Guest guest Posted June 1, 2006 Report Share Posted June 1, 2006 Hari OM! Dear all, It is said that the material world is a reflection of Brahman, like a reflection of the moon on water. To the objection that this analogy betrays Brahman's formlessness, because to be reflected Brahman must have form, . When we see a reflection of something, it is of the form, not of the substance itself. Thus form is distinct from substance. And because form can be reflected, How can we say Brahman is formless?? With Love & OM! Krishna Prasad Dare to give up the comfort of the 'known' and venture into the 'unknown' The more we know, the more we will come to realize what we do not know. If we want to achieve our true potential and live life to the fullest. As Poojya Gurudev said it, "Open your eyes. Burst your shell. Spread your wings and fly!" Swami Chinmayananda Hate not the sinner - hate the sin; and always hate the sin even with an excess of hatred." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 2, 2006 Report Share Posted June 2, 2006 advaitin, "Krishna Prasad" <rkrishp99.> wrote: > > Hari OM! > > Dear all, > > It is said that the material world is a reflection of Brahman, like a > reflection of the moon on water. To the objection that this analogy betrays > Brahman's formlessness, because to be reflected Brahman must have form, . > When we see a reflection of something, it is of the form, not of the > substance itself. Thus form is distinct from substance. And because form can > be reflected, How can we say Brahman is formless?? > > With Love & OM! > > Krishna Prasad > > Namaste Krishna Prasad ji, There is a related discussion in the Brahma Sutras that may be studied for further clarity. Here is a relevant portion from the Acharya's Bhashya on the Sutra III.ii.20. The 19th and the 21st Sutras may also be perused for great clarity. 20. Since (the highest Brahman) is inside (of the limiting adjuncts), it participates in their increase and decrease; owing to the appropriateness (thus resulting) of the two (things compared) it is thus (i.e. the comparison holds good). The parallel instance (of the sun's reflection in the water) is unobjectionable, since a common feature--with reference to which alone the comparison is instituted--does exist. Whenever two things are compared, they are so only with reference to some particular point they have in common. Entire equality of the two can never be demonstrated; indeed if it could be demonstrated there would be an end of that particular relation which gives rise to the comparison. Nor does the sûtrakâra institute the comparison objected to on his own account; he merely sets forth the purport of a comparison actually met with in scripture.--Now, the special feature on which the comparison rests is 'the participation in increase and decrease.' The reflected image of the sun dilates when the surface of the water expands; it contracts when the water shrinks; it trembles when the water is agitated; it divides itself when the water is divided. It thus participates in all the attributes and conditions of the water; while the real sun remains all the time the same.-- Similarly Brahman, although in reality uniform and never changing, participates as it were in the attributes and states of the body and the other limiting adjuncts within which it abides; it grows with them as it were, decreases with them as it were, and so on. As thus the two things compared possess certain common features no objection can be made to the comparison. Trust this gives you the required clarification. The above was sourced from: http://www.bharatadesam.com/spiritual/brahma_sutra/brahma_sutra_sankar a_38123.php Regards, subbu Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 2, 2006 Report Share Posted June 2, 2006 subrahmanian_v <subrahmanian_v > wrote: --- ' Similarly Brahman, although in reality uniform and never changing, participates as it were in the attributes and states of the body and the other limiting adjuncts within which it abides; it grows with them as it were, decreases with them as it were, and so on. As thus the two things compared possess certain common features no objection can be made to the comparison. From Sankarraman Then, the reflection etc is from the viewpoint of the intellect, the attributes of the intellect being foisted on the impartite Brahman which does not admit of the idea of even reflection. Or can we say that the world being the reflection of Brahman is only in the light of the phenomenal existence, this being merely a theory of causation of the world, which cannot brook enquiry. with warm regards Sankarraman Tired of spam? Mail has the best spam protection around Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.