Aham Brahmasmi - please help me understand this verse

October 2, 2005

Hare Krishna and all glories to Sri Sri Guru and Gauranga

I posted this on another board but got no responses /images/graemlins/frown.gif

I need some help understanding a verse from the Brihad-Aranyaka Upanishad (1.4.10):

brahma va idam agra asit, tad atmanam evavet, aham brahmasmiti: tasmat tat sarvam abhavat, tad yo yo devanam pratyabudhyata, sa eva tad abhavat, tatha rsinam, tatha manusyanam. taddhaitat pasyan rsir vama-devah pratipede, aham manur abhavam suryas ceti, tad idam api etarhi ya evam veda, aham brahmasmiti sa idam sarvam bhavati; tasya ha na devas ca nabhutya isate, atma hy esam sa bhavati. atha yo anyam devatam upaste, anyo' sau anyo' ham asmiti, na sa veda; yatha pasur, evam sa devanam; yatha ha vai bahavah pasavo manusyam bhunjyuh, evam ekaikah puruso devan bhunakti; ekasminn eva pasav adiyamane'priyam bhavati, kim u bahusu? tasmad esam tan na priyam yad etan manusya vidyuh.

This is one of the most "famous" verses of the Upanishads, because it contains the "Aham Brahmasmi" phrase. The "Aham Brahmasmi" part of the verse has been explained many times by Srila Prabhupada and various other Vaishnava acaryas.

My question is really regarding the rest of the verse. This verse, in really straight-forward language (unusual for an Upanishad!), clearly states, that you must consider yourself Brahman,(Aham Brahmasmi), AND if you regard God as Someone other than you, then you are like an animal bound to a peg for sacrifice, and you are a victim.

Now, as I said, the Aham Brahmasmi phrase of this verse has been explained very well. But the rest of the verse creates some confusion in my mind. This verse clearly states, in the beginning there was God, who was full of and with Himself. And it is this fullness and knowledge that we must develop and (the troubling part) not consider any difference between us and Him. Further, it goes on to specify that IF we consider ANY difference between us and Him, then we are fools.

any help would be greatly appreciated!

Haribol

October 2, 2005

different teachings for different peoples... some are in the mode of worship and others in the mode of mergence. I won't say which one is higher/lower but different people find their respective beliefs within their own capacity to understand/comprehend/love.

Therefore God has given these different paths with different philosophies. Ultimately everyone comes to the Truth, whichever that may be. For me, regarding God as separate may well be foolish but I think it is easier to love that way. Well, at least i try anyway.

G.

October 2, 2005

Brahman is simply the unconditioned state of consciousness, nothing more. It isn't what people call God, that's a common misunderstanding. Purushottama, which is beyond Brahman or unconditioned state, is God, if at all you need to use that term.

Do not confuse Brahman with Purushottama. Aham Brahasmi or "I am brahman" doesn't mean "I am God." It means you're in the nirguna state where no factor conditions your consciousness. That doesn't make you God. That's why you never find any verseas like "I am Purushottama" and so forth.

October 2, 2005

Let me see if i can explain..

To your last statement - " it goes on to specify that IF we consider ANY difference between us and Him, then we are fools"

Isnt that our philosophy- inconcieveble simultaneous oneness and difference!

First of all, this statement does not in any way capture the entire position of God and individual entities and so we cannot consider this as a complete statement. It only goes so far to explain the concept of the supreme brahman and us (the individual souls).

It only says, there is no difference between HIM and us which is true because we are truly like GOD satcit and ananda. In that capacity we are like HIM. Also, Srila Prabhupada always says we are part and parcel of Krishna.

The Gita also says, i am in everybody and everybody is in me. If you see that statement, it means we are part of Krishna. It is similar to this statment where it says, both God and individual souls are not different.

"AND if you regard God as Someone other than you, then you are like an animal bound to a peg for sacrifice, and you are a victim"

Yes we are not different from GOD-it is 100% true. It does not say we are GOD or we merge in GOD. It says we are not different from GOD. Becoming/merging with GOD is different from we are not different from GOD. There is a lot of room for interpretation for both. Lord Chaitanya's philosohpy clearly captures this portion of "We are not different from God" when Srila Prabhupada says we are QAULITATIVELY the same as GOD but QUANTITATIVELY different.

So, i take it using Srila Prabhupada words, we are not different from God only in the capacity that we are not different qualitatively but we are different from God quantitatively.

and HOW this is POSSIBLE- I DONT KNOW and that is why Lord CHaitanya said IT IS ACINTYA (INCONCIEVEBLE).

Haribol!

anand