[Advaita-l] Explanation needed regarding the Mahavakya "aham Brahmasmi"
ssriram1992 at icloud.com
Fri Apr 14 18:41:05 EDT 2017
(Dear Shashwata ji - I am cc'ing the group to your reply)
I should humbly refute by saying imposing nouns is NOT the same as imposing
quality. If I say Milk is "Ksheeram", I am imposing the noun "Ksheeram" on
milk, and it implies they are one and the same. Milk doesn't have any
quality that ksheeram doesn't and vice versa.
This is contrast to saying "Milk is white" where milk has other attributes
apart from "whiteness" like being a liquid, tasting sweet, and there are
other objects in the world apart from milk, which are white in colour, like
a cloud. But here white is clearly an adjective because there is no
object/thing known as white. You cannot give me one kg of "white".
Also just because honey and milk, both taste sweet, it would not be
profound to say, "Milk has honey-ness" unless you state clearly, it is the
quality of taste that you are talking about. In case of Aatman and Brahman,
there is no such qualification in any of the Shruti vaakyas, what quality
are they talking about. This happens despite numerous repetitions of
Brahma-aatma ekatva in Shruti phrased in various ways.
And please provide your opinions regarding the word Brahman being
adjective. If not I, other better informed people in the group would be
able to answer you.
Still it does not eradicate the confusion. Since name and quality are both
attributes. Imposing noun or name is as the same as imposing quality. And
also I have some opinions regarding the word "Brahma" being an adjective.
On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 6:27 PM, Shashwata Shastri <
shashwata.unimas at gmail.com> wrote:
> Pranam Sriramji,
> Still it does not eradicate the confusion. Since name and quality are both
> attributes. Imposing noun or name is as the same as imposing quality. And
> also I have some opinions regarding the word "Brahma" being an adjective.
> Best Regards,
> Shashwata Chowdhury
> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 1:07 AM, Sriram Sankaranarayanan <
> ssriram1992 at icloud.com> wrote:
>> With respects to all more knowledgable members of the group, I am
>> inclined to answer it is a noun.
>> By adjective, it looks like we are imposing a quality of "Brahman-ness"
>> in Aatman, while the aatman has non-brahman-ic qualities too. This is not
>> the message implied in this or any of the veda vakyaas.
>> Apart from Aham brahmasmi, other vaakyas including Tattvamasi, Ayam aatma
>> brahma, Om tat sat imply strongly the one-ness of Aatman and brahman,
>> rather than "brahmatvam" being a quality of aatman.
>> A statement like - "aham brahmatvin asmi" is more indicative of aatman
>> possessing the quality of brahman. But "Aham brahmasmi" is unequivocally
>> conveying the Advaita message. "Brahma" is a noun there, and it is NOT
>> implying "aham" possessing the quality of brahmatva, but indicates Aham =
>> Namaskarams to all.
>> Hamsah Soham
>> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 5:28 PM, Shashwata Shastri via Advaita-l <
>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>>> To all the learned members of group-
>>> It has been a long time since I posted a question.
>>> Above mentioned statement reveals the highest truth of Vedas. My question
>>> is- the word "Brahma" which is contained in the sentence, is it a noun or
>>> an adjective?
>>> Best Regards and Pranam,
>>> Shashwata Chowdhury
>>> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>>> To unsubscribe or change your options:
>>> For assistance, contact:
>>> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon> Virus-free.
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list