jnAni = brahman BUT brahman is not jnAni

[Guest guest]

praNAms

Hare Krishna

 

The subject equation is newly found equation for me in advaita...Perhaps this equation would be the result of analogy bangles & rings are gold but gold is not rings nor bangles OR bhagavan krishna's words in geeta that : " they are in me but I am not there in them " . OK this is quite acceptable since according to advaita brahman is attributeless (nirguNa), shapeless (nirAkAra), nirAmaya, nirvishesha..And to point out this truth 'not this not this' is the only highest teaching...When this is taken as the teaching of brahman then there is no need to specifically mention jnAni is brahman but brahman is not jnAni...This singling out jnAni is not at all required in the context of realization jnAni's brahman realization...Moreover, if we say categorically brahmaN is NOT jnAni, we should be in a position to objectify this brahman & clear cut idea about brahman to make it different from jnAni...that is needless to mention out of proportion...Because realization here is not mere understanding it is becoming or realizing that he is secondless THAT..If brahman is not Atman of every being and if we say brahman is NOT Atman, then we are forced to say brahman is mere fictious character that can be found only in the words of shAstra..No advaitin would accept this type of equation...As far as I know no advaita Acharya has propagated this type of equation..Not even bhAmati or vivaraNa schools for that matter...This is only a concocted equation to suit their pet theory that jnAni even realization carries his own set of indriya-s...

 

Whenever scriptures points at jnAni (jnAni in an absolute sense) it says jnAni is Atma svarUpa.. But the question needs to be asked here is can brahman be known without treating that it is nothing but our Atman?? If this brahman is not our Atman then we cannot prove the existence of brahman..then it will be *shunya* only...Shankara expressly states that brahman is Atman, point to be noted here is, it is not comparison like brahman is like AkAsha (AkAshavat sarvagatasTha nityaH etc)...coz. elsewhere shankara says AkAsha is the kArya of brahman...but nowhere he says Atman is the kArya of brahman to make it different from brahman. OTOH, he without any ambiguity declares abhedena Atmaiva brahma, brahmaiva Atma ityevaM sarvAtmA vaishvAnarO brahma sa AtmA ityetat sidddhaM bhavati..(chAndOgya bhAshya 5-11-1) Since jnAni is nothing but Atman or Atma svarUpa there is absolutely no bedha he is brahman and brahman is Atman...After all, all upanishads start their teaching to show the unity of Atman only (Atmaikatva vidyA pratipattaye)..And shruti confirms that this Atman is brahman (ayamAtma brahma)..since brahman which is unobjectifiable by any means has to be realized solely by means of the concept of Atman (ekAtma pratyaya sAraM)..When Sri pranipat chaitanya prabhuji tried to brought this point that jnAni = Atman and hence Atman is equal to brahman, so brahman is NOT jnAni is shruti, yukti and anubhava viruddha, he has been sidelined by relentless attack by holding the jnAni's BMI as a concrete reality...Atman/brahman is not an adventitious thing and one should regard it as our innermost self ..Why go elsewhere, go to the chAndOgya it clearly says this subtle principle all this universe has it for its essence that is reality that is Atman, and that is you shvetaketu...

 

But main problem here who say brahman is not jnAni..they only still seeing the jnAni-s body, mind & intellect & his conditioned chaitanya and they are not seeing him as Atma svarUpa..This is due to dehAdhyAsa...They are not able to think beyond the boundaries of deha, , indriya, manObuddhi ahaMkAra.. That is the reason why they are forced to say as long as jnAni associated with his BMI he is brahma jnAni and 'after' giving up his BMI, the absolute merger would happen etc. etc. This stand clearly shows that they are giving undue importance to jnAni's body, whereas jnAni is Atma svarUpa.

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar