[Advaita-l] 'aham Brahmasmi' in Bhagavatam
vmurthy36 at gmail.com
Thu Mar 3 20:23:13 CST 2011
On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at braincells.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Feb 2011, Venkatesh Murthy wrote:
>> This is not correct. If you say Nirguna Brahma and Saguna Brahma are
>> one the same I say Nirguna Brahma and a stone are one and same.
> Then you would be right.
>> Nirguna Brahma is there in stone also because the stone is. Adi
>> Sankara never said Saguna Brahma with his divine qualities is true but
>> the Universe is a illusion.
> More misunderstanding has been caused by calling maya "illusion" than any
> other mistake in the annals of translation. It would be more accurate to
> say it is "delusion." In other words the problem is not one of existence
> but truth.
>> The qualities of Saguna Brahma also are false like the qualities of
>> men. It is a dream with Saguna Brahma as King and Jeevas as
>> subjects. In the dream King can command subjects but after the dream
>> ends where is the King?
> And where in the world of dream is the dreamer who could ask where is the
>> After Moksha Jeeva is not there. Saguna Brahma
>> is not there also. We can say also both Jeeva and King have become
>> Nirguna Brahma. From Paramartha Nirguna Brahma only exists. He is
>> higher than Saguna Brahma.
> From the paramarthic standpoint only Brahman exists. The qualification
> nirguna or saguna only make sense from a vyavaharic standpoint.
The question asked will Saguna Brahma continue his Leela activities
after Moksha. The answer is no.
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list