Among Advaita Vedāntins there is a tension between those who believe texts are the ultimate authority and primary soteriological method for gaining liberation and those who advocate an independent process of meditation and self-inquiry leading to religious experience. This dissertation examines the role of Advaita's contemplation (nididhyāsana) as a method in which text and practice intersect. I focus on Śaṅkara, the seventh-century Advaitin, whose interpretations of Advaita have been authoritative within the tradition. This investigation examines how Śaṅkara strove to exclude contemplation from a discourse of practice while maintaining it as a part of textual study, and explores the intersections of text, contemplative practice, and liberating experience in Advaita's soteriological program. I argue that sacred texts possess a receding horizon for Śaṅkara. At first there appears to be a clean distinction between texts and contemplative practice. However, if one enters the methodology prescribed by Śaṅkara, the notion of text expands and continues to grow the deeper one studies. Sacred texts stretch beyond conventional boundaries of words, not only to encompass contemplation, but knowledge of non-duality and liberation as well. One never catches the boundary of the boundless text. This dissertation will be of benefit to religious studies scholars seeking to understand the relationships of textual study, contemplation, and religious experience in the Indian context. / text

This thesis is a study of the Saundarya Lahari, a Sanskrit poem associated with the Srividya Sakta Tantric tradition. It traces the movement of meaning between textual, ritual, and cultural spaces in order to understand the performed possibilities of the text. The Goddess as Sakti (power) both grants enjoyment and is the principle of that enjoyment: beauty, love, and worldly powers. These powers follow the movements of the text: its scanning of the Goddess from shining head to toe; the twinned movements of publicity (exoterism) and secrecy (esoterism); and the gestures and utterances of ritual performance. First the text is located among classical Sanskrit aesthetics, then as a devotional song (stotra), and finally as a manual for occult practice (prayoga). Situated in these contexts, the multivalence of the text comes to the foreground; mapping the tensions between these meanings is the starting point for the development of a Tantric hermeneutic.

Note:

No description available.

Submitted by Geandra Rodrigues (geandrar@gmail.com) on 2018-04-18T18:05:45Z No. of bitstreams: 1 brunodocarmosilva.pdf: 1572353 bytes, checksum: 2b2ba13400bf180af68edd33ad685484 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Adriana Oliveira (adriana.oliveira@ufjf.edu.br) on 2018-04-19T13:32:22Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 brunodocarmosilva.pdf: 1572353 bytes, checksum: 2b2ba13400bf180af68edd33ad685484 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2018-04-19T13:32:22Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 brunodocarmosilva.pdf: 1572353 bytes, checksum: 2b2ba13400bf180af68edd33ad685484 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2018-02-07 / O principal objetivo deste trabalho é investigar e compreender a natureza e a operacionalidade da razão discriminativa (viveka) no empreendimento soteriológico da tradição Advaita Vedānta, principalmente nas obras do filósofo indiano Śaṅkarācārya (séc. VIII), seu maior expoente. Seus tratados (prakaraṇas) e seus comentários (bhāṣyas) destacam a relação entre ātman e Brahman conforme revelada pelos Upaniṣads, que são os textos conclusivos dos Vedas, i.e, sua porção final (vedānta). Os Vedas constituem o cânone literário referente à Revelação védica (śruti), que é o fundamento sagrado da religiosidade indiana. Segundo Śaṅkarācārya, é a ignorância (avidyā) que aprisiona o sujeito, fazendo dele um ser circunstancialmente marcado pelo sofrimento (duḥkha). Portanto, essa condição circunstancial de sofrimento só pode ser superada libertando-se da ignorância. A libertação (mokṣa) da ignorância depende totalmente da presença e da orientação de um mestre (guru/ācārya) consagrado pela tradição, aqui neste caso, pela tradição Advaita Vedānta. Assim, é através do mestre que o discípulo (śiṣya) recebe os ensinamentos upaniṣádicos que conduzem à libertação. / The main objective of this work is to investigate and understand the nature and operability of the discriminative reason (viveka) in the soteriological knowledge of the Advaita Vedānta tradition. This investigation will mainly take place through the works of the Indian philosopher Śaṅkarācārya (séc. VIII), the greatest exponent of the Advaita Vedānta tradition. The treatises (prakaraṇas) and the commentaries (bhāṣyas) of Śaṅkarācārya highlight the relationship between ātman and Brahman; the final portion of the Vedas (vedānta), the Upaniṣads, reveals this relationship. The Vedas constitute the literary canon referring to the Vedic Revelation (śruti), which is the sacred foundation of Indian religiosity. According to Śaṅkarācārya, the ignorance (avidyā) imprisons the subject, and then this ignorance makes the subject circumstantially marked by suffering (duḥkha). Therefore, the overcoming of this circumstantial condition of suffering happens only when the subject becomes free from ignorance. The liberation (mokṣa) of ignorance depends entirely on the presence and guidance of a teacher (guru/ācārya) consecrated by the some tradition – in the case of this study, by the Advaita Vedānta tradition. Thus, is through the teacher that the disciple (śiṣya) receives the upanishadic teachings that leads to liberation.

This study is a comparison of the philosophical systems composed by the Indian philosopher Sankara (788-830 CE), and the Muslim mystic, Ibn Arabi (1165-1240 CE). The primary thesis found in this study is that the conceptual systems constructed by Sankara and Ibn Arabi are not perfectly new creations derived from the core of their mystical realizations. Rather, they contain fundamental pre-existing principles, concepts, and teachings that are expanded upon and placed within a systematic philosophy or theology that is intended to lead others to a state of realization. A selection of these presuppositions are extracted from within each of these thinkers’ philosophical systems and employed as structural indicators. Similarities are highlighted, yet the differences between Sankara and Ibn Arabi’s thought, witnessed within their philosophical systems, lead us to the conclusion that the two mystics inhabited different conceptual space. / iv, 195 leaves ; 29 cm