[Advaita-l] Explanation needed regarding the Mahavakya "aham Brahmasmi"

[Sriram Sankaranarayanan]

With respects to all more knowledgable members of the group, I am inclined
to answer it is a noun.

By adjective, it looks like we are imposing a quality of "Brahman-ness" in
Aatman, while the aatman has non-brahman-ic qualities too. This is not the
message implied in this or any of the veda vakyaas.

Apart from Aham brahmasmi, other vaakyas including Tattvamasi, Ayam aatma
brahma, Om tat sat imply strongly the one-ness of Aatman and brahman,
rather than "brahmatvam" being a quality of aatman.

A statement like - "aham brahmatvin asmi" is more indicative of aatman
possessing the quality of brahman. But "Aham brahmasmi" is unequivocally
conveying the Advaita message. "Brahma" is a noun there, and it is NOT
implying "aham" possessing the quality of brahmatva, but indicates Aham =
Brahma.

Namaskarams to all.

Sriram

Hamsah Soham

On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 5:28 PM, Shashwata Shastri via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> To all the learned members of group-
>
> It has been a long time since I posted a question.
>
> Above mentioned statement reveals the highest truth of Vedas. My question
> is- the word "Brahma" which is contained in the sentence, is it a noun or
> an adjective?
>
> Best Regards and Pranam,
>
> Shashwata Chowdhury
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>