[Advaita-l] Re: Advaita-l Digest, Vol 1, Issue 29

[Jay Nelamangala]

VidyAshankar,

Namaste.

>Be that as it may, your argument entails that even the words of Sruti and
>smRti describe brahman only partially, never fully, inasmuch as they too
are
>words. So how does one really know brahman then?

That is why Brahman is always Brahman, and those who are trying to know
Brahman will never be Brahman.

Upanishats make this clear as:

"yadi manyase suvEdaa iti daharamEvApi noonam tvam vEttha brahmaNo roopam"
"yasyAmatam tasya matam matam yasya na vEda saha"
"avijnAtam vijAnatAm vijnAtam avijAnatAm"

In summary we can say,

If we say God can not be known at all,  then whole vEdAnta becomes futile.
If we say God can be known completely, then we are putting a limit to a
limitless God.    So,  having recognized this we say

"na ativEdyO na cha avEdyaha tasmAt sa paramEshwaraha"
(God is God because you can neither know Him completely nor
He is totally unknown)  In other words,  everyone's knowledge of God can be
only partial.