Aham Brahmasmi

[Guest guest]

Hi All

 

What is Aham Brahmasmi

 

Thanks

Sangeetha

[Guest guest]

SRINIVASA

 

Dear Sangeetha:

 

A very profound question that has it's roots in the Vedas and Unpanishads

and is interpreted various ways by various philosophers and sages. As always

in the Upanishads, the implied meaning is far more rigorous than the literal

meaning, which in this case means "I am Brahman" - not be confused with the

Chathurmukaha Brhaman.

 

I will be happy to discuss with you on this - please contact me directly

rsravi

 

Thank you,

 

Adiyen Ravi Rajagopal

 

 

[]

Friday, October 08, 2004 8:23 AM

 

Aham Brahmasmi

 

 

 

 

 

Hi All

 

What is Aham Brahmasmi

 

Thanks

Sangeetha

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Links

[Guest guest]

Adiyen feel that this can be discussed on the board only. I am waiting to learn

 

dasan/raghavan

 

R Ravi <rsravi wrote:

 

SRINIVASA

 

Dear Sangeetha:

 

A very profound question that has it's roots in the Vedas and Unpanishads

and is interpreted various ways by various philosophers and sages. As always

in the Upanishads, the implied meaning is far more rigorous than the literal

meaning, which in this case means "I am Brahman" - not be confused with the

Chathurmukaha Brhaman.

 

I will be happy to discuss with you on this - please contact me directly

rsravi

 

Thank you,

 

Adiyen Ravi Rajagopal

 

 

[]

Friday, October 08, 2004 8:23 AM

 

Aham Brahmasmi

 

 

 

 

 

Hi All

 

What is Aham Brahmasmi

 

Thanks

Sangeetha

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

/

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

vote. - Register online to vote today!

 

 

[Guest guest]

Dear Srinivas,

 

The Q1 is a oft repeated qurrey. Aham Brahma asmi, is a sutric statement which

all 3

of the acharyas take. Only the interpretation differs. If you take this with tat

tvam asi

and other aphorism's Emperumanar's definition fits logically.

 

Yr Q2, why people go to other gods? Answers are many. Let me give a simple logic

For the work that can be done by the municipal clerk, you dont go to the

Collector

correct. That is it.

 

Dasan/raghavan

 

Sv5679 wrote:

Dear members

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

Namaste to all.

Can somebody clarify these questions ?

 

Question 1:

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

"Aham Brahmasmi" (meaning that I am Bramhan)

is the philosophy propounded By Sri Sankaracharya,

who started the Advaita philosophy ? Is this true ?

 

Question 2

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

Lord Krishna tells in Geeta that "people with low

intelligence pray other Gods "Anthavathhu phalam

thesham thadbhavatyalpa medhasam..". All our

scholars read this, but still they pary other Gods like

Shiva, Ganapthi etc ? Why is this ? In the temples of

Lor Vishnu also in USA, I see people pray other Gods ? Is this

because they are overpowered by His Maya ?

 

 

Srinivas

Sv5679

 

 

 

 

vote. - Register online to vote today!

 

 

[Guest guest]

DEAR SRINIVAS,

Aham BRAHMASMI IS A VAKYA FROM UPANISHAD.IT IS CONSIDERED BY SHANKARA TO BE A

MAHAVAKYA & HE BASED HIS PHILOSOPHY ON SUCH MAHAVAKYAS & WROTE COMMENTARIES ON

THE UPANISHADS,BRAHMASUTRAS & GITA (PRASTHANA TRAYAS)& INTERPRETED THEM IN THE

LIGHT OF HIS ADVAITA PHILOSOPHY & HELD OTHER UPANISHADIC STATEMENTS WHICH

CONTRADICTED HIS PHILOSOPHY AS INFERIOR IN NATURE.

SIMILARLY SRI MADVACHARYA HELD THE ABHEDA STATEMENTS AS INFERIOR & COMMENTED ON

THE PRASTHANA TRAYAS IN THE LIGHT OF HIS DWAITA PHILOSOPHY.

SRI RAMANUJA FELT THAT WE HAVE NO AUTHORITY  TO HOLD STATEMENTS OF VEDAS AS

INFERIOR & CAME FORTH WITH A WONDERFUL BHASHYA ON THE PRASTHANA TRAYAS WHICH

RECONCILED ALL THE ABEDA & BEDA STATEMENTS BY HIS SHARIRA SHARIRI CONCEPT.

SHRI SHANKARA SAID JEEVA IS NOT A REALITY & BRAHMAN IS IDENTIFYING ITSELF AS

JEEVATMA DUE TO IGNORANCE.

SRI MADHVA SAID THAT JEEVA & BRAHMAN ARE TWO MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE REALITIES.

SRI RAMANUJA SAID JEEVA & BRAHMAN ARE NOT MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE BUT JEEVA HAS A

INSEPARABLE EXISTENCE FROM BRAHMAN.THE BODY 'S SOLE EXISTENCE IS BASED ON

ATMA.SIMILARLY JEEVATMA 'S EXISTENCE IS BASED ON BRAHMAN.

AS MANY A TIMES A PERSON'S BODY IS REFERRED AS THE PERSON ITSELF ,JEEVATMA IS

REFERRED AS PARAMATMA IN SCRIPTURES.THE JEEVATMA IS TOTALLY CONTROLLED BY

PARAMATMA.

HENCE AHAM BRAHMASMI MEANS SINCE BRAHMAN IS THE ANTAYARYAMI OF ME ,I MAY BE

REFERRED AS BRAHMAN ITSELF.JEEVA & BRAHMAN ARE LIKE FLOWER & ITS FRAGRANCE ,LIKE

CLOTH & ITS COLOUR.THEY ARE INSEPAREBLE ORGANIC UNIT.

AS YOU RIGHTLY POINTED OUT, DUE TO IGNORANCE OF THE NATURE OF THE PARAMATMA,

PEOPLE WORSHIP DEMIGODS.SRI KRISHNA SAYS THOUGH THE EFFORTS IN WORSHIP OF HIM &

DEMIGODS ARE THE SAME ,PEOPLE GET LIMITED FRUITS FROM THEM WHILE IF THEY WORSHIP

HIM, THEY GET THE LIMITLESS MOKSHA ANANDAM.SRI SHANKARA ALSO HAS COMMENTED THUS

ON THIS SHLOKA.HE SAYS THAT THE LORD FEELS SORRY FOR SUCH PEOPLE.

DASAN

 

On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 Vijaya Raghavan wrote :

>

>

>Dear Srinivas,

>

>The Q1 is a oft repeated qurrey. Aham Brahma asmi, is a sutric statement which

all 3

>of the acharyas take. Only the interpretation differs. If you take this with

tat tvam asi

>and other aphorism's Emperumanar's definition fits logically.

>

>Yr Q2, why people go to other gods? Answers are many. Let me give a simple

logic

>For the work that can be done by the municipal clerk, you dont go to the

Collector

>correct. That is it.

>

>Dasan/raghavan

>

>Sv5679 wrote:

>Dear members

>---------------------

>Namaste to all.

>Can somebody clarify these questions ?

>

>Question 1:

>-----------------

>"Aham Brahmasmi" (meaning that I am Bramhan)

>is the philosophy propounded By Sri Sankaracharya,

>who started the Advaita philosophy ? Is this true ?

>

>Question 2

>------------------

>Lord Krishna tells in Geeta that "people with low

>intelligence pray other Gods "Anthavathhu phalam

>thesham thadbhavatyalpa medhasam..". All our

>scholars read this, but still they pary other Gods like

>Shiva, Ganapthi etc ? Why is this ? In the temples of

>Lor Vishnu also in USA, I see people pray other Gods ? Is this

>because they are overpowered by His Maya ?

>

>

>Srinivas

>Sv5679

>

>

>

>

>vote. - Register online to vote today!

>

>

>

>

Links

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Dear Sri. Vasn and Sri Raghavan

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

1. Namaste. Thanks for the clarifications.

2. It is very nice to know that there are some

people, like you, in our community, who take pains

to clarify such doubts.

 

Srinivas

Sv5679

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Vasan Swami,

 

thanks for explanation.

 

Dasan/raghavan

 

Vasan Sriranga Chari <vasan_chari_hk wrote:

 

DEAR SRINIVAS,

Aham BRAHMASMI IS A VAKYA FROM UPANISHAD.IT IS CONSIDERED BY SHANKARA TO BE A

MAHAVAKYA & HE BASED HIS PHILOSOPHY ON SUCH MAHAVAKYAS & WROTE COMMENTARIES ON

THE UPANISHADS,BRAHMASUTRAS & GITA (PRASTHANA TRAYAS)& INTERPRETED THEM IN THE

LIGHT OF HIS ADVAITA PHILOSOPHY & HELD OTHER UPANISHADIC STATEMENTS WHICH

CONTRADICTED HIS PHILOSOPHY AS INFERIOR IN NATURE.

SIMILARLY SRI MADVACHARYA HELD THE ABHEDA STATEMENTS AS INFERIOR & COMMENTED ON

THE PRASTHANA TRAYAS IN THE LIGHT OF HIS DWAITA PHILOSOPHY.

SRI RAMANUJA FELT THAT WE HAVE NO AUTHORITY TO HOLD STATEMENTS OF VEDAS AS

INFERIOR & CAME FORTH WITH A WONDERFUL BHASHYA ON THE PRASTHANA TRAYAS WHICH

RECONCILED ALL THE ABEDA & BEDA STATEMENTS BY HIS SHARIRA SHARIRI CONCEPT.

SHRI SHANKARA SAID JEEVA IS NOT A REALITY & BRAHMAN IS IDENTIFYING ITSELF AS

JEEVATMA DUE TO IGNORANCE.

SRI MADHVA SAID THAT JEEVA & BRAHMAN ARE TWO MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE REALITIES.

SRI RAMANUJA SAID JEEVA & BRAHMAN ARE NOT MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE BUT JEEVA HAS A

INSEPARABLE EXISTENCE FROM BRAHMAN.THE BODY 'S SOLE EXISTENCE IS BASED ON

ATMA.SIMILARLY JEEVATMA 'S EXISTENCE IS BASED ON BRAHMAN.

AS MANY A TIMES A PERSON'S BODY IS REFERRED AS THE PERSON ITSELF ,JEEVATMA IS

REFERRED AS PARAMATMA IN SCRIPTURES.THE JEEVATMA IS TOTALLY CONTROLLED BY

PARAMATMA.

HENCE AHAM BRAHMASMI MEANS SINCE BRAHMAN IS THE ANTAYARYAMI OF ME ,I MAY BE

REFERRED AS BRAHMAN ITSELF.JEEVA & BRAHMAN ARE LIKE FLOWER & ITS FRAGRANCE ,LIKE

CLOTH & ITS COLOUR.THEY ARE INSEPAREBLE ORGANIC UNIT.

AS YOU RIGHTLY POINTED OUT, DUE TO IGNORANCE OF THE NATURE OF THE PARAMATMA,

PEOPLE WORSHIP DEMIGODS.SRI KRISHNA SAYS THOUGH THE EFFORTS IN WORSHIP OF HIM &

DEMIGODS ARE THE SAME ,PEOPLE GET LIMITED FRUITS FROM THEM WHILE IF THEY WORSHIP

HIM, THEY GET THE LIMITLESS MOKSHA ANANDAM.SRI SHANKARA ALSO HAS COMMENTED THUS

ON THIS SHLOKA.HE SAYS THAT THE LORD FEELS SORRY FOR SUCH PEOPLE.

DASAN

 

On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 Vijaya Raghavan wrote :

>

>

>Dear Srinivas,

>

>The Q1 is a oft repeated qurrey. Aham Brahma asmi, is a sutric statement which

all 3

>of the acharyas take. Only the interpretation differs. If you take this with

tat tvam asi

>and other aphorism's Emperumanar's definition fits logically.

>

>Yr Q2, why people go to other gods? Answers are many. Let me give a simple

logic

>For the work that can be done by the municipal clerk, you dont go to the

Collector

>correct. That is it.

>

>Dasan/raghavan

>

>Sv5679 wrote:

>Dear members

>---------------------

>Namaste to all.

>Can somebody clarify these questions ?

>

>Question 1:

>-----------------

>"Aham Brahmasmi" (meaning that I am Bramhan)

>is the philosophy propounded By Sri Sankaracharya,

>who started the Advaita philosophy ? Is this true ?

>

>Question 2

>------------------

>Lord Krishna tells in Geeta that "people with low

>intelligence pray other Gods "Anthavathhu phalam

>thesham thadbhavatyalpa medhasam..". All our

>scholars read this, but still they pary other Gods like

>Shiva, Ganapthi etc ? Why is this ? In the temples of

>Lor Vishnu also in USA, I see people pray other Gods ? Is this

>because they are overpowered by His Maya ?

>

>

>Srinivas

>Sv5679

>

>

>

>

>vote. - Register online to vote today!

>

>

>

>

Links

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

/

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

vote. - Register online to vote today!

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hi Vasan,

 

Thanks for sharing your insight. My husband, who talks about Quantum Mechanics

all the time, asked me the following question. So, I earnestly request you

provide some light on the following questions.

 

>>In my understanding one of the basic TRUTHS accepted by Vishistadvaitins is

that JEEVATMA is NOT CREATED by PARAMATAMA. Both JEEVATMA and PARAMATMA coexist

eternally but Vasan says that

THE JEEVATMA IS TOTALLY CONTROLLED BY PARAMATMA.

 

My question is, if JEEVATMA is not created by PARAMATMA, what gives

PARAMATMA the right to control JEEVATMA. What did JEEVATMA do that

made him/her to be controlled by PARAMATMA. Why is one superior and

the other inferior?

 

Vishistadvaitins do say that the differnece between JEEVATMA and

PARAMATMA is that, PARAMATMA has the power of creation and the power

of bestowing MOKSHA to JEEVATMAs. If thats what makes the JEEVATMA to

be controlled by PARAMATMA, is't it unfair/unjust giving one the

power of creation and denying it to the other, thenin making one pray to the

other for MOKSHA, though they both coexist for eternity?

 

Another question. BUDDA is considered as one of the avataras of Vishnu by some.

As

everyone knows BUDDHA preached AGAINST Vedas. If Buddha is one of the

avataras of Vishnu, why did he contradict the Vedas. In one avatara

(Krishna) he recognizes Vedas as the supreme authority and in another

avatara he denounces Vedas. Its quite confusing for any simple minded

person. I am sure someone might have raised these questions before

and someone might have answered too, but I did NOT come across any so

far. :-)

 

Thanks in advance.

[Guest guest]

Sriman NArAyaNAya namaha|

Srimathe RamAnujAya namaha|

Srimathe NigamAnta mahAdeSikAya namaha||

 

nama: Sri ranganAdhAya nama: Sri rangasAyine

nama: Sri rangadevAya Sri srinivAsaya te nama:

 

Question 1:

 

Vishistadvaitins do say that the differnece between JEEVATMA and

PARAMATMA is that, PARAMATMA has the power of creation and the power

of bestowing MOKSHA to JEEVATMAs. If that's what makes the JEEVATMA

to

be controlled by PARAMATMA, is't it unfair/unjust giving one the

power of creation and denying it to the other, thenin making one

pray to the

other for MOKSHA, though they both coexist for eternity?

 

This is said to be question of a scientist. Being a scientist and

engineer,

and a bhakta raised in the fold of Srivaishnavam adiyen cannot pass

the opportunity to answer this question.

 

The answer is as follows. Jiva by definition is but an amsam of the

Lord.

In whatever form he exists, he also chooses to control the jivas

while

they are alive. The control is implicit in science, but it is

explicit

in religion. The science postulates intrinsic forces associated with

matter.

At what point do the forces enter the matter? Do the matter and

forces were

created and paired instantaneously? If not, which came first,

matter

or force? This is described by the taitriya upanishat beautifully as

follows:

 

tat shrutva tatonupravishat.

 

God created the things (in the sense of shrusti ) and entered them (

in order to

support [sustain] them for the rest of their lives .) Rest of the

upanishat

starting with this line is also very beautiful.

 

Here both the advaitins and vishishtAdvaitins cannot say anything

contradictory

and theorize what this verse tries to postulate. It is vedam and a

sensible one too.

Even the scientist can appreciate that there is very small time scale

where there could be difference between pure matter and matter with

added force.

This suggests a Nobel-prize winning opportunity for a physicist to

perform

an experiment in order to separate the force from matter! All the

matter

that we see is the matter with an added force. All light emanates

from matter. This completes the basic picture of the universe.

Elsewhere

we have seen that the Lord is jwalantam since He makes everything

shine.

He creates and adds the shining ability ( which the science can

quantify in 'innumerable' ways ). Thus the light is also explained.

 

Finally, if It creates and sustains, It is certainly the Lord

and the rest are just dependants. Assuming that it is not so and

that everything has equal power, why does the jiva in us let us die

within time scale which is very small compared to the cosmic time

scale

of inert objects as well as the powerful stars in the universe? In

other words,

why are we not as powerful as the stars, at least in terms of

longevity?

It is obvious that we are not equal to even a single star. Then we

cannot

be equal to the might of the galaxies of stars ('Koti' surya )

put together. The 'Koti' surya is still finite compared to the

Infinite.

Thus we, the JIVAMATMAS, are certainly just very small, and hence

are

at the mercy of the PARAMATMA.

 

Since the question follows the messages related to a question on

'Aham Brahmasmi', let me add the following. We can expose the

weakness of strong advaitic arguments made in favor of Aham

BrahmAsmi

and Tat Tvamasi this way. Saying A=B (Aham Brahmasmi) and B=A

(tat tvam asi) and (hence) A is identically equal to B (once

ultimate realization is attained[questionable]) is certainly

mighty incorrect because we have proved just above that jiva

is controlled by the paramatma. We can only to milder

supplicative (in)equality advocated by Sri Ramanuja.

Why? Vedantam supports advaitam. But only in a sensible way.

Not to an illogical extreme. The purport of the vedantam is to show

that

the Lord also lives in us in the sense of providing a part of him

for our

forms (matter [derived in the sense of Purushs suktam] )

and function ( through anupravesam, etc.). The purport is not to

show

absolute equality at the end. By any measure it is insensible to

assume

this perfect equality. Also it is insensible to write non-advaitic

commentaries on Brahma sutras which have origins in Vedantam

which is actually 'advaitic'. Thus Sri Ramanuja and Vishtadvaitam

having been the first in having made correct assumptions

are certainly lofty and deserve our attention.

 

 

Question 2:

 

BUDDHA is considered as one of the avataras of Vishnu by some.

As everyone knows BUDDHA preached AGAINST Vedas. If Buddha is one of

the

avataras of Vishnu, why did he contradict the Vedas?

 

Adiyen has gathered from a Web site the detailed answer given by

Srila Prabhupada for this question. The argument is powerful indeed.

The answer is provided as a commentary of a verse in Srimad

Bhagavatam.

>From the verse stated below, we believe Buddha was born to delude

the non-believers and correct their errant ways. The himsa-filled

yagas of Vedas and the resulting rivers of blood made a person

as powerfully influential as Buddha to revolt against the

Vedas. By Vedas we mean the non-vedanta portions that described

animal

sacrifices. Vedanta (upanishats) completely avoid this blemish

and strongly preaches ahimsa. Thus the modern hinduism is

essentially

vedantam.

 

On the question of Buddha, Srimad Bhagavatam 1.3.24 would say:

 

tatah kalau sampravritte sammohAya sura-dvishAm

buddho nAmnAn'jana-sutah kIkatheshu bhavishyati

 

Let us look at what Srila PrabupAda has to say for this verse.

 

'Then, in the beginning of Kali-yuga, the Lord will appear as Lord

Buddha,

the son of Anjana, in the province of Gaya, just for the purpose of

deluding those who are envious of the faithful theist.'

 

"Lord Buddha, a powerful incarnation of the Personality of Godhead,

appeared in the province of Gaya (Bihar) as the son of Anjana,

and he preached his own conception of nonviolence and deprecated

even the animal sacrifices sanctioned in the Vedas. At the time when

Lord Buddha appeared, the people in general were atheistic and

preferred animal flesh to anything else. On the plea of Vedic

sacrifices, every place was practically turned into a

slaughterhouse,

and animal killing was indulged in unrestrictedly . Lord Buddha

preached nonviolence, taking pity on the poor animals. He preached

that he did not believe in the tenets of the Vedas and stressed

the adverse psychological effects incurred by animal-killing.

Less intelligent men of the age of Kali, who had no faith in God,

followed his principle, and for the time being they were trained

in moral discipline and nonviolence, the preliminary steps on

the path of God realization. He deluded the atheists because

such atheists who followed his principles did not believe in God,

but they kept their faith in Lord Buddha, who himself was

the incarnation of God. Thus the faithless people were made

to believe in God in the form of Lord Buddha. That was the mercy

of Lord Buddha: he made the faithless faithful to him.

 

Killing of animals before the advent of Lord Buddha was the most

prominent feature of the society. People claimed that these were

Vedic sacrifices. When the Vedas are not accepted through

the authoritative disciplic succession, the casual readers of

the Vedas are misled by the flowery language of that system

of knowledge. In the Bhagavad-gita a comment has been made

on such foolish scholars (avipaschitah). The foolish scholars

of Vedic literature who do not care to receive the transcendental

message through the transcendental realized sources of disciplic

succession are sure to be bewildered. To them, the ritualistic

ceremonies are considered to be all in all. They have no debth

of knowledge. According to the Bhagavad-gita (15:15),

vedaicca sarvair ahameva vedyo, the whole system of the Vedas

is to lead one gradually to the path of the Supreme Lord.

The whole theme of the Vedic literature is to know

the Supreme Lord, the individual soul, the cosmic situation

and the relation between all these items. When the relation is

known,

the relative function begins, and as a result of such a function

the ultimate goal of life or going back to Godhead takes place

in the easiest manner. Unfortunately, unauthorized scholars of

the Vedas become captivated by the purifactory ceremonies only,

and natural progress is thereby checked.

 

To such bewildered persons of atheistic propensity, Lord Buddha

is the emblem of theism. He therfore first of all wanted

to check the habit of animal killing. The animal-killers are

dangerous elements on the path going back to Godhead.

There are two types of animal-killers. The soul is also sometimes

called the 'animal' or the living being. Therefore, both

the slaughter of animals and those who have lost

their identity of soul are animal-killers.

 

Maharaja Pariksit said that only the animal-killer cannot

relish the transcendental message of the Supreme Lord. Therefore

if people are to be educated on the path of Godhead, they must be

taught first and foremost to stop the process of animal-killing

as above mentioned. It is nonsensical to say that animal-killing

has nothing to do with spiritual realization. By this dangerous

theory many so-called sannyasis have sprung up by the grace of

Kali-yuga who preach animal-killing under the garb of the Vedas.

The animal sacrifice as stated in the Vedas is different from the

unrestricted animal-killing in the slaughterhouse. Because

the asuras or so-called scholars of Vedic literatures

put forward the evidence of animal-killing in the Vedas,

Lord Buddha superficially denied the authority of the Vedas.

This rejection of the Vedas by Lord Buddha was adopted in order

to save people from the vice of animal-killing as well as

to save the poor animals from the slaughtering process of

their big brothers who clamor for universal brotherhood,

peace, justice and equity. There is no justice when there

is animal-killing. Lord Buddha wanted to stop it completely,

and therefore his cult of ahimsa was propagated

not only in India but also outside the country.

 

Technically Lord Buddha's philosophy is called atheistic

because there is no acceptance of the Supreme Lord and

because that system of philosophy denied the authority

of the Vedas. But that is an act of camouflage by the Lord.

Lord Buddha is the incarnation of the Godhead. As such,

he is the original propounder of Vedic knowledge. He therefore

cannot reject Vedic philosophy. But he rejected it outwardly

because the sura-dvisa, or the demons who are always envious

of the devotees of Godhead, try to suppor t cow-killing

or animal-killing from the pages of the Vedas,

and this is now being done by the modernized sannyasis.

Lord Buddha had to reject the authority of the Vedas altogether.

This is simply technical, and had it not been so he would not

have been s o accepted as the incarnation of Godhead.

Nor would he have been worshiped in the transcendental

songs of the poet Jayadeva, who is a Vaishnava acharya.

Lord Buddha preached the preliminary principles of the Vedas

in a manner suitable for the time being to establish

the authority of the Vedas. Therefore both Lord Buddha and

Acharya Sankara paved the path of theism,

and Vaishnava acharyas led the people on the path towards

a realization of going back to Godhead.

 

It is interesting to note that Sri Ramanuja would write

a fairly long polemical commentary for gIta verse 15.15

in his gIta bhAsya deriving support of several verse

from the upanishats and establish the vishnu tattvam.

 

Effectively this verse states

 

'And I am seated in the hearts of all.

>From Me are memory, knowledge and their removal also.

Indeed I am alone am to be known from the Vedas.

I bring about the fruition of the rituals of Vedas;

I alone am the knower of the Vedas.'

 

Thus Sri Krishna establishes the Godhead in the udgita upasana.

 

dAsan

U. Ve. RTV Varadarajan

[Guest guest]

Dear Bhagavathas,

 

It is a good question. I try to answer this from a scientific perspective. It is

true from Lord's words that Jeevathma and Paramathma coexist sice eternity. It

is by nature that Paramatma is one and supreme. Jeevatma is always controlled by

Paramatma - thats also by nature. Jeevatma can rise to the level of paramatma

(except for two important attributes) while attaining moksham which is in

Paramatma's hands. All we can say is, it is just by nature. Creation has to end

somewhere, and it is here they end. U dont have to create something to be a

master of it.

 

In a lighter vein, u may not be a master of all that u have created too (this is

just a filler).

 

Resuming, Neucleus and electron in atomic stricture have different attributes.

if u view Nucleus is the master in the atom and electrons are its slaves then it

is rather not possible to establish why nature had bestowed these attributes to

them. Similar is for quarks, gluons, mesons etc. They exist like that, say from

almost eternity. One can extend these to almost all particles found in the

recent particle physics research area. There is no answer as to who has bestowed

these attributes to them and why? The answer to this from philosophy is

'Paramatma'. But this kind of questioning has to end some where. That ends at

'Paramatma'.

 

Now coming to the question of Buddha, I dont think 'Sri Sampradayam' accepts

Buddha as an avatharam of Lord. BTW, there are other 'avatharams' of Lord, e.g.

Kapila, whose philosophy is not fully accepted by 'Sri Sampradayam'. To

understand these intricate arguments one need to take the help of Ramanuja's

philosophy. Vedas, by definition are the total knowledge space (not the ones

that are known to humans so far but much more). The knowledge space regarding

understanding jeevatma and paramatma and their relationship has been classified

into bheda and abheda shrutis, meaning places which say jeevatma and paramatma

are same and places which say paramatma is owning jeevatma. Both have to be

looked in unison and that is not clear from earlier teachers such as Kaplia or

Buddha or Sankara for that matter. In order to hold the ground, some portions of

vedas had to be ommitted by these teachers. It is Ramanuja's singular efforts

that brought them together and made them look in a way that they

all have ultimate unison.

 

I think I should end here and allow it to settle.

 

Sajjana Pada padma parama renuhu

 

Lakshmi Narasimha dasan