- Project Hail Mary (2026)

Very fun movie, has some flashy scenes, innovative story and great character. Doesn’t take itself too serious and plays around with the concepts it uses. A delight for every Sci-Fi lover. 8/10
- Deep Sea Embers

Amazing webnovel. I am always looking to read about something new; something that I have not experienced before, something that feels alien, foreign, and unfamiliar. This is that.
But it does not only offer creative ideas; its atmospheric horror is excellent. Never have I read a book that gave me so many chills, not because of jumpscares, but because the environment in which the events take place is itself so unheimlich.
The characters are also all unique. I put the book down numerous times and started reading it again after a prolonged time (not because the novel was bad, but because I had to wait for new chapters to come out), and whenever I jumped back in, I had no problem recognizing any character. Every one is different, not only in appearance and what they are, but also in their motivations, attitudes, and behavior, and together they build a nice harmony.
Another thing this novel does great is the mystery, keeping you always on edge and wanting to learn more. Even though in the end of the novel the big mysteries are revealed, it still feels like the world is full of mysteries and untold stories. There are so many characters and events where you feel like a whole book could be written about them. The world feels large and expansive, not only in breadth but also in depth, making you want to know more. But not in an unsatisfying way; rather, in a very good way.
I could write much more, but I want to end with this: there are many webnovels that have a good story and good characters and are creative, but novels that have all three are few and far between. And as the cherry on top, this novel offers not just pure entertainment but also thematic elements that make you think.
Just to name one: only in a fallen world so full of decay and rot, where the world itself is dying, can the many characters shine so brightly; one after another trying to delay the world’s inevitable demise, and in this struggle revealing so much meaning. There is the phrase “the indomitable spirit of humans,” but this is not entirely accurate for this book, since many of the characters are not human but belong to different races or types of beings. So it may be more adequate to say that this novel really shows the “indomitable spirit of all beings”, the everlasting struggle of being versus non-being.
- Siddhartha
Govinda said, not without hesitation, these words: “Before I’ll continue on my path, Siddhartha, permit me to ask one more question. Do you have a teaching? Do you have a faith, or a knowledge, you follow, which helps you to live and to do right?”
Quoth Siddhartha: “You know, my dear, that I already as a young man, in those days when we lived with the penitents in the forest, started to distrust teachers and teachings and to turn my back to them. I have stuck with this. Nevertheless, I have had many teachers since then. A beautiful courtesan has been my teacher for a long time, and a rich merchant was my teacher, and some gamblers with dice. Once, even a follower of Buddha, travelling on foot, has been my teacher; he sat with me when I had fallen asleep in the forest, on the pilgrimage. I’ve also learned from him, I’m also grateful to him, very grateful. But most of all, I have learned here from this river and from my predecessor, the ferryman Vasudeva. He was a very simple person, Vasudeva, he was no thinker, but he knew what is necessary just as well as Gotama, he was a perfect man, a saint.”
Govinda said: “Still, oh Siddhartha, you love a bit to mock people, as it seems to me. I believe in you and know that you haven’t followed a teacher. But haven’t you found something by yourself, though you’ve found no teachings, you still found certain thoughts, certain insights, which are your own and which help you to live? If you would like to tell me some of these, you would delight my heart.”
Quoth Siddhartha: “I’ve had thoughts, yes, and insight, again and again. Sometimes, for an hour or for an entire day, I have felt knowledge in me, as one would feel life in one’s heart. There have been many thoughts, but it would be hard for me to convey them to you. Look, my dear Govinda, this is one of my thoughts, which I have found: wisdom cannot be passed on. Wisdom which a wise man tries to pass on to someone always sounds like foolishness.”
“Are you kidding?” asked Govinda.
“I’m not kidding. I’m telling you what I’ve found. Knowledge can be conveyed, but not wisdom. It can be found, it can be lived, it is possible to be carried by it, miracles can be performed with it, but it cannot be expressed in words and taught. This was what I, even as a young man, sometimes suspected, what has driven me away from the teachers. I have found a thought, Govinda, which you’ll again regard as a joke or foolishness, but which is my best thought. It says: The opposite of every truth is just as true! That’s like this: any truth can only be expressed and put into words when it is one-sided.** Everything is one- sided which can be thought with thoughts and said with words, it’s all one-sided, all just one half, all lacks completeness, roundness, oneness.** When the exalted Gotama spoke in his teachings of the world, he had to divide it into Sansara and Nirvana, into deception and truth, into suffering and salvation. It cannot be done differently, there is no other way for him who wants to teach. But the world itself, what exists around us and inside of us, is never one-sided. A person or an act is never entirely Sansara or entirely Nirvana, a person is never entirely holy or entirely sinful. It does really seem like this, because we are subject to deception, as if time was something real. Time is not real, Govinda, I have experienced this often and often again. And if time is not real, then the gap which seems to be between the world and the eternity, between suffering and blissfulness, between evil and good, is also a deception.”
“How come?” asked Govinda timidly.
“Listen well, my dear, listen well! The sinner, which I am and which you are, is a sinner, but in times to come he will be Brahma again, he will reach the Nirvana, will be Buddha—and now see: these “times to come” are a deception, are only a parable! The sinner is not on his way to become a Buddha, he is not in the process of developing, though our capacity for thinking does not know how else to picture these things. No, within the sinner is now and today already the future Buddha, his future is already all there, you have to worship in him, in you, in everyone the Buddha which is coming into being, the possible, the hidden Buddha. The world, my friend Govinda, is not imperfect, or on a slow path towards perfection: no, it is perfect in every moment, all sin already carries the divine forgiveness in itself, all small children already have the old person in themselves, all infants already have death, all dying people the eternal life. It is not possible for any person to see how far another one has already progressed on his path; in the robber and dice-gambler, the Buddha is waiting; in the Brahman, the robber is waiting. In deep meditation, there is the possibility to put time out of existence, to see all life which was, is, and will be as if it was simultaneous, and there everything is good, everything is perfect, everything is Brahman. Therefore, I see whatever exists as good, death is to me like life, sin like holiness, wisdom like foolishness, everything has to be as it is, everything only requires my consent, only my willingness, my loving agreement, to be good for me, to do nothing but work for my benefit, to be unable to ever harm me. I have experienced on my body and on my soul that I needed sin very much, I needed lust, the desire for possessions, vanity, and needed the most shameful despair, in order to learn how to give up all resistance, in order to learn how to love the world, in order to stop comparing it to some world I wished, I imagined, some kind of perfection I had made up, but to leave it as it is and to love it and to enjoy being a part of it.—These, oh Govinda, are some of the thoughts which have come into my mind.”
Siddhartha bent down, picked up a stone from the ground, and weighed it in his hand.
“This here,” he said playing with it, “is a stone, and will, after a certain time, perhaps turn into soil, and will turn from soil into a plant or animal or human being. In the past, I would have said: This stone is just a stone, it is worthless, it belongs to the world of the Maja; but because it might be able to become also a human being and a spirit in the cycle of transformations, therefore I also grant it
importance. Thus, I would perhaps have thought in the past. But today I think: this stone is a stone, it is also animal, it is also god, it is also Buddha, I do not venerate and love it because it could turn into this or that, but rather because it is already and always everything— and it is this very fact, that it is a stone, that it appears to me now and today as a stone, this is why I love it and see worth and purpose in each of its veins and cavities, in the yellow, in the gray, in the hardness, in the sound it makes when I knock at it, in the dryness or wetness of its surface. There are stones which feel like oil or soap, and others like leaves, others like sand, and every one is special and prays the Om in its own way, each one is Brahman, but simultaneously and just as much it is a stone, is oily or juicy, and this is this very fact which I like and regard as wonderful and worthy of worship.—But let me speak no more of this. The words are not good for the secret meaning, everything always becomes a bit different, as soon as it is put into words, gets distorted a bit, a bit silly—yes, and this is also very good, and I like it a lot, I also very much agree with this, that this what is one man’s treasure and wisdom always sounds like foolishness to another person.”
Govinda listened silently.
“Why have you told me this about the stone?” he asked hesitantly after a pause.
“I did it without any specific intention. Or perhaps what I meant was, that love this very stone, and the river, and all these things we are looking at and from which we can learn. I can love a stone, Govinda, and also a tree or a piece of bark. This are things, and things can be loved. But I cannot love words. Therefore, teachings are no good for me, they have no hardness, no softness, no colours, no edges, no smell, no taste, they have nothing but words. Perhaps it are these which keep you from finding peace, perhaps it are the many words. Because salvation and virtue as well, Sansara and Nirvana as well, are mere words, Govinda. There is no thing which would be Nirvana; there is just the word Nirvana.”
Quoth Govinda: “Not just a word, my friend, is Nirvana. It is a thought.”
Siddhartha continued: “A thought, it might be so. I must confess to you, my dear: I don’t differentiate much between thoughts and words. To be honest, I also have no high opinion of thoughts. I have a better opinion of things. Here on this ferry-boat, for instance, a man has been my predecessor and teacher, a holy man, who has for many years simply believed in the river, nothing else. He had
noticed that the river’s spoke to him, he learned from it, it educated and taught him, the river seemed to be a god to him, for many years he did not know that every wind, every cloud, every bird, every beetle was just as divine and knows just as much and can teach just as much as the worshipped river. But when this holy man went into the forests, he knew everything, knew more than you and me, without teachers, without books, only because he had believed in the river.”
Govinda said: “But is that what you call ’things’, actually something real, something which has existence? Isn’t it just a deception of the Maja, just an image and illusion? Your stone, your tree, your river— are they actually a reality?"
“This too,” spoke Siddhartha, “I do not care very much about. Let the things be illusions or not, after all I would then also be an illusion, and thus they are always like me. This is what makes them so dear and worthy of veneration for me: they are like me. Therefore, I can love them. And this is now a teaching you will laugh about: love, oh Govinda, seems to me to be the most important thing of all. To thoroughly understand the world, to explain it, to despise it, may be the thing great thinkers do. But I’m only interested in being able to love the world, not to despise it, not to hate it and me, to be able to look upon it and me and all beings with love and admiration and great respect.”
“This I understand,” spoke Govinda. “But this very thing was discovered by the exalted one to be a deception. He commands benevolence, clemency, sympathy, tolerance, but not love; he forbade us to tie our heart in love to earthly things.”
“I know it,” said Siddhartha; his smile shone golden. “I know it, Govinda. And behold, with this we are right in the middle of the thicket of opinions, in the dispute about words. For I cannot deny, my words of love are in a contradiction, a seeming contradiction with Gotama’s words. For this very reason, I distrust in words so much, for I know, this contradiction is a deception. I know that I am in agreement with Gotama. How should he not know love, he, who has discovered all elements of human existence in their transitoriness, in their meaninglessness, and yet loved people thus much, to use a long, laborious life only to help them, to teach them! Even with him, even with your great teacher, I prefer the thing over the words, place more importance on his acts and life than on his speeches, more on the gestures of his hand than his opinions. Not in his speech, not in his thoughts, I see his greatness, only in his actions, in his life.”
For a long time, the two old men said nothing. Then spoke Govinda, while bowing for a farewell: “I thank you, Siddhartha, for telling me some of your thoughts. They are partially strange thoughts, not all have been instantly understandable to me. This being as it may, I thank you, and I wish you to have calm days.”
(But secretly he thought to himself: This Siddhartha is a bizarre person, he expresses bizarre thoughts, his teachings sound foolish. So differently sound the exalted one’s pure teachings, clearer, purer, more comprehensible, nothing strange, foolish, or silly is contained in them. But different from his thoughts seemed to me Siddhartha’s hands and feet, his eyes, his forehead, his breath, his smile, his greeting, his walk. Never again, after our exalted Gotama has become one with the Nirvana, never since then have I met a person of whom I felt: this is a holy man! Only him, this Siddhartha, I have found to be like this. May his teachings be strange, may his words sound foolish; out of his gaze and his hand, his skin and his hair, out of every part of him shines a purity, shines a calmness, shines a cheerfulness and mildness and holiness, which I have seen in no other person since the final death of our exalted teacher.)
As Govinda thought like this, and there was a conflict in his heart, he once again bowed to Siddhartha, drawn by love. Deeply he bowed to him who was calmly sitting.
“Siddhartha,” he spoke, “we have become old men. It is unlikely for one of us to see the other again in this incarnation. I see, beloved, that you have found peace. I confess that I haven’t found it. Tell me, oh honourable one, one more word, give me something on my way which I can grasp, which I can understand! Give me something to be with me on my path. It it often hard, my path, often dark, Siddhartha.”
Siddhartha said nothing and looked at him with the ever unchanged, quiet smile. Govinda stared at his face, with fear, with yearning, suffering, and the eternal search was visible in his look, eternal not-finding.
Siddhartha saw it and smiled.
“Bent down to me!” he whispered quietly in Govinda’s ear. “Bend down to me! Like this, even closer! Very close! Kiss my forehead, Govinda!”
But while Govinda with astonishment, and yet drawn by great love and expectation, obeyed his words, bent down closely to him and touched his forehead with his lips, something miraculous happened to him. While his thoughts were still dwelling on Siddhartha’s wondrous words, while he was still struggling in vain and with reluctance to think away time, to imagine Nirvana and Sansara as one, while even a certain contempt for the words of his friend was fighting in him against an immense love and veneration, this happened to him:
He no longer saw the face of his friend Siddhartha, instead he saw other faces, many, a long sequence, a flowing river of faces, of hundreds, of thousands, which all came and disappeared, and yet all seemed to be there simultaneously, which all constantly changed and renewed themselves, and which were still all Siddhartha. He saw the face of a fish, a carp, with an infinitely painfully opened mouth, the face of a dying fish, with fading eyes—he saw the face of a new-born child, red and full of wrinkles, distorted from crying—he saw the face of a murderer, he saw him plunging a knife into the body of another person—he saw, in the same second, this criminal in bondage, kneeling and his head being chopped off by the executioner with one blow of his sword—he saw the bodies of men and women, naked in positions and cramps of frenzied love—he saw corpses stretched out, motionless, cold, void— he saw the heads of animals, of boars, of crocodiles, of elephants, of bulls, of birds—he saw gods, saw Krishna, saw Agni—he saw all of these figures and faces in a thousand relationships with one another, each one helping the other, loving it, hating it, destroying it, giving rebirth to it, each one was a will to die, a passionately painful confession of transitoriness, and yet none of them died, each one only transformed, was always re-born, received evermore a new face, without any time having passed between the one and the other face—and all of these figures and faces rested, flowed, generated themselves, floated along and merged with each other, and they were all constantly covered by something thin, without individuality of its own, but yet existing, like a thin glass or ice, like a transparent skin, a shell or mold or mask of water, and this mask was smiling, and this mask was Siddhartha’s smiling face, which he, Govinda, in this very same moment touched with his lips. And, Govinda saw it like this, this smile of the mask, this smile of oneness above the flowing forms, this smile of simultaneousness above the thousand births and deaths, this smile of Siddhartha was precisely the same, was precisely of the same kind as the quiet, delicate, impenetrable, perhaps benevolent, perhaps mocking, wise, thousandfold smile of Gotama, the Buddha, as he had seen it himself with great respect a hundred times. Like this, Govinda knew, the perfected ones are smiling.
Not knowing any more whether time existed, whether the vision had lasted a second or a hundred years, not knowing any more whether there existed a Siddhartha, a Gotama, a me and a you, feeling in his innermost self as if he had been wounded by a divine arrow, the injury of which tasted sweet, being enchanted and dissolved in his innermost self, Govinda still stood for a little while bent over Siddhartha’s quiet face, which he had just kissed, which had just been the scene of all manifestations, all transformations, all existence. The face was unchanged, after under its surface the depth of the thousandfoldness had closed up again, he smiled silently, smiled quietly and softly, perhaps very benevolently, perhaps very mockingly, precisely as he used to smile, the exalted one.
Deeply, Govinda bowed; tears he knew nothing of, ran down his old face; like a fire burnt the feeling of the most intimate love, the humblest veneration in his heart. Deeply, he bowed, touching the ground, before him who was sitting motionlessly, whose smile reminded him of everything he had ever loved in his life, what had ever been valuable and holy to him in his life.
~ Siddhartha
- Advaita Vedānta: A Philosophical Reconstruction

This is a brief summary of the book Advaita Vedanta : A Philosophical Reconstruction which is about the Indian philosophical system Advaita Vedanta. I cannot vouch for its accuracy, but I liked the way the chapters are organized: none is overly long. Note that the text does not use simple language; familiarity with the Western philosophical tradition may help.
Summary of the book Chapters
<p>Chapters:</p>1. Brahman
Brahman is the ultimate reality in Advaita Vedanta: a non-dual state of being in which all distinctions (e.g., subject vs. object) disappear.
It is neither a personal God (“He”) nor an impersonal object (“It”), but pure, undivided existence that is directly experienced. This realization is experiential (anubhava), not merely theoretical, and is considered the goal of human life.
Brahman is described using three key terms:
- Sat (Being): pure, unified existence underlying everything
- Cit (Consciousness): awareness or illuminating presence
- Ananda (Bliss): an ecstatic, ultimate value beyond all lesser joys
These are not true attributes but ways the human mind interprets the experience of Brahman. Brahman cannot be fully described or conceptualized.
The tradition uses “neti neti” (“not this, not that”) to indicate that all descriptions fail. Any positive statement about Brahman is only a tool to guide seekers, not a literal truth. Language and logic are limited because they arise from a world of distinctions, while Brahman transcends all distinctions.
Advaita distinguishes between:
- Nirguna Brahman (without qualities): absolute, indescribable, beyond all thought and language
- Saguna Brahman (with qualities): Brahman as interpreted by the mind, allowing religious or experiential expression
Brahman is also understood through two forms of spiritual experience:
- Nirvikalpa samadhi: pure, undifferentiated non-dual experience
- Savikalpa samadhi: structured spiritual experience where distinctions still appear but are harmonized
Ultimately, Brahman is the “content” of non-dual experience: a direct realization of unity.
2. Levels of Being
Subration is the process of overturning a previous belief or experience through a more valid one.
Key principle:
- The more something can be subrated, the less real it is.
- The less it can be subrated, the more real it is.
Reality (Ultimate Reality)
- Definition: That which can never be subrated by any experience.
- Identified with non-dual experience (Brahman):
- No subject–object distinction
- Pure unity, consciousness, and bliss
- Final and absolute—nothing can contradict it
Appearance (Relative Reality)
- Definition: That which can be subrated by a higher experience.
- Includes all ordinary experience: the world, relationships, and thoughts.
It has three sub-levels:
- Real Existent (Highest within Appearance)
- Can only be subrated by ultimate Reality, not by ordinary experience
- Examples: deep love or religious experience, great art, fundamental logical principles
- These feel ultimate within human experience but are surpassed by non-dual realization
- Existent (Everyday Reality)
- Can be subrated by higher experiences within the world
- Examples: superficial relationships replaced by deeper ones, isolated objects replaced by understanding of interconnection, conventional ideas replaced by necessary truths
- Represents the bulk of everyday life
- Illusory Existent (Lowest level)
- Can be subrated by almost any correct experience
- Examples: illusions (mistaking a log for an alligator), dreams, hallucinations, errors
- These lack practical or empirical validity
Unreality (Non-being)
- Definition: That which cannot exist or be experienced at all
- Not just false, but logically impossible
- Examples: “square circle,” self-contradictory concepts
- These are pure contradictions, not even illusions
This hierarchy (Reality → Appearance → Unreality) is valid only from the standpoint of ordinary thought.
From the standpoint of ultimate Reality (non-duality), these distinctions disappear: only Reality exists.
Advaita uses subration as a criterion for truth and being. The highest reality is found in an experience that cannot be overturned—the non-dual unity beyond all distinctions. All other levels are progressively less real, culminating in sheer impossibility.
3. Brahman and the World
What is the relationship between Brahman (ultimate reality) and the world (multiplicity)?
In direct realization (nirvikalpa samadhi):
- Only Brahman exists (pure being–consciousness–bliss)
- The world disappears as a separate reality
- Therefore, the world’s apparent independence must arise from error (maya)
Maya = the power that makes the one appear as many:
- Creates subject–object distinctions
- Makes the world seem real
Avidya (ignorance): failure to recognize Brahman Adhyasa (superimposition): projecting false attributes
- Like mistaking a rope for a snake
- Attributing limitations to the Self and reality to the non-self
The world is:
- Not fully real (because it can be subrated)
- Not unreal (because it appears)
Therefore, it has empirical reality (vyavaharika): a practical, provisional reality within experience, ultimately indescribable (anirvacaniya).
Two Theories of Causation
a) Satkaryavada (Effect pre-exists in cause)
- The world comes from Brahman, like cloth comes from threads
- Brahman (as Isvara, the Lord) is:
- Material cause (what things are made of)
- Efficient cause (what produces them)
b) Vivartavada (Apparent transformation)
- The world is not a real transformation of Brahman
- It is only an appearance, like:
- A mirage
- Double vision of the moon
- Brahman never actually changes
Brahman as Isvara appears as creator:
- Creation is spontaneous, purposeless play (lila)
- Avoids:
- Any need or goal in creation
- The problem of evil
Note: This applies only at the empirical level, not ultimately.
Levels:
- Empirical level (Appearance): World exists; Brahman = cause (Isvara)
- Ultimate level (Reality): No creation, no distinction; only Brahman exists
Key point:
- The question “How does Brahman create the world?” only makes sense within ignorance (maya)
- It disappears upon realization
- Final teaching: the world is an apparent manifestation of Brahman; no real causal relation exists
- Reality is non-dual
4. The Self
Core claim of Advaita Vedanta:
- Brahman alone is real
- The world is ultimately illusory (mithya)
- The individual self (jiva) is not different from Brahman
- Self-knowledge = knowledge of Reality → freedom from suffering and ignorance
Atman is:
- Pure, self-luminous consciousness
- Timeless, spaceless, unchanging
- Beyond thought, language, and perception
- Not an object, but the pure subject underlying all experience
- Identical with Brahman, expressed in the mahāvākya: Tat Tvam Asi (“Thou art That”)
- Realization requires stripping away all limiting conditions (body, mind, ego)
Empirical self (jiva) is:
- A mix of reality (grounded in Atman) and appearance (due to ignorance)
- Two main explanations:
- Reflection theory: jiva is a reflection of Atman in ignorance (like a face in a mirror)
- Limitation theory: jiva is Atman appearing limited by conditions (like space in a pot)
- In truth, the self is never separate, only misperceived
The root problem is ignorance (avidya):
- We identify with:
- Body
- Vital forces
- Mind and intellect
- Emotions and desires
- This creates the illusion of being a finite individual
- The self is mistakenly treated as an object rather than the subject
States of Consciousness
- Waking State
- Consciousness directed at external objects
- Identified with the physical body
- Characterized by desire and dissatisfaction
- Dream State
- Inner world of impressions and desires
- Shows independence of consciousness from external reality
- Still involves misidentification
- Deep Sleep
- No distinctions or desires
- Experience of peace/bliss, but ignorance remains
- A potential state, not true realization
- Transcendental State (Turiya)
- Pure, non-dual consciousness
- Beyond subject/object distinction
- True realization of Atman = Brahman
Samadhi types:
- Savikalpa samadhi: awareness of unity, but subtle distinctions remain
- Nirvikalpa samadhi: complete non-dual realization; the self does not just know Reality—it is Reality
Summary:
- One consciousness (Atman) appears in different forms due to ignorance
- Human life is a process of misidentification
- Spiritual development is the movement toward recognizing true identity
5. Karma
The doctrine of karma—that actions determine one’s character and future states—is central in Indian thought. However, in Advaita Vedanta, it is ultimately not provable and should be understood as a “convenient fiction”: a useful idea for interpreting experience and guiding practice, rather than a demonstrable truth.
What Karma Claims:
- A person becomes what they do: good actions → good character, bad actions → bad character
- Actions create tendencies (vasanas) that shape future behavior
- Karma links action to consequences across multiple lifetimes
Advaita accepts several “means of valid knowledge” (pramāṇas), and karma fails under all of them:
- Perception (pratyakṣa): We cannot perceive karma or past lives directly
- Comparison & non-cognition (upamāna, anupalabdhi): These deal only with observable similarities or absences, not universal laws like karma
- Inference (anumāna): Requires a proven universal relation; karma cannot be established this way
- Postulation (arthāpatti): Works only if one explanation is uniquely necessary; karma is not the only explanation for inequality (others include fate, genetics, etc.)
- Testimony (śabda / scripture): Even scripture is secondary to spiritual experience; in enlightenment, karma disappears and is not experienced as real
Metaphysical Argument (Advaita View):
- Ultimate reality (Brahman / Atman) is unchanging and beyond action
- Karma belongs only to the empirical world (illusion / maya)
- Therefore, karma is not ultimately real and not logically necessary
Despite being unprovable, karma is practically useful:
- Defines bondage and motivates liberation: People need to feel “bound” to seek freedom; karma explains this
- Encourages moral behavior: Belief in consequences motivates ethical action
- Prevents discouragement: Effort carries over across lifetimes → no effort is wasted
- Explains inequality and suffering: Differences in ability, status, and suffering are attributed to past actions
6. Aspects of Advaita Epistemology
Advaita Vedanta distinguishes between:
- Para Vidya (higher knowledge): Knowledge of the Absolute (Brahman / Atman). Intuitive, immediate, self-certifying, and ultimate. Overrides all other knowledge and is attained in a single realization
- Apara Vidya (lower knowledge): Knowledge of the empirical world—objects, events, means, virtues, and vices. Valid within its domain but ultimately subordinate to para vidya
Until one attains para vidya, apara vidya is practically valid. Once Brahman is realized, all other knowledge is seen as touched by avidya (ignorance) and ultimately unreal.
Key points:
- Para vidya is not about empirical facts; it is an axiological realization. Knowing Brahman renders all else of real value “known” or unnecessary
- Knowledge of Brahman destroys ignorance; questions about the origin of ignorance are meaningless
- All cognition is intrinsically valid until proven false. Perception, inference, and other pramanas are justified for empirical life but can be sublated (overridden) by higher knowledge
- Truth is relative in the empirical realm, but ultimate truth is only Brahman
- Cognitions are like the accused in court: considered true until falsified
Perception:
- Active and participatory; the mind assimilates the object and is modified by it
- Knowledge involves both subject and object; both are distinct yet mutually involved
- Confirms empirical reality, even though this reality is ultimately illusory from the Brahman standpoint
Inference (Anumana):
- Empirical and relative; used to understand and explain the world
- Probabilistic, not absolutely necessary
Tarka (hypothetical reasoning):
- Not a valid pramana; speculative, fallible, and subordinate to Sruti (scriptural revelation)
- Reason supports spiritual understanding indirectly, mainly through analogies and guiding empirical experience toward insight
Overall:
- Advaita rejects subjective idealism in the empirical world; subject and object are distinct and interdependent
- Empirical knowledge is permeated with avidya (ignorance), making it philosophically necessary but ultimately false
- Advaita’s epistemology is “soft realism”: valid for practical purposes but subordinate to the ultimate realization of Brahman
7. Advaita Ethics
Advaita Vedanta is often criticized as “a-ethical” because it does not treat morality as an independent, systematic field.
Ethics is implicit:
- Value judgments are embedded in the metaphysics and epistemology of Advaita
- Brahman transcends good and evil
- The true Self, identical with Brahman, is beyond moral distinctions
- Absolute moral laws do not exist; morality applies only to those not yet self-realized
Practical morality:
- Acts, desires, and thoughts are “good” if they lead toward self-realization; “bad” if they are egoistic and prevent it
- Spiritual wisdom and self-knowledge are the highest good; pleasure and ego-gratification are secondary and potentially obstructive
- Moral virtues (truthfulness, compassion, charity, self-control, non-injury) are supportive tools for self-realization, not ends in themselves
For the realized person:
- Beyond judgment; actions cannot be evaluated morally in the usual sense
- Egoism is absent; morally “immoral” acts presuppose egoistic desire, which the realized sage no longer has
- Actions are naturally informed by non-egoistic love, recognizing that others are not different from oneself
Summary: Morality in Advaita is instrumental and relative, aimed at cultivating self-knowledge. True action is grounded in knowledge, expressed through love and non-egoism, rather than adherence to abstract rules.
8. Moksa and Jnana Yoga
Moksa:
- Traditional freedom: liberation from constraints—passions, society, laws, or nature
- Advaita: freedom from karma and the cycle of births and deaths
- Beyond mere “freedom from,” which can be psychologically unsettling
- Positive spiritual freedom: a state of at-onement with Reality, self-knowledge, and full realization of human potential
Jnana Yoga: Mental-spiritual discipline leading to moksa.
Four qualifications for the aspirant:
- Discrimination (viveka): Distinguish real (timeless) from apparent (temporal)
- Detachment (vairagya): Renunciation or indifference toward sensuous pleasures
- Mental discipline: Tranquility (sama), self-control (dama), dispassion (uparati), endurance, focus (samadhana), faith (sraddha)
- Longing for wisdom: Passionate, exclusive dedication to understanding and self-knowledge
This discipline requires radical reorientation of consciousness; only a few are naturally suited for it. Advaita is “aristocratic” in this sense.
Three stages of practice:
- Hearing (shravanam): Study and attentive listening to Advaita texts and sages; learn the mahāvākya (“great sayings”) and orient the mind
- Thinking (manana): Internal reflection; discern reality from appearance; understand Brahman, Atman, maya, avidya, and the distinction between Atman and jiva
- Meditation (nididhyasana): Direct experiential realization of self-knowledge; detachment from ego and phenomena; Neti neti (“not this, not this”) method to remove false identifications
Goal:
- The realized being (jivanmukta) sees all as Brahman; distinctions vanish
- Freedom (moksa) is both living and knowing: full awareness of the self as identical with Reality
- Brahman is everywhere; liberation is inclusively seeing and being, recognizing the unity of all
- Advaita Vedanta on the True Nature of Everything
“The self that I ordinarily see,” says the aspirant, “this is not Me; the world as it presents itself to me with its divisions and contradictions, this cannot be Real. With intellect alone, I remain outside of everything. I ask something in Nature what it is and receive as an answer only my own categories and classifications. Led from one thing to another, I do not grasp what is. “Who are you?‘I might silently ask another, and as soon as I make noise within myself, I fail to find the answer. Desires, needs, attachments well up within me and bind me to what I should not be.
“What is the body? What is the mind? Am I only a collection of the accidents of birth, of language, of country? I am awake, I dream, and sometimes I seem to rest peacefully in my very being. The body changes and deteriorates. It cannot be the Self. The mind is fickle, intemperate, and yet powerful. It enables me to master my environmentbut what does this mastery mean? Today I am a success, tomorrow, a failure. Should I be only the praise and blame of others? Civilizations come and go; what meaning, then, can my petty mastery have? Awake, I am the world: it and me are so mutually involved that I can only partially discriminate between them. Asleep, I still remain its victim. And even when awake, am I not still half-asleep? I cannot completely control the stream of images, of desires, of memoriesof nonsensethat is so much a part of my waking consciousness. The mind cannot be the Self. Still there are moments of intense well-being; of self-satisfaction and aesthetic delight. Unself-consciously I find myself to be a part of something else; I give myself over to it and find a wonderful harmony there. Everything finds its place here. Without fear, without anxiety, without restlessness and ambition, and without the need to possess, I realize the immense potentiality of being, the power that sustains life. But this state of being too is transitory. This feeling and knowing self, this state of delightful harmony cannot be the Self.
“Events appear and disappear. I accept some and reject others. What is important to me today, I discover to be unimportant to me tomorrow. Truths are turned into illusions: what I value most before attaining it, I disvalue when I attain it. The things of the worldpower, prestige, money, even family and hometurn out to be empty: instead of liberating they bind me. Everything gets rejected by something else. No thing, then, can be truly real.
“The more I learn, the less I know what is of real value to me. The more I strive, the less I know where I am going. Around and around I am turned. What do I really know? I see the world in terms of my knowledge and desire, and therefore I do not really see the world at all. This world of mine cannot be Real.”
Neti neti, the Self is not this, not this: “my,” “me,” “mine” become sounds signifying nothing. Tat tvam asithe Self is Reality. ‘‘You” and “me” are not-different. Causes and effects are mutually involved: the material elements (gross and subtle) that constitute physical nature are ontologically nothing but their cause, namely, (I-consciousness) and buddhi (intelligence); they are nothing but their cause, namely, Brahman, or consciousness associated with maya , and Brahman has its ultimate ground in pure consciousness or Brahman. Desuperimposition (apavada), the reducing of effects back into their causes, the discriminating away of all lower levels of experience, is the sword that cuts away false identifications. It culminates in those “great sayings,” brahmasmi *I am Brahman, there are no distinctions in Reality and tat tvam asithou art that; Brahman is one and all is Brahman.
~ Advaita Vedanta A Philosophical Reconstruction, Chapter 8 (II)