Guest guest Posted September 16, 2008 Report Share Posted September 16, 2008 advaitin , " Mouna " <maunna wrote: > > Pranams All, > > A person pointed out to me two days that there are contradictions in > the 'major' Upanishads. Since I am only beginning this study, I was > attentive to his statements. He pointed out to the Taittiriya Up., > 2nd Valli, verse 7, where it reads: > > " asad va idam agra asit tato va sad > ajayata tad atmanam svayam akuruta " > > (one of the translations read:) > " In the beginning all this was non-existent. From it was born what > exists. That created Itself by Itself; therefore It is called the > self-made. " > or according to another translation: > " In the beginning this was indeed Non-Being. From that, Being sprang > up. That of itself assumed a self. " > > And of course this seems to contradict that existence is eternal (it > cannot come into existence from... non existence). It seems to also > contradict Bhagavan Krishna's statement that the unreal cannot come > into being and the real never ceases to exist. > I found another translation that makes more sense from the Advaita > Vedanta point of view that reads " un-manifest " instead of > " non-existent " or " non-being " . > Does the Taittiriya speaks about the unfolding, potential state > wherefrom the manifest springs, or simply is stating a " sunya " reality > as cause? > Would any of the learned members throw a light regarding this specific > translation of the word " asad/asat " beginning this verse of the > Taittiriya Up? > > Thank you as always, for your attention and time. > > Yours in All, > Mouna Dear Michael-ji, In his bhAshya on the mantra from taitt. up. quoted by you, Shankara says:-- asad iti vyAkRitanAmarUpavisheShaviparItarUpam avyAkRitam brahma ucyate. na punaH atyantam eva asat. na hi asataH sajjanma asti. asad iti- By `asad' avyAkRitam brahma- brahman as the unmanifest, vyAkRitanAmarUpavisheShaviparItarUpam- which is opposite to that characterized by manifest names and forms. ucyate- is meant. na punah- not certainly, atyantam eva asat- totally non-existent. asataH- from the non-existent, sajjanma- the birth of the existent, na hi asti- there cannot be at all. Thus the meaning is that the names and forms were in potential, unmanifest state before they became manifest. avyAkRita means unmanifest and not non-existent. Shankara specifically says here that this word does not mean `non-existent'. Best wishes, S.N.Sastri Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 16, 2008 Report Share Posted September 16, 2008 Namaste, Whether it is 'non-existent' or 'unmanifest' can only be known by travelling into the 'future' which happens only when one is 'realised'. Till then one may treat it either way depending upon one's belief / faith/understanding/logic etc acceptable/convenient to oneself. In any case Bhagavan's refernce to the same in 'gita' verse 2/16 (nAsato....darsHibHihiH) is enough for one's purpose to choose the path/things/thoughts/directions on the journey to deeper spiritual knowledge & understanding. Counting the trees the chances of missing the path is more. Be Alert and Be Aware. Regards Balagopal Unlimited freedom, unlimited storage. Get it now, on http://help./l/in//mail/mail/tools/tools-08.html/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 16, 2008 Report Share Posted September 16, 2008 " snsastri " <sn.sastri wrote: > Thus the meaning is that the names and forms were in potential, > unmanifest state before they became manifest. > avyAkRita means unmanifest and not non-existent. Shankara > specifically says here that this word does not mean `non-existent'. > Best wishes, > S.N.Sastri > Sri Sastriji, Pranams Thank you so much for this prompt and very precise answer. My humble Respects, Yours in Bhagavan, Mouna Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 16, 2008 Report Share Posted September 16, 2008 advaitin , " Mouna " <maunna wrote: > Sri Sastriji, Pranams > > Thank you so much for this prompt and very precise answer. > > My humble Respects, > Yours in Bhagavan, > Mouna Dear Mouna-ji, I am sorry I wrongly addressed you as Michael-ji. Such confusion is common in old age. Best wishes, S.N.Sastri Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 16, 2008 Report Share Posted September 16, 2008 " snsastri " <sn.sastri wrote: > Dear Mouna-ji, > I am sorry I wrongly addressed you as Michael-ji. Such confusion is > common in old age. > Best wishes, > S.N.Sastri > Respectd Sri Sastriji, What is not common in old age is Clarity and Firmness of Understanding, Honesty with Oneself and a Humble Heart. You seem to embody all these qualities to my still clouded eyes. My humble respects, Mouna 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.