Cause of Creation

Subrahmanian, Sundararaman V [IT] sundararaman.v.subrahmanian at CITIGROUP.COM
Wed Nov 13 16:32:03 CST 2002

> Also infiniteness need not imply non-duality. It does not even imply
> completeness. Set of rational numbers is infinite -- it is neither
> non-dual and nor it is complete. By infinite, it is meant bhagavAn
> incomprehensible and immeasurable.  And by complete it is
> meant that he
> is innately content and does not need anything external to sustain him
> or his state of pure joy.

The verse "ekam eva advitiyam brahma" of Chandogya is very pertinent in this
case.  Brahman is said to be both single and non-dual.  Something could be
non-dual, but may be part of a set of such elements.  "single" takes care of
it.  Being single does not preclude that it has parts. "Non-dual" takes care
of it.  Single and Non-Dual are essential to complete the definition.

By completeness, the main idea is that there is no "other".

Swami Dayananda Sarasvati says:
Advaitins don't say:  There is ONLY ONE God.
Advaitins instead say:  There is ONLY God.

My 2c worth.

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list