes as one approaches Objective Reality.
Dualism is diversity, it's differentness.
Dualism includes qualities like this and that, self and non-self, here and there, past and present, black and white, moving and unmoving. All these are illusions; part of the dream.
There are levels of consciousness corresponding to level of illusion. For example, dream state (2nd state) is less real than waking state (3rd state). 5th state is more real than waking state. All are dreams within dreams; different levels of awakeness.
The final awakening is into a non-dualistic Reality; a Real Reality, without qualities or differences.
Non-Dualism is a timeless, undifferentiated sea of conscious no-thingness.
There is no concept of level-of-consciousness in the Abrahamic religions. There is no merger of diversity into unity. Life's goal is merely an idealized version of what's currently being experienced.
The Abrahamic religions are, thus, very different from non-dualistic, philosophical Hinduism.
The "lecture" was on both, and Brahman is advaita. Advaita describes Brahman. Dvaita is thingness, advaita is no-thingness.
What specific questions do you have?
I'll try.Sorry but I don't understand your distinction between thingness and no-thingness,or what this has to do with Dvaita v. Advaita.
Could you explain this in simple terms?
As explained in the OP, I am trying to understand basic distinctions. The various convolutions of Advaita thinking don't seem that relevant.
Thingness and no-thingness are English translations of dvaita and advaita.
Dont call it absurd, Sirona. Understand it better. The problem arises when you consider Brahman as a God. But if you do not consider Brahman as a interfering God and just the "material" which makes all things, then there is no problem. I neither believe in existence of any God nor of soul. So, for me Brahman is what makes everything, you, me, a cockroach or a stone. One just has to surrender ones ego.Over-simplification leads to the claim that in Advaita, the soul = God, which may lead critics to the absurd statement that "YOU are God", but atman is just a form of pure consciousness, and Brahman is of the same nature of pure consciousness.
Or you can consider that they are never separated, the apparent separation being only an illusion.Advaita means non-dual meaning God and creation are not-two things but just temporarily appears seperate through illusion (maya).