[Advaita-l] Power of Brahman

[Venkatraghavan S]

>
>
> If someone knows Brahman as 'object' such is not the Upanishadic Brahma
> jnanam.
>

Very true.

Yes, advaita does not permit kartr karma virodha, but this is a fallacy
only when the subject is objectified by the action. However advaita does
not talk of the knowledge of Brahman as objectification of the self by
knowledge.

So what does knowing Brahman mean in advaita?

The Kena mantra नाहं मन्ये सुवेदेति नो न वेदेति वेद च illustrates this
beautifully. The student says - I do not consider that I know Brahman, nor
do I consider that I do not know Brahman at all, for I do know it.

As an explanation for the apparent contradiction, we need to look at mantra
4 of the first chapter, अन्यदेव तद्विदितादथो अविदितादधि. Brahman is that
which is different from the known and the unknown.

shankarAchArya says in the bhAShya - विदितं नाम यद्विदिक्रिययातिशयेनाप्तं
विदिक्रियाकर्मभूतम् ।  The known is that which is eminently obtained
through the action of knowing, that which happens to be the object of the
verb "to know". Brahman is different from such a known entity. Does it mean
it is unknown?

No, it is not unknown either, because the shruti says it is different from
the unknown. What is the unknown here? ShankarAchArya says:
अविदितात् विदितविपरीतादव्याकृतादविद्यालक्षणाद्व्याकृतबीजात् । अधि इति
उपर्यर्थे ; लक्षणया अन्यदित्यर्थः । "From unknown" means from the opposite
of the known, ie from the unmanifest, indicated by the term ignorance, the
seed of the manifest. Above the unknown means, that which is different from
such an unknown.

Therefore, Brahman is not objectified by knowledge, it is not unknown
because it is different from ignorance which is the cause of not knowing.
It is not nothing either, because the student in the  Shruti says वेद च - I
do know it. What is it then?

ShankarAchArya concludes - न ह्यन्यस्य स्वात्मनो विदिताविदिताभ्यामन्यत्वं
वस्तुनः सम्भवतीत्यात्मा ब्रह्मेत्येष वाक्यार्थः The meaning of the sentence
(अन्यदेव तद्विदितादथो अविदितादधि) is that Brahman cannot be anything but
the Atma, because that which is different from the known and the unknown
cannot be anything but the Atma.

Thus when the student says नो न वेदेति वेद च, he is saying I the Self, am
Brahman, the knower of Brahman - ब्रह्मविदाप्नोति परम्.

Kind regards,
Venkatraghavan