Brahman, Paramatma, and Bhagavan are well known Vedantic terms referring to the Absolute—terms that are often considered synonymous. However, while Gaudiya Vaishnavas agree that Brahman, Paramatma, and Bhagavan are different names for the Absolute, they emphasize that the three are, at the same time, not synonymous. They are God’s effulgence, his manifestation as the oversoul of the world, and his form for lila in the world beyond, respectively. The Gaudiyas further contend that the former two manifestations arise from the latter.

In his acceptance address for the Nobel prize in literature, Alexander Solzhenitsyn cited a Russian proverb: “One word of truth outweighs the whole world.” He also quoted Dostoyevsky: “Beauty will save the world.” If one word of truth outweighs the whole world, the world must be very false. But this truth is unpalatable, given the extent of beauty in this world. So much is this so that we cling to the beauty of the world, even when we are told the simple yet profound truth that it will not endure. How then will beauty save us, when attachment to it seems to be the cause of samsara, suffering in rounds of repeated birth and death?

Setting sacred literature and the logic for adherence to its conclusions aside, is there any other logic that supports the notion of a concrete Absolute of unlimited form? While the highest form of divine revelation must be free from sectarianism and thus represent the greatest generality, it must also possess the greatest wealth of positive content.

Perennialism is a term that lends itself to various interpretations. Here I am speaking about it as a philosophy. Its loudest proponents today consider the term “sanatana dharma” to be synonymous with perennialism.

The term “sanatana” (eternal) “dharma” (nature) is one that transcends any particular religion and speaks instead about the eternal nature of being. Since all of the great wisdom traditions essentially acknowledge that “being” in some form or another is ultimately eternal, they are all included within perennialism. That being is eternal is of course not all that there is to say about its nature. Many contemporary perennialists are nonetheless content to stop there.

At first sight, dualism appears palpable in the world of Mahavisnu. There is consciousness and there is matter, two different substances very much unlike one another. Consciousness is the mover, while matter is moved. In today’s world some would be quick to ask that if consciousness moves matter, why can’t we observe the interaction between the two?