the jivan mukta in advaita

[Guest guest]

Here again are some insights from Srila Sridhara Maharaj

 

Wonder of Wonders

Just the realization of your own soul, can suffice to create a sensation of wonder in your mental plane for real spiritual life, enough to outweigh all the immeasurable so called wonders of this material world, like going to the moon, or any such aspiration within this material sphere. By the help of your pure intelligence you can rise up to the level where your very soul exists, and it alone will sufficiently purify. That can give a glimpse of a new world, whose comparison can never be compared within this scientific world of trash, however astonishing it may be.

Without proper attention to learning the alphabet from abcd, we cannot hope to have the pleasure of reading a full novel and entering the story.

atmaramas ca munayo

nirgrantha apy urukrame

kuruanty-ahaitukam bhaktim

itham-bhua-guno harih

So many experts have labored hard to understand their soul. Even with self realization it is still difficult to go up. Even they are captured by the charm of their own existence, as we are charmed by this body and its food, the liberated souls are also charmed by their own souls’ position and do not want anything else, atmaram. But there is a superior world made of stuff far finer than that which we are composed. Generally that so-called spiritualist is thinking there can’t be anything higher than this position we’re in, it is all imaginary and speculation. But those who are really from that land, when they come here as agents, with their help we can pass to that other world. We should always try to keep in front of us the model of our great master and Lord Mahaprabhu and those others who are showing us the way. How all those highly qualified stalwarts are approaching towards Vrndavan with such heartfelt reverence and respect. We can’t touch how wonderful it is.

 

The Real Sun

This ordinary material conception of the infinite, the sound, sight of the eye, the colour, the touch, so many infinite forms are there and even there we hold such a negligent position, yet this in itself is finite, but the atom, the electron, the stars and this finite world appears so big and infinite to us. Then to taste the depths of spiritual infinity and who is the potency of the source of infinity, not only that, He says, “My every part is infinite.”

Through service to God and His dear servitors you will find satisfaction within you, thousands of times more in quality. The atma is the real sun and by the light of the soul we can see everything, the mind and false ego are like clouds covering the sun or soul. Without light there is no world, without soul, no world, the soul is the basis of all expression, all knowledge, anything, you can feel, touch, see, hear, is all dependent on the soul. If it is withdrawn, then all is dead matter. Just as the sun is giving light to the whole world, similarly the soul is giving light to all this phenomenon, bright and dark, hard and soft. Only because the feeling atma is present, do all these things have meaning, through consciousness.

The key to success

If we can only come into contact with our own self, with that soul within us. I must have realization of my own proper self, then I will have confidence to go on to the substantial real and eternal world beyond this transient lower existence, and beyond the tatasta marginal realm which is inbetween this material world and the spiritual world.

evam buddheh param buddhva

samstabhyatmanam atmana

jahi satrum maha-baho

kama-rupam durasadam

This is Krishna’s recommendation of how to conquer all our lust for the mundane world in one stroke, all can be smashed in one blow when you come to understand that this soul, that we are, is such a dignified and noble unit. If you can find that basis then that noble world will be open to you in reality, not just imagination. Your affinity for the sense experience world will be finished for good. This is the key of success to controlling this mundane charm. Then our progress will be valuable and prosperous. Socrates was murdered in the name of religion for his statement that “The soul is immortal” the people of this world were disturbed by this threat to their worldly existence. Christ also threatened the complacency of the people by claiming God exists and we belong in His world not this mortal temporary place. Any way we can, we should try to contact those agents who are from that domain and they will secure a visa for us. We must strictly rely on the divine association of our guardians who live in their spiritual identity.

Srila B.R.Sridhar Maharaj

[shvu 1]

 

I am not clear what the idea was behind posting this series of quotes by people such as Sai Baba, who is a Maayaavaadin [apparently]. But if this was supposed to prove that people who state Advaitins say "I am God" know more about Advaita than can be written on the head of a pin, it simply does not. Au contraire, it only strenghtens my earlier statment, as we shall see now.

 

For starters, none of the above people have said "I am God" . They are instructing the student with "You are Brahman" in accordance with "tattvamasi, O Shvetaketu", which [suprise, surprise !!] was not conjured up by a "Maayaavaadin", but is from the Chaandogya Upanishad. Refer to the sixth book of CU for a better understanding of what that means, especially iskcon folks who have little or no idea about Vedas.

 

 

Satguru Sivaya Subrahmanya (Hinduism Today): Again and again in the Vedas and from satgurus we hear "Aham Brahmasmi,I am God,"

 

 

AhaM Brahmaasmi is from the Brhadaaranyaka and the full verse runs as follows.

 

This self was indeed Brahman in the beginning. It knew itself only as "I am Brahman." Therefore it became all. And whoever among the gods had this enlightenment, also became That Brahman. It is the same with the seers (rishis), the same with men. The seer Vamadeva, having realized this self as That, came to know: "I was Manu and the sun." And to this day, whoever in a like manner knows the self as "I am Brahman," becomes all this universe . Even the gods cannot prevent his becoming this, for he has become their Self.

 

Now, if a man worships another deity, thinking: "He is one and I am another," he does not know. He is like an animal to the gods. As many animals serve a man, so does each man serve the gods. Even if one animal is taken away, it causes anguish to the owner; how much more so when many are taken away! Therefore it is not pleasing to the gods that men should know this. - BU 1.4.10

 

It is obvious from the above verse that it is as Advaitic as can be. In fact, Maadhva had to change it to "aheyam brahmaasmi" in order to justify his philosophy. When an advaitin quotes "aham brahmaasmi" it is in this context and not to mean he looks upon himself as some God. Of course, how can one expect someone who hasn't the basic knowledge of Advaita to know this? The "head of a pin" statement fits right in here.

 

Enough said.

[raga 0]

 

And to this day, whoever in a like manner knows the self as "I am Brahman," becomes all this universe.

 

 

Thanks for the emphasis, Shvu. In other words, the fourth brAhmaNa cited earlier in its entirety gives a license for thinking just like the original Purusha did in the first mantra, "ahaM brahmAsmi".

 

Who is this original Purusha of the text, by the way? The cited description of Brihad Aranyaka (mantras 2-5) actually reminds me of Prajapati Brahma at the dawn of creation rather than Vishnu prior to creation.

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

 

I am not clear what the idea was behind posting this series of quotes by people such as Sai Baba, who is a Maayaavaadin [apparently]. But if this was supposed to prove that people who state Advaitins say "I am God" know more about Advaita than can be written on the head of a pin, it simply does not.

 

 

Your doing a typical Shvu on us here. First you claim no Advaitin would ever say "I am God". Then when it is shown that virtually every single advaitin says exactly that, you back peddle and try to change your original stance to something completely different. Thats pulling a typical Shvu.

 

Just to remind us exactly how they all say "I am God." I will repost those quotes here. Otherwise someone who didn't read them may actually think you a right.

 

 

 

Shvu said:

No Advaitin says "I am god". If someone has led you to believe so, you can be sure that their knowledge of Advaita can safely and effortlessly be written on the head of a pin.

 

 

 

I replied:

Let's see whose knowledge of advaita can be written on the head of a pin:

 

Sai Baba on advaita: Always think like that. “I am God. I am God. I am atma. I am everything.”

 

Satguru Sivaya Subrahmanya (Hinduism Today): Again and again in the Vedas and from satgurus we hear "Aham Brahmasmi,I am God,"

 

Ramana Maharshi: Be still and know that I am God.

 

Ramakrishna Paramahamsa: One should not say, 'I am God,' until one has transcended body-consciousness.

 

Swami Vivekananda: If you are a monist, you know that you are God

 

Maharishi Mahesh Yogi: Be still and know that you are God. When you know that you are God, you will begin to live Godhood.

 

Swami Muktananda: If you understand your own true nature you will know that you are God.

 

Amritanandamayi (Ammachi): It was always my hope to say to a student "You are God," and recognizing the truth of that, she or he became That I Am, God.

 

Swami Chinmayananda: Pure existence beyond Time, Space and Causality - where the experience is "I am God". This knowledge is the last and final stage in the evolution of man.

 

Swami Shivananda: If you are humble, you are divine, you are God.

 

Thus when Prabhupada says the following, it is true.

 

Prabhupada: These Mayavadi philosophers, they are declaring that "I am God."

 

 

Now you want us to believe that despite it being proven factually that these noted advaitins have indeed taught "I am God," you want to back track and say that they meant something other then they said, so it doesn't count.

 

Here is a classic Shvu dialog (hypothetical):

 

1) Criticize someone like Prabhupada for saying something about Advaitins, like that they teach "I am God." Rant about how he doesn't known anything, because a real advaitin will never say "I am God". Then continue the ranting, saying how all the blind followers of him don't have a clue, because they accept this false statement that Advaitins teach "I am God."

 

2) When it is pointed out that virtually every single prominent advaitin does teach "I am God," try to pretend that your original stance was something else. And then conclude by asking, "What is the point in showing that advaitins teach 'I am God'?"

 

I realize it is impossible to communicate with you, as you like to change your stance and the meaning of words half way into a discussion.

 

To conclude, Prabhupada said that mayavadi's proclaim "I am God." You denied this, but it has been conclusively shown that virtually every prominent advaitin does indeed proclaim "I am God". Whether they don't understand the English language, and actually mean something different is irrelevent.

 

Further, you said anyone who tells you that advaitins say "I am God" does not know advaita, and their knowledge of advaita can be written on the head of a pin . Thus I concluded that those advaitins cited above must all have knowledge that can fit on the head of a pin, as they all say advaita teaches "I am God."

[Guest guest]

thalaiva kalakkitta. pasangala shokka oru bigil oodhunga. thalaivar is the cho of spiritualism. appadi podu aisalakkadi gumma.

[karthik_v 0]

Karthik here:

 

 

First you claim no Advaitin would ever say "I am God". Then when it is shown that virtually every single advaitin says exactly that, you back peddle and try to change your original stance to something completely different. Thats pulling a typical Shvu.

 

...

 

Now you want us to believe that despite it being proven factually that these noted advaitins have indeed taught "I am God," you want to back track and say that they meant something other then they said, so it doesn't count.

 

 

In case of the quote from Ramana Maharishi, it was conclusively shown that what he meant was radically different from what you [rather SP] implied. But then I must commend for having taken up the onerous task of defending SP's faulty understanding of Advaita /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

Having said that I must add that a Vaishnava acarya needn't know one line about Advaita or the vedas or Upanishads. All he needs is unalloyed devotion to Krishna, of which SP had aplenty. In fact, Vaishnavism is dependent foremost on bhakti. What is rather sad is the tendency to attack other sampradayas, which are as great as Vaishnavism and to malign their acaryas, without even knowing who they are or what they stand for.

[Gauracandra 1]

Where did Prabhupada say anything about Ramana? Srila Prabhupada said mayavadis are declaring that "I am God." This is a fact. Mayavadis do declare that they are God. Case closed. All of the people cited said EXACTLY what Srila Prabhupada said mayavadis say. The fact that some won't accept this obvious fact suggests their own dishonesty concerning what Mayavadis say. Just be honest with yourself. Once you are shown that you wrong, just admit it, and move on. Mayavadis do say "I am God."

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

 

It was conclusively shown that what he meant was radically different from what you [rather SP] implied.

 

 

 

You are confused as to what Srila Prabhupada "implied". You seem to think when he said "mayavadis say 'I am God'" he was refering to a saguna Brahman, such as Krishna. Please read more of what he wrote so you can understand his direct statement clearer and don't need to look for implied meanings. Brahman is the supreme source of everything, which is identified with the word God.

 

Mayavadis do indeed say "I am God", as has been shown conclusively from the quotes provided. As a dogmatic follower of advaita, you may try to defend their statements and say they mean something else. That's your right. But honesty would require you to admit that Srila Prabhupada was right when he said, "Mayavadis say 'I am God.'"

 

You have no consistency in your arguments. You try to interpret "I am God" spoken by advaitins in one way, and "I am God" spoken by Prabhupada in another way to avoid admitting you are wrong.

 

 

 

Mr. Ziggy: "Oh Prabhupada is way off when he says advaitins say 'I am God'."

 

Swami Bhogananda (noted advaitin): "What do you mean Ziggy-ji. I am God, You are God, Everyone is God."

 

Mr. Ziggy: "Well Prabhupada meant something different when he said those words. Even though he didn't say it, Swami Prabhupada actually meant a 6 foot 2 inch tall God with blonde hair. Your Wholeness Swami Bhogi used the same words, but you meant something different then Prabhupada was thinking when he said those words. Isn't that so Swamiji?"

 

Swami Bhogananda: "Sure. Whatever. Om."

[Somesh Kumar 0]

Dear Karthik,

 

If you feel that there is even a some amount of sarcasm in what I said I ask a thousand apologies from you.

 

I have no intention to hurt anyone's feelings. Please forgive me if you or anyone else felt so!

 

Let Krsna give us the intelligence to understand Him!!!

[raga 0]

 

raga writes: ...whereas a person with little knowledge of Advaita thinks the person declares himself as The Personal Godhead.

 

JNDas then writes:

 

One would need to have absolutely no knowledge of advaita to make such a conclusion, and I don't think anyone does.

 

<hr>

JNDas also writes:

 

You are confused as to what Srila Prabhupada "implied". You seem to think when he said "mayavadis say 'I am God'" he was refering to a saguna Brahman, such as Krishna. Please read more of what he wrote so you can understand his direct statement clearer and don't need to look for implied meanings. Brahman is the supreme source of everything, which is identified with the word God.

 

 

This understanding can be nothing but the outcome of Bhaktivedanta's numerous statements to that extent. This was "rascaldom" to him, which he felt he needed to fight against. Let me cite a couple of his statements in this regard. There are literally hundreds of them all over his works.

 

<hr>

<font color="blue">Just like the Mayavadi philosophers, they are thinking themselves that they are Krsna. "I am God."

 

Lecture on Bhagavad-gita 13.3 -- Bombay, September 26, 1973

 

</font color><hr><font color="red">

In the Isopanisad, the word isa is used to describe the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Isa means "controller." Do you think you are controlled or not? Is there any person anywhere within this universe who is not controlled? Can anyone say, "I am not controlled"? Nobody can say that. So if you are controlled, then why do you declare, "I am not controlled, I am independent, I am God"? Why this nonsense? Mayavadi impersonalists claim, "I am God, you are God, everyone is God." But if they are controlled, how can they be God? Does this make any sense? God is never controlled; He is the supreme controller. So if somebody is controlled, immediately we should know that he is not God.

 

The Laws of Nature: Krsna, the Controller and Owner of All

 

</font color><hr><font color="blue">

So even those who are trying for that, because that original disease is there, therefore even one who has advanced spiritually, he also says, "I am God. I am God." The same spirit, to make competition with Krsna. The maya is there. "Why you are going to worship Krsna? You are God.Oh, yes, I am God." This is the last snare of maya. Therefore they are Mayavadis. Nobody can become Krsna.

 

Lecture on Bhagavad-gita 4.20 -- Bombay, April 9, 1974

 

</font color><hr><font color="red">

The Mayavadi philosophers, they claim to be the whole. But Vaisnava philosophy, we do not claim that we are the whole. The Mayavadi philosophers, they claim that "I am God." But we do not claim. We claim that we are part and parcel of God. As part and parcel of God, we have got the same quality. Just like minute particle of gold is also gold, but that part gold and the whole gold they are never equal. So I have got all the qualities. Qualitatively I am one, but quantitatively I am different. That is the version of Bhagavad-gita. And actually, if we falsely claim that "I am God," then we have to show godly power. Unless we show godly power, simply claiming that "I am God," that is dambha, that is false pride.

 

Lecture on Bhagavad-gita 13.6-7 -- Montreal, October 25, 1968

 

</font color><hr><font color="blue">

The Mayavadi sannyasis address amongst themselves: namo narayana. "Namo narayana" means every one of them has become a Narayana. This is their philosophy. And from this namo narayana principle, Vivekananda Swami has manufactured the word "daridra-narayana." So Narayana has become very cheap thing for them. Everyone has become Narayana; everyone has become God. Just like the rascal God is now in the hospital. God is under operation. (laughter) A "guruji" God. So they have no shame even that "If I am God, I cannot cure my bodily pains, what kind of God I am?" But these rascals will proclaim that they are God, and there is set of rascals, they will accept, "Oh, here is God." Vivekananda also said that "Why you are finding out God? Don't you see, so many gods are loitering in the street?" So God has become a funny thing for them.

 

Lecture on Bhagavad-gita 18.5 -- London, September 5, 1973 (Radhastami)

 

</font color><hr><font color="red">

Krsna's another name is Acyuta. He never falls down from His position. And if we fall down from the position... Therefore we are not on the same level. We may have some power, and we can claim that "I am God"—that you can claim—but not that God, like Krsna. Therefore two words are there: isvara, paramesvara. In the Brahma-samhita therefore it is described that isvaras, there may be many, but not paramesvara. Paramesvara is one. Isvarah paramah krsnah [bs. 5.1]. So these Mayavadis, they forget this, that isvara, paramesvara, there are two words. Atma and paramatma, there are two words. So they are not equal. And Krsna says mattah parataram nanyat [bg. 7.7]. He is the supermost isvara. Nityo nityanam cetanas cetananam. Although both of us are nitya, eternal, and living entities, still, there is difference. He is supreme living entity, we are subordinate. Prabhu and anu. Vibhu and anu.

 

So this philosophy is perfect, and anyone who accepts this Mayavada philosophy, that God and living entity are on the same level, they have got poor fund of knowledge.

 

Lecture on Srimad-Bhagavatam 1.7.15 -- Vrndavana, September 13, 1976

 

</font color><hr><font color="blue">

And don't try to become imitator. But the imitation is so strong that even persons who are very much elevated in knowledge, they are also falsely presenting that "I am God." The maya's influence is so strong that at the last stage... Therefore they fall down. These people, these Mayavadis who are trying to become God... Aruhya krcchrena param padam tatah [sB 10.2.32]. To merge into the existence of the Supreme. You can merge, but you cannot be equal. That is not possible. Asamordhva. But the Mayavadis, they are thinking, "We are as good as Krsna." Therefore they do not go to the temple of Krsna. Because they think self, Narayana, Krsna. But that is a mistake. Therefore sastra says that ye 'nye 'ravindaksa vimukta-maninah. They are thinking that they have become liberated, become Narayana, Narayana, God, but that is avisuddha-buddhayah.

 

Lecture on Srimad-Bhagavatam 1.8.18 -- Mayapura, September 28, 1974

 

</font color><hr><font color="red">

So these Mayavadis, karmi, jnani, yogi, they are not krsna-bhaktas. They'll say, "Krsna is not God. I am God. I am also God. Krsna is not God. I am God. But Krsna is not God." This is their version. Therefore they're rascals. "I am God." They'll declare, "I am God. You are God." But Krsna is not God. Except Krsna, everyone is God." This is their version.

 

Lecture on Srimad-Bhagavatam 1.10.13 -- Mayapura, June 26, 1973

 

</font color><hr><font color="blue">

Then Mayavadi will say, "Then I am God. Because I am carrying the message of Krsna, therefore I am Krsna."

 

Lecture on Srimad-Bhagavatam 2.9.7 -- Tokyo, April 24, 1972

 

</font color><hr><font color="red">

The Mayavadi theory is like that, that "I am Krsna. I am God. Now I am overpowered by maya, and as soon as I become free from maya, again I become Krsna."

 

Lecture on Srimad-Bhagavatam 3.26.15 -- Bombay, December 24, 1974

 

</font color><hr><font color="blue">

People are... Sometimes a so-called incarnations are, they are declaring that "I am God." Then one should test whether actually God. That is intelligence. Simply by declaring, if somebody declares falsely that "I am God..." Just like this Ramakrishna. He declared that "I am the same Krsna and Rama." Is it not? You do not know?

 

Lecture on Srimad-Bhagavatam 6.1.22 -- Indore, December 13, 1970

 

</font color><hr><font color="red">

The Mayavadis, although they have undergone penances, austerities—very strictly they follow the principles of spiritual life—but because they are under maya, at the end they are thinking that "I am God, Purusa," the same disease, purusa. Purusa means bhokta. That "I am Krsna..."

 

Lecture on Srimad-Bhagavatam 6.1.55 -- London, August 13, 1975

 

</font color><hr><font color="blue">

Aham brahmasmi—"I am Brahman"—that is a fact, but I am not Supreme Brahman, Parabrahman. The Mayavadi, they take it: "Because I am Brahman, I am Supreme Brahman."

 

Lecture on Srimad-Bhagavatam 7.9.33 -- Mayapur, March 11, 1976

 

</font color><hr><font color="red">

God means Supreme Person. But these advaitavadi, Mayavadis, they have made God everyone. God means Supreme Person, that is the dictionary word. "Supreme Being." That is the dictionary meaning. God does not mean ordinary, but they have made ordinary, anyone God. "I am God, you are God, he is God."

 

Room Conversation with Professor Francois Chenique -- August 5, 1976, New Mayapur (French farm)

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

 

Just like the Mayavadi philosophers, they are thinking themselves that they are Krsna. "I am God."

 

Lecture on Bhagavad-gita 13.3 -- Bombay, September 26, 1973

 

 

 

As someone who previously was a follower of Prabhupada, you certainly know that Prabhupada did not mean the Mayavadi's literally claim to be a blue skinned God. I can only see your misrepresentation of His position as open dishonesty on your part. You seem to have some built up dislike for him and are looking for somewhere to vent your anger. Either you are purposely being dishonest, or you were really dull when you studied Prabhupada's teachings in ISKCON.

[Somesh Kumar 0]

First of all my sincere apologies to Karthik and Shvu prabhus if they felt that I've hurt their feelings or have felt that I have been sarcastic. I don't have even the slightest intentions of doing that!

 

 

No Advaitin says "I am god". If someone has led you to believe so, you can be sure that their knowledge of Advaita can safely and effortlessly be written on the head of a pin.

 

 

As JN DasJi pointed out all the Advaitins say that "I am God". If they tell this to say that "Aham Brahmasmi" then it is OK! But if they want to say "Aham Parabrahmasmi" then it is wrong. For example some say that "You can become Krishna" - This means that "You can become Parabrahman" which is wrong. Because Only Krishna is Parabrahman na tat samas chabyatikas ca vidyate

 

Please do tell then what does Advaitins say of a person who has transcended material conciousness if not that " He is God"?

 

 

I would caution you against accepting any info about Advaita from such sources without verification.

 

 

Please do inform which is the proper source for knowing Advaita?

 

 

. btw, the first line does not say "only a devotee knows me". Rather, it says "Through/By devotion, he knows me".

 

 

Yes, I agree with you. I misinterpreted it here! But has Krishna ever told anywhere that through knowledge(gyaan) or action(karma) anyone can know me?

Krishna appreciates the Gopis and says:

 

Macchhita madgatpraana,

bodhayanta parasparam,

kathanthascha maam nityam,

tushyanti ca ramanti ca.

 

"They(the devotees) have their minds and life on Me and they always discuss about me enoying those discussions about Me." If we interpret it here as discussing about Brahman, then where is the discussion because Brahman itself is attributeless. What are we going to discuss of Brahman when it itself is attributeless. There's nothing to discuss! Do you agree?

 

 

Neither does Krishna say "vishate goloka tad anantaraM" or "vishate vaikunta tad anantaraM". "Since he does not specifically say place, it is meant to be maaM", which therefore means maaM, which happens to be Advaitic.

 

 

I am very sure that Krishna was very specific in BG whenever He was referring to Himself and never missed that point anywhere.

I think He did this so that people don't start bringing someone else in His place . Because if something/someone else replaces Krishna then BG has no value. Don't you think so Shvu prabhu ji???

 

There are lots of verses where He mentions Maam, Mattah, Maameva, Aham....

 

Mattah parataram naanyet

kincit asti dhananjaya

Mayi sarvam idam proktam,

sute mani gana iva

 

...Maameva ye prapdyante

Maayametaam taranti te

 

Mayyeva mana adhastva,

mayi buddhim niveshaya...

 

man mana bhav,mad bhakta

mad yaji mamnamaskuru...

 

and so on......

 

Why will He knowingly not say Maam in this verse???

 

 

"Brahma NirvaanaM" is clear in it's meaning and while "my supreme abode" can be interpreted to mean Nirvaana in a figurative sense, can one explain things the other way?

 

 

OK I accept this. But, still 18.54 still remains. What does a person do after Brahmanirvaanam or Brahma bhuta stage???

 

He engages in devotion... mad bhakti labhate param. So the final aim is bhakti and for bhakti or loving service to be performed there must be a Loving propensity for the Most Beautiful and Attractive Person - Sri Krishna!!! And when there is a most beautiful/attractive person who controls everything then He has a beautiful abode where He enjoys His pastimes. Do you agree???

 

 

Also Sruti such as, "brahmavit brahmaiva bhavati", etc confirm this interpretation of the Giita.

 

 

If I am not wrong this means that "The person who knows Brahman becomes Brahman". Is'nt it? OK there's nothing wrong in it. BG also says that. After knowing Brahman what does He do? The point again comes to 18.54

 

 

 

Thanks. That is exactly what I am doing.

 

 

Let the All-Knowing Allmighty Syama Sundar Sri Krishna give us the intelligence to understand Him.

 

 

[raga 0]

 

JNDas writes:

 

As someone who previously was a follower of Prabhupada, you certainly know that Prabhupada did not mean the Mayavadi's literally claim to be a blue skinned God. I can only see your misrepresentation of His position as open dishonesty on your part. You seem to have some built up dislike for him and are looking for somewhere to vent your anger. Either you are purposely being dishonest, or you were really dull when you studied Prabhupada's teachings in ISKCON.

 

 

Perhaps not blue skinned, but Personal God nevertheless. It is very clear from the references above. Again, why would he have objected to "ahaM brahmAsmi" as "I am Brahman, I am of that spirit, knowing which there is no longer me or you, but mere understanding of 'I am Brahman, everything is Brahman'."? This is just the Upanishad.

 

But feel free to surf your way around it, JNDas, as the moderator of this forum, who can stop you? I will not blame you for dishonesty, disintegrity, angriness, fanaticism, dull-headedness and so forth. I think you are a very intelligent and verbally able youngster who knows how to surf his way around statements not befitting with his frame of conceptions, and when intelligent remarks do not suffice, increased rhetorics will supplement.

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

 

Perhaps not blue skinned, but Personal God nevertheless. It is very clear from the references above.

 

 

Yup, looks like you are intentionally trying to mislead people regarding Prabhupada's position. I would only suggest others actually read the writings and teachings of Prabhupada to find out what his position on advaita is rather then rely on a few quotes from Raga.

 

If you believe Prabhupada thought advaitins believed they were a personal God equal to Krishna, or that they were physically the blue skinned Krishna (or the green skinned Rama), then perhaps you should do some more reading.

[raga 0]

 

Yup, looks like you are intentionally trying to mislead people regarding Prabhupada's position. I would only suggest others actually read the writings and teachings of Prabhupada to find out what his position on advaita is rather then rely on a few quotes from Raga.

 

 

I did not take special trouble picking out the quotes I presented. As I said, there are literally hundreds of such quotes. I just keyed in "I am God" and "mayavad*", and kept getting references like that page after page.

 

Yes, watch out. I may be intentionally misleading people in regards to JNDas's opinion of Prabhupada's position. As far as I am personally concerned, I am a rather neutral observer without an emotional bond to the Swami and his lineage, and thus may not share an overly interpretative and reconciliatory attitude on all of his statements. And no, I am not on a mission to vent out surpressed anger, as some have suggested. I have merely shifted my angle of vision from that of a follower to that of an observer in regards to the Swami. Some do consider this offensive. My apologies for them. Please do understand, not everyone follows the path of your choice, and this is not necessarily evil.

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

I would suggest anyone interested in knowing what Prabhupada taught to approach a follower of Prabhupada and inquire from them. I would not advise learning such things from someone who is a "neutral observer", who has not imbibed the teachings and message of Prabhupada.

 

Otherwise you may end up with misconceptions about Prabhupada's teachings, as we have seen often in these forum. (Prabhupada supported slavery, Prabhupada taught that impersonalists think they are a personal blue-skinned God named Krishna, etc.)

[shvu 1]

 

 

To conclude, Prabhupada said that mayavadi's proclaim "I am God." You denied this, but it has been conclusively shown that virtually every prominent advaitin does indeed proclaim "I am God".

 

 

Perhaps you need a course in rudimentary english? Show me one quote in your series of quotes where one proclaimed that he or she is God. Just one will do. The pinhead statment was not targetted at Prabhupada alone. It nets everyone who are of the opinion that Advaitins claim to be God.

 

Prabhupada also said that man did not go to the moon. This does not mean that he knew astronomy. Lack of knowledge about a topic never stopped him from giving an opinion as in the case of Advaita. Like Rajan said, "He[sP] had an opinion on everything from sex to salvation to quarks to Begum Akthar".

 

Now let me show how the typical jndas mind works.

 

1. Somone posts a quote from SP where SP says Shankara's Bhaashya is a rascal's version.

 

2. Jndas steps up to defend his Guru, by saying SP never called Shankara a rascal. By rascal, SP must have meant all other Mayaavaadins except Shankara.

 

3. How do you know?

 

4. Because that is the interpretation that suits me best.

 

This the kind of strawman you are creating, in an attempt to justify your Guru's knowledge [or the lack thereof]. Anyway, please go back to your list and pull out *one quote* where an Advaitin said he or she is God.

 

[shvu 1]

 

 

As JN DasJi pointed out all the Advaitins say that "I am God".

 

 

Sorry Somesh,

 

As Jndas has failed to point out, no Advatin says "I am God". Please take the time to look at the Brhadaaranyaka verse that I posted to find out where this misconception came from.

 

Can you provide some evidence to differentiate beween Brahman and Parabrahman?

 

Thanks

[shvu 1]

 

 

Who is this original Purusha of the text, by the way? The cited description of Brihad Aranyaka (mantras 2-5) actually reminds me of Prajapati Brahma at the dawn of creation rather than Vishnu prior to creation.

 

 

According to Shankara, it is the Supreme Brahman that is meant here. In his commentary on this verse, an objection is raised that it should mean the conditioned Brahman (Hiranyagarbha). Shankaa refutes this view and establishes that it is the Supreme Brahman. The commentary for this verse alone, runs to 19 pages where other objections are raised and refutted.

 

Cheers

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

 

Perhaps you need a course in rudimentary english? Show me one quote in your series of quotes where one proclaimed that he or she is God. Just one will do.

 

 

 

Sai Baba on advaita: Always think like that. “I am God. I am God. I am atma. I am everything.”

 

Satguru Sivaya Subrahmanya (Hinduism Today): Again and again in the Vedas and from satgurus we hear "Aham Brahmasmi," "I am God."

 

Ramana Maharshi: Be still and know that I am God.

 

Ramakrishna Paramahamsa: One should not say, 'I am God,' until one has transcended body-consciousness.

 

Swami Vivekananda: If you are a monist, you know that you are God.

 

Maharishi Mahesh Yogi: Be still and know that you are God. When you know that you are God, you will begin to live Godhood.

 

Swami Muktananda: If you understand your own true nature you will know that you are God.

 

Amritanandamayi (Ammachi): It was always my hope to say to a student "You are God," and recognizing the truth of that, she or he became That I Am, God.

 

Swami Chinmayananda: Pure existence beyond Time, Space and Causality - where the experience is "I am God". This knowledge is the last and final stage in the evolution of man.

 

Swami Shivananda: If you are humble, you are divine, you are God.

 

I can't figure out your point in saying none of these advaitins say "I am God." They all do. It is plain english. Come to grips with the fact that all of these prominent advaitins have stated this. You can try to interpret their statements in some other way, but the fact is they have said this. Perhaps we are speaking different languages.

 

[Somesh Kumar 0]

Dear Shvu,

 

 

As Jndas has failed to point out, no Advatin says "I am God".

 

 

What does all these quotes indicate.

 

I'll take some of them:

 

 

Sai Baba on advaita: Always think like that. &#8220;I am God. I am God. I am atma. I am everything.&#8221;

 

 

When Sai Baba is saying this does'nt this mean that He is also saying that "He is God". When He says to everyone to think that "I am God". That means He is also practising it. Without practising will any Great Saint preach anything?

 

It's the same for all other Great Saints mentioned whom I respect from the core of my heart!

 

 

Please take the time to look at the Brhadaaranyaka verse that I posted to find out where this misconception came from.

 

 

I'll have a look at it and get back to you.

 

 

Can you provide some evidence to differentiate beween Brahman and Parabrahman?

 

 

 

Comeon Shvu Ji, What is the need of having two words when they are not different? Each word conveys it's own meaning. Don't you think so?

 

Parabrahman means the "Superior Brahman" as Para means Superior

 

As Arjuna adresses Krishna

 

Parambrahma paramdhama,

pavitram paramam bhavan,

purusham sasvatam divyam,

adi devam ajam vibhum.

 

"You are the Supreme Brahman....."

 

And then Krishna says:

 

Brahmano hi prathishtaham,

amritasya avyayasya ca,

sasvatasya ca dharmasya,

sukhasya aikantikasya ca.

 

"I've established the Brahman..."

 

It's so crystal clear. I don't understand why do Advaitins want to interpret here that when Krishna says "Aham" it's not Krishna?

 

For example if I say that I have done something and someone else says to me that no you have'nt done anything. That's ok for me.

 

If Krishna's grace is there then I can think -

 

Prakrteh kriyamanani,

gunai karmani sarvasha,

Ahamkara vimudhaatma,

kartaaham iti manyate.

 

But for the Supreme Personality Sri Krishna who himself says that "Aham bija prada pita" - "I am the seed-giver of all the living entities" Is there anything called false ego which He was talking of in the "Prakrteh kriyamanani..." So when He says Aham, Mam it is He Himself without even a tinge of material aspect in it.

 

Please don't try to take away Krishna from Bhagavad Gita. He is the life and soul of BG.

 

And He is the Parabrahman, vibhu... And we are brahman, anu...

 

Shvu .. You have'nt answered to my following quote

 

 

I am very sure that Krishna was very specific in BG whenever He was referring to Himself and never missed that point anywhere.

I think He did this so that people don't start bringing someone else in His place . Because if something/someone else replaces Krishna then BG has no value. Don't you think so Shvu prabhu ji???

 

There are lots of verses where He mentions Maam, Mattah, Maameva, Aham....

 

 

Let Krishna give us the intelligence to understand Him!!!

 

 

 

[Somesh Kumar 0]

Shvu,

 

 

Shankaa refutes this view and establishes that it is the Supreme Brahman. The commentary for this verse alone, runs to 19 pages where other objections are raised and refutted.

 

 

I have high regard for Shankaracharya for the spiritual upliftment He has done. But one thing I feel wrong is He is using too much intellect(gyaan) and very little or no feeling(bhakti) in understanding Krishna/Parabrahman/God. And Krishna says so many times that "I want bhakti"

 

I am a very ignorant person compared to Jagad Guru Adi Shankaracharya, who is an incarnation of Lord Shiva, but this is what I think. I might be completely wrong here!

 

Hope that Adi Shankaracharya will forgive Me if this ignorant person has said something wrong!

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

 

Perhaps you need a course in rudimentary english? Show me one quote in your series of quotes where one proclaimed that he or she is God. Just one will do.

 

 

Here are some more prominent advaitins saying "I am God".

 

Swami Rama Tirtha: "I am God, as you are".

 

Swami Omkarananda Saraswati: "Where there us no mind, finished - the man becomes God Himself, he becomes one with the Divine, and like the sages of the Upanishads, he says: "I am God.""

 

Swami Omkarananda Saraswati: "Man without mind is God."

 

Muktananda: He experiences the true bliss of Consciousness. He knows without

any doubt, `I am God, and God is me.' Such a yogi lives in constant awareness of the Self, in the state of perfect fearlessness and freedom. This is liberation.

 

Muktananda: "Your God dwells within you as you.".

 

Satya Sai Baba: "I am God and you are God, except you don't know it".

 

Satya Sai Baba: "I am not man at all. I am God." Have firm faith in that Truth. When you are God, keep Divine feelings within you.

 

Ramana Maharshi: ‘Know I am God’, it is said, and not ‘Think I am God’.

 

Subramanya Bharati: "Deivam Nee Enrunar.'' (Realise that you are God.)

 

Swami Dayananda Saraswati: Self-realization, as I said, is the discovery that "the Self is the whole"that you are the Lord; in fact, you are God, the cause of everything.

 

Satya Sai Baba: Recite daily, "I am God. I am God. I am no different from God. I am the supreme reality."

 

Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj: You yourself are God, the Supreme Reality.

 

Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj:You are God, but you do not know it.

 

Sri Chinmoy: You need God. You have God. You are God. You want God and you need God.

 

Shri Shri Ananda Murti: “Be constantly in the thought of God and you too will become God”

 

Sri Sri Ravi Shankar: I am God, so are You! There is nothing that exists beyond and other than God. God in Hindi is Bhagwan.

 

Swami Vishnudevananda: "The aim of all yoga practice is to achieve truth wherein the individual soul identifies itself with the supreme soul of God.”

 

Again, we can conclude that Prabhupada is precisely acurate when he says that mayavadis declare "I am God."

[shvu 1]

The second list is much better.

 

To clarify, my statement was not targetted at Prabhupada, but towards all who hold such an ignorant notion about Advaita. Jndas mistakenly assumed that I was having SP in mind and "Prabhupada'ized" the discussion. But I am referring to the whole set of ignorant critics and so will avoid discussing SP in particluar. Pulling SP into this discussion is highly misleading. Therefore, I also regret shooting off my mouth about SP earlier. Let the poor soul rest in peace.

 

yes, Let me apologize for some of my earlier statements. The *prima facie view* that one gets by reading the above does give an impression that Maayaavaadins declare they are God.

 

Since in reality this is untrue [as I have explained the import of Aham Brahmaasmi and tattavamasi above, anyone who states, "Maayaavaadins declare they are God" knows nothing about Advaita. Their knowledge of Advaita can easily be written on the head of a pin [in fact, there would be space left] and no one should rely on their version of Advaita. Finally, half the dudes [sai baba, etc] mentioned above are not Advaitins at all in which case the argument falls flat again.

 

To summarize, an Advaitin/Maayaavaadin will not declare "I am God". Hypothetically, If someone does, he is not an advaitin/Maayaavaadin at all, for he has not understood the doctrine. Thus, in either case, the argument against Maayaavaadins is invalid.

 

Cheers

[shvu 1]

 

Somesh,

 

All the questions you have asked have been discussed in detail in "Is Advaita a genuine tradition?". This thread is a few months old and you can check it out to get my views on the Advaitic perspective of of the Gita which is based on the larger picure of including Upanishads. An interpretation of the Gita which is consistent with Sruti [viz., Advaita] is bound to be different from an interpretation that does not take Sruti into consideration [viz, Gaudiya].

 

Cheers