aham brahmasmi --why so confusion ?

[ratikala]

namaskaram Terese ji

Is it that Sri Krishna called himself jiva as an explanation that he is all things? jiva, atman, world, universe, all things.

he is the all pervading atman , the residing paramatma in the heart of all living beings , ...residing within all individual jivas

I am seated in everyone's heart, and from Me come remembrance, knowledge and forgetfulness. By all the Vedas am I to be known; indeed I am the compiler of Vedānta, and I am the knower of the Vedas.
...chapter 15 .. verse 15 Bhagavad Gita , ...


Sri Ramanujacharya ji's Commentary on ...chapter 15 .. verse 15 Bhagavad Gita ,

''Lord Krishna's manifestation of Himself as paramatma the Supreme Soul situated within the etheric heart of every jiva or embodied being next to His expansion of the atma or individual immortal soul. The heart is the exclusive, absolute center from where all consciousness radiates. It is also the factual center from where all impulses and frequencies originate both active and passive. The Brihadaranya Upanisad V.VI.I beginning manomayo ayam puruso states: One meditating should perceive the resplendent Supreme Lord the ruler and lord of all within the heart of the size of a grain of rice. The Chandogya Upanisad VIII.I beginning harih sum atha yadidamasmin states: Within the jiva or embodied being in the inner sanctorum of the heart abides the atma or immortal soul which is an infintesimal portion of paramatma. Hence from the Supreme Lord comes all memory remembered from past experience. All wisdom accruring from factual true perception and inference. Intuitive knowledge related exclusively to the authority of the Vedic scriptures and meditation which expands the consciousness. Contrarily also from the Supreme Lord comes the antithesis of the above which are loss of memory, speculative reasoning, erroneous hypothesis, conjectural suppositions and deprivation of consciousness.''

''The Supreme Lord is to be known by the exclusive authority of the Vedic scriptures. He is the atma within all jivas, the witness, the monitor, the inner guide. The terms found in the Vedas of demigod, humans, demons, etc. are alluding to the jivatma or individual immortal soul within the myriad of varieagated forms of embodied beings. The compound word vedanta-krt refers directly to Lord Krishna's avatara or incarnation of Vedavyasa who compiled the Vedas and divided them into four divisions. It also denotes the performance of Vedic enjoined rituals. The antonym antah also means the end which infers the fruits, the results of such rituals. He is the sole bequeather of all the fruits promised in the Vedic scriptures. This was previously touched upon in chapter seven verses 21 and 22 where Lord krishna confirms that in whatever form one chooses to worship the Supreme Lord, He renders there faith firm and they obtain the wishes they yearned for from Him alone. He is also the supreme knower of the Vedic scriptures for they originated from Him to guide and teach jivas about Himself. Whosoever understands the Vedic scriptures otherwise then what has been instructed by Lord Krishna in Srimad Bhagavad-Gita factually has no knowledge of it at all. This is due to their understanding and comprehension being influenced by under faulty assumptions and erroneous suppositions. The Vedic scriptures must be understood exclusively in light of the comprehensive and full authority of the Bhagavad-Gita.''

 

[kalyan]

Nowhere I said Krishna is Jeeva. You've been Confused, and I challenge you to prove my translation dubious.

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.

This post is wrong on all aspects and an absurd translation. Sarva atmana means he is the atma if everyone i.e us every jIva...In vedas when they say 'you' it refers to jIva not physical body...the translation attributes physical body as real you which is basics gone wrong

 

[Acintya_Ash]

In chapter 13 of the Gita, Lord Krishna says he is the Knower(ksetragnya) in all bodies.

There are two things here, Knower and known, or The Self and Non-Self. And God says He is the Self, now you can't be Non-Self/jada. So you must be The Self/God/Brahman.

 

[Aupmanyav]

And pray, Vipravara, what are chara and achara (moving and non-moving), chaitanya and jada (living and non-living), if not Brahman?

 

[kalyan]

In chapter 13 of the Gita, Lord Krishna says he is the Knower(ksetragnya) in all bodies.

There are two things here, Knower and known, or The Self and Non-Self. And God says He is the Self, now you can't be Non-Self/jada. So you must be The Self/God/Brahman.

good point will get back later when my mind can concentrate.........it is not easy understanding the words of sAkshat Bhagawan, needs full concentration!

 

[निताइ dasa]

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.

In defense of our Sampradaya, I would like to give an alternative translation of this verse,

Mayaisvarena- I am the supreme controller; jivena- of the jiva; gunena- of the modes of nature; gunina- of the mahat tattva vina- without; sarvatma- I am the atma in everyone (paramatma); api-indeed; sarvena-everything; na-not; bhuva-existence; vidyate- there is; kvacit- even so

"I am the supreme controller and basis of the Jiva, the modes of nature and mahatattva. Being the soul(paramatma) within everyone's heart, nothing can exist without Me"

I am very pained by your words to draw an impersonal truth from the Bhagavatam which always asserts the highest truth as personal. Trust me my friend, this adwaita vada corrupts the heart and with such a conception you will never be able to enter into and taste the rasa of Krsna Bhakti. On whose authority do you make such a claim? The scriptures should always be read under the authority of a bonafide Sampradaya and not my ones own mental strength. But doing so, the message of the Bhagavatam is never truly revealed.

 

[kalyan]

In defense of our Sampradaya, I would like to give an alternative translation of this verse,

Mayaisvarena- I am the supreme controller; jivena- of the jiva; gunena- of the modes of nature; gunina- of the mahat tattva vina- without; sarvatma- I am the atma in everyone (paramatma); api-indeed; sarvena-everything; na-not; bhuva-existence; vidyate- there is; kvacit- even so

"I am the supreme controller and basis of the Jiva, the modes of nature and mahatattva. Being the soul(paramatma) within everyone's heart, nothing can exist without Me"

I am very pained by your words to draw an impersonal truth from the Bhagavatam which always asserts the highest truth as personal. Trust me my friend, this adwaita vada corrupts the heart and with such a conception you will never be able to enter into and taste the rasa of Krsna Bhakti. On whose authority do you make such a claim? The scriptures should always be read under the authority of a bonafide Sampradaya and not my ones own mental strength. But doing so, the message of the Bhagavatam is never truly revealed.

When in the sloka itself there is a distinction shown betwen jIva and Isvara, these wrong translations push the people studying them into much more confused state. Apparently the internet is full of these translations.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I am very pained by your words to draw an impersonal truth from the Bhagavatam which always asserts the highest truth as personal.

You should not be. It is a Hindu forum. People will have different views. There are Shaivas, Shaktas, Smartas, and even among Vishnavas, many sampradayas. Even atheists for that matter.

 

[निताइ dasa]

You should not be. It is a Hindu forum. People will have different views. There are Shaivas, Shaktas, Smartas, and even among Vishnavas, many sampradayas. Even atheists for that matter.

Many sampradayas yes, but it still is sad to see people going down what I consider a inferior. path (no offense to you, this is just personal thought). I am aware that the Vedas do prescribe different paths for individuals with different eligibilities, yet this does not mean all paths are same. I'm sorry if I offended you,

Anyway what is really sad is that he is using the Bhagavatam to draw these impersonal claims, when the Bhagavata itself is non different from Sri Krsna. Instead of learning the truth of scripture from a Guru, as Sruti commands, people nowadays are trying to tackle scripture with simply a dictionary and their own intellect. Very sad indeed.

 

[Akshara]

Hello,

To start off, this is my opinion and not necissarily the opinion of the great Acharyas. But, for one to understand the Shastra and the message they are trying to convey, i remember that the Shastras are broken up (at least according to Sri Vaishnavism) into the abheda, bheda, and Ghataka Shrutis. This verse, obviously, comes from the abheda Shrutis. However just like if a smriti contradicts the Vedas it is discarded, it can be understood that the Vedas should not contradict themselves. Because the Shrutis, and authentic Puranas and so forth also speak of dualism this Mahavakya cant condradict the bheda shrutis, and vice versa.

So i interpret "Aham Brahmasmi" as like looking at the fishes, the water, the waves, etc. and saying "this is the ocean" However by making that clain you are not refuting the differences that occur within that ocean. So when the Vedas say that i am Brahman, all this is Brahman, that in my opinion doesnt refute differences or state they are illusory, especially when the same Shastra also points to bheda or differences (two birds in a tree, one eats the fruit and the other witnesses, for example).

 

[Aupmanyav]

Welcome to the forum Akshara. Please understand that these are various interpretations. Krishna is as much mine as of any Vaishnava and so are Srimad BhagawadPurana and Srimad BhagawadGita. No sampradya has a copy-right over them.

 

[Akshara]

In chapter 13 of the Gita, Lord Krishna says he is the Knower(ksetragnya) in all bodies.

There are two things here, Knower and known, or The Self and Non-Self. And God says He is the Self, now you can't be Non-Self/jada. So you must be The Self/God/Brahman.

I dont believe this is nearly as black and white as you are making it seem.

There is Para Tattva, Chit Tattva and Achit tattva. Two of which have the ability to know (chit and para). Krishna indeed is the knower within all bodies, however from personal experiance i am not. I have no clue exactly what you are doing right now, as you dont know exactly what i am doing at this time proving that neither of us are the knower in all bodies, yet we are knowers.

If this non-dualistic interpretation is true and i am indeed Krishna why am i only conscious of my body and not all bodies?

 

[Terese]

In defense of our Sampradaya, I would like to give an alternative translation of this verse,

Mayaisvarena- I am the supreme controller; jivena- of the jiva; gunena- of the modes of nature; gunina- of the mahat tattva vina- without; sarvatma- I am the atma in everyone (paramatma); api-indeed; sarvena-everything; na-not; bhuva-existence; vidyate- there is; kvacit- even so

"I am the supreme controller and basis of the Jiva, the modes of nature and mahatattva. Being the soul(paramatma) within everyone's heart, nothing can exist without Me"

I am very pained by your words to draw an impersonal truth from the Bhagavatam which always asserts the highest truth as personal. Trust me my friend, this adwaita vada corrupts the heart and with such a conception you will never be able to enter into and taste the rasa of Krsna Bhakti. On whose authority do you make such a claim? The scriptures should always be read under the authority of a bonafide Sampradaya and not my ones own mental strength. But doing so, the message of the Bhagavatam is never truly revealed.

And in defense of Advaita,

I dont believe this is nearly as black and white as you are making it seem.

There is Para Tattva, Chit Tattva and Achit tattva. Two of which have the ability to know (chit and para). Krishna indeed is the knower within all bodies, however from personal experiance i am not. I have no clue exactly what you are doing right now, as you dont know exactly what i am doing at this time proving that neither of us are the knower in all bodies, yet we are knowers.

If this non-dualistic interpretation is true and i am indeed Krishna why am i only conscious of my body and not all bodies?

Your Atma is a part of Krishna himself. To realise atma is non different from Brahman, is the first step to moksha. Your atma is buried deep within your consciousness.

 

[ratikala]

namaskaram Nitai dasa ji

Many sampradayas yes, but it still is sad to see people going down what I consider a inferior. path (no offense to you, this is just personal thought). I am aware that the Vedas do prescribe different paths for individuals with different eligibilities, yet this does not mean all paths are same. I'm sorry if I offended you,

as Gaudiya my self l have learnt that there is no benifit in our conscidering ourselves or our path superior , ...if Sri Bagahvan himself says ......

''I am in everyone's heart as the Supersoul. As soon as one desires to worship the demigods, I make his faith steady so that he can devote himself to some particular deity.'' ..............Bhagavad gita ....ch ..7 v ..21

then we must greet all as the Lord himself , ...as he lives within the heart of all beings , if he sanctions and supports their choice of faith by allowing them to worship according to their own natures , then we likewise should accept and support their choice , ....

Anyway what is really sad is that he is using the Bhagavatam to draw these impersonal claims, when the Bhagavata itself is non different from Sri Krsna. Instead of learning the truth of scripture from a Guru, as Sruti commands, people nowadays are trying to tackle scripture with simply a dictionary and their own intellect. Very sad indeed.

l often ask my self if there is even any benifit to be had by entering into conversations with impersonalists if all that will happen is that we each defend our own position , ...this does nothing except close the mind of the oponent , ....if we hope for others to desire to understand the true nature of the lord we could prehaps do more good by avoiding argument and by some skillfull means allowing the all atractive nature of the lord to ripen in their own hearts , ..
if we become attracted to the lord we are more likely to seek out a Guru who can impart that true knowledge which stems from the heart , ...the interlect you speak of is merely a tool that can be used or abused , if we are wise we will use it in Krsna's service , ...if we are not carefull it will lead only to false pride , ...

this is not to say that l do not get into a fair number of arguments here all be they mild , ...this often occurs as you rightly observe by people clinging to one sided veiws based upon definition of the word rather than endeavoring to understand it in the context it was spoken , ...you say also that one should ''learn the truth of scripture fom a ''bonafide ''Guru'' , ...this undoubtably is true , ...but also we should be prepaired to learn in a submissive mood , ...otherwise there is the danger that we simply arm ourselves with superficial knowledge , ...then thinking ourselves learned we argue and fight rather than accept and listen to eachothers thoughts and try to understand their position .

 

[Aupmanyav]

Ratiben, this is BG 7.21.

 

[निताइ dasa]

namaskaram Nitai dasa ji



as Gaudiya my self l have learnt that there is no benifit in our conscidering ourselves or our path superior , ...if Sri Bagahvan himself says ......

''I am in everyone's heart as the Supersoul. As soon as one desires to worship the demigods, I make his faith steady so that he can devote himself to some particular deity.'' ..............Bhagavad gita ....v ..7 ch ..12

then we must greet all as the Lord himself , ...as he lives within the heart of all beings , if he sanctions and supports their choice of faith by allowing them to worship according to their own natures , then we likewise should accept and support their choice , ....




l often ask my self if there is even any benifit to be had by entering into conversations with impersonalists if all that will happen is that we each defend our own position , ...this does nothing except close the mind of the oponent , ....if we hope for others to desire to understand the true nature of the lord we could prehaps do more good by avoiding argument and by some skillfull means allowing the all atractive nature of the lord to ripen in their own hearts , ..
if we become attracted to the lord we are more likely to seek out a Guru who can impart that true knowledge which stems from the heart , ...the interlect you speak of is merely a tool that can be used or abused , if we are wise we will use it in Krsna's service , ...if we are not carefull it will lead only to false pride , ...

this is not to say that l do not get into a fair number of arguments here all be they mild , ...this often occurs as you rightly observe by people clinging to one sided veiws based upon definition of the word rather than endeavoring to understand it in the context it was spoken , ...you say also that one should ''learn the truth of scripture fom a ''bonafide ''Guru'' , ...this undoubtably is true , ...but also we should be prepaired to learn in a submissive mood , ...otherwise there is the danger that we simply arm ourselves with superficial knowledge , ...then thinking ourselves learned we argue and fight rather than accept and listen to eachothers thoughts and try to understand their position .

Nitai' Yes you are very right. Perhaps I was a bit too harsh. I just want to share the joy that I get from Bhakti with everyone, because for me it is quite fulfilling. That is why if I can give them this knowledge, perhaps maybe it will save them another thousands of lifetimes of birth and death. That is also the function of preaching. If they accept that knowledge, that is fine, if they don't that is also fine. If we can give them a higher bliss, then we should, it is our duty. That's what I think anyway. But you are right, by our behavior we can set an example and attract other souls to Bhakti.

I apologise if I have offended anyone again, I did not mean to offend . Our Goswamis always debated in a very submissive mood, and they always strived to understand the opponent and resolve their doubts. Ultimately everyone is on their own spiritual path and worships according to their own spiritual eligibility. However, if you have any questions about Nitai, or Gaudiya Vaishnav Siddhanta in general, then I would be more than happy to answer it Nitai!!

 

[Akshara]

Your Atma is a part of Krishna himself. To realise atma is non different from Brahman, is the first step to moksha. Your atma is buried deep within your consciousness.

There is a massive difference philosophically between being a part of Krishna and non-different.

 

[kalyan]

I dont believe this is nearly as black and white as you are making it seem.

There is Para Tattva, Chit Tattva and Achit tattva. Two of which have the ability to know (chit and para). Krishna indeed is the knower within all bodies, however from personal experiance i am not. I have no clue exactly what you are doing right now, as you dont know exactly what i am doing at this time proving that neither of us are the knower in all bodies, yet we are knowers.

If this non-dualistic interpretation is true and i am indeed Krishna why am i only conscious of my body and not all bodies?

QFT...Very good post

 

[Aupmanyav]

To realise atma is non different from Brahman, is the first step to moksha.

Realize that it is not different. That is Moksha, deliverance from all ignorance and fear.

 

[ratikala]

namaskaram Nitai dasa ji

pranama's prabhu ji , pranama's

Nitai' Yes you are very right. Perhaps I was a bit too harsh. I just want to share the joy that I get from Bhakti with everyone, because for me it is quite fulfilling. That is why if I can give them this knowledge, perhaps maybe it will save them another thousands of lifetimes of birth and death. That is also the function of preaching. If they accept that knowledge, that is fine, if they don't that is also fine. If we can give them a higher bliss, then we should, it is our duty. That's what I think anyway. But you are right, by our behavior we can set an example and attract other souls to Bhakti.

jai jai , ....l understand your feelings entirely , ...but even amongst Vaisnavas it is not allways possible to share the same understanding as due to our births we come variously to realisation of the supreme , ......

so we having developed that taste for Bhakti must count ourselves particularly blessed, ...prehaps the best way to share such bliss in this day is as was so simply done by by their lordships Sri Gaura and Gauranga , ...

for others l post a rough translation to give the sence of the meaning , ....

ln the land of Nadiya , on the holy lsland of Godrume , the magnanomous Nityananda prabhu has opened his market place of the holy namefor the deliverance of all the fallen souls .

There he calls out , ''Oh people of faith , by the instruction of Sri Chaitanya , l beg you to fulfill this one request , chant the names of Krsna , worship Krsna , and follow his teachings ''

''without offence chant the holy names of Krsna , ..Krsna is our mother , Krsna is our father , Krsna is the treasure of our life ''

''Continue with your worldly duties , do it with rememberance of Krsna , give up all sinfull behaviors , show compassion to all living entities by loudly singing krsna's divine names , ...the esence of all forms of religion ''

​

I apologise if I have offended anyone again, I did not mean to offend . Our Goswamis always debated in a very submissive mood, and they always strived to understand the opponent and resolve their doubts.

jai jai , ...if we could acheive this one goal we would be a true credit to our tradition and in some way able to repay the lords kindness in granting us the blessing of his service , ...

Ultimately everyone is on their own spiritual path and worships according to their own spiritual eligibility. However, if you have any questions about Nitai, or Gaudiya Vaishnav Siddhanta in general, then I would be more than happy to answer it Nitai!!

please start a new thread so we may discuss and glorify without de railing Terese ji's question , ...

hari hari bol

Ratikala