[Advaita-l] Taittiriya Brahmana question

[श्रीमल्ललितालालितः]

*श्रीमल्ललितालालितः <http://www.lalitaalaalitah.com>
lalitAlAlitaH <http://about.me/lalitaalaalitah/bio>*



On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 09:19, Venkatesh Murthy <vmurthy36 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Namaste
>
> Because Brahma is the material of all trees and forest .


Whatever I'm saying is just examination of your view. I'm not advaitin here.
Shruti just says 'brahma vanam' means brama and vanam are same. It doesn't
say that brahma is cause or anything else.
Moreover, how could dyAvA-pR^ithivI get birth from forest and tree.
Existence of both stands on pR^ithivI, etc.

Like wood is
> the material for every tree and and forest is only group of trees.
>

There is no word for wood in shruti and brahma was not equated with wood
anywhere.
Tree is not made of only wood. It has fruits, flowers, leaves, bark, etc.
So, saying 'like wood' will prove that brahma and some other things make
tree.
Forest is a group of trees and not same as trees. But shruti says that vanam
is brahma which is again tree. So, we must see whole chapter to say
something useful.
brahma = wood. wood + something = tree. tress + other trees = vanam. So,
tree = vanam = brahma is not justified.

Brahma is material of trees and forest.


as wood ?
But, shruti doesn't say anything for wood.
shruti says tree = brahma = vanam and not that brahma is material cause of
anything.


> Another case is with gold we
> can make many parts of necklace. Join all parts to make necklace. But
> Gold is material for parts and necklace also.
>

We can't break or mold brahman. We can make designs. So, this example is not
correct.


> किंस्विद् वनम् इत्यादिप्रश्नप्रतिवचनभृत ब्रह्मवनम् इति
> श्रुतिप्रतिपन्नोपादानत्वस्य
>

सिद्धवत्कृत्वा कथनं श्रद्धालोरेव शोभते । विदुषां पुरत एतदुदाहरणं बालक्रीडैव
स्यात् ।