[Advaita-l] Re: brahman and koshas

drganesh at vsnl.com drganesh at vsnl.com
Thu May 27 17:44:07 CDT 2004


Anandavalli of Taitriya starts with brahmavid aapnothi param,it then gives a definition 'lakshyartha' for brahman- which sankara has elaborately and beautifully commented upon.The upanisad then goes into elaboration of creation and the koshas ONLY to show that all these anatmas are different from atma and later the same upanisad says that all the anatmas get resolved in atma alone and that they dont have an independent existance.Hence, the purpose of differentiation is only to point towards the 'sat vasthu' and having done that dismisses all the kosas and creation.All the differences are from 'Avidya' standpoint and once the 'tatparyam of the sruthi' is arrived at,then there is only one advithiyam brahman,A=B but B is not A, being a product of maya.
Dr s.ganesh     
 Original Message -----
From: advaita-l-request at lists.advaita-vedanta.org
Date: Thursday, May 27, 2004 9:00 am
Subject: Advaita-l Digest, Vol 13, Issue 19

> Send Advaita-l mailing list submissions to
> 	advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	advaita-l-request at lists.advaita-vedanta.org
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	advaita-l-owner at lists.advaita-vedanta.org
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Advaita-l digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>   1. Re: Anandamaya and brahman (drganesh at vsnl.com)
>   2. Re: Re: Anandamaya and brahman (bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com)
>   3. Re: RE: brahman and Anandamaya-Atman (bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com)
>   4. Anandamaya  (latha vidya)
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> ---
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 26 May 2004 10:18:49 -0700
> From: drganesh at vsnl.com
> Subject: [Advaita-l] Re: Anandamaya and brahman
> To: advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org
> Message-ID: <37ad7d237a9e77.37a9e7737ad7d2 at vsnl.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> 
> The two descriptions commonly used for brahman are -'satyam gnanam 
> anantham' and  'sat chit ananda'. Anandamaya is also brahman 
> because everything that is here is nothing but brahman , the 
> 'mayat' suffix indicates gradation or vikara hence can be taken as 
> an experiential ananda.
> The common trap that many people fall is when we transalate ananda 
> as 'bliss' because everyone will then want to experience that 
> ultimate bliss.This brings some kind of mystisism to brahman which 
> is misleading. The word 'anantha' is purposefully replaced by 
> 'ananda' in the scriptures because it is difficult to 
> conceptualise limitless or anantha in a student's mind.It is 
> limitlessness when expressed in our minds is termed 'ananda'.Hence 
> when we say brahman is ananda-it is really anantha.This ananda is 
> nonexperiential and is the substratum of all the grades of 
> experiential ananda possible in lokas.Hence one should never look 
> out for ananda as a brahman experience.Any experience happens in 
> time,hence false.
> Dr s. ganesh   
> 
> Original Message -----
> From: advaita-l-request at lists.advaita-vedanta.org
> Date: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 9:00 am
> Subject: Advaita-l Digest, Vol 13, Issue 18
> 
> > Send Advaita-l mailing list submissions to
> > 	advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org
> > 
> > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> > 	http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
> > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> > 	advaita-l-request at lists.advaita-vedanta.org
> > 
> > You can reach the person managing the list at
> > 	advaita-l-owner at lists.advaita-vedanta.org
> > 
> > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> > than "Re: Contents of Advaita-l digest..."
> > 
> > 
> > Today's Topics:
> > 
> >   1. RE: brahman and Anandamaya-Atman (Vidyasankar Sundaresan)
> > 
> > 
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
> --
> > ---
> > 
> > Message: 1
> > Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 20:00:59 -0700
> > From: "Vidyasankar Sundaresan" <svidyasankar at hotmail.com>
> > Subject: [Advaita-l] RE: brahman and Anandamaya-Atman
> > To: advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org
> > Message-ID: <BAY13-F69jgJKVApwOL000263ef at hotmail.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
> > 
> > In the preceding posts, we have seen that
> > 
> > a. the vedAnta-sUtra does not quite deny the meaning of vikAra 
> for 
> > the -maya 
> > suffix, but rejects the idea that this meaning of vikAra negates 
> > Anandamaya 
> > as brahman;
> > 
> > b. it also rejects the idea that Anandamaya may be the 
> > transmigrating jIva;
> > 
> > c. contrary to mistaken interpretations of advaita thought, 
> > SankarAcArya's 
> > sUtra commentary also affirms that Anandamaya is brahman, but 
> > points out 
> > that Anandamaya is saviSesha (saguNa) brahman; and
> > 
> > d. the text of the taittirIya upanishad, AnandavallI, gives rise 
> > to certain 
> > issues that SankarAcArya raises in the form of doubts/questions 
> > and 
> > addresses in his commentary.
> > 
> > In this post, I will briefly go over the commentary on the 
> > Anandamaya 
> > description in the taittirIya upanishat. SankarAcArya points out 
> that,> 
> > i. the -maya suffix continues to bear the meaning of vikAra here 
> > too, as in 
> > the outer four Atman-s/SarIra-s.
> > 
> > ii. the text goes on to say, "etam Anandamayam AtmAnam 
> > upasaMkrAmati". It is 
> > logically impossible for the Anandamaya-Atman to go beyond the 
> > Anandamaya-Atman. Therefore, Sruti does describe a brahman who 
> > goes beyond 
> > the Anandamaya,
> > 
> > iii. the Anandamaya is described in terms of parts, with priya, 
> > moda etc., 
> > which would not hold true of the absolute nirguNa brahman,
> > 
> > iv. the text also says "adRSye 'nAtmye 'nirukte 'nilayane" 
> thereby 
> > showing 
> > the absence of all qualifiers in the highest brahman,
> > 
> > v. after describing the Anandamaya, the text quotes Sloka-s 
> (asann 
> > eva sa 
> > bhavati ...) which imply the possibility of a doubt whether the 
> > highest 
> > brahman exists or not. Such a doubt would be impossible with 
> > respect to the 
> > Anandamaya, which is experienced by everybody, for varying reasons,
> > 
> > Having said all this, what then is this highest brahman? 
> > SankarAcArya points 
> > out that it is not the Anandamaya (the body made of bliss) per 
> se, 
> > but 
> > Ananda itself, the highest bliss, which is indicated as the 
> > highest brahman. 
> > The taittirIya says that Ananda itself is the Atman (self) of 
> the 
> > Anandamaya, and that brahman is the tail (puccha) / basis 
> > (pratishThA). It 
> > is not as if the highest brahman is literally one of the limbs 
> of 
> > the 
> > Anandamaya self. Rather, brahman, which is bliss (Ananda), is 
> the 
> > innermost 
> > Self of being, from the outermost annamaya to the Anandamaya. It 
> > is this 
> > brahman that is further described in terms of the absence of all 
> > attributes 
> > (adRSya, anAtmya, anirukta, anilayana) and it is with respect to 
> > this 
> > brahman that a question may arise as to whether it exists or 
> not. 
> > (Indeed, 
> > there are schools of thought that claim that nirguNa brahman 
> does 
> > not exist 
> > at all.) SankarAcArya here draws our attention to an important 
> > point 
> > regarding how to get rid of the doubt whether nirguNa brahman 
> > exists or not. 
> > The Anandamaya is known through our ordinary experiences of 
> > bliss/happiness. 
> > This may be a result of learning, or performance of actions, or 
> > the mere 
> > sight of a loved child. If we pay internal attention to our 
> > experience of 
> > Anandamaya, it is also known in the sleeping state. However, 
> > because our 
> > ordinary experiences of happiness are directed towards external 
> > objects, 
> > they do not last. When we turn away from external objects and 
> find 
> > the bliss 
> > inherent in our own Self, as our own Self, that is no longer 
> just 
> > a fleeting 
> > experience of happiness. Thus, the Anandamaya self, in its best 
> > experience, 
> > culminates in the highest Ananda. That Ananda is the highest 
> > brahman, and is 
> > described as the foundation of the Anandamaya. Therefore, we can 
> > infer that 
> > the highest brahman is not non-existent and that this brahman is 
> > the end of 
> > all the duality posited by ignorance (Anandamayasya ekatva-
> > avasAnatvAt | 
> > asti tad ekam avidyA-kalpitasya dvaitasya-avasAna-bhUtam-
> advaitaM 
> > brahma 
> > pratishThA puccham).
> > 
> > The upanishat further goes on to say, "asad vA idam agra AsIt 
> tato 
> > vai sad 
> > ajAyata" - here the highest brahman, which is devoid of all 
> > attributes, is 
> > figuratively described as "asat" - non-existence. This does not 
> > mean 
> > absolute non-existence, but indicates that the highest brahman 
> is 
> > beyond all 
> > name and form (nAma-rUpa). This is because the doubt regarding 
> the 
> > possible 
> > non-existence of brahman has already been addressed. From this 
> > brahman 
> > arises all that has name and form and is generally known to be 
> > existent in 
> > the world (tato vai sad ajAyata).
> > 
> > Thus, we can see that SankarAcArya draws a crucial distinction 
> > between 
> > Anandamaya-Atman, the self known through experiences of 
> > happiness/bliss, and 
> > Ananda itself, the brahman which is beyond all sensory 
> experience. 
> > His 
> > explanation is the best possible one of the seemingly 
> > contradictory and 
> > puzzling statements in the taittirIya upanishat. After all, read 
> > by itself, 
> > without the help of the commentary, the upanishat first warns 
> that 
> > one who 
> > knows brahman as "asat" (non-existence) will himself become non-
> > existent and 
> > then goes on to say "asad vA idam agra AsIt tato vai sad 
> ajAyata" 
> > (non-existence alone was, in the beginning, from this, arose 
> > existence). It 
> > is only through SankarAcArya's clear interpretation that we get 
> an 
> > idea of 
> > what these enigmatic statements in the upanishat really mean.
> > 
> > This concludes this short series.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Vidyasankar
> > 
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > MSN Toolbar provides one-click access to Hotmail from any Web 
> page 
> > ? FREE 
> > download! http://toolbar.msn.click-
> > url.com/go/onm00200413ave/direct/01/
> > 
> > 
> > ------------------------------
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Advaita-l mailing list
> > Advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org
> > http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
> > 
> > 
> > End of Advaita-l Digest, Vol 13, Issue 18
> > *****************************************
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 27 May 2004 10:03:19 +0530
> From: bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com
> Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Re: Anandamaya and brahman
> To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta
> 	<advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
> Message-ID: <OF0C9D3BF6.D105B000-ON65256EA1.00145549 at in.abb.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> 
> 
> The two descriptions commonly used for brahman are -'satyam gnanam
> anantham' and  'sat chit ananda'. Anandamaya is also brahman because
> everything that is here is nothing but brahman.
> 
> praNAm Ganesh prabhuji
> Hare Krishna
> 
> prabhuji thanks for your clarification.  I've small doubt here, 
> you are
> saying, Anandamaya, the fifth  kOsha is also brahman( I suppose, 
> you are
> telling this  in the light of sarvaM khalvidaM brahma).  If that 
> is the
> case, dont we have to accept previous four sheaths i.e. annamaya,
> prANamaya, vijnAnamaya  are also brahman(s). If all are brahman, why
> taiterya shruti all the way had to enumerate the  five *selves* 
> which are
> invented by avidyA, beginning with the body, different from this 
> self made
> up of food (annamaya) there is another self the prANamaya & so on 
> & as you
> know,  in each case it enjoins the meditation of the body etc. 
> taken in its
> samaShti.  And more importantly at the end it tells the innermost 
> brahmanitself as the tail of Anandamaya & declares *he who thinks 
> that brahman is
> asat  he himself becomes non existent.  Prabhuji, dont you think 
> by saying
> this shruti passing all the selves superimposed by avidyA & 
> emphasisingbrahman (Ananda) alone as the one subtrate of all maNo 
> kalpita-s??  shruti
> says in that state  all the specific features have vanished altogether
> including avidyA kalpita paNcha kOSa-s as well.
> 
> Further, shankara while commenting on 
> yEtamAnandamayamAtmAnamupasankrAmati,says  saNkramaNa is not 
> attaining nor is it the act of any one of the
> kOsha-s beginning with annamaya Atman.  So, the only alternative 
> left for
> us is to take saNkramaNa as the act of that *which is other than 
> the five
> kOSA-s*  and it is only knowledge that is meant by the term 
> saNkramaNam.
> Shankara here clearly says our true svarUpa is encompasses all 
> five koSA-s
> & it is jnAna svarUpa & Sri vidyA prabhuji said it is Ananda 
> itself not
> Anandamaya.  So, prabhuji kindly clarify,  how can we say 
> Anandamaya is
> also brahman when shankara making clear distinction between five 
> kOSa-s &
> brahma svarUpa ??
> 
> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
> bhaskar
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 27 May 2004 10:55:57 +0530
> From: bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com
> Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] RE: brahman and Anandamaya-Atman
> To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta
> 	<advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
> Message-ID: <OF870995D9.B6BC2182-ON65256EA1.001A9898 at in.abb.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> 
> 
> Thus, we can see that SankarAcArya draws a crucial distinction between
> Anandamaya-Atman, the self known through experiences of 
> happiness/bliss,and
> Ananda itself, the brahman which is beyond all sensory experience. His
> explanation is the best possible one of the seemingly 
> contradictory and
> puzzling statements in the taittirIya upanishat.
> 
> praNAm Sri VidyAshankar prabhuji
> sAshtAnga praNAms
> Hare krishna
> 
> Thanks a lot for your painstaking series on AnandamayamAtma  prabhuji.
> After seeing shankara's clear distinction between AnandamayamAtma 
> & Ananda
> svarUpa of ours, we can say these kOSa-s are in avidyA kShEtra & mere
> superimposition on brahma tattva.  Out of five kOSa-s, three kOSa-s
> (manOmaya, vijnAnamaya & Anandamaya)made up of antahkaraNa & 
> vijnAnamaya &
> Anandamaya Atman-s are nothing but kartrutva & bhOktrutva of ahaM 
> pratyaya& our true svarUpa which is Ananda itself  is sAkshi to 
> even aham pratyaya.
> After all, these are all from adhyArOpita drushti adopted by 
> shruti to
> teach us the ultimate reality.  Sri surEshwara in taitirIya 
> vArtika says
> that apart from brahman there is no separate existence to these 
> five koSa-s
> like serpent does not have individual existence apart from rope ( 
> na hi
> kOshAtmanA satyaM R^tE  brahma samaSnute! kutaH sarpAtmanA satyaM R^tE
> rajjum sadAtmikAM!!  Further he goes on to say that these koSa-s 
> are mere
> avidyA kalpita & we have to get rid of our identification with 
> these kOSA-s
> & tobe established ourselves in anAdi, anata paramArtha tattva ( yasmA
> devamatO hitvA! kOSAn ajnAna kalipitAn nirvikAraM anAdim, anantaM!
> paramAtmAnam ASrayEt!.
> 
> It is once again clear for us  that shankara never ever goes 
> against shruti
> pratipAdya siddhAta & as you said,  it is through Sri shankara
> bhagavadpAda's prasanna, gambhIra commentaries only we would be 
> able to
> know the shruti's imports in its entirety.
> 
> Sri vidyA prabhuji & Sri Jaldhar prabhuji, kindly accept my humble
> prostrations for clearing Swamy Krishnananda's objections on 
> bhagavadpAdA'scommentary.
> 
> Your humble servant
> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
> bhaskar
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 4
> Date: Thu, 27 May 2004 16:36:09 +0100 (BST)
> From: latha vidya <lathavidya at yahoo.co.in>
> Subject: [Advaita-l] Anandamaya 
> To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta
> 	<advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
> Message-ID: <20040527153609.80423.qmail at web8001.mail.in.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
> 
> Hari Om,
> Namaste.
> 
> The confusion here arises because Brahman is also called the pure 
> Ananda and the innermost of the koshas is also called the 
> Anandamaya kosha.
> 
> Anandamaya kosha, the fifth kosha, is the ananda that we derive 
> through our senses which is not an independent entity but which 
> depends upon the Chit or our consciousness. I, the body and the 
> mind complex, is conscious of the ananda that i am deriving from 
> the outside world. Since this is a procured ananda it is bound by 
> the Time and the Space and is short lived. Whereas the Sat, Chit 
> Ananda is the Swaroopa or Swabhava of Brahman which is independent 
> of Time and Space and by the presence of which alone we are able 
> to derive the Time and Space bound Ananda.
> 
> When we are able to go beyond the five koshas and get established 
> in the True ananda, the Satchidaananda Swaroopa can be realised.
> 
> Hari om,
> namaste,
> Latha Vidyaranya
> 
> p.s. Sorry, I am not following the thread of this topic. I just 
> happen to read one of the mails and have written this impulsively. 
> Kindly excuse if you feel it as an intrusion.
> 
> Yahoo! India Matrimony: Find your partner online.
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Advaita-l mailing list
> Advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
> 
> 
> End of Advaita-l Digest, Vol 13, Issue 19
> *****************************************
> 




More information about the Advaita-l mailing list