IS BRAHMAN JUST A CONCEPT

[Guest guest]

**********************************************************************

*

shankar. p. at chennai

 

IS BRAHMAN JUST A CONCEPT

-------------------------

>From words to more words, on to Brahman and then on to silence.

Namaste to all the members. As I was going through the previous

postings (I am a new member and I did study some 10,000 postings

before taking up the courage to join the sat sang.) it was possible

for me to see some general trends. One of the trends was or even now

is to send a posting reading somewhat on the following lines: Words!

Words!! Words!!! These are all empty words, just words…. But what is

convieniently forgotten is that even to convey this they are using

the very same 'words'. And the Vedas, smrutis, Upanishads and so on

are all built on words only. I was amused. And I did ponder over

the acceptability or even dependability of words. And the word is

that "in the beginning was the Word."

But the moment such a posting appears, the learned members who are in

a position to throw light on some of the most difficult and

imponderable finer points of Vedanta go into a shell and take to

silence. Fortunately this does not last for a long duration - when

some other point of interest comes up for discussion they actively

participate and contribute their knowledge and wisdom - well, until

such a posting resurfaces once again.

The problem is very simple to define. And the root cause of the

problem is also very simple if one really bothers to look into this.

You see, most of us are not spontaneous advaitins! With apologies to

Shakespeare I would say:

Some are born advaitins

Some are made advaitins

And

Some achieve advaitinhood.

Sorry, I am not getting the rhyme right. Someone else can repair

that, I suppose.

Take Shankara for example, who guided him to the principles of

Advaitic philosophy? Who encouraged him to undertake his quest to

realise Brahma? He was a natural and spontaneous advaitin and was

even able to influence the whole of the future generations.

And then there are those who are made into advaitins by right gurus

like Chinmaya, Swamini Sarada Priyanandaji etc.,

The rest of us would have to struggle. If guidance is not coming to

us we will have to go towards it and take it on our own. For this to

happen knowledge is a required priority. And knowledge only can take

us to wisdom and then on to realisation. Of course once realisation

is achieved words become really unnecessary and the sadhaka merges

into silence. To acquire knowledge we have to rely on words - words

are expressions of thoughts - so instead of seeing them as alphabets

in the form of sound or print, we must see them as pure thoughts.

Even for attaining the experience of 'experiencing' words are

necessary. To get into the right sort of experience we have to think

in terms of words only. Otherwise the wrong experience would be

misunderstood as realisation. One could go into a trance or samadhi

state while meditating- a similar experience could be arrived at by

consuming drugs like lsd too. If we have the wish to know, we have

to rely on words, at least in the initial stages. It is 'asatho ma

sadgamaya' - lead me from untruth to truth - essentially we agree

that we are living in untruth. But the very wish to know the truth

itself implies that we know something of the truth - at least to the

extent that truth exists. How can you think about something about

which you don't anything at all?

Dr. Radhakrishnan says, " If we know the Real it is because the Real

knows itself in us. The desire for God, the feeling that we are in a

state of exile implies the reality of god in us." We do not say - we

are in utter darkness. There is a diffuse light. When those who are

in the know things enlighten us, combined with our meditations and

introspections, the light becomes stronger, and thus leads us into

the truth - tamaso ma jyothirgamaya - it is thus attained.

Dr. Radhakrishnan further says, ' all spiritual progress is the

growth of half-knowledge into a clear illumination."

Sadanandaji did put this thought more explicitly and forcefully. To

quote sadanandaji "1562 (Kuntimaddi Sadananda

<k_sadananda (AT) xxxxxxx (DOT) xxxx>

Mon Jun 14, 1999 8:53am

 

Yes I agree with Swami Atmanandaji. This vichaara is an inquiry,

meditation

involves conviction that truth is advaita.

 

Then only the neti neti - I am not this not this works.

 

Bhagawaan Ramana puts this clearly in his Upadesha saara

Bhedha bhaavana soham mityasou

bhaavanaabhidaa paavanii mata||

 

Meditation involving " I am differnt and He is different - involving

Bhakta

and the Lord" and that involved " soham" I am He - adviatic bhaavana -

the

second is supreme and more secred he says it is mata - mata means

openion -

it is sarva sammata or shaastra sammata - or his own openion.

 

I cannot meditate on oneness unless I am throughly convinced of that.

Hence all theses discussions and the need for discussion.

shravaNa, manana and nidhidhyaasana or the three steps involved -

first

listening, then reflecting and finally contemplation on the truth

expounded

are the three steps.

Hari Om!

Sadananda)

(Ref: posting by Sadanandaji - no. 1562 dated Jun 14, 1999)

And for those who are more interested in the nature of "experience"

Dr.Radhakrishnan has this to say: Religious experience is the

evidence of the divine. In our inspired moments we have the feeling

that there is a greater reality within us, though we cannot tell what

it is. From the movements that stir in us and the utterances that

issue from us, we perceive the power not ourselves, that moves on.

Religious experience is by no means subjective. God cannot be known

or experienced except through His own. If we have a knowledge of

Brahman, it is due to the working of Brahman in us. Prayer is the

witness to the spirit of the transcendent divine immanent in the

spirit of man. The thinkers of the Upanishads based the reality of

Brahman on the fact of spiritual experience ranging from simple

prayer to illuminated experience."

There is a misunderstanding that Brahman is only a concept and not an

experienced one or a proven one. But it is clear that "Brahman" is

just not a theory. But then Dr.Radhakrishnan has something more to

say on this.

"The distinctions which they (Upanishads) make in the nature of the

Supreme Reality are not merely logical. They are facts of spiritual

experiences."

People become speechless at the sight of the

trees, the flowers, the pond....

But, alas, how few are they who seek the owner

of all these?

 

- Ramakrishna Paramahamsa

In my next posting let us consider the word "Brahman" itself.

With Regards and pranams to all the advaitins,

Shankar P. (chennai)

Om! Shankaraya namaha

 

**********************************************************************

*

[Guest guest]

advaitin wrote:*

shankar. p. at chennai IS BRAHMAN JUST A CONCEPT

> As I was going through the previous

postings (I am a new member and I did study some 10,000 postings

before taking up the courage to join the sat sang.) it was possible

for me to see some general trends.

 

 

= Hari Om,

 

 

It is indeed creditable that Shri Sankar (Chennai) has gone through the past

postings in some detail.

 

 

As far as I understood, as per Advaitin, Brahman is the only reality and "It is

Man who is just a concept (of Brahman)", infact not only man, but every other

/creature or things we see, feel or think - that seem to exist to our senses.

This includes words, which Mr. Sankar has noticed it to be rather in abundance

amongst us in this list and he himself has used it generously. Incidentally no

one would deny that a blind & dumb person, born or forced into, is not

human, but he/she also has thoughts- they are not dependent on words. Sculpture,

painting and mime and such other forms of expression can also be used instead of

words to generate and convey thoughts. Words are also useless if one does not

understand the language it is spoken in. It can thus be concluded, that Brahman

is beyond words.

 

 

Pranams.

 

 

P.B.V.Rajan

 

 

 

Get Your Private, Free E-mail from Indiatimes at http://email.indiatimes.com

Buy Music, Video, CD-ROM, Audio-Books and Music Accessories from

http://www.planetm.co.in

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Namaste Rajanji

 

Brahman is indeed beyond words. But the very words have to be employed to

communicate the Self knowledge. We don't seem to have another choice in this

matter. Hence, the whole Vedanta tradition is still existing as a teaching

tradition. Although there are limitations in any language medium, a skilful

teacher should overcome this by precisely using the correct words (and

simple words) with the correct method to teach this knowledge.

 

best regards,

K Kathirasan

>

> pbvrajan [sMTP:pbvrajan]

> Tuesday, October 08, 2002 11:56 AM

> advaitin

> Re: IS BRAHMAN JUST A CONCEPT

>

> advaitin wrote:*

> shankar. p. at chennai IS BRAHMAN JUST A CONCEPT

> > As I was going through the previous

> postings (I am a new member and I did study some 10,000 postings

> before taking up the courage to join the sat sang.) it was possible

> for me to see some general trends.

>

>

> = Hari Om,

>

>

> It is indeed creditable that Shri Sankar (Chennai) has gone through the

> past postings in some detail.

>

>

> As far as I understood, as per Advaitin, Brahman is the only reality and

> "It is Man who is just a concept (of Brahman)", infact not only man, but

> every other /creature or things we see, feel or think - that seem to exist

> to our senses. This includes words, which Mr. Sankar has noticed it to be

> rather in abundance amongst us in this list and he himself has used it

> generously. Incidentally no one would deny that a blind & dumb person,

> born or forced into, is not human, but he/she also has thoughts- they are

> not dependent on words. Sculpture, painting and mime and such other forms

> of expression can also be used instead of words to generate and convey

> thoughts. Words are also useless if one does not understand the language

> it is spoken in. It can thus be concluded, that Brahman is beyond words.

>

>

> Pranams.

>

>

> P.B.V.Rajan

>

>

>

> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from Indiatimes at

> http://email.indiatimes.com

> Buy Music, Video, CD-ROM, Audio-Books and Music Accessories from

> http://www.planetm.co.in

>

>

>

>

>

>

> Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of

> Atman and Brahman.

> Advaitin List Archives available at:

> http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/

> To Post a message send an email to : advaitin

> Messages Archived at: advaitin/messages

>

>

>

> Your use of is subject to

>