Change and the changeless
goode at DPW.COM
Tue Nov 4 17:25:07 CST 1997
At 04:37 PM 11/4/97 -0330, Gummuluru Murthy wrote:
>While the screen and the characters in the movie is a good analogy, I am
>not entirely sure it fits the advaitic thinking fully.
>It does not allow the jeeva [in this analogy, the characters in the
>movie] to merge with the Absolute [in this analogy, the screen]. It
>stresses the non-reality of the jeeva. But it does not show the
>fundamental precis of the advaita that the jeeva without upAdhis is
>the Brahman. How could that be accommodated in the screen and movie
>character analogy ? Yet, I see this analogy being used effectively
>by Nisargadatta and others.
I've heard it go several ways:
watcher = jiva
screen = Absolute
lamp = Absolute (different writer of the analogy)
movie itself = phenomenality (other jivas, the rest of the world)
As for the jiva merging with Brahman, I've seen this described as the
watcher realizing "this is only a movie." By this, the jiva loses
identification with the events in the movie.
What I respond to in the analogy is that there is really no causality,
evolution, progression, or passage of time in the movie when it's seen as a
movie. The movie is in the can, already finished, all of a piece. I think
the world is just like that (as per the Gaudapada Karika).
Still not a perfect analogy, but what analogy is perfect? If it were a
perfect fit, it wouldn't be an analogy, it would be the case itself.
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list