[Advaita-l] Fwd: Knowledge of Brahman

[Ravi Kiran]

// a person can be said to be videhamukta when he realized Brahman..

Sorry, in the above context of realization of Brahman (स एष नेति
नेत्यात्मा....यत्र त्वस्य सर्वमात्मैवाभूत् ...तत्केन कं विजानीयात्? ..एतावदरे
खल्वमृतत्वमिति), could not relate to this linking to koshas ...

ज्ञानादेव कैवल्यम्

On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 10:18 PM, Sunil Bhattacharjya <
sunil_bhattacharjya at yahoo.com> wrote:

> The Koshas are neither my creation nor my imagination. Vedanta does talk
> about the Koshas.
>
>
>
>
> On Thursday, November 12, 2015 4:05 AM, Ravi Kiran <
> ravikiranm108 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> Namaste
>
> // a person can be said to be videhamukta when he realized Brahman but the
> leaving of all the Koshas may not be instantaneous
>
> when Sruti clearly says - न तस्य प्राणा उत्क्रामन्ति,
>  ब्रह्म विद् ब्रह्मैव भवति - the knower of Brahman is Brahman itself.
> ब्रह्मैव सन्ब्रह्माप्येति - Being but Brahman, he is merged in Brahman
>
> why emphasize on the upAdhis ( Koshas ) and its dropping  and importance
> of videhamukti?
>
> what is the relevance of this Kosha in paramArtha jnAna ( realization ) ?
>
> Are you indicating that realization is not complete by Itself, until body
> drops away?
>
> Any Sruti refs ?
>
> Regards
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 12:46 PM, Sunil Bhattacharjya <
> sunil_bhattacharjya at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Namaste,
>
> I will suggest that you read the Vivekachudamani again , if you read it
> long ago. I read it many years ago but  the experience of reading the
> Vivekachudamani is actually unforgettable for most of the readers. . Anyway
> I will give you a hint. If you turn of the switch  the overhead fan would
> not stop immediately and it would take sometime to stop, even though the
> process of stopping started the moment you turned off the switch. So also a
> person can be said to be videhamukta when he realized Brahman but the
> leaving of all the Koshas may not be instantaneous, the way the fan does
> not stop at the very instant you turn off the switch. May be you will like
> to ponder over this.
>
> Regards,
> Sunil KB
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, November 11, 2015 7:19 PM, Ravi Kiran <
> ravikiranm108 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 1:24 AM, Sunil Bhattacharjya via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
> Namaste,
> The Upanishada does talk about the five Koshas. After the Jiva  leaves
> behind the Sthula sarira, which consists of the Annamaya Kosha and the
> Pranamaya Kosha, it is left with Sukshma sarira, which consists of the
> three finer Koshas. The Jiva will have to leave the Sukshma sarira too, to
> become Videha-mukta, in order to become free from the Maya. It is Maya,
> which creates the false division between the Jiva and Brahman.
>
>
> अथाकामयमानः—योऽकामो
> निष्काम आप्तकाम आत्मकामो न तस्य प्राणा उत्क्रामन्ति,
> ब्रह्मैव सन्ब्रह्माप्येति ॥ ६ ॥
>
> Bri Up - 4.4.6
>
>
> He who sees the Self, as in the state of profound sleep, as
> undifferentiated, one without a second, and as the constant light of Pure
> Intelligence—only this disinterested man has no work and consequently no
> cause for transmigration; therefore his organs such as that of speech do
> not depart. Rather this man of realisation is Brahman in this very life,
> although he seems to have a body. *Being but Brahman, he is merged in
> Brahman.* Because he has no desires that cause the limitation of
> non-Brahmanhood, therefore ‘being but Brahman he is merged in Brahman’ in
> this very life, not after the body falls. A man of realisation, after his
> death, has no change of condition—something different from what he was in
> life, but he is only not connected with another body. This is what is meant
> by his becoming ‘merged in
> <http://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/the-brihadaranyaka-upanishad/d/doc122058.html#page-721>Brahman’;
> for if liberation was a change of condition, it would contradict the unity
> of the Self that all the Upaniṣads seek to teach. And liberation would be
> the effect of work, not of knowledge—which nobody would desire. Further, it
> would become transitory, for nothing that has been produced by an action is
> seen to be eternal, but liberation is admitted to be eternal, as the Mantra
> says, ‘This is the eternal glory (of a knower of Brahman),’ etc. (IV. iv.
> 23).
>
> ...
>
> for the Supreme Self is the only entity that exists. As the Śruti says,
> ‘One only without a second’ (Ch. VI. ii. 1.). And there is no other entity
> that is bound, whose freedom from bondage, as from fetters, would be
> liberation,  the cessation of ignorance alone is commonly called
> liberation...
>
>
> तदेष श्लोको भवति ।
>     यदा सर्वे प्रमुच्यन्ते कामा येऽस्य हृदि श्रिताः ।
>     अथ मर्त्योऽमृतो भवत्यत्र ब्रह्म समश्नुत ॥ इति ।
> तद्यथाहिनिर्व्लयनी वल्मीके मृता प्रत्यस्ता शयीत, एवमेवेदं शरीरं शेते,
> अथायमशरीरोऽमृतः प्राणो ब्रह्मैव तेज एव; सोऽहं भगवते सहस्रं ददामीति होवाच
> जनको वैदेहः ॥ ७ ॥
> .....
> But how is it that when the organs have been merged, and the body also has
> dissolved in its cause, the liberated sage lives in the body identified
> with all, but does not revert to his former embodied existence, which is
> subject to transmigration? The answer is being given: Here is an
> illustration in point. *Just as *in the world *the lifeless slough of a
> snake is cast off* by it as no more being a part of itself, *and lies in
> the ant* - *hill,* or any other nest of a snake, *so does this body, *discarded
> as non-self by the liberated man, who corresponds to the snake, *lie* like
> dead.
> ....
> आत्मानं चेद्विजानीयादयमस्मीति पूरुषः ।
> किमिच्छन्कस्य कामाय शरीरमनुसंज्वरेत् ॥ १२ ॥
>
> If a man knows the Self as ‘I am this,’ then desiring what and for whose
> sake will he suffer in the wake of the body?
> ...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>