Hindu Philosophy- A Rational Life

 Reality is eternal and permanent; that it is blissful because it is permanent for what is permanent is bliss and what is momentary is misery Absolute idealism (Vijnapti- matrata- Siddhi)  If reality is pure consciousness then the external objects does not exist outside of thoughts.   All the three worlds do not exist outside of thought. Mind, consciousness, knowledge are synonyms. External objects depend on thoughts like the hair seen floating in the atmosphere or life the perception of the double moon. It is declared that the phenomenal is like water in a jar, while the absolute is like the vast ocean. The intellect is transcended in the last meditation in which the meditation becomes one with the Real. The pure knowledge is called ‘Shramnaya’ as well as Brahmanya. But critics urged that is external objects do not exist then we cannot account for their spatial determination and their temporal determination. That means that the determination of the perceiving stream of conscious

Is there such knowledge exist which can be conceived without knowing the empirical universe, material objects and without sensory data? Is it possible to know the mystery of universe without keeping faith on sensual information and without the help of intellect? And Buddhist already set up that reality do not exist out of the sphere of consciousness and in reality there is no objective or material world then how can one have a knowledge of object or of universe? Yes and Buddhist tried their best to form such knowledge not based on empirical things. They said that the mediate (Adhyavasaya) type of knowledge is that knowledge whose validity is independent of all sense expressions. It is, thus, a logical law which guides the intellect and is not dependent on the empirical sense data. They explain the inferential aspect of such knowledge through Apoha (view of meaning) and in that Buddhist evoked the principle of Adhyavasaya (mediate) knowledge. The knowledge of the particular thin

Kshitiz Gaur Buddha remained silence on the most fundamental questions of metaphysics and therefore it need probe into the reason of that silence. The searching of his silence gave birth to dialectic inquiry. Nagarjuna took this task to explain the silence of Buddha and came out with the theory of middle path. The Buddha announced fourteen things to be inexpressible   (1)    Whether the world is – (a) eternal, (b) or not (c) or neither. (2)    Whether the world is (a) finite (b) or not (infinite) (c) or both (d) or neither. (3)    Whether the Tathagata (reality) (a) exist after death (b) or does not (c) or both (d) or neither. (4)    Whether the soul is- (a) identical with the body (b) or different from the body. Nagarjuna tried to structure these questions and on silence of Buddha and refusing to give any categorical answer to such questions on which Buddha used to say that he neither believed in absolute affirmation nor in the absolute negation. His position was one o

Kshitiz Gaur From a very long time, I was speculating about perfection and a perfect life.   And for this I again went back to reading Vedas, Upnishads and beyond that the present cosmology of Hawkins or Nobel Laureate in Physics Sir Roger Penrose. Looking for the meaning of perfection and aim of perfect life described in Hindu religion to Hindu philosophy and probing meaning of life to perfect life. I introspect what actually people, I mean common mass think about the perfect life.   Google states that ‘perfection  is a flawless state where everything is exactly right. It can also be the action of making something perfect. Since perfect things are without fault or flaw,  perfection  is a perfect condition — everything is 100% great. Of course,  perfection  is hard to find.” Is it really possible to live a perfect life or having perfection in life and is there any example of human being lived a perfect life? If in reality, perfect life is possible and such life can leads to solace?