saidevo
07 April 2012, 08:37 AM
This universe, as we see and experience it, is the result of involvement of five entities: nirguNa brahman (NB), saguNa brahman (SB), mAyA, jIvAtmas, and prakRuti. We can think of some analogies in the context of our modern world to explain the relationships that exist between them. As with all analogies, each has its limit that cannot be stretched. We should also note that except NB all other entities exist only as practical reality (PR)--not absolute reality (AR).
The database analogy
In a relational database management system (RDBMS) there are entities, relationships and attributes. An entity is an independent existence that is captured in a table. A relationship captures how entities are related to each other. Attributes are names that identify different features of an entity. Entities are arranged in a hierarchy.
Three kinds of relationships exist between the entities:
one-to-one relationship
one-to-many relationship
many-to-many relationship.
• One-to-one relationship is like every child having only one mother.
• One-to-many is like a mother having many children. Here the relationship is one-to-one between a child and mother, and many-to-one between the children and their mother.
• many-to-many is like a student having many lecturers in a college and each lecturer having many sets of students to teach.
Using this relationship model,
One-to-one relationship exists between
• NB and SB (in PR);
• NB and jIvAtman (who in AR is identical to NB as Self);
• SB and mAyA; (as mAyA is inherent in NB, there is no relationship there).
• SB and prakRuti (which is another face of mAyA, so no relationship between mAyA and prakRuti);
One-to many relationship exists between
• NB and jIvas (in PR);
• NB and the individual deities of SB (in PR);
• SB and its individual deities;
• SB and jIvas;
• prakRuti and jIvas;
Many-to-many relationship exists between
• jIvas (when related to each other in PR);
• jIvas and deities of SB;
• jIvas and the three guNas of prakRuti;
• jIvas and mAyA (which whose two faces are prakRuti--objective, and avidyA--subjective);
The object-oriented programming analogy
In OOP, there is a superclass at the apex of the hierarchy from which all its subclasses are derived. The superclass has only the minimum attributes to define the entity. These attributes are inherited by subclasses, with addition of their own attributes. The superclass subsumes all its subclasses.
Two kinds of relationships exist between classes in OOP:
is-a relationship
has-a relationship.
• When a class D is derived from a superclass B, they have an is-a relationship: that is, D is-a B. Concept D is a specialization of concept B. while concept B is a generalization of the concept D. As an example, apples and oranges are specialization of fruits, which as a general concept subsumes all fruits, so an apple is-a fruit and so is an orange.
• Has-a relationship arises when a class subsumes another class. In this case, the subsumed class becomes an attribute of the class that subsumes it. Multiple has-a relationships will combine to form a possessive hierarchy. As an example, a house subsumes the bathroom, where bathroom becomes one of the member objects that constitute the house.
Using this relationship model,
is-a relationship exists between
• NB and SB, NB and jIva, prakRuti and mAyA, mAya and avidyA, and so on.
and has-a relationship exists between
• SB and mAyA, SB and the individual deities, jIva and mAyA, and so on.
Other analogies
There could be other analogies too:
• mAyA is like a computer software that processes the inputs from prakRuti and avidyA from jIva and creates the world as its output. Although mAyA is said to create the world, it is actually the programmer--SB--behind it who is the author of creation.
• mAyA is a firewall that NB sets up, delegating SB to deal with it. In order to 'access' NB and realize it as their immanent Self, jIvas have to get past this firewall, relinquishing their input of avidyA that causes worldly desires to spring up.
• The Hindu classical ghaTa-AkAsha--space and the pot, analogy seems to be the best of all analogies. As a modern equivalent, we might think of mAyA as a virtual grid or matrix placed over the infinite consciousness that is Brahman: this creates the effects of time and confined space and gives rise to forms and names that limit brahma-chaitanya to the chaitanya-jaDa--sentient-insentient units of existentence in this world.
The database analogy
In a relational database management system (RDBMS) there are entities, relationships and attributes. An entity is an independent existence that is captured in a table. A relationship captures how entities are related to each other. Attributes are names that identify different features of an entity. Entities are arranged in a hierarchy.
Three kinds of relationships exist between the entities:
one-to-one relationship
one-to-many relationship
many-to-many relationship.
• One-to-one relationship is like every child having only one mother.
• One-to-many is like a mother having many children. Here the relationship is one-to-one between a child and mother, and many-to-one between the children and their mother.
• many-to-many is like a student having many lecturers in a college and each lecturer having many sets of students to teach.
Using this relationship model,
One-to-one relationship exists between
• NB and SB (in PR);
• NB and jIvAtman (who in AR is identical to NB as Self);
• SB and mAyA; (as mAyA is inherent in NB, there is no relationship there).
• SB and prakRuti (which is another face of mAyA, so no relationship between mAyA and prakRuti);
One-to many relationship exists between
• NB and jIvas (in PR);
• NB and the individual deities of SB (in PR);
• SB and its individual deities;
• SB and jIvas;
• prakRuti and jIvas;
Many-to-many relationship exists between
• jIvas (when related to each other in PR);
• jIvas and deities of SB;
• jIvas and the three guNas of prakRuti;
• jIvas and mAyA (which whose two faces are prakRuti--objective, and avidyA--subjective);
The object-oriented programming analogy
In OOP, there is a superclass at the apex of the hierarchy from which all its subclasses are derived. The superclass has only the minimum attributes to define the entity. These attributes are inherited by subclasses, with addition of their own attributes. The superclass subsumes all its subclasses.
Two kinds of relationships exist between classes in OOP:
is-a relationship
has-a relationship.
• When a class D is derived from a superclass B, they have an is-a relationship: that is, D is-a B. Concept D is a specialization of concept B. while concept B is a generalization of the concept D. As an example, apples and oranges are specialization of fruits, which as a general concept subsumes all fruits, so an apple is-a fruit and so is an orange.
• Has-a relationship arises when a class subsumes another class. In this case, the subsumed class becomes an attribute of the class that subsumes it. Multiple has-a relationships will combine to form a possessive hierarchy. As an example, a house subsumes the bathroom, where bathroom becomes one of the member objects that constitute the house.
Using this relationship model,
is-a relationship exists between
• NB and SB, NB and jIva, prakRuti and mAyA, mAya and avidyA, and so on.
and has-a relationship exists between
• SB and mAyA, SB and the individual deities, jIva and mAyA, and so on.
Other analogies
There could be other analogies too:
• mAyA is like a computer software that processes the inputs from prakRuti and avidyA from jIva and creates the world as its output. Although mAyA is said to create the world, it is actually the programmer--SB--behind it who is the author of creation.
• mAyA is a firewall that NB sets up, delegating SB to deal with it. In order to 'access' NB and realize it as their immanent Self, jIvas have to get past this firewall, relinquishing their input of avidyA that causes worldly desires to spring up.
• The Hindu classical ghaTa-AkAsha--space and the pot, analogy seems to be the best of all analogies. As a modern equivalent, we might think of mAyA as a virtual grid or matrix placed over the infinite consciousness that is Brahman: this creates the effects of time and confined space and gives rise to forms and names that limit brahma-chaitanya to the chaitanya-jaDa--sentient-insentient units of existentence in this world.