[Advaita-l] Accounting for Brahman appearing as the world

[Ravi Kiran]

Namaste Sri Bhaskarji

On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 4:10 PM, Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com> wrote:

> praNAms Sri Ravi Kiran prabhuji
> Hare Krishna
>
> How is the identity of the Atman with the Brahman ( Supreme Lord mentioned
> below) established by negation itself?
>
> >  The negation should end with brahman and it should not end with
> 'shUnyaM' clarifies bhAshyakAra.  BTW, the negation is there not to
> establish identity between Atman and brahman, it is there to reject the
> anAtma vastu through that establishing the AtmaikatvaM.  And this identity
> is not like : I am such and such a person (Atman)  and would like to
> identify myself with such and such other person (brahman).  The negation
> (neti neti) is there to denote brahman is nirvishesha, nirguNa, niravayava
> etc. Hence the words like satyaM, jnAnaM etc. too are not depicting the
> brahman / Atman, for that matter even the word 'Atman' itself not denoting
> THAT that which is inexplicable.  Brahman or THAT is without genus and so
> cannot be expressed by words like 'being', nor has it any quality /
> attribute..it is by its very nature free from all qualities and
> attributes.  It is because of this reason only the only means to express
> the inexpressible is to point out it by negation by calling neti neti ...


Yes, by negation, if it is said, the inexpressible revealed is Kutastha
Atman, then the question is, how its aikya with upanisadic Brahman is
established ? how is the sruti maha vAkya interpreted based on
sAmAnAdhikaraNya and lakshaNa nirUpaNa.

I think, it is extensively discussed and clarified in this thread itself,
but based on one of the later responses on negation, I had the above
clarification. You may want to read the entire series of emails on this
subject to know the full context.


> which is the highest teaching of brahman's nirvisheshatva.
>
> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
> bhaskar
>
> Thanks