Advaita and Neoplatonism

A Critical Study in Comparative Philosophy

[p. 161]

Part III
A Comparison between Advaita and Neoplatonism

Introduction

In the previous part a sketch of the principal doctrines of Advaita was given. In this part a comparison of these ideas with the Neoplatonic doctrines as expressed in the Enneads of Plotinus will be made. Occasional reference is made to some of the other Neoplatonists (e.g. Proclus and Damascius). It is not feasible to put forward a description and discussion of the metaphysics of Neoplatonism in the same way as for Advaita. Many topics which could not play any part in the comparison intended would have to be included. Therefore the following method will be adopted: every topic of Advaita as discussed in the second part will be discussed in connection with Neoplatonism in this part: The order of topics will be principally the same, so that sections of the third part correspond (not numerically as their length is often different) with those of the second part. But a different system of thought does not always allow such a transposition. Therefore the parallelism has been abandoned where it became artificial. The reader will do well to refer occasionally to the sections of the second part.

This method would seem to constitute a comparison between two entities placed on an unequal footing and to do a phenomenological injustice to Plotinus' philosophy. But some knowledge of the general tenets of Neoplatonism is assumed. Moreover¹ the principal aim of this work is to study Advaita. This cannot be satisfactory and critical, as pointed out in the first part, if it is not comparative; and for reasons also stated there the Neoplatonic doctrines provide the best basis of comparison for a Western approach to Advaita. As a consequence of those preliminaries the ‘tertium comparationis’ cannot be left out of consideration. Hence in this part more than in the last, contemporary and, in general, later philosophical ways of thought will occur. In this respect the

1 See above I, 1.

[p. 162]

present study could have been called ‘A critical and comparative study of Advaita - with special reference to Neoplatonism’ - were it not that the Enneads play an important part in the whole work.

A student of Advaita must know what constitutes its background and has therefore to turn especially to the Brāhmaṇas, the Upaniṣads and Pūrva Mīmāṁsā. A student of Neoplatonism must first turn to Platonism; but then also to Parmenides² and Aristotle,³ both forerunners of Neoplatonism. This background will not be systematically studied here, but will frequently be referred to.

2 See J.F. Staal, Parmenides and Indian Thought, Philosophical Quarterly 28 (1955), 81-106.

3 Cf. below III, 1, etc., P. Merlan has proved the existence of an ‘Aristoteles Neoplatonicus’ (P. Merlan, From Platonism to Neoplatonism, The Hague 1953, Chapt. VII and conclusion); see below, Appendix 249.