[Advaita-l] How can one claim to know Brahman?

praveen.r.bhat at exgate.tek.com praveen.r.bhat at exgate.tek.com
Mon Mar 21 00:46:35 CST 2005

Humble praNAm all,

(I read your next posting suggesting that we end this thread, but since I
read this one first, may I safely post the following?) :)

Maheshji wrote:
> All your points are well taken and I would agree to most of them. But
> the purpose of my mail was different. In my opinion, Brahman is not
> knowledge to be acquired (like we would do physics or chemistry) but
> knowledge to be lived.

I can see two points in above:
--You do not believe in following jnAna mArga, which I don't have anything
to say about.
--brahmaN is not knowledge to be acquired. Perhaps, comes from the first
assertion or the first comes from this one. May I say I agree
(hypothetically, for what I want to say next) with the way you worded
"brahmaN is not knowledge to be acquired" and then try to twist the
statement and say "but acquiring knowledge (of brahmaN), one acquires

Maheshji wrote:
> As Jaldhar has oft pointed out that we are all
> Brahman but have forgotten it, I can only say that we can remember
> this original state only when we live like the Master's did 

By renouncing everything? Maybe, maybe not. Some *masters* renounced, some
didn't. Which one are we to follow? By reading/hearing of them or their
works, right? Aren't we all doing the same?

Maheshji wrote:
> and not by
> understanding their subtle theories about why Brahman is Advaitic only
> or Vishistha Advaitic or Dwaitic!
In jnAna mArga, without refuting the *wrong* (unreal, not real) attributes
of brahmaN, one can't know brahmaN (real) or acquire It or be It.

Maheshji wrote:
> That makes you a pundit and not a
> Master!
Neither being a master guarantees moksha nor being a punDita. Who wants to
be either and not brahmaN? :)

jai bajrangabali,

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list