neti neti

Sankaran Jayanarayanan sjayana at HOTMAIL.COM
Tue Mar 31 14:15:57 CST 1998

Anand Hudli <anandhudli at HOTMAIL.COM> wrote:

>  Jonathan Bricklin wrote:
> >Anand,
> >
> >Thank you for your ever as always thoughtful and penetrating
> >
> >You end, though, with a question that seems too easy to answer:
> >
> >"If the Shruti were to
> > declare only that "Brahman is all there is", what is there to
> > negate with "neti neti"?"
> >
> >The quick answer, which probably means I don't understand the
> >would be:
> >
> >Anything and everything that claims its absolute status.
>  My question was intended to be more rhetorical than anything else!
>  But your answer does point out one thing. It presupposes the
>  (at least apparent) existence of "anything and everything that
>  claims its absolute status." Unless we admit such an (albeit
>  apparent) existence there is no use of the "neti neti" principle.


A similar doubt once occurred to me and I was referred to a Zen homepage
by Giri, which provided a beautiful answer to my question.

When the disciple is instructed,"Everything is the Buddha," the
intellect comes to the conclusion that there is nothing to be done, and
spiritual degeneration takes place, because *the intellect is not the
Self*. The truth that "Everything is the Buddha" is to be grasped by the
Self and not the intellect.

> Anand


Get Your Private, Free Email at

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list