Absolute Feeling - Book Summary

Here's a comprehensive summary of the provided Jain text, "Absolute Feeling" by Georg Burch:

The text explores the philosophical concept of the "absolute," traditionally understood as a singular, ultimate reality. Historically, philosophers have attempted to define it through negative, figurative, or analogical means, with some believing in a single path to the absolute and others in multiple valid paths.

Professor K.C. Bhattacharya's Theory of Alternative Absolutes: The central thesis of the text is based on the work of Professor K.C. Bhattacharya, who introduced the notion of alternative absolutes. This theory posits that not only are there different philosophical paths to the absolute, but also that the philosophical goal itself can be understood in several equally valid, yet mutually exclusive, ways. These are not different descriptions of one absolute, nor separate absolutes to be attained sequentially, but distinct, exclusionary conceptions of the absolute.

Bhattacharya identifies four "grades of theoretic consciousness" and links them to potential absolutes:

Empirical thought: Perception of physical fact.
Pure objective thought: Contemplation of self-subsistent essence.
Spiritual thought: Enjoyment of subjective reality.
Transcendental thought: Belief in absolute truth.

He further proposes that consciousness of absolute truth, absolute freedom, and absolute value constitute a triple absolute, mirroring the three subjective functions: knowing, willing, and feeling. These are not unified but are alternative apprehensions of the absolute. Historically, he associates:

Absolute truth with the Brahman of Advaita Vedanta.
Absolute freedom with the nirvana of nihilistic Buddhism.
Absolute value with Hegelianism.

Critique of Bhattacharya's Historical Identifications: The author, Georg Burch, while acknowledging the profundity of Bhattacharya's thought, critiques the identification of "absolute value" (the absolute of feeling) with Hegel's absolute idea. Burch argues that Hegel's absolute is primarily intellectual, not rooted in feeling or value, and importantly, it's an abstract idea divorced from actual experience, unlike the Vedantic Brahman or Buddhist nirvana. This point is supported by a quote from G.R. Malkani.

Professor T.R.V. Murti's Elaboration and Further Critique: The text then discusses Professor T.R.V. Murti, who elaborated on Bhattacharya's ideas. Murti establishes the distinction between knowing, willing, and feeling a priori:

Knowing: Determination of consciousness by content (leading to absolute truth/objectivity).
Willing: Determination of content by consciousness (leading to absolute freedom/subjectivity).
Feeling: Mutual determination of consciousness and content (leading to absolute bliss/unity).

These are presented as alternative and incommensurable apprehensions of the one absolute. Murti historically associates:

Absolute knowing with Vedanta.
Absolute willing with Mādhyamika Buddhism.
Absolute feeling with Vijñānavāda Buddhism.

Burch reiterates his critique, arguing that while Bhattacharya and Murti's system is elegant, their historical identifications are flawed. He contends that while Vedantic Brahman can represent absolute truth and Mādhyamika (or Vijñānavāda) nirvana can represent absolute freedom, no form of Buddhist absolute, with its subjective and negative emphasis, can adequately represent the positive absolute of feeling as defined by the union of consciousness and content.

The Nature of Absolute Feeling and its Historical Manifestation: Burch clarifies that the concept of ānanda (bliss) in Satchitānanda is not a separate absolute but an analysis of Brahman (absolute truth). He then defines absolute feeling as absolute love, characterized by the paradoxical union and merging of the self with the other (subject and object), a state free from confusion with mere knowing or willing. This definition aligns with the conscious function of feeling as mutual determination.

The author proposes Christianity as the historical manifestation of the philosophy of absolute love. God, in Christianity, is identified as love (agape), distinct from Platonic or Vaishnavite concepts of a personal God as an object of love.

Saint Bernard's Dialectic of Love: The text illustrates this with Saint Bernard's four grades of love, which are presented as analogous, though distinct from, Bhattacharya's grades of consciousness:

Loving oneself for one's own sake: Analogous to empirical knowledge; purely selfish feeling.
Loving God for one's own sake: Loving God for the good He provides; feeling for the supersensuous good as related to the sensuous.
Loving God for God's sake: Loving God for His intrinsic goodness; loving enjoyment of reality as contrasted with appearance.
Loving oneself only for God's sake: Loving all creatures, including oneself, for God's sake; a perfect union and felt identity with God, leading to deification.

This final stage of absolute love in Christianity, achieved through the purification of feeling, is presented as the culmination of Christian spiritual practice.

Conclusion: The text concludes by stating that Vedanta, Buddhism, and Christianity represent the historical manifestations of absolute knowing, absolute willing, and absolute feeling, respectively. Their paths (knowing, willing, feeling) and ultimate experiences (Moksha, Nirvana, Beatitude) are fundamentally distinct.