Sorry for just ending it like that! What does Shiva say to Parvati?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
aham brahmasmi --why so confusion ?
- Thread starter kalyan
- Start date
@kalyan Why so confusion? I think you guys are clearly defeated by advaitians from time to time. Yet managed to explain Aham brahmasmi in vague and illogical words. Even Lord Krishna had disagreement with you.
Krishna says:
"As long as there is dependency ,there is fear of god.Those who get entangled in ‘I’, those who consider multiplicity and dependency of soul and those who don’t follow detachment, they get only sorrow" BP 11.10.30
"The Lord, the Atman is Himself what is created as the Universe and the creator as the Atman only, one with it, by whom it is coming into existence. He protects it, it is protected by Him as Vishwatma, the All-pervading God, and He also sums up and withdraws it in Himself. Therefore there is nothing else but Atman, described to be Reality. All these things coming, existing or ending – the three states only falsely appear on the true base of Atman." BP 11.28.6/7
Krishna explicitly mentioned himself as Jeeva in following verse.
"Lord said - I am the knowledge of these principles and the counting of them. I am the Jeeva, I am the God, I am the wielder of Gunas and I am the Gunas themselves; and without me, who am the Atman of all, there is nothing separate existing." BP 11.16.38
Krishna talks about one soul manifested in many Jivas under the power of Maya.
"This Atman was not born, will never die. It neither grows nor decays; because it is the witness of the different states of those objects, which are created and destroyed. It is omnipresent and eternally abiding pure consciousness; yet it appears as many (like Prana) under the limited power of the senses." BP 11.3.38
Now shri Krishna declares that unity of soul and brahman is absolute and gives an example.
"With his intellect thus established, he sees me in himself and himself actually merged in me (bramhan) like an individual light in the element of fire." BP 11.14.45
"Such a person is complete Brahman as I am and he does not move either within himself or outside." BP 11.25.35
Krishna says:
"As long as there is dependency ,there is fear of god.Those who get entangled in ‘I’, those who consider multiplicity and dependency of soul and those who don’t follow detachment, they get only sorrow" BP 11.10.30
"The Lord, the Atman is Himself what is created as the Universe and the creator as the Atman only, one with it, by whom it is coming into existence. He protects it, it is protected by Him as Vishwatma, the All-pervading God, and He also sums up and withdraws it in Himself. Therefore there is nothing else but Atman, described to be Reality. All these things coming, existing or ending – the three states only falsely appear on the true base of Atman." BP 11.28.6/7
Krishna explicitly mentioned himself as Jeeva in following verse.
"Lord said - I am the knowledge of these principles and the counting of them. I am the Jeeva, I am the God, I am the wielder of Gunas and I am the Gunas themselves; and without me, who am the Atman of all, there is nothing separate existing." BP 11.16.38
Krishna talks about one soul manifested in many Jivas under the power of Maya.
"This Atman was not born, will never die. It neither grows nor decays; because it is the witness of the different states of those objects, which are created and destroyed. It is omnipresent and eternally abiding pure consciousness; yet it appears as many (like Prana) under the limited power of the senses." BP 11.3.38
Now shri Krishna declares that unity of soul and brahman is absolute and gives an example.
"With his intellect thus established, he sees me in himself and himself actually merged in me (bramhan) like an individual light in the element of fire." BP 11.14.45
"Such a person is complete Brahman as I am and he does not move either within himself or outside." BP 11.25.35
This post has so many many flaws, well idk where to start..read my post 88..my suggestion dont try to fit ocean in a cup n stop attributing idiotic translations(idk where u got them) to Sri Krushna name
May be this post helps suitable aspiring vaishnavites in the future to come
that would be a long post, in short he explains the secrets of nArAyaNa maha mantram and uses the term 'pashandas' or equivalent to rock, a heavy term to refer people who treat other mantrams as superior to nArAyaNa mantra. which is called 'astakshari'...also you might have heard of Kashi right ? the Siva's holy place, it is said that when one does penance at Kashi for 9 days, it is said that at the time of death, Siva chants 'Taraka mantram' or 'rAma mantram' in his/her ears....vaidika gurus do not give 'Krushna mantram' or 'rAma mantram' because they are also of the category called 'avyapaka mantrams' which only exhibit or say about 1 attribute of god(but not to underestimate these as these when uttered with concentration can cause spiritual awakening but not comparable relative to nArAyaNa mantra)...so we dont take them when one gets initiation from guru....but nArAyaNa mantra is the essence of entire vedas and it can be said that entire vedam is in nArAyaNa mantra......there is no term in sanskrit that is most powerful and all telling than 'nArAyaNa' the grammar with which it is formed is unique and exquisite. This is a totally vast subject I would not get into........you would be surprised how much meaning this 1 term 'nArAyaNa' has..........
Yama the king of hell, says if one even chants the word 'nArAyaNa' once in their lifetime, there won't be any 'Naraka/hell' for him and he gets surprised why are people still making queue lines to naraka?
guys chant and pronounce well 'nArAyaNa' once and avoid hell(the details of hells are in Garuda purana which talks about 21 different types of hells mainly but say there are 864000 hells/narakas for different types of punishment, scary, Vishnu even explain about the location of nAraka which is 86000 yojanas(distance unit in sanskrit) in the southern direction where the dead are given a temporary body called 'yAthana shareera' to punish them severely ).........Thanks me later
note:when i say mantram it needs to be appended with 'Ommm' and 'namaha' at the end like 'Ommm KrishnAya namaha', how Krishna turns to KrishnAya but Vishnu turns to 'Ommm Vishnave namaha' is the according to the grammar of sanskrit .....when a nAmam is turned into a mantra, you can start doing 'upAsana' or meditate on it for some time.....
Here is one of my post i posted in a different site long time back..
Astakshari Maha mantram is the entire essence of Vedas. It is given by Narayana to Nara at Badrinath where the Narayana appeared in 2 forms, one is Nara and the other Narayana, one taking the position of acharya and the second is shishya, it is said the power of Astakshari when received from a proper acharya lineage comes from Badrinath due to chanting by Nara-Narayana.
the below is just like introductory explanation of the term:
naarayaNa does not mean who is seated in water, 'ra' is agnibheejam and which can destroy the sins when uttered. 'ra' means something that is destructible('nas' in sanskrit actually means going into a state where we cannot see it ) 'na+ra' is something which is not at all destroyed. 'n'+'aa' means groups of groups of entire things in the universe. Nothing is destroyed in the universe, only it changes form and name. 'Ayana' is the supporter. So naarayaNa means the ones who is inside and outside everything and supports them as a whole. In everything it exists. Narayana and Vishnu are the same as Sriyapathi is called Narayana and Narayana tattvam is Vishnu.....one has to remember at this point 'nArAyaNa' does not refer to any person it is a neither a he/she/it......it is just that...but when it appeared in form, we call it Vishnu
nArayaNa is the most powerful word in the entire sanskrit and vedic literature...Many of the pandits tried to interpret it differently or tried to improve it and say it differently but failed because the way the nArayaNa word is formed there cannot be any syntax violations..If they give the meaning something differently, the grammatical syntax fails.
A word becomes a mantra when the 'Ommm' and 'Namaha' words are appended as prefix and suffix. Namaha can come in middle too
For example :
The rAma word although very powerful does not come close to nArayaNa because rAma just explains about one attribute of paramaatma..The ability to make others happy(ramaNam), the rAma mantram is called avyapaka mantram
Mantrams fall into 2 categories,
1. Vyapaka mantram (which explain vyapti or the spread of tattvam) which are most powerful as these explain how that supreme has spread, this is most important thing as only if the supreme is spread everywhere we can be assured that it protects anyone from anywhere, god is not someone who sits in heaven/hell and passes judgements unlike other religions...Beauty of Sanatana Dharma
2. Avyapaka mantrams(which are formed basis on the work, guna or attribute, or due to aakaram(form))
Vyapaka mantrams are only 3 in the entire vedic literature
Om vishnave namaha
Om Namo bhagavathe vasudevaya
Om n*m* Narayanaaya (purposefully asterisked the middle portion as this should not be chanted without initiation from a guru strictly, )
Out of these 3, om vishnave namaha explains the supreme brahma is present in everything but does not explain what it does by being in everything, same with vasudeva, vasudeva explains that which is spread and \which illuminates...also for these mantrams when they are born or seen by some rishi they appeared as 'vishnu' or 'vasudeva' and om and namaha had to be appended. But narayana mantram appears directly with om and namaha in the middle. That makes the mantram more powerful in terms of sabdham (sound) and also artham (meaning)
nArayAna mantram explains why the tattvam has spread in all things, what it does by spreading, how it does that and it is the complete complete mantram.
There is much indepth meaning for the word nArayaNa, we have to visit dravida vedantam for the indepth meaning of the word nArayaNa given by Pillai Lokacharya Swamy while explain astadasa rahasyas
Its called Tirumantram.
adiyen Chinna Jeeyar Swamy daasa
adiyen Ramanuja daasa
Last edited:
Thank you for such a lovely post and for teaching me about the meaning of Narayana and the two types of mantras! To respond to your post fully, i would have to be much more knowledgeable about the Vedas and all of Hindu scriptures really. I believe Vishnu is supreme. Narayana, being synonymous with Brahman, would mean it has many forms, which include Shiva and Shakti. As Vishnu means all-pervading, and Shiva means auspicious, Shakti meaning power, that means to me they are a part of Vishnu's power, and that Vishnu is the form that all that is. But to defend Saivites and Shaktis, all i have to say that they are different forms of God. Worshiping Shiva and Shakti is still worshiping God. I see nothing wrong with it.
So you accept my authentic (ATU idiotic) translations uproot the authenticity of your Philosophy?
Our translations are as they are. We translate it without any presumed belief.
Krishna indeed says that he's Jeeva.
mayā — Me; īśvareṇa — the Supreme Lord; jīvena — Jeeva; guṇena — the modes of nature; guṇinā — the mahat-tattva; vinā — without; sarva-ātmanā — the soul of everyone; api — indeed; sarveṇa — everything; na — not; bhāvaḥ — existence; vidyate — there is; kvacit — whatsoever.
"Lord said - I am the knowledge of these principles and the counting of them. I am the Jeeva, I am the God, I am the wielder of Gunas and I am the Gunas themselves; and without me, who am the Atman of all, there is nothing separate existing." BP 11.16.38
So why so confusion if Brahman has been manifested as Jeeva and so jeeva is none other than Brahman?
Aham brahmasmi= I'm Brahman= I'm not Jeeva, my true nature is brahman, no confusion at all.
Last edited:
I stopped reading at Krishna is jeeva ...I would not waste time further arguing! lets just say i disagree with you.So you accept my authentic (ATU idiotic) translations uproot the authenticity of your Philosophy?
Our translations are as they are. We translate it without any presumed belief.
Krishna indeed says that he's Jeeva.
mayā — Me; īśvareṇa — the Supreme Lord; jīvena — Jeeva; guṇena — the modes of nature; guṇinā — the mahat-tattva; vinā — without; sarva-ātmanā — the soul of everyone; api — indeed; sarveṇa — everything; na — not; bhāvaḥ — existence; vidyate — there is; kvacit — whatsoever.
"Lord said - I am the knowledge of these principles and the counting of them. I am the Jeeva, I am the God, I am the wielder of Gunas and I am the Gunas themselves; and without me, who am the Atman of all, there is nothing separate existing." BP 11.16.38
So why so confusion if Brahman has been manifested as Jeeva and so jeeva is none other than Brahman?
Aham brahmasmi= I'm Brahman= I'm not Jeeva, my true nature is brahman, no confusion at all.
Last edited:
Well you are good at puranas like ramayanam in understanding the story of it but lets say you aren't good at Vedanta...Well, your view is 100% correct and so is Kalyan's view too. Take out 100 from 100 and it still remains 100. "Purnasya purnamadaya purnamevavashishyate". This 'higher mathematics' has long been known in Hinduism. That is the beauty of Hinduism.
You forget, my specialization is 'advaita'.
, am just kidding......
Last edited:
So you've been defeated
Krushna is jIva? Are u high or was it a wrong absurd translation...So you've been defeated
Nowhere I said Krishna is Jeeva. You've been Confused, and I challenge you to prove my translation dubious.
ratikala
Istha gosthi
namaskaram, Kalyan ji
prehaps take the 's' away and you would be correct , ...but so quick to scoff at others you forget that although Veda it self is true knowledge therefore eternal and un authored 'Vedas' constitute colections of revealed knowledge relating to hymns , ...mantra and the performance of sacrifices etc , thus this is revelation it may be transmitted oraly or in the form of written texts , ....so in this context are they not colections of texts therefore not so diferent to books , ...?
Vedas in in respect of 'Rig' , 'Sama' , ' Yajur' and 'Athar' and the revelation and instruction contained there in , are specific to this manvantara , ...were we not so ingulfed in ignorance we would not need them .
, ....
No point in arguing with people who do not know what apauruṣeyatva is and it is laughable when people think vedas are a book
prehaps take the 's' away and you would be correct , ...but so quick to scoff at others you forget that although Veda it self is true knowledge therefore eternal and un authored 'Vedas' constitute colections of revealed knowledge relating to hymns , ...mantra and the performance of sacrifices etc , thus this is revelation it may be transmitted oraly or in the form of written texts , ....so in this context are they not colections of texts therefore not so diferent to books , ...?
Vedas in in respect of 'Rig' , 'Sama' , ' Yajur' and 'Athar' and the revelation and instruction contained there in , are specific to this manvantara , ...were we not so ingulfed in ignorance we would not need them .
, ....
Is it that Sri Krishna called himself jiva as an explanation that he is all things? jiva, atman, world, universe, all things.