[Advaita-l] Fwd: Omnipresence

[श्रीमल्ललितालालितः]

*श्रीमल्ललितालालितः*www.lalitaalaalitah.com




> I don't see a contradiction sir. Brahman cannot be completely  described
> with one sentence is what it means.
>
There is no talk of description in veda-s, it's all about it's validity as
pramANa.
If it has to be accepted as pramANa, it must generate pramA.
To generate pramA of brahman, it must propound it.



> Brahman has to be experienced. Just as emotions cannot be described but
> only experienced.
>

Brahman can't be experienced is what 'na manaH' said, and now if you say
'it has to be experienced' --- shows the contradiction and even negation by
that veda-vAkya.
So, using these words so losely is not good.

> For the mind to take initial steps towards experiencing Brahman and
> feeling the oneness the indicating marks are important.
>

If vAk can't say it, and manaH can't percieve it -- as was claimed; then
how this sentence is even meaningful?

The whole idea of commenting last post was that the expression was unclear
and was so bad that it can easily create illusion in many.
And part of expression was wrong too.

BTW, your post is also not able to support or clarify anything.