1. 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!

Brahman [Hindu Only]

Discussion in 'Same Faith Debates' started by atanu, Aug 6, 2019.

?
  1. Knowledge is not intrinsic to brahman

    22.2%
  2. Knowledge is intrinsic to brahman

    77.8%
  1. atanu

    atanu Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2010
    Messages:
    14,905
    Ratings:
    +3,751
    Religion:
    Hindu
    Brahman, the non dual reality, is defined in Upanishads as ‘satyam, jnanam, anantam’ (Existence, knowledge, infinity).

    Teachers of all Vedanta Hindu schools (broadly advaita, vishistaadvaita, and dvaita) agree that brahman is truth-existence, knowledge, infinity. All three intrinsic qualities together define brahman. Brahman is not amenable to be delineated; it is not non existence; it is not unconscious.

    So. Is there any Vedantist who disagrees? Why?
     
  2. George-ananda

    George-ananda Advaita Vedanta, Theosophy, Spiritualism
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2012
    Messages:
    15,554
    Ratings:
    +5,822
    Religion:
    Advaita and Spiritualist and Pantheist
    Since I voted first I am ahead 100% to 0%.

    I voted 'Knowledge is not intrinsic to brahman '

    I am thinking Brahman to be sat-cit-Ananda (being-awareness-bliss). There is nothing to have knowledge of until maya/creation comes into the picture. And Brahman is the playwright of all that, so maybe I got the answer wrong?
     
    • Like Like x 2
  3. osgart

    osgart Nothing my eye, Something for sure

    Joined:
    May 1, 2017
    Messages:
    4,503
    Ratings:
    +2,101
    Without the knowing aspect the reality is pretty useless. I suppose when i die existing in a state of total unawareness is almost the same as ceasing to exist altogether. Knowing our experience is being aware of our experience, and the joy of living.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  4. Aupmanyav

    Aupmanyav Be your own guru

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    Messages:
    27,674
    Ratings:
    +12,554
    Religion:
    Atheist, Advaita (Non-duality), Orthodox Hindu
    What will Brahman do with knowledge? It is uninvolved, going its own way. What you say in the sentence is just one of the many interpretations.

    Nice explanation, George, but do you see any reason why Brahman will write a play. Actually, it does none of that. That is our illusion, 'maya'.

    Yeah, Osgart. Knowledge is important for us. Not for Brahman. Probably there is no difference between existence and non-existence. That is what Quantum Mechanics tell us. And so said the RigVeda 3,000 years ago:

    Sato bandhumasati niravindan hridi prtishyakavayo manisha ll
    Sages who searched with their heart's thought discovered the existent's kinship in the non-existent.
    Rig Veda: Rig-Veda, Book 10: HYMN CXXIX. Creation.
     
    #4 Aupmanyav, Aug 6, 2019
    Last edited: Aug 6, 2019
  5. atanu

    atanu Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2010
    Messages:
    14,905
    Ratings:
    +3,751
    Religion:
    Hindu
    But ‘cit’ (of sat chit ananda) and jnanam, from Taittiriya Upanishad, both signify awareness/consciousness.

    You are correct that there is nothing to be aware of until mAyA creation kicks in. But intrinsically brahman being jnanam means it is the foundation of knowing — of absence or presence of things and beings.

    In light of this information will you wish to review your vote?
     
    #5 atanu, Aug 6, 2019
    Last edited: Aug 6, 2019
    • Informative Informative x 1
  6. Kirran

    Kirran
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Messages:
    10,694
    Ratings:
    +6,396
    Dude, how you gonna prove anything through rationality and semantics about Brahman? Meditate on the 'I am' bro.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  7. George-ananda

    George-ananda Advaita Vedanta, Theosophy, Spiritualism
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2012
    Messages:
    15,554
    Ratings:
    +5,822
    Religion:
    Advaita and Spiritualist and Pantheist
    I changed my vote.

    Don't have a challenge to the Taittiriya Upanishad in me, :)
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  8. atanu

    atanu Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2010
    Messages:
    14,905
    Ratings:
    +3,751
    Religion:
    Hindu
    I agree. “Mind and word return from it”. But, was your post directed at me? :) Am I the dude?

    If yes, then I will like to clarify that the OP was created primarily to gauge the range of notions that Hindus (and others) hold regarding brahman and whether those notions are aligned or antagonistic to scripture. Secondarily, the OP may facilitate a positive discussion.
     
    • Creative Creative x 1
  9. Kirran

    Kirran
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Messages:
    10,694
    Ratings:
    +6,396
    What's up my dude! But is scripture's intent (aside from the bits which came out of power mongering and cultural ideas and whatever) really about cultivating and developing notions?
     
  10. atanu

    atanu Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2010
    Messages:
    14,905
    Ratings:
    +3,751
    Religion:
    Hindu
    I don’t understand your reservations to a poll.

    As per advaita teachers, the intention and practice in respect of scripture should include shravana, manana, and niddhidhyasana (hearing, contemplation, and meditation). I think that discussion on the Vedantic definition of brahman can promote all three steps.
     
    #10 atanu, Aug 6, 2019
    Last edited: Aug 6, 2019
    • Useful Useful x 1
  11. SalixIncendium

    SalixIncendium अहं ब्रह्मास्मि
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2016
    Messages:
    15,488
    Ratings:
    +26,136
    Religion:
    Hindu
    **MOD POST**

    This is Same Faith Debates. Posts by members that do not identify as Hindu are subject to moderation under Rule 10.
     
  12. Jainarayan

    Jainarayan ॐ नमो भगवते वासुदेवाय
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2011
    Messages:
    21,542
    Ratings:
    +10,010
    Religion:
    śrī kṛṣṇasya sevāyām - “In Lord Krishna’s service”
    I originally voted no but now I'm questioning that. If Brahman is all there is, sarvam khalvidam brahma, then knowledge must be Brahman itself, Saguna Brahman.

    Well, Shankaracharya's position is secure, I'm no threat to him. :D
     
    • Like Like x 2
  13. SalixIncendium

    SalixIncendium अहं ब्रह्मास्मि
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2016
    Messages:
    15,488
    Ratings:
    +26,136
    Religion:
    Hindu
    I'm not sure I'm comfortable with the term 'jnanam' or 'knowledge' when describing Brahman. For me, Brahman is 'existence (truth), consciousness, bliss' or 'satcitananda.'

    While I'm open to other ideas, for me, knowledge is a product of intellect, which is resides in the brain. If there is no brain, there is no intellect, no knowledge. What is it that knows when the jiva expires?
     
  14. atanu

    atanu Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2010
    Messages:
    14,905
    Ratings:
    +3,751
    Religion:
    Hindu
    I explained to Jai earlier that jnana and cit are equivalent words, both signifying consciousness. Let me explain.

    Jnana, is knowledge, in general. Jnana can be vijnana (as in dream or in waking when subject-object division has occurred) or prajnana (as in deep sleep, which is devoid of any kind of diversity whatsoever). Brahman is slumberless and is the cause of knowing the objects in waking and in dream (vijnana) or their absence in deep sleep (prajnana).

    In short, whether consciousness is of the type of vijnana or consciousness of the type of prajnana, it is brahman that is the sole cause of knowing and (as per Advaita) also the known. That is the meaning of brahman being pure jnanam.
    ...
     
  15. ajay0

    ajay0 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2012
    Messages:
    2,370
    Ratings:
    +1,707


    Yes, this is true and I agree with this.

    The following sayings of the masters will substantiate this further...


    The Self, our Being, is awareness. - Sri Muruganar

    Chit ( awareness ) means pure knowledge. - Swami Prajnanpad

    Knowledge and 'I' ( Self) are both one. - Sree Narayan Guru

    The mind is ignorance. - Shankaracharya ( Vivekachudamani )

    Your true nature is awareness and not what your mind is producing. - Burt Harding

    Buddha means awareness, the awareness of body and mind that prevents evil from arising in either. - Bodhidharma




    The Self or self-knowledge is considered as true knowledge in Vedanta, as there is a dramatic change in perception of the one anchored in such knowledge. The likes of the Rishis or enlightened beings such as Ashtavakra, Janaka, Buddha, Mahavira, Ramana Maharshi, Nisargadatta, Ramakrishna possessed such self-knowledge. Same goes for Christ and Sufi enlightened sages like Rumi and Mansur Al-Hallaj.


    Who we are varies according to our state of consciousness. When you are more aware, you are someone else than when you are less aware or unconscious.

    I have stated this in detail in this thread of mine...

    On Awareness-Proactivity and Unconsciousness-Ego-Reactivity...
     
    • Like Like x 1
Loading...