Guest guest Report post Posted October 8, 2004 Hi All What is Aham Brahmasmi Thanks Sangeetha Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted October 8, 2004 SRINIVASA Dear Sangeetha: A very profound question that has it's roots in the Vedas and Unpanishads and is interpreted various ways by various philosophers and sages. As always in the Upanishads, the implied meaning is far more rigorous than the literal meaning, which in this case means "I am Brahman" - not be confused with the Chathurmukaha Brhaman. I will be happy to discuss with you on this - please contact me directly rsravi Thank you, Adiyen Ravi Rajagopal [] Friday, October 08, 2004 8:23 AM Aham Brahmasmi Hi All What is Aham Brahmasmi Thanks Sangeetha Links Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted October 9, 2004 Adiyen feel that this can be discussed on the board only. I am waiting to learn dasan/raghavan R Ravi <rsravi wrote: SRINIVASA Dear Sangeetha: A very profound question that has it's roots in the Vedas and Unpanishads and is interpreted various ways by various philosophers and sages. As always in the Upanishads, the implied meaning is far more rigorous than the literal meaning, which in this case means "I am Brahman" - not be confused with the Chathurmukaha Brhaman. I will be happy to discuss with you on this - please contact me directly rsravi Thank you, Adiyen Ravi Rajagopal [] Friday, October 08, 2004 8:23 AM Aham Brahmasmi Hi All What is Aham Brahmasmi Thanks Sangeetha / vote. - Register online to vote today! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted October 11, 2004 Dear Srinivas, The Q1 is a oft repeated qurrey. Aham Brahma asmi, is a sutric statement which all 3 of the acharyas take. Only the interpretation differs. If you take this with tat tvam asi and other aphorism's Emperumanar's definition fits logically. Yr Q2, why people go to other gods? Answers are many. Let me give a simple logic For the work that can be done by the municipal clerk, you dont go to the Collector correct. That is it. Dasan/raghavan Sv5679 wrote: Dear members --------------------- Namaste to all. Can somebody clarify these questions ? Question 1: ----------------- "Aham Brahmasmi" (meaning that I am Bramhan) is the philosophy propounded By Sri Sankaracharya, who started the Advaita philosophy ? Is this true ? Question 2 ------------------ Lord Krishna tells in Geeta that "people with low intelligence pray other Gods "Anthavathhu phalam thesham thadbhavatyalpa medhasam..". All our scholars read this, but still they pary other Gods like Shiva, Ganapthi etc ? Why is this ? In the temples of Lor Vishnu also in USA, I see people pray other Gods ? Is this because they are overpowered by His Maya ? Srinivas Sv5679 vote. - Register online to vote today! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted October 11, 2004 DEAR SRINIVAS, Aham BRAHMASMI IS A VAKYA FROM UPANISHAD.IT IS CONSIDERED BY SHANKARA TO BE A MAHAVAKYA & HE BASED HIS PHILOSOPHY ON SUCH MAHAVAKYAS & WROTE COMMENTARIES ON THE UPANISHADS,BRAHMASUTRAS & GITA (PRASTHANA TRAYAS)& INTERPRETED THEM IN THE LIGHT OF HIS ADVAITA PHILOSOPHY & HELD OTHER UPANISHADIC STATEMENTS WHICH CONTRADICTED HIS PHILOSOPHY AS INFERIOR IN NATURE. SIMILARLY SRI MADVACHARYA HELD THE ABHEDA STATEMENTS AS INFERIOR & COMMENTED ON THE PRASTHANA TRAYAS IN THE LIGHT OF HIS DWAITA PHILOSOPHY. SRI RAMANUJA FELT THAT WE HAVE NO AUTHORITY TO HOLD STATEMENTS OF VEDAS AS INFERIOR & CAME FORTH WITH A WONDERFUL BHASHYA ON THE PRASTHANA TRAYAS WHICH RECONCILED ALL THE ABEDA & BEDA STATEMENTS BY HIS SHARIRA SHARIRI CONCEPT. SHRI SHANKARA SAID JEEVA IS NOT A REALITY & BRAHMAN IS IDENTIFYING ITSELF AS JEEVATMA DUE TO IGNORANCE. SRI MADHVA SAID THAT JEEVA & BRAHMAN ARE TWO MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE REALITIES. SRI RAMANUJA SAID JEEVA & BRAHMAN ARE NOT MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE BUT JEEVA HAS A INSEPARABLE EXISTENCE FROM BRAHMAN.THE BODY 'S SOLE EXISTENCE IS BASED ON ATMA.SIMILARLY JEEVATMA 'S EXISTENCE IS BASED ON BRAHMAN. AS MANY A TIMES A PERSON'S BODY IS REFERRED AS THE PERSON ITSELF ,JEEVATMA IS REFERRED AS PARAMATMA IN SCRIPTURES.THE JEEVATMA IS TOTALLY CONTROLLED BY PARAMATMA. HENCE AHAM BRAHMASMI MEANS SINCE BRAHMAN IS THE ANTAYARYAMI OF ME ,I MAY BE REFERRED AS BRAHMAN ITSELF.JEEVA & BRAHMAN ARE LIKE FLOWER & ITS FRAGRANCE ,LIKE CLOTH & ITS COLOUR.THEY ARE INSEPAREBLE ORGANIC UNIT. AS YOU RIGHTLY POINTED OUT, DUE TO IGNORANCE OF THE NATURE OF THE PARAMATMA, PEOPLE WORSHIP DEMIGODS.SRI KRISHNA SAYS THOUGH THE EFFORTS IN WORSHIP OF HIM & DEMIGODS ARE THE SAME ,PEOPLE GET LIMITED FRUITS FROM THEM WHILE IF THEY WORSHIP HIM, THEY GET THE LIMITLESS MOKSHA ANANDAM.SRI SHANKARA ALSO HAS COMMENTED THUS ON THIS SHLOKA.HE SAYS THAT THE LORD FEELS SORRY FOR SUCH PEOPLE. DASAN On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 Vijaya Raghavan wrote : > > >Dear Srinivas, > >The Q1 is a oft repeated qurrey. Aham Brahma asmi, is a sutric statement which all 3 >of the acharyas take. Only the interpretation differs. If you take this with tat tvam asi >and other aphorism's Emperumanar's definition fits logically. > >Yr Q2, why people go to other gods? Answers are many. Let me give a simple logic >For the work that can be done by the municipal clerk, you dont go to the Collector >correct. That is it. > >Dasan/raghavan > >Sv5679 wrote: >Dear members >--------------------- >Namaste to all. >Can somebody clarify these questions ? > >Question 1: >----------------- >"Aham Brahmasmi" (meaning that I am Bramhan) >is the philosophy propounded By Sri Sankaracharya, >who started the Advaita philosophy ? Is this true ? > >Question 2 >------------------ >Lord Krishna tells in Geeta that "people with low >intelligence pray other Gods "Anthavathhu phalam >thesham thadbhavatyalpa medhasam..". All our >scholars read this, but still they pary other Gods like >Shiva, Ganapthi etc ? Why is this ? In the temples of >Lor Vishnu also in USA, I see people pray other Gods ? Is this >because they are overpowered by His Maya ? > > >Srinivas >Sv5679 > > > > >vote. - Register online to vote today! > > > > Links > > > > > > > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted October 11, 2004 Dear Sri. Vasn and Sri Raghavan -------------- 1. Namaste. Thanks for the clarifications. 2. It is very nice to know that there are some people, like you, in our community, who take pains to clarify such doubts. Srinivas Sv5679 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted October 12, 2004 Vasan Swami, thanks for explanation. Dasan/raghavan Vasan Sriranga Chari <vasan_chari_hk wrote: DEAR SRINIVAS, Aham BRAHMASMI IS A VAKYA FROM UPANISHAD.IT IS CONSIDERED BY SHANKARA TO BE A MAHAVAKYA & HE BASED HIS PHILOSOPHY ON SUCH MAHAVAKYAS & WROTE COMMENTARIES ON THE UPANISHADS,BRAHMASUTRAS & GITA (PRASTHANA TRAYAS)& INTERPRETED THEM IN THE LIGHT OF HIS ADVAITA PHILOSOPHY & HELD OTHER UPANISHADIC STATEMENTS WHICH CONTRADICTED HIS PHILOSOPHY AS INFERIOR IN NATURE. SIMILARLY SRI MADVACHARYA HELD THE ABHEDA STATEMENTS AS INFERIOR & COMMENTED ON THE PRASTHANA TRAYAS IN THE LIGHT OF HIS DWAITA PHILOSOPHY. SRI RAMANUJA FELT THAT WE HAVE NO AUTHORITY TO HOLD STATEMENTS OF VEDAS AS INFERIOR & CAME FORTH WITH A WONDERFUL BHASHYA ON THE PRASTHANA TRAYAS WHICH RECONCILED ALL THE ABEDA & BEDA STATEMENTS BY HIS SHARIRA SHARIRI CONCEPT. SHRI SHANKARA SAID JEEVA IS NOT A REALITY & BRAHMAN IS IDENTIFYING ITSELF AS JEEVATMA DUE TO IGNORANCE. SRI MADHVA SAID THAT JEEVA & BRAHMAN ARE TWO MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE REALITIES. SRI RAMANUJA SAID JEEVA & BRAHMAN ARE NOT MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE BUT JEEVA HAS A INSEPARABLE EXISTENCE FROM BRAHMAN.THE BODY 'S SOLE EXISTENCE IS BASED ON ATMA.SIMILARLY JEEVATMA 'S EXISTENCE IS BASED ON BRAHMAN. AS MANY A TIMES A PERSON'S BODY IS REFERRED AS THE PERSON ITSELF ,JEEVATMA IS REFERRED AS PARAMATMA IN SCRIPTURES.THE JEEVATMA IS TOTALLY CONTROLLED BY PARAMATMA. HENCE AHAM BRAHMASMI MEANS SINCE BRAHMAN IS THE ANTAYARYAMI OF ME ,I MAY BE REFERRED AS BRAHMAN ITSELF.JEEVA & BRAHMAN ARE LIKE FLOWER & ITS FRAGRANCE ,LIKE CLOTH & ITS COLOUR.THEY ARE INSEPAREBLE ORGANIC UNIT. AS YOU RIGHTLY POINTED OUT, DUE TO IGNORANCE OF THE NATURE OF THE PARAMATMA, PEOPLE WORSHIP DEMIGODS.SRI KRISHNA SAYS THOUGH THE EFFORTS IN WORSHIP OF HIM & DEMIGODS ARE THE SAME ,PEOPLE GET LIMITED FRUITS FROM THEM WHILE IF THEY WORSHIP HIM, THEY GET THE LIMITLESS MOKSHA ANANDAM.SRI SHANKARA ALSO HAS COMMENTED THUS ON THIS SHLOKA.HE SAYS THAT THE LORD FEELS SORRY FOR SUCH PEOPLE. DASAN On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 Vijaya Raghavan wrote : > > >Dear Srinivas, > >The Q1 is a oft repeated qurrey. Aham Brahma asmi, is a sutric statement which all 3 >of the acharyas take. Only the interpretation differs. If you take this with tat tvam asi >and other aphorism's Emperumanar's definition fits logically. > >Yr Q2, why people go to other gods? Answers are many. Let me give a simple logic >For the work that can be done by the municipal clerk, you dont go to the Collector >correct. That is it. > >Dasan/raghavan > >Sv5679 wrote: >Dear members >--------------------- >Namaste to all. >Can somebody clarify these questions ? > >Question 1: >----------------- >"Aham Brahmasmi" (meaning that I am Bramhan) >is the philosophy propounded By Sri Sankaracharya, >who started the Advaita philosophy ? Is this true ? > >Question 2 >------------------ >Lord Krishna tells in Geeta that "people with low >intelligence pray other Gods "Anthavathhu phalam >thesham thadbhavatyalpa medhasam..". All our >scholars read this, but still they pary other Gods like >Shiva, Ganapthi etc ? Why is this ? In the temples of >Lor Vishnu also in USA, I see people pray other Gods ? Is this >because they are overpowered by His Maya ? > > >Srinivas >Sv5679 > > > > >vote. - Register online to vote today! > > > > Links > > > > > > > / vote. - Register online to vote today! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted October 12, 2004 Hi Vasan, Thanks for sharing your insight. My husband, who talks about Quantum Mechanics all the time, asked me the following question. So, I earnestly request you provide some light on the following questions. >>In my understanding one of the basic TRUTHS accepted by Vishistadvaitins is that JEEVATMA is NOT CREATED by PARAMATAMA. Both JEEVATMA and PARAMATMA coexist eternally but Vasan says that THE JEEVATMA IS TOTALLY CONTROLLED BY PARAMATMA. My question is, if JEEVATMA is not created by PARAMATMA, what gives PARAMATMA the right to control JEEVATMA. What did JEEVATMA do that made him/her to be controlled by PARAMATMA. Why is one superior and the other inferior? Vishistadvaitins do say that the differnece between JEEVATMA and PARAMATMA is that, PARAMATMA has the power of creation and the power of bestowing MOKSHA to JEEVATMAs. If thats what makes the JEEVATMA to be controlled by PARAMATMA, is't it unfair/unjust giving one the power of creation and denying it to the other, thenin making one pray to the other for MOKSHA, though they both coexist for eternity? Another question. BUDDA is considered as one of the avataras of Vishnu by some. As everyone knows BUDDHA preached AGAINST Vedas. If Buddha is one of the avataras of Vishnu, why did he contradict the Vedas. In one avatara (Krishna) he recognizes Vedas as the supreme authority and in another avatara he denounces Vedas. Its quite confusing for any simple minded person. I am sure someone might have raised these questions before and someone might have answered too, but I did NOT come across any so far. :-) Thanks in advance. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted October 13, 2004 Sriman NArAyaNAya namaha| Srimathe RamAnujAya namaha| Srimathe NigamAnta mahAdeSikAya namaha|| nama: Sri ranganAdhAya nama: Sri rangasAyine nama: Sri rangadevAya Sri srinivAsaya te nama: Question 1: Vishistadvaitins do say that the differnece between JEEVATMA and PARAMATMA is that, PARAMATMA has the power of creation and the power of bestowing MOKSHA to JEEVATMAs. If that's what makes the JEEVATMA to be controlled by PARAMATMA, is't it unfair/unjust giving one the power of creation and denying it to the other, thenin making one pray to the other for MOKSHA, though they both coexist for eternity? This is said to be question of a scientist. Being a scientist and engineer, and a bhakta raised in the fold of Srivaishnavam adiyen cannot pass the opportunity to answer this question. The answer is as follows. Jiva by definition is but an amsam of the Lord. In whatever form he exists, he also chooses to control the jivas while they are alive. The control is implicit in science, but it is explicit in religion. The science postulates intrinsic forces associated with matter. At what point do the forces enter the matter? Do the matter and forces were created and paired instantaneously? If not, which came first, matter or force? This is described by the taitriya upanishat beautifully as follows: tat shrutva tatonupravishat. God created the things (in the sense of shrusti ) and entered them ( in order to support [sustain] them for the rest of their lives .) Rest of the upanishat starting with this line is also very beautiful. Here both the advaitins and vishishtAdvaitins cannot say anything contradictory and theorize what this verse tries to postulate. It is vedam and a sensible one too. Even the scientist can appreciate that there is very small time scale where there could be difference between pure matter and matter with added force. This suggests a Nobel-prize winning opportunity for a physicist to perform an experiment in order to separate the force from matter! All the matter that we see is the matter with an added force. All light emanates from matter. This completes the basic picture of the universe. Elsewhere we have seen that the Lord is jwalantam since He makes everything shine. He creates and adds the shining ability ( which the science can quantify in 'innumerable' ways ). Thus the light is also explained. Finally, if It creates and sustains, It is certainly the Lord and the rest are just dependants. Assuming that it is not so and that everything has equal power, why does the jiva in us let us die within time scale which is very small compared to the cosmic time scale of inert objects as well as the powerful stars in the universe? In other words, why are we not as powerful as the stars, at least in terms of longevity? It is obvious that we are not equal to even a single star. Then we cannot be equal to the might of the galaxies of stars ('Koti' surya ) put together. The 'Koti' surya is still finite compared to the Infinite. Thus we, the JIVAMATMAS, are certainly just very small, and hence are at the mercy of the PARAMATMA. Since the question follows the messages related to a question on 'Aham Brahmasmi', let me add the following. We can expose the weakness of strong advaitic arguments made in favor of Aham BrahmAsmi and Tat Tvamasi this way. Saying A=B (Aham Brahmasmi) and B=A (tat tvam asi) and (hence) A is identically equal to B (once ultimate realization is attained[questionable]) is certainly mighty incorrect because we have proved just above that jiva is controlled by the paramatma. We can only to milder supplicative (in)equality advocated by Sri Ramanuja. Why? Vedantam supports advaitam. But only in a sensible way. Not to an illogical extreme. The purport of the vedantam is to show that the Lord also lives in us in the sense of providing a part of him for our forms (matter [derived in the sense of Purushs suktam] ) and function ( through anupravesam, etc.). The purport is not to show absolute equality at the end. By any measure it is insensible to assume this perfect equality. Also it is insensible to write non-advaitic commentaries on Brahma sutras which have origins in Vedantam which is actually 'advaitic'. Thus Sri Ramanuja and Vishtadvaitam having been the first in having made correct assumptions are certainly lofty and deserve our attention. Question 2: BUDDHA is considered as one of the avataras of Vishnu by some. As everyone knows BUDDHA preached AGAINST Vedas. If Buddha is one of the avataras of Vishnu, why did he contradict the Vedas? Adiyen has gathered from a Web site the detailed answer given by Srila Prabhupada for this question. The argument is powerful indeed. The answer is provided as a commentary of a verse in Srimad Bhagavatam. >From the verse stated below, we believe Buddha was born to delude the non-believers and correct their errant ways. The himsa-filled yagas of Vedas and the resulting rivers of blood made a person as powerfully influential as Buddha to revolt against the Vedas. By Vedas we mean the non-vedanta portions that described animal sacrifices. Vedanta (upanishats) completely avoid this blemish and strongly preaches ahimsa. Thus the modern hinduism is essentially vedantam. On the question of Buddha, Srimad Bhagavatam 1.3.24 would say: tatah kalau sampravritte sammohAya sura-dvishAm buddho nAmnAn'jana-sutah kIkatheshu bhavishyati Let us look at what Srila PrabupAda has to say for this verse. 'Then, in the beginning of Kali-yuga, the Lord will appear as Lord Buddha, the son of Anjana, in the province of Gaya, just for the purpose of deluding those who are envious of the faithful theist.' "Lord Buddha, a powerful incarnation of the Personality of Godhead, appeared in the province of Gaya (Bihar) as the son of Anjana, and he preached his own conception of nonviolence and deprecated even the animal sacrifices sanctioned in the Vedas. At the time when Lord Buddha appeared, the people in general were atheistic and preferred animal flesh to anything else. On the plea of Vedic sacrifices, every place was practically turned into a slaughterhouse, and animal killing was indulged in unrestrictedly . Lord Buddha preached nonviolence, taking pity on the poor animals. He preached that he did not believe in the tenets of the Vedas and stressed the adverse psychological effects incurred by animal-killing. Less intelligent men of the age of Kali, who had no faith in God, followed his principle, and for the time being they were trained in moral discipline and nonviolence, the preliminary steps on the path of God realization. He deluded the atheists because such atheists who followed his principles did not believe in God, but they kept their faith in Lord Buddha, who himself was the incarnation of God. Thus the faithless people were made to believe in God in the form of Lord Buddha. That was the mercy of Lord Buddha: he made the faithless faithful to him. Killing of animals before the advent of Lord Buddha was the most prominent feature of the society. People claimed that these were Vedic sacrifices. When the Vedas are not accepted through the authoritative disciplic succession, the casual readers of the Vedas are misled by the flowery language of that system of knowledge. In the Bhagavad-gita a comment has been made on such foolish scholars (avipaschitah). The foolish scholars of Vedic literature who do not care to receive the transcendental message through the transcendental realized sources of disciplic succession are sure to be bewildered. To them, the ritualistic ceremonies are considered to be all in all. They have no debth of knowledge. According to the Bhagavad-gita (15:15), vedaicca sarvair ahameva vedyo, the whole system of the Vedas is to lead one gradually to the path of the Supreme Lord. The whole theme of the Vedic literature is to know the Supreme Lord, the individual soul, the cosmic situation and the relation between all these items. When the relation is known, the relative function begins, and as a result of such a function the ultimate goal of life or going back to Godhead takes place in the easiest manner. Unfortunately, unauthorized scholars of the Vedas become captivated by the purifactory ceremonies only, and natural progress is thereby checked. To such bewildered persons of atheistic propensity, Lord Buddha is the emblem of theism. He therfore first of all wanted to check the habit of animal killing. The animal-killers are dangerous elements on the path going back to Godhead. There are two types of animal-killers. The soul is also sometimes called the 'animal' or the living being. Therefore, both the slaughter of animals and those who have lost their identity of soul are animal-killers. Maharaja Pariksit said that only the animal-killer cannot relish the transcendental message of the Supreme Lord. Therefore if people are to be educated on the path of Godhead, they must be taught first and foremost to stop the process of animal-killing as above mentioned. It is nonsensical to say that animal-killing has nothing to do with spiritual realization. By this dangerous theory many so-called sannyasis have sprung up by the grace of Kali-yuga who preach animal-killing under the garb of the Vedas. The animal sacrifice as stated in the Vedas is different from the unrestricted animal-killing in the slaughterhouse. Because the asuras or so-called scholars of Vedic literatures put forward the evidence of animal-killing in the Vedas, Lord Buddha superficially denied the authority of the Vedas. This rejection of the Vedas by Lord Buddha was adopted in order to save people from the vice of animal-killing as well as to save the poor animals from the slaughtering process of their big brothers who clamor for universal brotherhood, peace, justice and equity. There is no justice when there is animal-killing. Lord Buddha wanted to stop it completely, and therefore his cult of ahimsa was propagated not only in India but also outside the country. Technically Lord Buddha's philosophy is called atheistic because there is no acceptance of the Supreme Lord and because that system of philosophy denied the authority of the Vedas. But that is an act of camouflage by the Lord. Lord Buddha is the incarnation of the Godhead. As such, he is the original propounder of Vedic knowledge. He therefore cannot reject Vedic philosophy. But he rejected it outwardly because the sura-dvisa, or the demons who are always envious of the devotees of Godhead, try to suppor t cow-killing or animal-killing from the pages of the Vedas, and this is now being done by the modernized sannyasis. Lord Buddha had to reject the authority of the Vedas altogether. This is simply technical, and had it not been so he would not have been s o accepted as the incarnation of Godhead. Nor would he have been worshiped in the transcendental songs of the poet Jayadeva, who is a Vaishnava acharya. Lord Buddha preached the preliminary principles of the Vedas in a manner suitable for the time being to establish the authority of the Vedas. Therefore both Lord Buddha and Acharya Sankara paved the path of theism, and Vaishnava acharyas led the people on the path towards a realization of going back to Godhead. It is interesting to note that Sri Ramanuja would write a fairly long polemical commentary for gIta verse 15.15 in his gIta bhAsya deriving support of several verse from the upanishats and establish the vishnu tattvam. Effectively this verse states 'And I am seated in the hearts of all. >From Me are memory, knowledge and their removal also. Indeed I am alone am to be known from the Vedas. I bring about the fruition of the rituals of Vedas; I alone am the knower of the Vedas.' Thus Sri Krishna establishes the Godhead in the udgita upasana. dAsan U. Ve. RTV Varadarajan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted October 15, 2004 Dear Bhagavathas, It is a good question. I try to answer this from a scientific perspective. It is true from Lord's words that Jeevathma and Paramathma coexist sice eternity. It is by nature that Paramatma is one and supreme. Jeevatma is always controlled by Paramatma - thats also by nature. Jeevatma can rise to the level of paramatma (except for two important attributes) while attaining moksham which is in Paramatma's hands. All we can say is, it is just by nature. Creation has to end somewhere, and it is here they end. U dont have to create something to be a master of it. In a lighter vein, u may not be a master of all that u have created too (this is just a filler). Resuming, Neucleus and electron in atomic stricture have different attributes. if u view Nucleus is the master in the atom and electrons are its slaves then it is rather not possible to establish why nature had bestowed these attributes to them. Similar is for quarks, gluons, mesons etc. They exist like that, say from almost eternity. One can extend these to almost all particles found in the recent particle physics research area. There is no answer as to who has bestowed these attributes to them and why? The answer to this from philosophy is 'Paramatma'. But this kind of questioning has to end some where. That ends at 'Paramatma'. Now coming to the question of Buddha, I dont think 'Sri Sampradayam' accepts Buddha as an avatharam of Lord. BTW, there are other 'avatharams' of Lord, e.g. Kapila, whose philosophy is not fully accepted by 'Sri Sampradayam'. To understand these intricate arguments one need to take the help of Ramanuja's philosophy. Vedas, by definition are the total knowledge space (not the ones that are known to humans so far but much more). The knowledge space regarding understanding jeevatma and paramatma and their relationship has been classified into bheda and abheda shrutis, meaning places which say jeevatma and paramatma are same and places which say paramatma is owning jeevatma. Both have to be looked in unison and that is not clear from earlier teachers such as Kaplia or Buddha or Sankara for that matter. In order to hold the ground, some portions of vedas had to be ommitted by these teachers. It is Ramanuja's singular efforts that brought them together and made them look in a way that they all have ultimate unison. I think I should end here and allow it to settle. Sajjana Pada padma parama renuhu Lakshmi Narasimha dasan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
