Re: aham brahmasmi ....
firstname.lastname@example.org (Vidyasankar Sundaresan) wrote:
I am only addressing the relevant section of the post here -Manish
:let me close by quoting the BrhadAraNyaka upanishad to you. In the last
:portion of the Maitreyi Brahmana, Yajnavalkya says,
:"yatra tu dvaitam iva bhavati, tatra itara itaram jigrati, paSyati,
:sprSati. yatra sarvam AtmA eva abhUt, tatra kena kam paSyet, kena kam
:jigret, kena kam sprSet? .... vijnAtAram are kena vijAnIyat?"
:Note the use of the words iva and eva.
:yatra tu dvaitam iva bhavati - where there *seems* (iva) to be duality,
:tatra itara itaram paSyati,... - there one sees, smells, touches the
:yatra sarvam AtmA eva abhUt - where the Atma *alone* (eva) is
:tatra kena kam paSyet,....... - there how is one to see, smell, or touch
:vijnAtAram are kena vijAnIyat? - How is the Knower to be known?
:Please note the categorical description of all duality as *iva* - a
:seeming thing only. Note the complete absence of duality of all duality in
:the state of moksha - "yatra sarvam AtmA eva abhUt".
We know very well that seeing, smelling, touching, etc. as in this verse
refers to these actions of the body. Since we are spirit souls, obviously,
in the liberated state (of moksha) we will not engage in/experience these
mundane material senses.
The verse "yatra sarvam AtmA eva abhUt" doesn't says ONE bit about the
existence or non-existence of paramatma, cunning advaitans would however
like us to believe that it does.
Meanwhile, here is more from the Upanisads:
(1) Mundaka Upanisad (3.2.9) "paramam brahma veda brahmaiva bhavati"
One who knows the Supreme Brahman attains Brahman (thanks Vijay)
(2) Gopal-tapani Upanisad (1.1)
namo vedanta vedyaya gurave buddhi-saksine
"I offer my respectful obeisances unto Krishna, who has a transcendental
form of eternity, knowledge, and bliss. I offer my respect to Him
because understanding Him means understanding the Vedas and He is
therefore the Supreme spiritual master."
(3) Mundaka Upanisad (3.1.2)/ Svetasvatara Upanisad (4.7)
samane urkse puruso nimagno 'nisaya socati muhyamanah
justam yada pasyaty anyam isam asys mahimanam iti vita-sokah
"Although the two birds are in the same tree (body), the eating bird
(jivatma) is fully engrosed with anxiety and moroseness as the enjoyer
of the fruits of the tree. But if in some way or other he turns his
face to his friend (paramatma) who is the Lord and knows His glories -
at once the suffering bird becomes free from all anxieties."
(4) Gopal-tapani Upanisad (1.24)
yo brahmanam vidadhati purvam ya vai vedams ca gapayati sma krshnah
"It was Krishna who in the beginning instructed Brahma in Vedic
knowledge and who disseminated Vedic knowledge in the past."
(5) Narayana Upanisad (1)
atha puruso ha vai narayano 'kamayata prajah srjeyeti
"Then the Supreme Personality Narayana desired to create living entities."
(6) Svetasvatara Upanisad (6.7-8)
tam isvaranam paramam mahesvaram tam devatanam paramam ca daivatam
patim patinam paramam parastad vidama devam bhuvanesesam idyam
na tasya karyam karanam ca vidyate
na tad-samas cabhyadhikas ca drsyate
parasya saktir vividhaiva sruyate
svabhaviki jnana-bala-kriya ca
"The Supreme Lord is the controller of all other controllers, and He is
the greatest of all diverse planetary leaders. Everyone is under His
control. All entities are delegated with particular power only by the
Supreme Lord; they are not supreme themselves. He is also worshipable
by all demigods and is the supreme director of all demigods. Therefore,
He is transcendental to all kinds of material leaders and controllers
and is worshipable by all. There is no one greater than Him, and He is
the supreme cause of all causes."
"He does not posses bodily form like that of an ordinary living entity.
There is no difference between His body and His soul. He is absolute.
All His senses are transcendental. Any one of His senses can perform
the action of any other senses. Therefore no one is greater than Him
or equal to Him. His potencies are multifarious, and thus His deeds
are automatically performed as a natural sequence."
(7) Svetasvatara Upanisad (6.23)
yasya deva para bhaktir yatha deve tatha garau
tasyaite kathita hy arthah prakasante mahatmanah
and last but not least (actually there are many more)
(8) Kalisantarana Upanisad
hare rama hare rama rama rama hare hare
hare krishna hare krishna krishna krishna hare hare
I am sure it will take more than just fudging between logic and some
dogma(s) to explain with the advaita philosophy - how can one attain
liberation (moksha - your favourite word) simply by reciting mere symbols
as you would like to call them.
[Upanisadic quotes 2-7 from Bhagavad Gita As It Is by His Divine Grace
A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada]
yes in the state of moksha, atma alone is for *you*, but
1. what about the Supreme Brahman "paramam brahma" - (1)?
2. what about the two birds - (3)?
3. what about the Supreme Lord "isvaranam paramam" (6)?
4. what about the other jivatams (or atmas/atmans - pick your favourite word)?
please note that Yajnavalkya (in the quote you gave) is talking specifically
to the Maitreyi Brahmana, but the point about "atma alone is" applies to all
Since the nature of atma is brahman (i.e. sat-cit-ananda) how can there be
only one Giant atma and others join in that blob as they liberate and
consequently accuire the nature of sat-cit-ananda?
"sat" means truth and/or eternity. If jivatmas are brahman, they shall
remain to be so, if they are not than they cannot become sat either.
Either something is eternal or it is not. Period.
On the Absolute platform, either something is truth or it is not.
That was the simple point of my post. The quote from Brhadaranyaka upanishad
actually only supports what I had said in my original post.
Care to tell us why you continue to evade that point?
aham brahmasmi (and tat tvam asi) when taken literally implies oneness, but
the same when seen closely also implies duality (aham sat-cit-ananda). My
original post very elaborately described that there certainly is oneness
(qualitatively) and difference, since "aham brahmasmi" is true not for just
one soul but for all, and as they are all eternal, they shall always be.
Obviously S. Vidyasankar missed that.
Tell me how can you explain oneness and difference w/o acintya bheda-abheda
Also, here you proved beyond doubt that you are not capable/interested in
talking logic either.
:Note that this is exactly what the advaita interpretation of the Vedanta
Which is *exactly* what I adressed.
I will be very interested to have an independent person read my article and
decide whether that was the impression of advaita they got from my article
---------------- End Article ----------------------