Gummuluru Murthy gmurthy at MORGAN.UCS.MUN.CA
Wed Feb 18 13:36:58 CST 1998

On Wed, 18 Feb 1998, Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:

> On Thu, 5 Feb 1998, Charles Wikner wrote:
> > In his commentary on Brahma Suutra 1.1.1, "Sankara says:
> >
> >       ... Brahman does exist as a well-known entity -- eternal, pure,
> >       intelligent, free by nature, and all-knowing and all-powerful.
> >       For from the very derivation of the word Brahman, the ideas of
> >       eternality, purity, etc. become obvious, this being in accord
> >       with the root
> >
> This is very important.  Sometimes people on this list placing undue
> emphasis on texts such as "neti neti" seem to suggest that Brahman is
> something that is unknowable and indescribable.  Certainly Vedanta
> says Brahman is difficult to know but it is hardly a "void" as this
> passage shows.
> --
> Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at>

Namaste. The comment is well taken. Is Brahman describable ? If so, how,
except in neti, neti form ? I agree with the latter part of the comment
that Brahman is certainly not a void. I would also seek clarification
on what Charles wrote, quoting Shri Shankara that Brahman is a well-known
entity. I see it at the other extreme - very hard to comprehend -
guhAdguhyam - most secretive.

Gummuluru Murthy
Yadaa sarve pramucyante kaamaa ye'sya hr^di shritaah
atha martyo'mr^to bhavatyatra brahma samashnute   Katha Upanishhad II.3.14

When all the desires that dwell in the heart fall away, then the mortal
becomes immortal, and attains Brahman even here.

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list