OTKA-Workshop: How to heal ignorance: various vedāntin approaches in the commentaries on the Brahmasūtra

2026. március 5-én, 15.00-kor tartja a tanszéken működő OTKA-kutatócsoport a következő workshopját. Az alkalmon Aklan Anna Katalin mutatja be a májusban, Manipalban megrendezésre kerülő 58th SACP (Society for Asian and Comparative Philosophy) Conference c. szakmai fórumra szánt előadását.

Az eseményen minden érdeklődőt szeretettel várunk!

Az előadás angol nyelvű absztraktja:

In the ”Preamble” of his foundational commentary on the Brahmasūtra, the advaita vedāntin Śaṅkarācārya (7th-8th century) explains that the apparent distinction between subject and object, you and I, the world and Brahman, is due to ignorance (avidyā), i.e. faulty superimposition (adhyāsa) of the attributes of the object on the subject. The underlying truth is that the whole universe is in reality one and one only, nothing else but Brahman. Śaṅkarācārya holds that ignorance is the cause of perceiving the apparent difference, and he also explains the way to dissolve ignorance and realize the underlying truth behind perception.

The aim of the paper is to understand Śaṅkara’s concept of ignorance and compare his theories with later vedāntin thinkers belonging to different branches of the school, namely Bhāskara (8th-9th centuries), the main proponent of the bhedābheda vedānta, and the viśiṣṭādvaitin Rāmānuja (1017-1137).

Both authors refute Śaṅkara’s view. Bhāskara states that ignorance is a wrong belief that the self is the same as the body, etc. It is also a wrong belief about Brahman’s nature. Bhāskara points out that the way of removing ignorance is through wisdom learned from śruti (Brahmasūtrabhāṣya 1.1.4.)

Rāmānuja in his Śrībhāṣya 1.1.1. criticizes the advaitin view as he states that ignorance does not mean that there is no difference in the world but it concerns the real nature of the self, i.e. with the true knowledge of the self, spiritual ignorance will disappear. He proves his point in a lengthy debate with his fictional advaitin opponent, where some of the examples and analogies used by Bhāskara are repeated.

The three authors hold diverging views in general about Brahman and ātman. The question at stake is not only ignorance and its understanding within the three different schools, but also its metaphysical implications, which are also discussed in the paper.