[Advaita-l] Power of Brahman

[V Subrahmanian]

On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 1:32 AM Srinath Vedagarbha via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> On Sat, Sep 15, 2018 at 1:51 AM Jaldhar H. Vyas via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > > Such is the power of the knower of Brahman.
> >
> >
> > By all means respect any other saintly qualities Raghavendra Swami may
> > have but as a Dwaitin he definitely cannot be considered a knower of
> > Brahman.
> >
> >
> The term 'Knower of Brahman' is an oxymoron in Advaita. As it implies two
> things 'Knower' and 'Brahman'. Do not forget Brahman in Advaita has no
> kartu-karma virOdha of knowing itself. "na cha agneriva AtmA Atmani
> viShayaH: "  says Shankara.
>

The 'knower' is a person in Advaita. He only realizes himself to be none
other than Brahman. 'Brahmavit Brahmaiva' says the shruti.  Brahman, as the
assumed jiva, can know Brahman.

Br.Up. bhashya 2.4.14:

 येन विजानाति, तस्य करणस्य, विज्ञेये विनियुक्तत्वात् ; ज्ञातुश्च ज्ञेय एव
हि जिज्ञासा, न आत्मनि ; न च अग्नेरिव आत्मा आत्मनो विषयः ; न च अविषये
ज्ञातुः ज्ञानमुपपद्यते ; तस्मात् येन इदं सर्वं विजानाति, तं विज्ञातारं केन
करणेन को वा अन्यः विजानीयात् — यदा तु पुनः परमार्थविवेकिनो ब्रह्मविदो
विज्ञातैव केवलोऽद्वयो वर्तते, तं विज्ञातारं अरे केन विजानीयादिति ॥

Translation by Swami Madhavananda:

The knower may desire to know not about itself, but about objects. As fire
does not burn itself, so the self does not know itself, and the knower can
have no knowledge of a thing that is not its object. Therefore through what
instrument should one know the knower owing to which this universe is
known, and who else should know it? And when to the knower of Brahman who
has discriminated the Real from the unreal there remains only the subject,
absolute and one without a second, through what instrument, 0
Maitreyi, should one know that Knower?


'Knower of Brahman'  concept applies only in Dvaita (irrespective of once
accepts Sri. Raghavendra Swamin is one or not).

If someone knows Brahman as 'object' such is not the Upanishadic Brahma
jnanam.

vs


>
>