Regarding sarvaM khalvidaM brahma

[Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian]

Anand wrote about shrI sha.nkara's interpretation of this statement. I think
the way I put it was a slightly different interpretation, but essentially the
same. brahman being the cause is the same as saying that brahman is the
substratum, and hence if the name and form are removed, the world as we
perceive it, is seen as brahman only by the GYAni. Or am I mistaken here?

Anyway, I have some comments about shrI sachchidanandendra sarasvati's
comments on shrI padmapada's explanation of the dual role of mAyA. I'll post
my thoughts sometime later since I am kind of busy right now.

Ramakrishnan.