Transcending Dichotomies
Ramana Maharshi's enigmatic statement,
"Brahman is real,
The world is illusion,
Brahman is the world."
Commentary: 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.
Some Sufis warn against pursuing the spiritual path merely for heavenly rewards. Such a pursuit is akin to a prince, exiled from his homeland, longing to return—not out of love for his father, the King, but for the treasures of the kingdom.
The Quran promises two Paradises for each blessed soul in the afterlife:
“For he who fears the meeting with his Lord, there will be two Paradises” (55:46).
The scholar Ibn Ajibah says that one Paradise is a reward for actions and the other is a reward for faith. In other words, one is a reward for the body and the other is a reward for the soul. Sahl at-Tustari says that our actions determine our share in the Garden, while faith determines our proximity to God. Some of the scholars say that one Paradise is a physical Garden and the other is a non physical Garden of Divine Proximity and Intimacy.
Interestingly, 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 (the drop merging with the Ocean) does not mean the dissolution of our own seperate identity. A concrete example from this world is that of a mystic who experiences ecstatic union with God inwardly while outwardly retaining their individuality. Ultimate states can encompass both without contradiction.
The Ridwan of Allah
Commentary: At first glance, the verse seems to imply a potential end to Paradise. But it immediately reassures us when it says Paradise is “a gift uninterrupted”—suggesting that this exception does not mean an end to Paradise, but rather alludes to something beyond it. Another verse says,
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 sacred 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—in the spiritual realm of Heaven. This reveals a deeper truth about the complex relationship between spirituality and sensuality.
The sacred texts of Muslims, Hindus and Buddhists speak of the sensual delights in Heaven, affirming that sensuality is not inherently profane but possesses a sacred dimension. This is something which the Tantric traditions have understood for centuries.
Such a perspective challenges the rigid dualism between spirit and matter that has shaped Western educated minds since Descartes (d. 1650). Europeans 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."
Semitic traditions = Judaism, Christianity & Islam
Indic traditions = Hinduism, Buddhism & Sikhism
Semitic view: Heaven and Hell are eternal.
Indic view: Heaven and Hell are temporary.
Common ground: Heaven is eternal, Hell is temporary.
The Indic traditions claim that both Heaven and Hell are temporary yet they accept that not all the Heavens are temporary but the higher ones are eternal. Conversely, the Semitic traditions claim both Heaven and Hell are eternal yet some scholars accept the possibility that Hell may be temporary. This is the basis upon which we establish the common ground between the two traditions.
Where do the Semitic faiths agree with Indic beliefs that Hell is temporary?
Most Jewish rabbis regard Hell as a temporary state of purification, not eternal damnation, since the Old Testament itself contains no concept of everlasting punishment. Eternal damnation first appears in the Semitic faiths through the New Testament. However, influential Church Fathers such as Origen of Alexandria and Gregory of Nyssa taught apokatastasis — the eventual restoration of all souls to God — rejecting the idea of endless torment. A minority view within Islam held by eminent scholars such as Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn al-Qayyim, and Sufi masters like Ibn ʿArabī also allow for Hell’s eventual cessation through Divine Mercy, based on Qurʾānic verses and Prophetic reports.
Where do the Indic traditions agree with the Semitic view that Heaven is eternal?
While the lower heavens are temporary within Hinduism and Buddhism, the higher heavens are actually eternal—beyond decay and return. Moreover, key doctrines such as Krama Mukti (gradual liberation) in Hinduism and the Pure Land (Sukhāvatī) in Mahāyāna Buddhism further portray paradise as a realm of ascent and progression, rather than a place of descent, fall, and rebirth into a mortal world. All of this provides genuine convergence with the Semitic notion of an eternal Paradise
Notes
1. Heaven is “temporary” only in the sense that it is a stepping stone toward the supreme Reality of moksha or nirvana—the drop merging with the Ocean. In Hindu Vedanta, this is known as the indirect path (Krama Mukti) towards Liberation.
In Mahayana Buddhism, the Pure Land is considered a place that is conducive to spiritual education and further progression whereby souls continue to mature and progress even after departing from this world. Such a soul in Heaven is not idly “passing time” in sublime pleasures. Rather, spiritual education continues there in ways beyond our comprehension. What appears as play or delight is, in truth, the very process of refinement and preparation for ultimate union. Just as a child’s early games may look trivial yet are essential for physical, mental, and social growth, so too the joys of Heaven may represent the child’s stage of the souls journey in the afterlife before final Liberation.
2. A provocative notion in some Sufi literature suggests that the inhabitants of Heaven have forgotten God because they are absorbed in pleasures, while those in Hell call upon God more frequently, because of their suffering, and thus receive His favour. This interpretation, however, is based on a misunderstanding of Paradise and its inhabitants. As Schuon eloquently states:
In Hinduism and Buddhism, the lower heavens are temporary while the higher ones are eternal. The lower heavens overflow with sensual delights — wine, women, and song. These sensual realms are impermanent, reserved for those who are virtuous yet still bound by desire (kāma), which implies a certain spiritual immaturity. Some assume that these heavens are places of spiritual distraction and therefore undesirable, yet this is mistaken. Perhaps such interpretations serve instead to elevate the seeker’s gaze beyond the personal pleasures of Heaven towards union with the Divine. The higher heavens, by contrast, are described as more spiritual than sensual, more luminous than pleasurable. It is there alone that desire for anything other than the Source — Brahman — has been utterly extinguished, and the soul, now ripened, abides in eternal communion with the Divine.
The Sufis say that all desire is ultimately a desire for God, though most remain unaware. In Paradise, when beings attain greater maturity, this reality becomes clear. The objects of sensual desire—wine, women, and song—still exist in the highest heavens of Islam, but they are no longer seen as multiple distractions from God. Instead, they are recognised as Divine Disclosures (tajalliyāt), transforming enjoyment itself into an act of worship. Tantric schools of Hinduism and Buddhism would agree that sensuality is not a hindrance to spirituality, but a means of Awakening when perceived properly.
In the Muslim Paradise, desire for things other than God dissolves not through suppression, but through illumination—for they no longer perceive anything as separate from God. To use the language of non-duality, they no longer see anything as distinct from the Self, and the Self (Ātman) is not other than Brahman. "All is Brahman" (सर्वं ब्रह्म ). "I am Brahman" (अहं ब्रह्मास्मि।). This is called non-dual realisation. It is what Imam al-Ghazali alluded to when he said the highest understanding of Divine Oneness is the realisation that there is actually nothing in existence but the One, alone and without partner.
Desire arises because we see ourselves as separate from the things we seek. This apparent distinction between subject and object dissolves after spiritual enlightenment. In Paradise, the multiplicity of delights and desirable objects is permitted precisely because it is no longer seen as a desire for something other, but rather the Self loving and communing with itself in infinite expressions. Multiplicity no longer divides Unity—but reveals its boundless and inexhaustible nature.
3. Desire (kāma in Sanskrit) can be transcended in two ways: through detachment or through a deeper experience of the desired object. Deeper experience does not mean indulgence but perceiving the Divine essence within it. This is only possible when we have discovered that same essence within oneself first and this involves detachment. Having found it within, one can return to the world and experience all things not as mere sensual gratification, but as openings to the supra-sensory. This prevents against attachment and sufffering, for the object is no longer seen as the end but as a window to the Beyond. Idolatry is to idolise the window itself rather than to see through it. It is this limited, materialistic form of desire (kāma) that is finally transcended through spiritual illumination.
In the Indic traditions, it is moksha or nirvāṇa — the drop merging with the ocean, the soul dissolving into its Source. In the Abrahamic faiths, it is the visio beatifica — the direct vision of God. To use an erotic analogy often employed by mystics, the visio beatifica is akin to the rapture of beholding the beautiful Beloved after a lifetime of separation, while moksha corresponds to the ecstasy of union, where lover and Beloved are one. Both describe the soul’s supreme joy in contact with the Divine, two modes of the same mystery — the soul’s intimacy with its Source. Muslim scholars tell us that this supreme state takes place in a formless realm, which accords with the Buddhist and Hindu view that the highest states are formless, while the lower heavens abound in form and multiplicity, remaining within the created order of Māyā — relativity — albeit in sublimated divine forms.
The laws of karma (cause and effect) are sometimes interpreted so rigidly that they overlook the possibility of repentance and Divine Forgiveness as a means of redressing past mistakes. It can be argued that 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.
References
2. This point is made in The Essential Writings of Frithjof Schuon, p. 468
No comments:
Post a Comment