What is the exact meaning/significance of this?

[kalyan chakravarthy]

Namaskaaram,

Just a thought. Asat could be the non-causal state(?) of brahman. Sat could
the causal state(?). Logically it is OK to say that the non-causal state
comes before the causal state. If the nAsadIya of RV is added further, then
we conclude that nirguNa brahman which is neither the causal nor the
non-causal state(?) was "there" before asat and sat.

But that lands us into a problem. If asat is the non-causal state, how did
it cause sat? To avoid this we can say that asat is the non-causal state as
far as creation is concerned while sat is the cause of creation. We are
looking at things from the point of view of creation.

This need not be the correct interpretation.

Best Regards
Kalyan






>From: Aniruddhan <ani at EE.WASHINGTON.EDU>
>Reply-To: List for advaita vedanta as taught by Shri Shankara
><ADVAITA-L at LISTS.ADVAITA-VEDANTA.ORG>
>To: ADVAITA-L at LISTS.ADVAITA-VEDANTA.ORG
>Subject: Re: What is the exact meaning/significance of this?
>Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 00:19:29 -0400
>
>namaste,
>
> >Creation should have actually proceeded from the being(or atleast I think
> >so.) This is because of the Chandogya Upanishad statement which says that
> >Sat or existence was there in the beginning.(and this later gave rise to
> >everything.)
>
>The Taittiriya Upanishad says "asadvA idam agra AsIt. tato vai sadajAyata.
>tadAtmAnaggus-svayamakuruta (or tadAtmAnam svayamakuruta)". In other words,
>in the beginning only asat (non-being) was there. From there, sat (being)
>was born. It (sat) created itself by itself...
>
>How do we interpret this with respect to the Chandogya Upanishad
>statement "sadeva soumya idam agra AsIt..."?
>
>Aniruddhan
>
>Sruti smRti purANAnAm Alayam karuNAlayam
>namAmi bhagavatpAda Sam.karam lokaSam.karam


_________________________________________________________________
Get cool ringtones. Make a statement. http://www.msn.co.in/Mobile/tunes/ Get
noticed.