[Advaita-l] Doubt in Isha Upanishad
sridhar.nithin at gmail.com
Fri Feb 14 21:57:21 CST 2014
Okay. So, the website has translated it wrongly? It says grihitva as
Why I have a doubt.
If, Aadaya is taken as removed, then in the sentence, Purnasya Poornam
Aadaya, Poornasya must refer to Nirguna Brahman/Paramartika Dasha i.e.
Having taken out the Jagat from Brahman, Brahman alone remains.
if Aadaya is taken as "realized", then Poornasya must refer to Saguna
Brahman or the Jagat, i.e. Having realized the Completeness of the Jagat,
Completeness alone remains.
Hence, though ultimately we have same meaning that Brahman alone exist, if
we use different meaning for aadaya, we must understand the term poornasya
Or am I getting something wrong here?
On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 9:12 AM, Venkata sriram P
<venkatasriramp at yahoo.in>wrote:
> Namaste Nitin Ji,
> The meaning "gruheetvA" is correct. The Apte gives the meanings
> as to receive, having taken.
> Popular example is "jalam Adaaya" ;
> There is a popular sloka for Hanuman Ji which starts with
> "ullanghya sindhOh salilam saleelam....
> .....Adaaya tEnEva dadaaha lankaam
> namaami praanjalim AnjanEyam"
> Here, the sloka says that Sri.Hanuman Ji, "having accepted,
> received, taken" the shOka-agni of Mother Sita, burnt the Lanka
> with the same fire.
> So, "gruheetvA" is correct.
> 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