aham brahmasmi --why so confusion ?

[Acintya_Ash]

for eternal wealth , for atma prapti , for bhagawad prapti

now you're the one who's disecting the verses and giving arbitrary interpretation.
Moksha is not some University which offers three different courses. The paths may be different but the final Goal isn't. It's freedom from everything, you alone revel in your being, pure Self Consciousness. "Verily, from duality arises fear." —Brih Up., I. 4. 2

Atman is the basis of all the three things you mentioned above and they are mutually inclusive.

In that verse, Krishna describes how Aham(Nirguna Brahman/Our Innermost Self) is the basis/substratum of Saguna Brahman ie the world.
OR how Atman is the basis of our body and mind, from which they derive their light.

 

[kalyan]

now you're the one who's disecting the verses and giving arbitrary interpretation.
Moksha is not some University which offers three different courses. The paths may be different but the final Goal isn't. It's freedom from everything, you alone revel in your being, pure Self Consciousness. "Verily, from duality arises fear." —Brih Up., I. 4. 2

Atman is the basis of all the three things you mentioned above and they are mutually inclusive.

In that verse, Krishna describes how Aham(Nirguna Brahman/Our Innermost Self) is the basis/substratum of Saguna Brahman ie the world.
OR how Atman is the basis of our body and mind, from which they derive their light.

Amruta and avyayam is the nature of atma.
Sashwathi dharma is for nithya aiswaryam.
Aikanthika bhakti is for mukti. Which part is not clear?

Refer to my meaning on 26 th sloka...Krushna says only thru bhakti yoga or prapatti one could cross the gunas and attain atma tattvam.
It is very clear.

If you just ask yourself the difference between kaivalyam and mukti you will have all answers

 

[kalyan]

In that verse, Krishna describes how Aham(Nirguna Brahman/Our Innermost Self) is the basis/substratum of Saguna Brahman ie the world.
OR how Atman is the basis of our body and mind, from which they derive their light.

again, you need to elaborate on your explanations. this does not make any sense whatsoever, ....

 

[Aupmanyav]

Vishnu keeps all the prakriti as moola prakriti inside him and also all the jIvas with their karmas are kept inside of him in sookshma or minute state and he exists as one.

Well, "Moola prakriti is Lord Shiva and Mother Parvati." These are the names that we have given to it. Some one may have given a different name to it than what name you have given to it. Why trip at names? I already accept that Vishnu/Krishna is Brahman. Basically, it is nameless whole. Has the entity ever introduced itself with a name? (Glad to meet you, I am Vishnu/Krishna and not Rama or Shiva?)

 

[kalyan]

Well, "Moola prakriti is Lord Shiva and Mother Parvati." These are the names that we have given to it. Some one may have given a different name to it than what name you have given to it. Why trip at names? I already accept that Vishnu/Krishna is Brahman. Basically, it is nameless whole. Has the entity ever introduced itself with a name? (Glad to meet you, I am Vishnu/Krishna and not Rama or Shiva?)

Moola prakrati is a term from upanishads on how the universe sristi happened..its one of the phases of sristhi like from aksharam->avyaktam->aham tattvam..in this line it comes .It does not relate to Siva or Parvathi...

 

[Acintya_Ash]

If you just ask yourself the difference between kaivalyam and mukti you will have all answers

I don't know because Krishna doesn't seem to differentiate between them. He seems to use both these terms interchangeably to mean the same thing. Again, The purport of the Gita is uniform about moksha, there are no varieties in moksha.

Krushna says only thru bhakti yoga or prapatti one could cross the gunas and attain atma tattvam.
It is very clear.

Advaita seekers also practice a form of Bhakti, its called Atma-Prapatti or Self Surrender. Even Prapatti to Krishna is nothing but Self-Surrender, because we simply have no way of stepping outside our Self-Consciousness. Thus, whichever deity your are claiming to surrender to, you are simply surrendering to yourSelf, assuming you've surrendered to that particular deity. Lord Krishna is criticizing such people by calling them less intelligent who surrender to anya devatas (and not their Self/Atman), in the seventh chapter. So this makes it crystal clear that when Krishna says surrender unto "me", he means Atman.

 

[kalyan]

I don't know because Krishna doesn't seem to differentiate between them. He seems to use both these terms interchangeably to mean the same thing. Again, The purport of the Gita is uniform about moksha, there are no varieties in moksha.

Advaita seekers also practice a form of Bhakti, its called Atma-Prapatti or Self Surrender. Even Prapatti to Krishna is nothing but Self-Surrender, because we simply have no way of stepping outside our Self-Consciousness. Thus, whichever deity your are claiming to surrender to, you are simply surrendering to yourSelf, assuming you've surrendered to that particular deity. Lord Krishna is criticizing such people by calling them less intelligent who surrender to anya devatas (and not their Self/Atman), in the seventh chapter. So this makes it crystal clear that when Krishna says surrender unto "me", he means Atman.

I am extremely sorry to say this but you have BhagawadGita ALL wrong...Kaivalyam and mukti are entirely different....These are separate and depending upon path u adopt u get these and self surrender is surrendering the self to Sri Krushna and not surrendering to self...no offense!

 

[shivsomashekhar]

I am extremely sorry to say this but you have BhagawadGita ALL wrong...Kaivalyam and mukti are entirely different....These are separate and depending upon path u adopt u get these and self surrender is surrendering the self to Sri Krushna and not surrendering to self...no offense!

According to you, that is.

Neither Advaita nor Tattvavada support this view of two kinds of liberation. I am surprised that Vishishtadvaita supports such a position.

Hare Krishnas have a confused approach to this. Sometimes, they say Advaita/Mayavada is a false philosophy. Some other times, the Advaita version of Mukti is real and they will attain something named Brahma-Jyothi , but it is lower than the Hare Krishna version of liberation.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Moola prakrati is a term from upanishads on how the universe sristi happened..its one of the phases of sristhi like from aksharam->avyaktam->aham tattvam..in this line it comes .It does not relate to Siva or Parvathi...

Shiva is akshara, avyaktam, aham tattvam, and much more - benignant, gracious, benign, kind, friendly, favourable, auspicious, etc. Check a Samskrit dictionary.

 

[Aupmanyav]

The purport of the Gita is uniform about moksha, there are no varieties in moksha.

The problem is about understanding the meaning of 'moksha', 'mukti', 'nirvana', 'jnana', etc. Do we or our purported soul goes anywhere after death? There is no evidence of that. Can anyone tell me where 'swarga' and 'naraka' are located, a million yojanas above the North Pole or a million yojanas below the South Pole. There is no going anywhere. Therefore, 'moksha', 'mukti', 'nirvana', 'the dawn of jnana' etc. should be considered as release from bondage of ignorance, release from our prejudices, release from our fears, release from the thought that we are going to get 72 'houris' in heaven. This is a hankering after continuance of life, the fear of extinction. But a 'mukta', a 'jnani' knows that there is no extinction. Lord Krishna said that there was no time when we were not there and there won't be any time when we won't be here. We, being none other than Brahman, have nothing to fear, no death, no birth, we are eternal, avyaya. There is nothing more to know when one knows this. That is why Upanishads said 'Brahma veda Brahmaiva bhavati'.
श्रीकृष्णार्पणमस्तु।

 

[shivsomashekhar]

ब्रह्मणो हि प्रतिष्ठाऽहममृतस्याव्ययस्य च।

शाश्वतस्य च धर्मस्य सुखस्यैकान्तिकस्य च।।14.27।।

[For I am the Abode of Brahman - the indestructible and immutable, the
eternal, the Dharma and absolute Bliss.]

What's your take on this verse?

This verse has been discussed on this forum before. Here is my posting on it -
Ramanuja on Bhagavad Gita 2:12

Also, read Tattva's response to my post (he has a different take on the matter) -
Ramanuja on Bhagavad Gita 2:12

 

[Acintya_Ash]

self surrender is surrendering the self to Sri Krushna and not surrendering to self.

When you have surrendered your self to Krishna, you no longer exist, that state is Non-Dual, the surrender of Ego, where God and Devotee become One. There are other forms of surrender too, but this is the highest
BG 9.29. The same am I to all beings; to Me there is none hateful or dear; but those who worship Me with devotion are in Me and I am also in them.

 

[kalyan]

When you have surrendered your self to Krishna, you no longer exist, that state is Non-Dual, the surrender of Ego, where God and Devotee become One. There are other forms of surrender too, but this is the highest
BG 9.29. The same am I to all beings; to Me there is none hateful or dear; but those who worship Me with devotion are in Me and I am also in them.

Surrendering A to B , A and B are different,

if self is same as Kanniah/Krushna, then what is the need for surrendering ? , surrendering the self to Krushna, this itself says Krushna is different from self.......

 

[kalyan]

The problem is about understanding the meaning of 'moksha', 'mukti', 'nirvana', 'jnana', etc. Do we or our purported soul goes anywhere after death? There is no evidence of that. Can anyone tell me where 'swarga' and 'naraka' are located, a million yojanas above the North Pole or a million yojanas below the South Pole. There is no going anywhere. Therefore, 'moksha', 'mukti', 'nirvana', 'the dawn of jnana' etc. should be considered as release from bondage of ignorance, release from our prejudices, release from our fears, release from the thought that we are going to get 72 'houris' in heaven. This is a hankering after continuance of life, the fear of extinction. But a 'mukta', a 'jnani' knows that there is no extinction. Lord Krishna said that there was no time when we were not there and there won't be any time when we won't be here. We, being none other than Brahman, have nothing to fear, no death, no birth, we are eternal, avyaya. There is nothing more to know when one knows this. That is why Upanishads said 'Brahma veda Brahmaiva bhavati'.
श्रीकृष्णार्पणमस्तु।

you don't even know what is on the other side of the moon till now even with the advanced technology, how would you know if I said there is Naraka some million light years away between the Southwest & Southern directions, do you plan to travel there and check yourself ? what an illogical loose statement!

2nd, If self equals Brahman, then there is no need of all those shastras.
3rd, If you realized the self as per you, then you should have attained atma prapti or you should have attained self by now which gives you 8 attributes of pure self...You should not have hunger, you should not have thirst and rest 6 which I will not explain here.....if not you are bound to the cycles of life and death, in the next birth you might be even a stone which lies for thousands of years as insentient being.
4th I would not bite the Sri Krushna misinterpretation you posted here

Shiva is akshara, avyaktam, aham tattvam, and much more - benignant, gracious, benign, kind, friendly, favourable, auspicious, etc. Check a Samskrit dictionary.

Like I said there are the phases of creation and not refer to any jIva.

Also you say like attaining eternal self is like an easy task...well let me tell you it is NOT! It is extremely complex and requires lots and lots of saadhana and all the principles said by Sri Krushna in Bhagawad Gita needs to be strictly followed, even then it is hardly attainable in this modern world....but based on how much saadhana/practice you did, you might get a next favorable birth for achieving the task!

 

[kalyan]

According to you, that is.

Neither Advaita nor Tattvavada support this view of two kinds of liberation. I am surprised that Vishishtadvaita supports such a position.

Hare Krishnas have a confused approach to this. Sometimes, they say Advaita/Mayavada is a false philosophy. Some other times, the Advaita version of Mukti is real and they will attain something named Brahma-Jyothi , but it is lower than the Hare Krishna version of liberation.

Kaivalyam is attaining self/atma.......This is extremely complex path, for those who attain self, there is no going back, they will be in a place devoid of Bhagawan Sri Maha Vishnu and it is termed as highly dangerous by the poorva acharyas because the person who attained self sees himself and enjoys, there would be no one with him, as an outsider one cannot imagine that,
Kaivalyam is state of liberation mentioned in the Upanishads, they also gave the description of this.
Moksham is a state of getting released and attaining something, but when it comes to vedic literature, it describes a state of attaining bhagawan( one should be very clear on that 'something' which should be attained)

Adi Shankara attained atma/brahma prapti through the study of entire vedas and through a lots of saadhana and that is why we see mystic experiences in his life story, because as i understand attaining self is something that needs to be done when you live right ? and there is no mukti perse from advaitic standpoint as self when it becomes completely pure only brahman remains, but when that happens you become a mystic, but if its not, you are not fit for that in this life and again have to continue the saadhana from where you left ofcourse in a different lifetime as Sri Krushna said no saadhana or practice goes waste in BG.

What saadhana or practice I need to do to realize the brahman inside me or well lets say brahman from an advaitic perspective is something I would leave this as a thought for advaitans because just knowing self equals Brahman is not going to take them anywhere well for a serious seeker anyway who realizes that death can bite at any moment !

adiyen Chinna Jeeyar Swamy daasa

 

[Aupmanyav]

you don't even know what is on the other side of the moon till now even with the advanced technology, ..

The other side of the Moon is known since the last 55 years. You were sleeping, Van Winkle. More pock marks since this side is not protected by earth.
"The Soviet Academy of Sciences published the first atlas of the far side in 1960."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Far_side_of_the_Moon

 

[Aupmanyav]

2nd, If self equals Brahman, then there is no need of all those shastras.

Shastras are there so that people can understand this. Some people cannot understand this, no matter however hard the teachers try, others knowing everything choose to go a particular way (Ratiben comes to mind). Shastras have many alternatives.

3rd, If you realized the self as per you, then you should have attained atma prapti or you should have attained self by now which gives you 8 attributes of pure self...You should not have hunger, you should not have thirst and rest 6 which I will not explain here.....if not you are bound to the cycles of life and death, in the next birth you might be even a stone which lies for thousands of years as insentient being.

Atributes, that is great fun. So, one can go wherever one wants to go, can become as small as a moleculle and as large as the Himalaya mountains. Excellent imagination. Yes, what I am constituted by will be a part of a stone in future. My ashes which will most probably be immersed in River Ganges will form part of a sedimentary formation. When the Indian place goes under the Tibetan plate in a few million year, it will be turned into metamorphic rock.

4th I would not bite the Sri Krushna misinterpretation you posted here

I respect your different views. They said 'Tunde tunde matir-bhinna' (Each head will have a different view). Let us together sing the Mahamantra (Hare Krishna, Hare Rama, Krishna Krishna, Hare-Hare; Hare Rama, Hare Rama, Rama Rama, Hare-Hare). The dark ones are very kind and beautiful.

 

[kalyan]

The other side of the Moon is known since the last 55 years. You were sleeping, Van Winkle. More pock marks since this side is not protected by earth.
"The Soviet Academy of Sciences published the first atlas of the far side in 1960."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Far_side_of_the_Moon

I said Dark Side of the moon and not far side hello ? even then your point about wanting to know about swarga and naraka is a joke, you don't even know lets say what exactly exists on mars and how many years it took to land something on mars? and you want to know to confirm the swarga/naraka?.....hypocricy! ......

 

[Aupmanyav]

Mars? What do you want to know about Mars? - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars

 

[kalyan]

Mars? What do you want to know about Mars? - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars

can we live on mars ?