[Advaita-l] Does Brahman Know?
vmurthy36 at gmail.com
Sun Nov 28 23:00:54 CST 2010
Jeeva and Ishwara are babies of same mother Maya. If Maya is not there
they cannot be there also. In Turiya Avastha only Nirguna Brahman is
without Maya and without Jagat because Maya is cause of Jagat. If
cause is not there effect is not there. Ishwara and Jeeva have
meaning if Jagat is there. But there is no Jagat. There is no Ishwara
no Jeeva. You can say also they are both Brahman. Brahman is Ishwara
is Jeeva. This is in Turiya.
That is why Brahma Satyam Jagan Mithya Jeevo Brahmaiva Naparaha.
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 4:25 AM, Rajaram Venkataramani
<rajaramvenk at gmail.com> wrote:
> *Sri Subrahmanian, you said that all the attributes of Ishwara are possible
> in relation to this world only. Even when nothing exists (not even time),
> Ishwara exists. Therefore, trans-temporal existence (pure existence) is an
> essential attribute of Ishwara and trans-relational because there is nothing
> else to relate to. *
> The Uddhavagita provides the basis for the Advaitic declaration: Brahma
> satyam jagat mithyA, jIvo brahmaiva na paraH.
> * Why is jagat not Brahman? The difference between Ishwara, Jiva and Brahman
> is only the nature of Upadhi. On removal of upadhi, all this is Brahman
> only. From an ultimate point of you, you said that jagat is unreal (asatya)
> but then why say jagat is mithya (sad asad lakshana) in a statement that
> says the ultimate reality of jIva?*
> *You concluded that jIva is untimately witness. For a kshetrajna to exist,
> there has to be a kshetra. As kshetra does not exist, there can be no
> kshetrajna also. Is it not like saying son of a barren woman? *
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list