The God Who Wasn't There?

[Sephiroth]

 

There is a new documentary out called The God Who Wasn't There. It specifically challenges the historical authenticity of Jesus Christ. The producers have presented the views of some of the top academic theologians who have arrived at the conclusion that the story of Christ is a myth.

 

This comes along with a new book by R.G. Price entitled Jesus, a very Jewish Myth.

 

How is it that it is Jewish myth when it was Jews who was first to reject Jesus? For 2,000 years, Jews are called "Christ Killers" because Christians were taught that Jews killed their "god".

[Sonic Yogi]

 

Which Vaishnava acharya taught you about "Advaitism?"

 

Would you consider it fair if an Advaitin said he knew all about Vaishnavism because he heard about it from an Advaitin acharya?

 

For what it's worth, your ideas about "Advaitism" are incorrect on several counts. What you describe as "Advaitism" sounds more like the bheda abheda philosophy of Bhaskara and the Neo-Advaita propagated by Vivekananda and others of his ilk.

 

And yes, I base my views on Advaita on the writings of Sri Sankaracharya.

 

You need to understand that the Vaishnava acharyas have gone to war with Advaitism, but the only way they could prepare their disciples to defeat Advaitism is by teaching them the core concepts of Advaitism and then teaching then how to defeat that with Vedic authority.

 

Again, I am not going to teach the pseudo-Advaitins on this forum about Advaitism, but it is obvious that none of them are legitimate students of Vedanta, but are simply fringe Advaitins with miniscule understand of Advaita Vedanta.

 

India has produced millions of pseudo-Advaitins that don't have a clue about what is actual Advaitism.

 

It's not my job to teach you about the Advaita Siddhanta of Shankar.

For that, you will need to do your own homework.

 

I encourage Krishna-bhakti and the achintya-bheda-abheda tattva of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu who is the incarnation of Krishna that appeared in Bengal about 500 years ago as foretold in shastra.

 

Advaitism is for Hindu neophytes.

When a Hindu becomes advanced in yoga practice, he will naturally take up Vaishnavism as the fruit of Vedic siddhanta.

 

Advaitism nowadays is being advocated on the WEB by so many fringe Advaitins who don't really have any actual grasp of the teachings of Shankaracharya - the founder of Advaita Vedanta.

[Sonic Yogi]

 

How is it that it is Jewish myth when it was Jews who was first to reject Jesus? For 2,000 years, Jews are called "Christ Killers" because Christians were taught that Jews killed their "god".

 

Because the Jews integrated with the Romans who were at that time much under the influence of classic Greek thought.

It is a Jewish myth, because these Hellenistic Jews were the ones who manufactured the Christ myth in an effort to bring Rome under the influence of Jewish theism.

The Roman Empire was desperate for a religious concept that would unite the kingdom. The Gospels were written by people who did not understand the Hebrew language as it is proven fact that they used the Septuagint as their source of Hebrew thought. The Septuagint was a Greek translation of the Torah. Whoever wrote the Gospels of the New Testament did not even know the original Hebrew language but depended on Greek translations of the books for their inspiration.

 

As such, we can conclude that the gospels of the New Testament were written by Hellenistic Jews who felt that some marriage of Judaism and Greek mythology would be an effective way to create a religion that Rome could use to keep the empire intact.

 

Obviously, the invention of Jesus was a very effective device, though in the long run the Jesus myth outlasted the Roman Empire by thousands of years.

[raghu]

 

You need to understand that the Vaishnava acharyas have gone to war with Advaitism, but the only way they could prepare their disciples to defeat Advaitism is by teaching them the core concepts of Advaitism and then teaching then how to defeat that with Vedic authority.

 

Again, I am not going to teach the pseudo-Advaitins on this forum about Advaitism, but it is obvious that none of them are legitimate students of Vedanta, but are simply fringe Advaitins with miniscule understand of Advaita Vedanta.

 

India has produced millions of pseudo-Advaitins that don't have a clue about what is actual Advaitism.

 

It's not my job to teach you about the Advaita Siddhanta of Shankar.

For that, you will need to do your own homework.

 

I encourage Krishna-bhakti and the achintya-bheda-abheda tattva of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu who is the incarnation of Krishna that appeared in Bengal about 500 years ago as foretold in shastra.

 

Advaitism is for Hindu neophytes.

When a Hindu becomes advanced in yoga practice, he will naturally take up Vaishnavism as the fruit of Vedic siddhanta.

 

Advaitism nowadays is being advocated on the WEB by so many fringe Advaitins who don't really have any actual grasp of the teachings of Shankaracharya - the founder of Advaita Vedanta.

 

Let me repeat the questions since you have not answered them:

 

Which Vaishnava acharya taught you about "Advaitism?"

 

Would you consider it fair if an Advaitin said he knew all about Vaishnavism because he heard about it from an Advaitin acharya?

 

For what it's worth, your ideas about "Advaitism" are incorrect on several counts. What you describe as "Advaitism" sounds more like the bheda abheda philosophy of Bhaskara and the Neo-Advaita propagated by Vivekananda and others of his ilk.

 

And yes, I base my views on Advaita on the writings of Sri Sankaracharya.

 

In addition, you mentioned that kaisersose never learned Advaita from the writings of Sri Sankaracharya. May I enquire as to what writings of Sri Sankaracharya you have read?

 

Answers to questions will be much appreciated. Assuming you have any.

[Sonic Yogi]

 

Let me repeat the questions since you have not answered them:

 

Which Vaishnava acharya taught you about "Advaitism?"

 

Would you consider it fair if an Advaitin said he knew all about Vaishnavism because he heard about it from an Advaitin acharya?

 

For what it's worth, your ideas about "Advaitism" are incorrect on several counts. What you describe as "Advaitism" sounds more like the bheda abheda philosophy of Bhaskara and the Neo-Advaita propagated by Vivekananda and others of his ilk.

 

And yes, I base my views on Advaita on the writings of Sri Sankaracharya.

 

In addition, you mentioned that kaisersose never learned Advaita from the writings of Sri Sankaracharya. May I enquire as to what writings of Sri Sankaracharya you have read?

 

Answers to questions will be much appreciated. Assuming you have any.

Yeah, I know. Sivoham??

The Shaivites seek to "become Siva" (Sivoham) and thus become the enjoyers and dominators of Durga-devi.(You can have it, I don't have any design on dominating a temporary platform of existence known as prakriti).

 

Well, I am sorry to report that you cannot become Siva and the enjoyer of Maya-devi. Well, you can, but you personally will never accomplish that because such a goal is only accomplished by the greatest of ascetics and yogis of which you ARE NOT.

 

That is a Hindu myth than nowadays passes under the garb of "Advaitism", though it is a very pathetic excuse for Vedanta.

[sylvester22]

 

There is a new documentary out called The God Who Wasn't There. It specifically challenges the historical authenticity of Jesus Christ. The producers have presented the views of some of the top academic theologians who have arrived at the conclusion that the story of Christ is a myth.

 

This comes along with a new book by R.G. Price entitled Jesus, a very Jewish Myth.

 

There is a website that deals specifically with the Christ myth theory.

 

http://www.christbusters.com

 

Is it possible that in fact the story of Jesus is a myth fabricated in Greek language by Hellenistic Jews looking for a marriage of the Jewish and the Greek traditions?

 

We don't have any evidences supporting the existence of Krishna, Rama and now there is a claim about Jesus existence. One thing that might support Jesus is no myth is that he is portrayed as an human unlike other Gods which may be different.

[Sonic Yogi]

 

We don't have any evidences supporting the existence of Krishna, Rama and now there is a claim about Jesus existence. One thing that might support Jesus is no myth is that he is portrayed as an human unlike other Gods which may be different.

 

Human Jesus?

No, Jesus was God.

You didn't get the memo?

Jesus walked on water, parted the sea and healed the sick.

Jesus was not portrayed as any human.

He raised from the grave and ascended to heaven.

How is that anything human?

Jesus is God according to the apostle Paul.

 

If you don't know your Christian myth very well, then maybe you should not be posting on the topic?

[raghu]

 

Yeah, I know. Sivoham??

The Shaivites seek to "become Siva" (Sivoham) and thus become the enjoyers and dominators of Durga-devi.(You can have it, I don't have any design on dominating a temporary platform of existence known as prakriti).

 

Well, I am sorry to report that you cannot become Siva and the enjoyer of Maya-devi. Well, you can, but you personally will never accomplish that because such a goal is only accomplished by the greatest of ascetics and yogis of which you ARE NOT.

 

That is a Hindu myth than nowadays passes under the garb of "Advaitism", though it is a very pathetic excuse for Vedanta.

 

Please reread posting #29 and answer the questions regarding your understanding of Advaita. Your repeated attempts to evade the question when you yourself criticized someone else for his supposed misunderstanding of Advaita are really not doing you any credit.

[sylvester22]

 

Human Jesus?

No, Jesus was God.

You didn't get the memo?

Jesus walked on water, parted the sea and healed the sick.

Jesus was not portrayed as any human.

He raised from the grave and ascended to heaven.

How is that anything human?

Jesus is God according to the apostle Paul.

 

If you don't know your Christian myth very well, then maybe you should not be posting on the topic?

 

I meant that Jesus had the pictorial identity of Humans and lived the life of humans unlike other Gods with 5 hands, 6 legs, 8 heads, blue colored, half snake and half human. The people who carried out this research should also be advised to carry out research on these Gods.

[Sonic Yogi]

 

Please reread posting #29 and answer the questions regarding your understanding of Advaita. Your repeated attempts to evade the question when you yourself criticized someone else for his supposed misunderstanding of Advaita are really not doing you any credit.

 

You want me to teach you Advaita Vedanta.

Sorry, you must do your own homework on that.

I have done my study of Advaita Vedanta.

I am not going to distill and extract the essence for you to abuse.

 

If you want to learn Advaita Vedanta, then maybe you should become a disciple of a guru in the Advaita sampradaya?

 

I am not going to make it easy for you.

I have studied for 35 years.

I am not going to just give away cheaply what you must learn from your own dedication and study.

 

Phony Advaitins are not going to get any crash course on Advaita Vedanta from me.

 

Submit to a guru in the Advaita sampradaya if you want to know the siddhanta.

 

I am not going to feed you the Advaita siddhanta that you so desperately desire.

 

I know it, but I am not giving it away to phony Advaitins in the forum.

[raghu]

 

You want me to teach you Advaita Vedanta.

 

No, we just want you to substantiate the idea that you know what Advaita is.

 

 

Sorry, you must do your own homework on that.

 

I already have.

 

 

I have done my study of Advaita Vedanta.

 

By "study" you mean what you heard from a Non-Advaitin Acharya?

 

 

I am not going to distill and extract the essence for you to abuse.

 

If you want to learn Advaita Vedanta, then maybe you should become a disciple of a guru in the Advaita sampradaya?

 

You claim to know what Advaita is, but you aren't a disciple of a guru in that sampradaya. Isn't that hypocrisy?

 

 

I am not going to make it easy for you.

I have studied for 35 years.

 

Please list the names of all Advaita books which you claim you have studied. If you have truly studied Advaita for 35 years, you must surely be able to name at least one.

 

 

Submit to a guru in the Advaita sampradaya if you want to know the siddhanta.

 

Which guru in the "Advaita sampradaya" did you submit to?

 

 

I am not going to feed you the Advaita siddhanta that you so desperately desire.

 

I do not desire to know Advaita siddhanta because I already know it. I am merely calling your bluff, since it was you who originally insinuated that you knew what Advaita was and that others did not. Now we are looking for some evidence for you to back up that claim.

 

 

I know it, but I am not giving it away to phony Advaitins in the forum.

 

So far, you have spent the last several postings reassuring us that you know what genuine Advaita is, but you already misspoke earlier and now you aren't saying anything at all about it - just telling us that you know it.

 

The real problem seems to be that you do not know it, but you want everyone to think that you do.

[Sephiroth]

 

Because the Jews integrated with the Romans who were at that time much under the influence of classic Greek thought.

It is a Jewish myth, because these Hellenistic Jews were the ones who manufactured the Christ myth in an effort to bring Rome under the influence of Jewish theism.

The Roman Empire was desperate for a religious concept that would unite the kingdom. The Gospels were written by people who did not understand the Hebrew language as it is proven fact that they used the Septuagint as their source of Hebrew thought. The Septuagint was a Greek translation of the Torah. Whoever wrote the Gospels of the New Testament did not even know the original Hebrew language but depended on Greek translations of the books for their inspiration.

 

As such, we can conclude that the gospels of the New Testament were written by Hellenistic Jews who felt that some marriage of Judaism and Greek mythology would be an effective way to create a religion that Rome could use to keep the empire intact.

 

Obviously, the invention of Jesus was a very effective device, though in the long run the Jesus myth outlasted the Roman Empire by thousands of years.

 

Let me get this straight, you actually believe that Jews went and invented Jesus so they could reach the Romans? You don't know much about Judaism, do you?

 

In Judaism, Jews MUST follow the Ten Commandments which makes up the basic for their belief. One of the commandments stated that "You do not take another as God" and "You do not create image of God".

 

If you accuse Jews of inventing Jesus, then know this that they have broken this important convent and therefore, they cannot be called Jews anymore.

[Sephiroth]

 

We don't have any evidences supporting the existence of Krishna, Rama and now there is a claim about Jesus existence. One thing that might support Jesus is no myth is that he is portrayed as an human unlike other Gods which may be different.

 

Actually, we do.

 

Ramayana have mentioned structures in its epic like the temple in Sri Lanka, the Rama Setru (Bridge which the NASA found), and the temple in Ayodhya (birth place of Rama).

 

Also in Mahayana, it is said that Dwarka sank in the ocean and it was home to Sri Krishna till the beginning of Kali yuga. Off the coast of Goa, you will find the ruins of Dwarka.

[Sonic Yogi]

 

Let me get this straight, you actually believe that Jews went and invented Jesus so they could reach the Romans? You don't know much about Judaism, do you?

 

In Judaism, Jews MUST follow the Ten Commandments which makes up the basic for their belief. One of the commandments stated that "You do not take another as God" and "You do not create image of God".

 

If you accuse Jews of inventing Jesus, then know this that they have broken this important convent and therefore, they cannot be called Jews anymore.

 

The apostle Paul who invented Christianity was a Jew.

He was not even born in Judaea. He was from Tarsus.

Paul was a Romanized descendant of Jews from Tarsus.

 

He was highly influenced by Roman culture.

He manufactured the Jesus myth because he thought it would save Rome from disintegration.

[Sephiroth]

 

The apostle Paul who invented Christianity was a Jew.

He was not even born in Judaea. He was from Tarsus.

Paul was a Romanized descendant of Jews from Tarsus.

 

He was highly influenced by Roman culture.

He manufactured the Jesus myth because he thought it would save Rome from disintegration.

 

All that shows that Paul was a ROMAN who were interested in Jewish Tradition.

 

IF he was a Jew, then he could have known and followed the Ten Commandment. He could have also knew that breaking ANY ONE of this Commandments means that he CANNOT REACH GOD (of Israel) no matter how hard he prayed and repented.

 

The Ten Commandment IS THE CONVENT of God (of Israel) to the People of Israel. One must NEVER break this Convent if he wishes to return back to God (of Israel).

[Sonic Yogi]

 

All that shows that Paul was a ROMAN who were interested in Jewish Tradition.

 

IF he was a Jew, then he could have known and followed the Ten Commandment. He could have also knew that breaking ANY ONE of this Commandments means that he CANNOT REACH GOD (of Israel) no matter how hard he prayed and repented.

 

The Ten Commandment IS THE CONVENT of God (of Israel) to the People of Israel. One must NEVER break this Convent if he wishes to return back to God (of Israel).

 

But, you seem to forget that the Jewish scriptures forecast the coming of a Messiah.

Paul was a rebel to orthodox Judaism.

He disliked it.

He wanted to modify Judaism and make it something universal and bring the gentiles into the Jewish religion by accepting the Jewish messiah.

 

Many people rebelled against orthodox Judaism.

That is what the Gnostics were about.

 

They complained that orthodox Judaism was deviant and that the Torah had been tampered with and changed to suit the priestly class of Jews.

 

So, Paul was no lone stranger to rebellion against orthodox Judaism.

 

The Gnostics were probably the real followers of the original Torah.

Orthodox Judaism is like a cheap imitation of true Judaism.

The Gnostics were very austere and renounced.

Orthodox Jews were very materialistic in the name of Judaism.

 

So, many people rebelled against orthodox Judaism and Jesus was the brain-child of Paul who wanted to more or less salvage Judaism from extinction and give it a new meaning in Christianity.

 

Fact was, Paul was never actually trained in the rabbinical disciplines and his understanding of Judaism was very shallow.

 

Originally, Judaism was about extreme asceticism as found in the Gnostic sects. That was lost as the Jewish priests became lazy householders.

Paul was an ascetic. He was against the laid-back orthodox Jewish fat cats.

In fact, Paul was ill. He had epilepsy and was prone to seizures.

[Sephiroth]

 

But, you seem to forget that the Jewish scriptures forecast the coming of a Messiah.

Paul was a rebel to orthodox Judaism.

He disliked it.

He wanted to modify Judaism and make it something universal and bring the gentiles into the Jewish religion by accepting the Jewish messiah.

 

 

I don't think you have understood what I was saying. I don't give a damn who or what Paul is.

 

What I'm saying is - as a Jew (orthodox or modern), they MUST follow the TEN COMMANDMENTS if they were to reach God (of Israel).

 

In Christianity, they went and created Jesus as a Son of God, produce the Cross as a Symbol and later, the image of Jesus on the Cross. All this is SACRILEGE in Judaism. It broke the Ten Commandments and therefore, anyone who follows such believe WILL NOT REACH God (of Israel).

 

I'm talking about the Ten Commandments, you're talking about Paul.

[sambya]

 

Hare Krishna. Please accept my obeisances. All glories to Guru and Gauranga. You are certainly very senior to me both by birth and also by education. You seem to know so much about everything. I tried hard not to reply to your post but I felt I had to. I do not think ISKCON is a failure at all. I know its one of the most successful societies ever made. Perhaps you are so far ahead in spiritual life that you can't appreciate the little things ISKCON centers around the world help with for some beginners like myself. I am sure you have valid reasons for your conclusions. It would be nicer if you shared them with people in private because this forum is open to the general public. Certainly every fruit bearing tree has some rotten fruits but I would not go as far to chop down the entire tree. Perhaps it is for selfish reasons I ask you not to post such negative thoughts about ISKCON. I am here to learn and grow in spiritual life and the aim of this forum seems to be just for that reason. I do not think such negative comments will encourage us to talk open heartedly and teach us to love one another as spiritual brothers and sisters rather than Indian and American. Please accept my humble obeisances and forgive me if I made any mistakes in my assumption.

 

obeisances to you too ...

 

i dont think im senior to you . im stilll a student and getting educated ! in my final years though....

 

i see from your post that you are new to the forum !! i would advise you to hang on and extensively read through the old threads to have a better idea of why me and others are up in arms against iskcon . done that , you would perhaps concentrate more on doing something with such characters who are doing much to defame iskcon than requesting me............

 

i can appreciate the positive sides of iskcon and the work it has done in the last century to spread indian culture to the western lands . but no sane person with minimal self esteem would tolerate continuous hate posts and derogation of other thoughts( even hinduism ) , based on incorrect interpretations of many slokas and wrong teachings !!

 

if iskcon devotees had kept silent and allowed others to live in peace such questions would not have arisen at all !! please refer to the thread " shiva maha purana doubts" and check out what a gaudiya vaishnava administrator of this forum has to say in this regard . love others and you will also be loved-- simple logic which many iskconites fail to understand .

 

by the way i like your approach ......perhaps you could stay aroung the forum and provide a better picture of gaudiya philosophy than what others do .....

 

sorry if i have offended you . pranaam

[sant]

 

sant , you are free to show a sloka from any standard advaitist scripture stating that the goal is to become god or that the practice is to proclaim yourself as god ......

 

You got me wrong.I meant that they beleive they are already god as in everything is god,Brahman.The unity.There is no need to change.Everything is an illusion.What is true is The self brahman.which is same as atma.

 

Listen to quotes of yogananda-

Self-realization is the knowing in all parts of body, mind, and soul that you are now in possession of the kingdom of God; that you do not have to pray that it come to you; that God’s omnipresence is your omnipresence; and that all that you need to do is improve your knowing.

 

Ramakrishna-

His teaching, "Jive daya noy, Shiv gyane jiv seba" (not kindness to living beings, but serving the living being as Shiva Himself

this has stemmed from his advaitic point of view.

 

Sathya sai-Youre god you just have to realise it.

 

 

One of the Upanishad lines on whose basis advaits jump-

aham brahmasmi

 

 

Many quotes from the gita where the soul is referred to as ishwara

and upanishads where sometimes atma is reffered To as brahman.

 

How about more common shivohum -i am shiva

 

So is that enough.

[sant]

 

Tell it to any Advaitin and he will laugh more. He will laugh at your ignorance of what Advaita is. Btw, Christians and Muslims have little or no time for your Hare Krishna brand of worshipping Krishna idols either. It is an offense and you guys are hell bound. As far as they are concerned, there is no difference between the Hare Krishna & the Advaitin.

 

Why dont you stick to topics you are familiar with, instead of constantly puting your foot in your mouth? Or read Advaita from a proper source and then criticize the doctrine.

 

Aha so do you know anything about advait.I already said correct me if i am wrong.So insteading of poking at me just tell me what i said was wrong.

 

 

 

Btw, Christians and Muslims have little or no time for your Hare Krishna brand of worshipping Krishna idols either. It is an offense and you guys are hell bound. As far as they are concerned, there is no difference between the Hare Krishna & the Advaitin.

 

 

Cetrtainly you have forgotten that sonic yogi,bhaktjan melvin and the many iskcon followers in the world were christians earlier.

So what do you think of that.

[sant]

please delete

[kaisersose]

 

You got me wrong.I meant that they beleive they are already god as in everything is god,Brahman.The unity.There is no need to change.Everything is an illusion.What is true is The self brahman.which is same as atma.

 

Advaitins do not believe they are God or will become God. if you disagree, please show some clear evidence. "Prabhupada said so" is not evidence. It is tiresome to see Hare Krishnas repeating the same nonsense over and over again, escaping when asked for evidence and then returning again to post the same bunk all over again.

 

 

Listen to quotes of yogananda-

 

No. Yogananda is a neo age Guru, with a new age liberal philosophy suited for the "modern mind". He is not an authority on Advaita.

 

 

Ramakrishna-

 

No. Ramakrishna is a neo age Guru, with a new age liberal philosophy suited for the "modern mind". He is not an authority on Advaita.

 

 

Sathya sai-

 

Again a NO, for the same reasons as above.

 

 

One of the Upanishad lines on whose basis advaits jump-

aham brahmasmi

 

That is an upanishad statement. That applies to all Vedanta traditions and is not specific to Advaita.

 

 

How about more common shivohum -i am shiva

 

Which Advaitin Guru said this? Please post your source.

 

Cheers

[kaisersose]

 

Aha so do you know anything about advait.I already said correct me if i am wrong.So insteading of poking at me just tell me what i said was wrong.

 

I already have - several times.

 

 

Cetrtainly you have forgotten that sonic yogi,bhaktjan melvin and the many iskcon followers in the world were christians earlier.

So what do you think of that.

 

That is my point. They are ex-Christians because they cannot have one foot in Christianity and one in Gaudiya Vaishanvism. The exclusive nature of Christianity does not permit this. And that is why they are not Christians anymore, though they have soft sentiments towards the religion as can be seen by their Jesus = Vaishnava arguments.

 

No Christian will endorse a belief outside his church as valid. Catholics do not consider other variants of Christianity as religion. In fact, some Catholics consider non-catholic Christians as atheists. What to speak of non-Christian beliefs?

 

Cheers

[Kulapavana]

ha! that thread predictably turned into quite an all out brawl... jai!

 

Jesus of New Testament is most likely a composite character - lives of at least 3 separate people went into it (Jeshu the Magician, John the Baptist, Appolonius of Tyana - and Jesus of Nazareth, or Jesus the Nazarene if he indeed had a separate existence).

 

Whether it was invented by 'disgruntled Jews' or followers of this new religion from a different ethnic group is really beside the point.

 

Still, there is no harm believing that Jesus of New Testament is a historical person. It is a positive and a heart warming story, just like the one about Santa Claus. I like the Santa Claus story better, because no religious wars were ever waged in his name.

[sant]

 

Advaitins do not believe they are God or will become God. if you disagree, please show some clear evidence. "Prabhupada said so" is not evidence. It is tiresome to see Hare Krishnas repeating the same nonsense over and over again, escaping when asked for evidence and then returning again to post the same bunk all over again.

 

 

Quote:

 

What proof do you want.All these advaitists are not advaitists and you know truly what is advait.All these renowned great saints are not advait but what you think is advait is the real advait.

 

OK TELL ME IS THIS ALSO UNTRUE

 

Brahman

According to Adi Shankara, God, the Supreme Cosmic Spirit or Brahman (pronounced [ˈbrəh.mən]; nominative singular Brahma, [ˈbrəh.mə]) is the One, the whole and the only reality. Other than Brahman, everything else, including the universe, material objects and individuals, are false. Brahman is at best described as that infinite, omnipresent, omnipotent, incorporeal, impersonal, transcendent reality that is the divine ground of all Being. Brahman is often described as neti neti meaning "not this, not this" because it cannot be correctly described as this or that. It is the origin of this and that, the origin of forces, substances, all of existence, the undefined, the basis of all, unborn, the essential truth, unchanging, eternal, the absolute. How can it be properly described as something in the material world when itself is the basis of reality? Brahman is also beyond the senses, it would be akin a blind man trying to correctly describe color. It (grammatically neutral, but exceptionally treated as masculine), though not a substance, is the basis of the material world, which in turn is its illusionary transformation. Brahman is not the effect of the world. Brahman is said to be the purest knowledge itself, and is illuminant like a source of infinite light.

Due to ignorance (avidyā), the Brahman is visible as the material world and its objects. The actual Brahman is attributeless and formless (see Nirguna Brahman). It is the Self-existent, the Absolute and the Imperishable (not generally the object of worship but rather of meditation)[citation needed]. Brahman is actually indescribable. It is at best "Satchidananda" (merging "Sat" + "Chit" + "Ananda", ie, Infinite Truth, Infinite Consciousness and Infinite Bliss). Also, Brahman is free from any kind of differences. It does not have any sajātīya (homogeneous) differences because there is no second Brahman. It does not have any vijātīya (heterogeneous) differences because there is nobody in reality existing other than Brahman. It has neither svagata (internal) differences, because Brahman is itself homogeneous

 

Which Advaitin Guru said this? Please post your source.

 

Avdhut shivanand.