Transcending Dichotomies
Ramana Maharshi's enigmatic statement,
"Brahman is real,
The world is illusion,
Brahman is the world."
These three lines move from initial division to ultimate unity. First, we distinguish between the Real and the illusory - between God and the world, the Infinite and the finite. Yet a deeper understanding reveals that God is also present within the world.
The Ascetic and the GnosticConsider two seekers at different stages of spiritual awakening: the ascetic (zahid) and the gnostic ('arif). The ascetic operates within a dualistic framework, maintaining a sharp duality between the world and God. The gnostic, having advanced further, has attained a non-dual understanding of reality.
The ascetic abandons the world to find God while the gnostic returns to the world and finds God within it. The ascetic describes this world and even the heavenly world with disdain, seeing both as distractions from the Divine. The gnostic, however, sees the Divine Presence pervading all existence. What the ascetic views as accursed, the gnostic sees as a Divine disclosure. As a Hadith states: “Everything is accursed except the remembrance of God.” The Sufi scholar William Chittick explains that everything is, in essence, a reminder of God “so nothing is accursed; the alchemy of dhikr [remembrance] transmutes the accursed into the blessed”.1
Heaven (swarga) and Liberation (moksha)
Some of the Sufis belittle those who pursue the spiritual path for the sake of heavenly rewards, citing the Sufi teaching that the true seeker desires "the Gardener, not the Garden”. While this sentiment can inspire devotion to God above all else, it risks fostering a misleading dichotomy between Paradise and the Divine.
A similar issue arises in Hinduism, where teachings often seem to present a choice between Paradise (swarga) and union with Brahman (moksha or mukti). Many warn that Paradise is temporary—once one’s good karma is exhausted, one must leave and return to the cycle of rebirths. The only way to be liberated from this cycle is union with Brahman (moksha).
However, a broader understanding of Moksha highlights that it is not solely about oneness with Brahman (the drop merging with the Ocean) but allows for the preservation of our personal identity in Paradise (see notes below). If it did not, one would have to conclude that the Avataras and all other liberated beings have ceased to exist—a notion no traditional doctrine supports.2 Meister Eckhart, the Christian mystic, beautifully described this state of Divine oneness as “fusion without confusion.”
Notes
1. The Upanishads describe five types of Moksha, four of which involve eternal residence in heaven and liberation from rebirths. Sayujya is the only one of the five type's of moksha that entails complete merging with Brahman where we no longer exist seperately at all, which is the ultimate goal of non-dualists (Advaita).
Three Classes of People
The ignorant desire this world and they are the majority,
The wise desire the Otherworld and they are a minority,
The noble desire God and they are the elect.
The Quran speaks about three classes of people on Doomsday:
The Companions of the Left Hand
The Companions of the Right Hand
And The Foremost
The first are condemned, the second attain Paradise and the third are brought near to God and these are the elect. Sufis understand this Divine nearness to be a state where the soul is immersed in the Divine Presence—like a drop entering the ocean. This reintegration closely parallels the Hindu Moksha and Buddhist Nirvana, where individual consciousness is reabsorbed into Universal Consciousness. However, this does not mean the termination of our identity which we will now explain.
Coexistence
The Quran reveals an interesting duality in the afterlife:
“For he who fears the meeting with his Lord, there will be two Paradises” (55:46).
Commentary: The scholar Ibn Ajibah says that one Paradise is a reward for actions and the other is a reward for faith. One is a physical Garden and the other is a purely spiritual state of Divine Proximity and Intimacy. Sahl at-Tustari also says that our actions determine our share in the Garden, while faith determines our proximity to God.
Frithjof Schuon points out that these two Paradises in the Quranic verse are an exact equivalent of the two bodies of the Buddhas3. In Buddhist doctrine, an enlightened being exists simultaneously in a heavenly body (Sambhogakaya) and in a formless ultimate body (Dharmakaya). “When speaking of his own state in the Hereafter, the Prophet ﷺ described it as a two-fold blessing: “The meeting with my Lord and Paradise4.”
The Vedanta teaches that Heaven (swarga) is attained through actions (karma) while Brahman is only attained through knowledge (jnana). The Quranic verse about the two paradises suggests there can be coexistence between the two. Union with God does not mean dissolution of our own identity. A concrete example from this world is that of a mystic who experiences ecstatic union with God inwardly while outwardly retaining their individuality.
This resolves some apparent contradictions in how traditions describe ultimate states - they can encompass both the formless/transcendent and the embodied/manifest without contradiction. This also aligns with the Vedantic concept of līlā (divine play) where manifestation or embodiment can be an expression of freedom rather than bondage.
In the Qur'an, Paradise is described as eternal, with one notable exception:
“As for the blissful, they shall be in the Garden, abiding therein as long as the heavens and the earth endure, except as God wills—a gift uninterrupted.” (Qur'an 11:108)
Paradise is a “gift without interruption”, meaning that this impermanence refers not to cessation but to a transition into a higher state beyond Paradise itself! Such a state is alluded to in another verse:
“Allah has promised the believers, men and women, gardens beneath which rivers flow, to dwell therein forever. Abodes of excellence in the gardens of Eden. And greater still, the Riḍwān of Allah. That is the supreme triumph.” (Qur'an 9:72)
A Hadith Qudsi illuminates this further:
“Allah will say to the denizens of Paradise, ‘Are you content?’ They will reply, ‘How could we not be content?’ Allah will say, ‘I will give you better than this.’ They will ask, ‘What is better than this, O Lord?’ He will reply, ‘I will envelope you in my Ridwan...'
Spirituality and Sensuality
Many ancient sages and mystics across the globe have recognised that sexuality, music, and beauty are not simply sources of sensual pleasure but possess a sanctifying or we can say spiritual dimension. They are capable of leading to spiritual elevation or degradation. Over the course of human history, however, they become increasingly susceptible to degradation because of humanity’s spiritual decline. This explains why the later religions in history, such as Islam, impose stricter regulations on these expressions which is part of the Divine wisdom, tailored to the conditions of the era.
Islam, for instance, tends to censor music, female beauty and sexuality more rigorously than other traditions. Yet paradoxically, it vividly portrays these same sensual pleasures—wine, women, and song—to be a part of Paradise. This reveals a deeper truth about the complex relationship between spirituality and sensuality.
Frithjof Schuon insightfully observes that Islam - like Hinduism and Buddhism - distinguishes between crude sensuality and sanctified sensuality, incorporating the latter within its Paradise. The sacred texts of Muslims, Hindus and Buddhists speak of the sensual delights in the heavenly realm, affirming that sensuality is not inherently profane but possesses a sacred dimension. This understanding reaches its zenith in the esoteric practices of Hindu and Buddhist tantra, which systematically explore the power of combining the sensual and the spiritual.
Such a perspective challenges the rigid dualism between spirit and matter that has shaped Western educated minds since Descartes (d. 1650). Western critics in the last few centuries have often dismissed the sensual descriptions of heaven in Muslim, Hindu, and Native American traditions as incompatible with genuine spirituality. They fail to grasp that the two are not mutually exclusive.
Notes
1. A quote from the Buddha on the sensual delights of Paradise (source: Magandiya Sutta 75):
"Having conducted himself well in body, speech, and mind, on the dissolution of the body, after death, he might reappear in a happy destination, in the heavenly world... and there, surrounded by a group of maidens in the Nandana Grove, he would enjoy himself, provided and endowed with the five cords of divine sensual pleasure... What do you think, Magandiya? Would that young god surrounded by the group of nymphs in the Nandana Grove, enjoying himself, provided and endowed with the five cords of divine sensual pleasure, envy [those on earth]... or would he [seek to] return to human sensual pleasures?"
Magandiya: "No, Master Gotama"
Buddha: "Why not?"
Magandiya: "Because celestial sensual pleasures are more excellent and sublime than human sensual pleasures."
2. The great Sufi Ibn Arabi explicitly states that the Qutb, the highest figure in the hierarchy of saints (awliya), frequently engages in conjugal acts and loves women. He notes:
"The sexual act of one in such a state is like the sexual union of the people of Paradise, only for the sake of pleasure [not procreation]..."
(Source: Ibn al-‘Arabi, Muhyi ‘l-Din. Al-Futuhat al-makkiyya. 4 vols. Beirut: Dar Sadir.2:573-574)
The concept aligns with some Tantric Hindu and Buddhist traditions, where advanced ascetics may engage in conjugal acts with multiple female partners as a means to accelerate Enlightenment. While highly restricted and controlled, such practices can be prone to abuse and require careful consideration.
References
1. On the Cosmology of Dhikr by William Chittick, p. 63
2. This point is made in The Essential Writings of Frithjof Schuon, p. 468
3. The Two Paradises by Frithjof Schuon (Essay)
4. Muhammad by Martin Lings, p. 95
Further Reading List
1. What is the Quranic Doctrine of the Afterlife and How is it Related to Sufism? By Martin Lings (Essay)
2. The Two Paradises by Frithjof Schuon (Essay)
Upaya
Semitic View: Heaven and Hell are eternal
Indic View: Heaven and Hell are temporary
Common Ground: Hell is temporary and Heaven is eternal
Imagine a person applying for the most prestigious job in the world, in the most ideal location imaginable. The job offer states that if they score an A on the entrance exam, they will receive the highest salary, the greatest perks, and complete job security—never having to resit the exam. However, if they score a B or C, they will still get the job, but after five years, they must resit the exam. This cycle, they are told, will continue indefinitely until they achieve an A.
In reality, no exam resits are actually enforced for those who achieved a B or C as they are both a pass grade. Instead of being ejected from their job after five years, employees continued learning and improving from their new position at work, gradually advancing until they reached the highest rank. The initial threat of exam retakes for lesser grades were only intended to inspire excellence and intense studying.
This allegory illuminates the Indic notion of temporary paradises. Hindus believe that souls did not quite reach the highest spiritual grade can go to Heaven but must eventually return to a mortal world again - like a student resitting an examination. Only those who achieve Moksha (grade A) attain permanence in the Divine realm and are free from the cycle of rebirths. Interestingly, however, Hinduism does have a concept known as Krama Mukti (gradual liberation)— where souls continue progressing through heavenly realms rather than having to regress back into a mortal world. Our argument is that the scriptural warning of leaving paradise and falling back into a mortal world may not be an actual fate but a motivational tool to push souls toward the highest goal of Moksha (defined as Liberation or union with the Absolute).
A parallel can be drawn with the Abrahamic concept of eternal hell. Many classical scholars across Muslim, Jewish and Christian traditions have questioned whether Hell is truly eternal, arguing that it is inconsistent with God’s all-merciful and forgiving nature. The Islamic tradition, in particular, seems to have the strongest evidence that it may be temporary (see notes below), even if this is a minority view and seems to be contradicted by the scriptures.
Both concepts of an eternal hell in Semitic religions or a temporary paradise in Indic religions may ultimately serve as a Divine strategy (akin to parental wisdom)—designed to inspire fear and greater effort but whose consequences can potentially be lifted through the Divine Mercy. Some Muslim scholars say a Divine promise (wa’ad) must be enforced, but a Divine threat (wa’id) can be revoked on the Day of Resurrection. The eternal Hell in Semitic faiths or a temporary Heaven in Indic religions both function as a Divine warning or threat. What may seem like a rigid law of consequence may be softened by grace, allowing souls to ascend rather than fall.
Notes
1. We should clarify that the lowest heavens in Hinduism and Buddhism are temporary while the higher heavens are eternal. The lower heavens are temporary and descending, eventually leading souls back to a mortal world, whereas the higher heavens are permanent or ascending.
In Hinduism and Buddhism, it is said that all desire (kama) has been overcome in the highest realms but perhaps it would be more accurate to say that desire has been refined and sublimated. The Sufis say all desire is ultimately a desire for God, though most remain unaware. This aligns with Vedantic thought that all seeking is, at its core, a search for the Source (Brahman). In Paradise, when beings attain full maturity, this reality becomes clear. The objects of sensual desire (kama)—wine, women, and song—still exist in the Muslim Heaven, but they are no longer seen as distractions. Instead, they are recognised as Divine Disclosures (tajalliyat), transforming enjoyment itself into an act of worship. This aligns with Tantric schools of Hinduism and Buddhism, which regard sensuality not as a hindrance to spirituality but a means of Awakening when perceived properly. In the state of Moksha, the realisation of Brahman, individual desire (kama) dissolves, not through suppression, but because they no longer perceive anything as separate from the Self, and the Self (Atman) is not distinct from Brahman.
In ordinary experience, desire arises because we see ourselves as separate from the things we seek. However, in the state of Divine Oneness (moksha), this illusion of seperation disappears. The multiplicity of celestial delights are no longer considered a desire for something external, but an expression of the Self seeking to connect with itself. Multiplicity no longer divides Unity but reveals its boundless and inexhaustible nature.
2. Desire (kama in Sanskrit) can be overcome in two ways: through denial or by experiencing the objects of desire more completely. More completely means experiencing their divine essence which is only possible when we have discovered that same essence within ourself first and this involves detachment. Having found it within, we can return to experience everything not just as sensual gratification, but as openings to the supra-sensory. This prevents attachment since we no longer see the objects as the endpoint but as windows to the Infinite. The sage is one who perceives the Infinite within the finite, the Everlasting within the ephemeral. One of the meanings of idolatry is idolising the window rather than looking beyond it. It is this type of limited and materialistic desire (kama) that is transcended after spiritual enlightenment.
All heavenly delights are far more sublime than anything in this world yet they are still considered indirect reflections of the Divine. The supreme bliss, according to the Abrahamic religions, is the Visio Beatifica—the direct vision of God. In the Indic traditions, the highest bliss is the complete union of the soul with the Source (Moksha or Nirvana), where all separation and distinctions dissolve as the drop merges with the Ocean. Both traditions essentially teach that the direct experience of the Divine is the supreme bliss in the afterlife, which takes place in a non-physical, non-spatial realm.
3. The temporary heavens in Hinduism and Buddhism are based on the laws of karma (actions), where a finite number of good deeds yields a finite stay in Heaven - the natural laws of causality. In the Abrahamic faiths, however, Paradise is earned through Divine Mercy and Grace not personal merit. If it were based on our actions alone (karma), then it too would be finite . The concept of salvation through grace is not entirely absent from Indic traditions. Mahayana Buddhism, for instance, teaches that entry into the Pure Land relies on Other-Power (tariki) rather than self-effort (jiriki). Similarly, the Bhakti movements of Hinduism emphasise surrender to God’s grace over individual merit. Such teachings ensure that salvation is rooted in humility rather than personal achievement.
The laws of karma (cause and effect) are sometimes interpreted so rigidly that they overlook the possibility of repentance or Divine Forgiveness as a means of redressing past mistakes. This one-sided understanding of karma—focusing solely on causality while ignoring the Divine side of the spiritual equation—leads to the inevitable belief in a temporary Paradise within the Indic traditions.
4. A provocative notion in some Sufi literature suggests that the inhabitants of Heaven are in divine forgetfulness, absorbed in pleasure, while those in Hell, through their suffering, call upon God more frequently and thus receive His favour. This interpretation, however, is based on a misunderstanding of Paradise and its inhabitants. As Schuon eloquently states:
“Paradise is a reflection of God, not a veil concealing Him.”
5. The following notes were adapted from Hamza Yusuf's article: Death, Dying and the Afterlife:
Some classical Muslim scholars, including Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn Qayyim, and many Sufis, have argued that Hell may not be eternal (just as Paradise may not be temporary in Hinduism and Buddhism, as we mentioned earlier). They quote several sources to suggest that Hell may serve as a temporary place of purification rather than eternal damnation.
Imam al-Ghazali appears to hold a similar position when he suggests that the overwhelming majority of Hell's denizens are ultimately released (see faysal al-tafriqa). We also have authentic Hadith in Sahih al-Bukhari which says that even people who did not do any good are released from the fire.
Ibn Abbas رضي الله عنه records the Prophet ﷺ as saying, "Surely a day will come over Hell when it will be like a field of corn that has dried up after flourishing for a while". Similarly Ibn Mas‘ud رضي الله عنه says, "Surely a time will come over Hell when its gates shall be blown by wind, there shall be none in it, and this shall be after they have remained there for ages." ‘Umar رضي الله عنه, the second Caliph, is recorded as follows: "Even if the dwellers in Hell may be countless like the sands of the desert, a day will come when they will be taken out of it".
We should reiterate that Hell being a temporary state is a minority opinion and we only highlight it for those who think that eternal punishment for temporal sins contradicts the Divine nature.
No comments:
Post a Comment