Absolute: Difference between revisions

From Theosophy Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
Line 55: Line 55:


A. Duration is; it has neither beginning nor end. How can you call that which has neither beginning nor end, Time? Duration is beginningless and endless; Time is finite.  
A. Duration is; it has neither beginning nor end. How can you call that which has neither beginning nor end, Time? Duration is beginningless and endless; Time is finite.  
 
<br>
Q. Is, then, Duration the infinite, and Time the finite conception?
Q. Is, then, Duration the infinite, and Time the finite conception?
 
<br>
A. Time can be divided; Duration—in our philosophy, at least—cannot. Time is divisible in Duration—or, as you put it, the one is something within Time and Space, whereas the other is outside of both.
A. Time can be divided; Duration—in our philosophy, at least—cannot. Time is divisible in Duration—or, as you put it, the one is something within Time and Space, whereas the other is outside of both.
 
<br>
Q. The only way one can define Time is by the motion of the earth.  
Q. The only way one can define Time is by the motion of the earth.  
 
<br>
A. But we can also define Time in our conceptions.
A. But we can also define Time in our conceptions.
 
<br>
Q. Duration, rather?  
Q. Duration, rather?  
 
<br>
A. No, Time; for as to Duration, it is impossible to divide it or set up landmarks therein. Duration with us is the one eternity, not relative, but absolute.
A. No, Time; for as to Duration, it is impossible to divide it or set up landmarks therein. Duration with us is the one eternity, not relative, but absolute.
 
<br>
Q. Can it be said that the essential idea of Duration is existence?  
Q. Can it be said that the essential idea of Duration is existence?  
 
<br>
A. No; existence has limited and definite periods, whereas Duration, having neither beginning nor end, is a perfect abstraction which contains Time. Duration is like Space, which is an abstraction too, and is equally without beginning or end.<ref>Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, ''Collected Writings'' vol. X (Wheaton, IL: Theosophical Publishing House, 1988), 310.</ref></blockquote>
A. No; existence has limited and definite periods, whereas Duration, having neither beginning nor end, is a perfect abstraction which contains Time. Duration is like Space, which is an abstraction too, and is equally without beginning or end.<ref>Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, ''Collected Writings'' vol. X (Wheaton, IL: Theosophical Publishing House, 1988), 310.</ref></blockquote>



Revision as of 20:02, 25 September 2012

Absolute is a term derived from the Latin absolūtus which means "loosened from" or "unattached." As such, the word "Absolute" points out a negative concept meaning non-relative, non-comparative, or without relation to anything else. In philosophy it refers to an unconditioned reality which transcends the limited, conditional, everyday existence. It is sometimes conceived of as the source through which all beings emanate.

General description

This Absolute reality is the first fundamental proposition found in The Secret Doctrine, described as follows:

An Omnipresent, Eternal, Boundless, and Immutable PRINCIPLE on which all speculation is impossible, since it transcends the power of human conception and could only be dwarfed by any human expression or similitude. It is beyond the range and reach of thought—in the words of Mandukya, “unthinkable and unspeakable.” To render these ideas clearer to the general reader, let him set out with the postulate that there is one absolute Reality which antecedes all manifested, conditioned, being. This Infinite and Eternal Cause—dimly formulated in the “Unconscious” and “Unknowable” of current European philosophy—is the rootless root of “all that was, is, or ever shall be.” It is of course devoid of all attributes and is essentially without any relation to manifested, finite Being. It is “Be-ness” rather than Being (in Sanskrit, Sat), and is beyond all thought or speculation.[1]

The Absolute is said to be the “Unknowable” and the “Causeless Cause” of the universe.[2] On certain occasions H. P. Blavatsky used the termed "Absoluteness" to provide an even less concrete idea of the Absolute:

Absoluteness. When predicated of the UNIVERSAL PRINCIPLE, it denotes an abstract noun, which is more correct and logical than to apply the adjective “absolute ” to that which has neither attributes nor limitations, nor can IT have any.[3]

Be-ness, Sat, Parabrahman, Ain Soph, are some of the terms Mme. Blavatsky uses to refer to the Absolute. As be-ness, it can be regarded to be both Absolute Being and Non-Being.[4]

Aspects of the Absolute

Although Mme. Blavatsky said the Absolute is "devoid of all attributes"[5] (which imply relative characteristics) we can still talk about some "aspects" of it:

This “Be-ness” is symbolised in the Secret Doctrine under two aspects. On the one hand, absolute abstract Space, representing bare subjectivity, the one thing which no human mind can either exclude from any conception, or conceive of by itself. On the other, absolute Abstract Motion representing Unconditioned Consciousness.[6]

Sometimes Mme. Blavatsky mentions a third aspect of it, called "duration".[7]

Absolute abstract motion

The "motion aspect" of the absolute is the basis for the development of all the different kinds of consciousness in the universe:

It is the fons et origo [source and origin] of force and of all individual consciousness, and supplies the guiding intelligence in the vast scheme of cosmic Evolution.[8]

Even our Western thinkers have shown that Consciousness is inconceivable to us apart from change, and motion best symbolizes change, its essential characteristic.[9]

In its absoluteness motion is called "the Great Breath":

This latter aspect of the one Reality, is also symbolized by the term “The Great Breath,” a symbol sufficiently graphic to need no further elucidation.[10]

Absolute abstract space

Space, in its absolute abstraction, is beyond the idea of emptiness or totality:

Space is neither a “limitless void,” nor a “conditioned fullness,” but both: being, on the plane of absolute abstraction, the everincognizable Deity, which is void only to finite minds, and on that of mayavic perception, the Plenum, the absolute Container of all that is, whether manifested or unmanifested: it is, therefore, that ABSOLUTE ALL.[11]

The "space aspect" of the absolute is frequently identified with the "root substance" (Mulaprakriti):

Space, however, viewed as a “Substantial Unity”—the “living Source of Life”—as the “Unknown Causeless Cause,” is the oldest dogma in Occultism. . .[12]

This aspect is the origin of all the different types of matter in the universe:

On the other hand, pre-cosmic root-substance (Mulaprakriti) is that aspect of the Absolute which underlies all the objective planes of Nature. Just as pre-cosmic Ideation is the root of all individual consciousness, so pre-cosmic Substance is the substratum of matter in the various grades of its differentiation.[13]

Duration

The Stanza I.2 reads: "Time was not, for it lay asleep in the infinite bosom of duration". Below is a series of answers given by Mme. Blavatsky in reference to this topic:

Q. What is the difference between Time and Duration?

A. Duration is; it has neither beginning nor end. How can you call that which has neither beginning nor end, Time? Duration is beginningless and endless; Time is finite.
Q. Is, then, Duration the infinite, and Time the finite conception?
A. Time can be divided; Duration—in our philosophy, at least—cannot. Time is divisible in Duration—or, as you put it, the one is something within Time and Space, whereas the other is outside of both.
Q. The only way one can define Time is by the motion of the earth.
A. But we can also define Time in our conceptions.
Q. Duration, rather?
A. No, Time; for as to Duration, it is impossible to divide it or set up landmarks therein. Duration with us is the one eternity, not relative, but absolute.
Q. Can it be said that the essential idea of Duration is existence?

A. No; existence has limited and definite periods, whereas Duration, having neither beginning nor end, is a perfect abstraction which contains Time. Duration is like Space, which is an abstraction too, and is equally without beginning or end.[14]

Notes

  1. Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine, vol. 1 (Wheaton, IL: Theosophical Publishing House, 1993), 14.
  2. Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine, vol. 1 (Wheaton, IL: Theosophical Publishing House, 1993), 14.
  3. Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, The Theosophical Glossary (Krotona, CA: Theosophical Publishing House, 1973), 4.
  4. Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, The Theosophical Glossary (Krotona, CA: Theosophical Publishing House, 1973), 249.
  5. Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine vol. I, (Wheaton, IL: Theosophical Publishing House, 1993), 14.
  6. Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine vol. I, (Wheaton, IL: Theosophical Publishing House, 1993), 14.
  7. Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine vol. I, (Wheaton, IL: Theosophical Publishing House, 1993), 43.
  8. Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine vol. I, (Wheaton, IL: Theosophical Publishing House, 1993), 15.
  9. Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine vol. I, (Wheaton, IL: Theosophical Publishing House, 1993), 14.
  10. Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine vol. I, (Wheaton, IL: Theosophical Publishing House, 1993), 14.
  11. Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine vol. I, (Wheaton, IL: Theosophical Publishing House, 1993), 8.
  12. Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine vol. I, (Wheaton, IL: Theosophical Publishing House, 1993), 9-10, fn.
  13. Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine vol. I, (Wheaton, IL: Theosophical Publishing House, 1993), 15.
  14. Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, Collected Writings vol. X (Wheaton, IL: Theosophical Publishing House, 1988), 310.

Further reading