Impact of a drop of water in water, a common analogy for Brahman and the
Ātman
In Hinduism, Brahman (ब्रह्मन् brahman) is the one supreme, universal Spirit that is the origin and support of the phenomenal universe.[1] Brahman is sometimes referred to as the Absolute or Godhead[2] which is the Divine Ground[3] of all being. Brahman is conceived as personal ("with qualities"), impersonal ("without qualities") and/or supreme depending on the philosophical school.
The sages of the Upanishads teach that Brahman is the ultimate essence of material phenomena (including the original identity of the human self) that cannot be seen or heard but whose nature can be known through the development of self-knowledge (atma jnana).[4] According to Advaita, a liberated human being (jivanmukta) has realised Brahman as his or her own true self (see atman).
The Isha Upanishad says:
Auṃ - That supreme Brahman is infinite, and this conditioned Brahman is infinite. The infinite proceeds from infinite. If you subtract the infinite from the infinite, the infinite remains alone.
Sanskrit Brahman (an n-stem, nominative bráhmā) from a root bṛh " to swell, expand, grow, enlarge". is a neutral noun to be distinguished from the masculine brahmán—denoting a person associated with Brahman, and from Brahmā, the creator God of the Hindu Trinity, the Trimurti. Brahman is thus a gender-neutral concept that implies greater impersonality than masculine or feminine conceptions of the deity.
The further origin of bṛh is unclear. According to the Indogermanisches etymologisches Wörterbuch (IEW, "Indo-European Etymological Dictionary"), written by the Austrian-German comparative linguist and Celtic languages expert Julius Pokorny, IE root bhreu-, bhreu-d- denotes to swell, sprout (cf Slovenian brsteti - to sprout) It could be from PIE *bherg'h- "to rise, high, eminent", cognate to Old Norse Bragi. Some, including Georges Dumézil, have said that the Latin word flāmen "priest" may also be cognate. However, the standard Indo-Aryan etymological dictionary by M. Mayrhofer (1986–2000, vol. II, p. 236-8) derives brahman 'formulation (of truth) [in poetry], from Indo-Iranian *bhrajh-man < Indo-European *bhreg'h-men; cf. Old Persian brahm, Middle Persian Zurvan 'form', Nuristani (Ashkun) blamade 'a god' ( from *brahma-daeva?), Old Norse bragr 'poetical art', etc., and argues against connection with Latin flamen.
In the early Vedic religion Brahman was the name given to the power that made the sacrifice effective, namely the spiritual power of the sacred utterances pronounced by the vedic priests who were by virtue of this known as brahmins. Connected with the ritual of pre-Vedantic Hinduism, Brahman signified the power to grow, the expansive and self-altering process of ritual and sacrifice, often visually realized in the sputtering of flames as they received the all important ghee (clarified butter) and rose in concert with the mantras of the Vedas.[citation needed]
The Rig Veda says that by desire (RV 10.12.94), the initial manifestation of the material universe came into being from Hiranyagarbha (literally "golden womb"), out of which the world, organisms and divine beings (devas) arose:
"Great indeed are the devas who have sprung out of Brahman." — Atharva Veda
The later Vedic religion produced a series of profound philosophical reflections in which Brahman is now considered to be the one Absolute Reality behind changing appearances; the universal substrate from which material things originate and to which they return after their dissolution. The sages of the Upanishads made their pronouncements on the basis of personal experience (revelation or sruti) as an essential component of their philosophical reflection. The earlier Upanisads were written during a time of intensely fertile philosophical and religious revival in which the old dogmas were being questioned and individual personal experiential knowledge was increasingly emphasised over uncritical acceptance of the old myths. The polytheism that characterises the vedic hymns gives way increasingly to a search for what is common in the diverse forms of nature. The unitive concepts that arise from this tendency are those of dharma and brahman.
The Upanisads recount the teachings of gurus to celibate pupils (Brahmacaryas) who are seeking knowledge of Brahman, the absolute, the origin of things, whose knowledge brings peace. This knowledge of brahman is not mere epistemic knowledge (knowing about something) but a direct, unambiguous knowing that is liberating in its experience. This culture of acquiring personal knowledge and its concomitant liberation is now referred to as sramanic culture and has constituted an important influence on the development of mainstream Hinduism.
Several mahā-vākyas (great sayings) from the Upanisads indicate what the principle of Brahman is:
| Sanskrit |
Advaita translation |
Vaishnava translation |
| prajnānam brahma[5] |
"Brahman is knowledge" |
Brahman knows everything |
| ayam ātmā brahma[6] |
"The Self (or the Soul) is Brahman" |
JivaAtma (soul) is of same eternal spiritual transcendental nature as Brahman |
| aham brahmāsmi[7] |
"I am Brahman" |
I am as eternal as Brahman |
| tat tvam asi[8] |
"Thou art that" ("You are the Supreme") |
"You are the servant of the Supreme"[9] |
| sarvam khalv idam brahma[10] |
"All this that we see in the world is Brahman" ("everything in this material world is Maya, illusion") |
Brahman is everything, and all we see are His different energies — material or spiritual |
| sachchidānanda brahma[11][12] |
"Brahman or Brahma is existence, consciousness, and bliss". |
Brahman, has sat-cit-ananda-vigraha — eternal spiritual body which is full of bliss, and He is Supreme Person (conscious Absolute Person/Truth) |
In the Upanisads the sages teach that brahman is infinite Being, infinite Consciousness, and infinite Bliss (saccidananda).
It is said that Brahman cannot be known by empirical means — that is to say, as an object of our consciousness — because Brahman is our very consciousness and being. Therefore it may be said that moksha, yoga, samādhi, nirvana, etc. do not merely mean to know Brahman, but rather to realise one's "brahman-hood", to actually realise that one is and always was Brahman. Indeed, closely related to the Self concept of Brahman is the idea that it is synonymous with jiva-atma, or individual souls, our atman (or soul) being readily identifiable with the greater soul (paramatma) of Brahman.
Generally, Vedanta rejects the notion of an evolving Brahman since Brahman contains within it the potentiality and archetypes behind all possible manifest phenomenal forms. The Vedas, though they are in some respects historically conditioned, are considered by Hindus to convey a knowledge[13] eternal, timeless and always contemporaneous with Brahman. This knowledge is considered to have been handed down by realised yogins to students many generations before the Vedas were committed to writing. Written texts of the Vedas are a relatively recent phenomenon.
The term Brahmin in the Vedic period actually meant one who has realized Brahman. However, later on Brahmin came to be identified with the highest of the four castes, the Brahmins, who by virtue of their purity and priesthood were held proprietors of rituals.
Among Hindu sects, Advaita Vedanta espouses monism. The closest interpretation of the term can be found in the Taittiriya Upanishad (II.1) where Brahman is described as satyam jnanam anantam brahman ("Brahman is of the nature of truth, knowledge and infinity"). Thus, Brahman is the origin and end of all things, material or otherwise. Brahman is the root source and Divine Ground of everything that exists, and is the only thing that exists according to Shankara. It is defined as unknowable and Satchitananda ("Truth-Consciousness-Bliss"). Since it is eternal and infinite, it comprises the only truth. The goal of Vedanta is to realize that the soul (Atman) is actually nothing but Brahman. The Hindu pantheon of gods is said, in the Vedas and Upanishads, to be only higher manifestations of Brahman. For this reason, "ekam sat" ("Truth is one"), and all is Brahman. This explains the Hindu view that "All paths lead to the one Truth, though many sages [and religions] call upon it by different names."
As mentioned before, Brahman is proclaimed to be the reality behind everything in this universe, the cause which sustains the effect. So, from the perspective of the Body, Atma (Soul or Self) is Brahman. From the perspective of the World, Brahma (the "Creator" deity)is deemed as the Brahman. From the perspective of Brahma, Isvarah (Personal Godhead according to the Dvaitis) is the (Param) Brahman. From the perspective of Knowledge, Veda is Brahman. So, in one sense whatever we see around is all Brahman. Brahman is hence not an unidimensional aspect. It needs to be viewed and understood from varied perspectives.
Different schools try to establish the primacy or supremacy of the personal or impersonal (or equality) nature of Brahman. Advaita argues the latter and dvaita the former.
- Here the underlined vowels carry the Vedic Sanskrit udātta short pitch accent. It is usual to use an acute accent symbol for this purpose. (on the first syllable).
In Vedic Sanskrit:-
In later Sanskrit usage:-
- Brahma (ब्रह्म) (nominative singular), brahman (stem) (neuter[14] gender) means the concept of the transcendent and immanent ultimate reality of the One Godhead or Supreme Cosmic Spirit in Hinduism; the concept is central to Hindu philosophy, especially Vedanta; this is discussed below. Also note that the word Brahman in this sense is exceptionally treated as masculine (see the Merrill-Webster Sanskrit Dictionary). It is called "the Brahman" in English. Brahm is another variant of Brahman.
- Brahmā (ब्रह्मा) (nominative singlular), Brahman (ब्रह्मन्) (stem) (masculine gender), means the deity or deva Prajāpati Brahmā. He is one of the members of the Hindu trinity and associated with creation, but does not have a cult in present day India. This is because Brahmā, the creator-god, is long-lived but not eternal i.e. Brahmā gets absorbed back into Purusha at the end of an aeon, and is born again at the beginning of a new kalpa.
One must not confuse these with:
- A brāhmaņa (ब्राह्मण) (masculine, pronounced [ˈbraːhməɳə]), (which literally means "pertaining to prayer") is a prose commentary on the Vedic mantras—an integral part of the Vedic literature.
- A brāhmaņa (ब्राह्मण) (masculine, same pronunciation as above), means priest; in this usage the word is usually rendered in English as "Brahmin". This usage is also found in the Atharva Veda. In neuter plural form, Brahmāņi. See Vedic priest.
- Ishvara, (lit., Supreme Lord), in Advaita, is identified as a partial worldly manifestation (with limited attributes) of the ultimate reality, the attributeless Brahman. In Visishtadvaita and Dvaita, however, Ishvara (the Supreme Controller) has infinite attributes and the source of the impersonal Brahman.
- Devas, the expansions of Brahman/God into various forms, each with a certain quality. In Vedic Hinduism, there were 33 devas, which later became exaggerated to 330 million devas. In fact, devas are themselves regarded as more mundane manifestations of the One and the Supreme Brahman (See Para Brahman). The Sanskrit word for "ten million" also means group, and 330 million devas originally meant 33 types of divine manifestations.
Some Upanishadic statements identify the Atman, the inner essence of the human being, with Brahman. While Advaita philosophy considers Brahman to be without form, qualities, or attributes, Visishtadvaita and Dvaita philosophies understand Brahman as one with infinite auspicious qualities. In Advaita, the ultimate reality is expressed as Nirguna Brahman. Nirguna means formless, attributeless, mega-soul, or spirit-only. Advaita considers all personal forms of God including Vishnu and Shiva as different aspects of God in personal form, Saguna Brahman i.e. God with attributes. In Visishtadvaita and Dvaita, God is Saguna Brahman with infinite attributes and is the source of the impersonal Nirguna Brahman, and God's energy is regarded as Devi, the Divine Mother.
The phrase that is seen to be the only possible (and still thoroughly inadequate) description of Brahman that humans, with limited minds and being, can entertain is the Sanskrit word Sacchidānanda, which is combined from sat-chit-ānanda, meaning "Being — Consciousness — Bliss".
The description of Brahman from Mandukya Upanishad:
सर्वं ह्येतद् ब्रह्मायमात्मा ब्रह्म सोयमात्मा चतुष्पात्
sarvam hyetad brahmāyamātmā brahma soyamātmā chatushpāt - Mandukya Upanishad, verse-2
sarvam (सर्वम्)- whole/all/everything; hi (हि)- really/surely/indeed; etad (एतद्)- this here/this; brahma (ब्रह्म)- Brahma/Brahman; ayam (अयम्)- this/here; ātmā(आत्मा)- atma/atman; sah(सः)- he; ayam (अयम्)- this/here; chatus(चतुस्)- four/quadruple; pāt(पात्)- step/foot/quarter
सर्वम् हि एतद् ब्रह्म अयम् आत्मा ब्रह्म सः अयम् आत्मा चतुस पात्
sarvam hi etad brahma ayam ātmā brahm sah ayam ātmā chatus paat
All indeed is this Brahman; He is Atman; He has four steps/quarters.
Vishnu is traditionally derived from the root "Vish" which means to enter or pervade, and He is called Vishnu because He pervades the whole universe. Brahmanda Purana (1.4.25) says that He is called as Vishnu because He has entered into everything in the universe. The most important aspect is that the whole universe is covered by only three steps of Vishnu which is referred to several times in the Vedas (Rig Veda 1.22.17, 1.154. 3, 1.155.4, Atharva Veda 7.26.5, Yajur Veda 2.25). In His three steps rests the whole universe (Rig Veda 1.154.2, Yajur Veda 23.49). All indeed is Brahman, which can thus be identified with Vishnu, based on the Vedas.
While Brahman lies behind the sum total of the objective universe, the human mind boggles at any attempt to explain it with only the tools provided by reason. Gital explains the concept of (Bhagavad Gita 5.21) "beyond the senses, beyond the mind, beyond intelligence, beyond imagination."
Yajur Veda Mundakopanishad 3.2.4 reads: This Self is not attained by one devoid of strength, nor through delusion, nor through knowledge unassociated with monasticism. But the Self of that knower, who strives through these means, enters into the abode that is Brahman.
Yajur Veda Mundakopanishad 3.2.6 reads: Those to whom the entity presented by the Vedantic knowledge has become fully ascertained, and who endeavour assiduously with the help of the Yoga of monasticism, become pure in mind. At the supreme moment of final departure all of them become identified with the supreme Immortality in the worlds that are Brahman, and they become freed from the cycle of Birth and Death.
There is reference in Bhagavad-Gita to material nature (mahat-tattva), comprising three gunas (sattva, rajas and tamas) as Brahman: "The total material substance, called Brahman, is the source of birth, and it is that Brahman that I impregnate, making possible the births of all living beings, O son of Bharata." It should also be properly understood that Brahman is actually "total substance of the material cause, in which there are three modes of nature", so material nature is Brahman, but whole Absolute Truth is transcendental and it includes 'material Brahman with three modes of nature' as well. Strictly speaking, Brahman is Supreme Personality of Godhead (Vishnu, Siva, Sakthi..).[16]
The universe does not simply possess consciousness, it is consciousness, and this consciousness is Brahman. According to Adi Shankara, knowledge of brahman springs from inquiry into the words of the Upanishads, and the knowledge of brahman that shruti provides cannot be obtained in any other way.[17]
In Advaita Vedanta, Brahman is without attributes and strictly impersonal. It can be best described as infinite Being, infinite Consciousness, and infinite Bliss. It is pure knowing itself, similar to a source of infinite radiance. Since the Advaitins regard Brahman to be the Ultimate Truth, so in comparison to Brahman, every other thing, including the material world, its distinctness, the individuality of the living creatures are all untrue. Brahman is the effulgent cause of everything that exists and can possibly exist. Since it is beyond human comprehension, it is without any attributes, for assigning attributes to it would be distorting the true nature of Brahman. Advaitins believe in the existence of both Saguna (with qualities, attributes) Brahman and Nirguna (without qualities, or attributes) Brahman, however they consider Nirguna Brahman to be the Absolute Truth.
When man tries to know the attributeless Brahman with his mind, under the influence of an illusionary power of Brahman called Maya, Brahman becomes (Ishvara), which is the reflection of the Brahman in the environment of illusion (Maya). Just like reflection of moon, in a pool of water. The material world also appears as such due to Maya. (Ishvara) is Saguna Brahman, or Brahman with attributes. He (gender neutral; "He" only for explanatory purposes) is Omniscient, Omnipresent, Incorporeal, Independent, Creator of the world, its ruler and also destroyer. He is eternal and unchangeable. He is both immanent and transcedent, as well as full of love and justice. He may be even regarded to have a personality. He is the subject of worship. He is the basis of morality and giver of the fruits of one's Karma. He rules the world with his Maya. However, while God is the Lord of Maya and she (i.e. Maya) is always under his control, living beings (jīva, in the sense of humans) are the servants of Maya (in the form of ignorance). This ignorance is the cause of all material experiences in the mortal world. While God is Infinite Bliss, humans, under the influence of Maya consider themselves limited by the body and the material, observable world. This misperception of Brahman as the observed Universe results in human emotions such as happiness, sadness, anger and fear. The ultimate reality remains Brahman and nothing else. The Advaita equation is simple. It is due to Maya that the one single Atman (the individual soul) appears to the people as many Atmans, each in a single body. Once the curtain of maya is lifted, the Atm Thus, due to true knowledge, an individual loses the sense of ego (Ahamkara) and achieves liberation, or Moksha.
Relevant verses from Bhagavad-Gita which establish the Advaita position:
The indestructible, transcendental living entity is called Brahman, and its eternal nature is called adhyatma, the self. (Bhagavad Gita 8.3)
Similar to a person who is not attached to external pleasures but enjoys happiness in the Atman (soul), the person who perceives Brahman (all-pervading consciousness) in everybody feels everlasting joy. (Bhagavad Gita 5.21)
Brahman of Visishtadvaita is synonymous with Narayana, who is the transcendent and immanent reality. Brahman or Narayana is Saguna Brahman with infinite auspicious qualities, and not the Advaita concept of attributeless Nirguna Brahman. "Sarvam khalvidam brahma, tajjalaniti santa upasita": According to Ramanuja, considering the appearance of the word "tajjalan iti" (Roots: tat + ja = born + la = dissolved), this statement from the Chandogya Upanishad does not simply mean that the universe is Brahman, but that it is pervaded by, born from and dissolves into Brahman. An analogy: fish is born in water, lives in water, and is ultimately dissolved into water; yet the fish is not water.
The concept of Brahman in Visishtadvaita is explained as an inseparable triad of Ishwara-Chit-Achit. Ishvara, the Supreme Self (Paramatman) is the indwelling spirit (Antaryami) in all. Both the Chit (sentient) and Achit (insentient) entities are pervaded and permeated by Ishvara. Brahman is the material and efficient cause of the universe. The concept of Brahman in Visishtadvaita can be seen as a hybrid of Advaita and Dvaita positions. Like all other Vaishnava schools of thought, Visishtadvaita is also panentheistic unlike the pantheism of Advaita. It also proposes a qualified attributive monism approach as opposed to the absolute monism of Advaita.
Brahman is, Antaryami, the real self of all beings. Everything other than Brahman form the Sarira (body) of Brahman. The inseparable relation between the body and the soul is similar to that of substance and attribute which are inseparable. So Brahman is the prakari and the universe is the prakara, mode of Brahman. Hence anything that describes a sentient or insentient being has its connotation only with Brahman, the real and ultimate self. The relationship between Ishvara-Chit-Achit can be further understood as follows:
1. The Sarira-Sariri Concept
The key concept of Visishtadvaita is the Sarira-Sariri Bhaava, the body-soul relationship between the universe and Ishvara. There are three realities, namely, Ishvara (the Lord), Jiva (individual souls), and Jagat (insentient matter). They are not separate entities but together they form an organic whole. This is similar to the concept of body-soul relationship, but on a cosmic scale. Thus, Ishvara has the Chit (sentient) and Achit (insentient) entities for His body and being the Supreme Self, exercises complete control over it.
2. Substance-Attribute Concept
In Visishtadvaita, Ishvara is the original substance, of which Jiva and Prakriti are attributes. An attribute cannot have an existence independent of an underlying substance. The substance-attribute concept establishes an uninterrupted, non-reciprocal relationship between Ishvara and the two modes.
Followers of Visishtadvaita refute Advaita thought that if it is indeed true that the one undivided Brahman, whose very nature is pure spirit, is the foundation of Maya and also embodies the liberating force of knowledge, then it is illogical to say that the very same Brahman falls under the influence of the illusory power of Maya and gets covered by ignorance. Thus establishing that Jiva and Ishvara are indeed separate entities. Since both their identities and capabilities are different, the Jiva and the Lord are essentially distinct. In other words, if Brahman is indivisible, changeless, and supreme, then a force of Maya cannot appear within Brahman, modify it, and put it into ignorance.
Bhakti Yoga is the sole means of liberation in Visishtadvaita. Through Bhakti (devotion), a Jiva ascends to the realm of the Lord to serve Him. Karma Yoga and Jnana Yoga are natural outcomes of Bhakti, total surrender, as the devotee acquires the knowledge that the Lord is the inner self. A devotee realizes his own state as dependent on, and supported by, and being led by the Lord, who is the Master. One is to lead a life as an instrument of the Lord, offering all his thought, word, and deed to the feet of the Lord. One is to see the Lord in everything and everything in Him. This is the unity in diversity achieved through devotion.
In Bhagavad-Gita, Krishna is Ishvara and denotes Saguna Brahman, and the term Brahman means Nirguna Brahman:
I (Ishvara) am the basis of the impersonal Brahman, which is immortal, imperishable and eternal and is the constitutional position of ultimate happiness. (Bhagavad Gita 14.27)
I (Ishvara) am transcendental, beyond both kshara (the fallible, perishable world) and akshara (the infallible). (Bhagavad Gita 15.18)
Brahman of Dvaita (substantial monism) is synonymous with Hari or Vishnu[citation needed], who is the most exalted Para Brahman (Supreme Brahman), superior to liberated souls and even the impersonal Brahman. Dvaita holds that the individual soul is dependent (paratantra) on God, since it is unable to exist without the energizing support of the universal spirit, just as a tree cannot survive without its sap.
Dvaita schools argue against the Advaita concept that upon liberation one realizes Brahman as a formless God is erroneous, quoting from Vedanta Sutra:
The form of Brahman is unmanifest, but even the form of Brahman becomes directly visible to one who worships devoutly (tat avyaktam aha, api samradhane pratyaksa anumanabhyam)[citation needed].[18] (Vedanta Sutra 3.2.23)
Within His divine realm, devotees see other divine manifestations which appear even as physical objects in a city (antara bhuta gramavat svatmanah). (Vedanta Sutra 3.3.36)
Dvaita propounds Tattvavada which means understanding differences between Tattvas (significant properties) of entities within the universal substrate as follows:
- Jîva-Îshvara-bheda — difference between the soul and Vishnu
- Jada-Îshvara-bheda — difference between the insentient and Vishnu
- Mitha-jîva-bheda — difference between any two souls
- Jada-jîva-bheda — difference between insentient and the soul
- Mitha-jada-bheda — difference between any two insentients
The Acintya Bheda Abheda philosophy is similar to Dvaitadvaita (differential monism). All Vaishnava schools are panentheistic and perceive the Advaita concept of identification of Atman with the impersonal Brahman as an intermediate step of self-realization, but not Mukti, or final liberation of complete God-realization through Bhakti Yoga.
Gaudiya Vaishnavas also conclude, that Brahman (or/and Parabrahman) is also Supreme Personality of Godhead. Purport of A.C.Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada on Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 2.5.39 confirms this, telling us about Brahmalokah sanatana — eternal abode of Brahman (Krishna, Narayana, Vishnu): "..satyalokas tu brahmalokaḥ sanātanaḥ
.. mūrdhabhiḥ — by the head; satyalokaḥ — the Satyaloka planetary system; tu — but; brahmalokaḥ — the spiritual planets; sanātanaḥ — eternal.
From the forefront of the chest up to the neck of the universal form of the Lord are situated the planetary systems named Janaloka and Tapoloka, whereas Satyaloka, the topmost planetary system, is situated on the head of the form. The spiritual planets, however, are eternal.
PURPORT ... Sometimes Satyaloka, the planet in which Brahmā resides, is also called Brahmaloka. But the Brahmaloka mentioned here is not the same as the Satyaloka planetary system. This Brahmaloka is eternal, whereas the Satyaloka planetary system is not eternal. And to distinguish between the two, the adjective sanātana has been used in this case. According to Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī, this Brahmaloka is the loka or abode of Brahman, or the Supreme Lord. ... Śrīla Śrīdhara Svāmī, therefore, rightly .. says that the Brahmaloka mentioned here (in Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 2.5.39) is Vaikuṇṭha, the kingdom of God, which is sanātana, or eternal, and is therefore not exactly like the material creations described above." (Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 2.5.39)
So, Brahman is not just impersonal, but also personal. That Brahman is Supreme Personality of Godhead, though on first stage of realization (by process called jnana) of Absolute Truth, He is realized (usually by advaita-vedantists, followers of Shankaracarya) as impersonal Brahman, then (by actual Shankaracarya followers and vaishnavas) as personal Brahman having eternal Vaikuntha abode (also known as Brahmalokah sanatana), then as Paramatma (by process of yoga-meditation on Supersoul, Vishnu-God in heart) - Vishnu (Narayana, also in everyone's heart) who has many abodes known as Vishnulokas (Vaikunthalokas), and finally (Absolute Truth is realized by bhakti) as Bhagavan, Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is source of both Paramatma and Brahman (personal and/or impersonal).
In Gaudiya-vaisnavism, philosophers who try to establish that everything is Brahman or Maya are called Brahmavadis (impersonalists) or Mayavadis. Thought they are still considered to be transcendentalists, but of other group (so-called followers of Shankaracarya, because he himself, as avatara of Shiva accepted Brahman to be Vishnu, not impersonal brahmajyoti as God).
The Advaita concept of a Jivanmukta is mocked as an absurd oxymoron because a person who has surmounted the realm of perception and realized the Absolute (as Advaita holds) should not continue to exist within and interact with the realm of perception that one has realized as being not real. The suggestion that such bondage to the world of perception continues for a while after the occurrence of God-realization, because of past attachments, is not tenable. Such attachments themselves are artifacts of the perceived world that has supposedly been sublated, and should not continue to besiege the consciousness of the self-realized. A Jivanmukta, or liberated person, should not even be physically present in the material universe. A person who is living in the world cannot be said to be free of sorrow born of material contact, and also cannot be said to experience the joy of liberation. The very act of being in a gross material body is not accepted in as a Jivanmukta i.e. a person liberated from the cycle of birth and death. The soul upon liberation does not lose its identity, which remains different from God, nor does one become equal to God in any respect. A mukta indeed becomes free from all suffering, but one's enjoyment is not of the same caliber as His, nor does a mukta become independent of Him. The permanent differential aspect of Atman (soul) from the Lord is established from:
Never was there a time when I (Ishvara) did not exist, nor you, nor all these kings; nor in the future shall any of us cease to be. (Bhagavad Gita 2.12)
In Dvaita, liberation (Moksha) is achieved by flawless devotion and correct understanding. Devotion to a personal form of God, Saguna Brahman, indicated here is the transcendental form of Krishna or Vishnu (see Vaishnavism). This conclusion is corroborated by the Bhagavata Purana, written by Vyasa as his commentary on Vedanta Sutra.
O my Lord, Krishna, son of Vasudeva, O all-pervading Lord, I offer my respectful obeisances unto You, the Absolute Truth and the primeval cause of all causes of the creation, sustenance and destruction of the manifested universes (om namo bhagavate vasudevaya janmady asya yatah 'nvayad itaratas cartheshv abhijnah svarat). (Bhagavata Purana 1.1.1)
Vyasa employs the words "janma-adi -- creation, sustenance and destruction; asya -- of the manifested universes; yatah -- from whom;", in the first verse of the Bhagavata Purana to establish that Krishna is the Absolute Truth. This is clear testimony of the author's own conclusion that the ultimate goal of all Vedic knowledge is Krishna.
Buddhism rejects the Upanishadic doctrine of Brahman/atman.[19][20] According to Damien Keown, "the Buddha said he could find no evidence for the existence of either the personal soul (atman) or its cosmic counterpart (brahman)".[21] According to David Webster, the metaphysics of Buddhism entails that desire for Brahman leads to dukkha (suffering).[22]
According to Merv Fowler, some forms of Buddhism have incorporated concepts that resemble that of Brahman.[23] As an example, Fowler cites the early Sarvastivada school of Buddhism, which "had come to accept a very pantheistic religious philosophy, and are important because of the impetus they gave to the development of Mahayana Buddhism".[24] According to William Theodore De Bary, in the doctrines of the Yogacara school of Mahayana Buddhism, "the Body of Essence, the Ultimate Buddha, who pervaded and underlay the whole universe […] was in fact the World Soul, the Brahman of the Upanishads, in a new form".[25] According to Fowler, some scholars have identified the Buddhist nirvana, conceived of as the Ultimate Reality, with the Hindu Brahman/atman; Fowler claims that this view "has gained little support in Buddhist circles."[26] Fowler asserts that the authors of a number of Mahayana texts took pains to differentiate their ideas from the Upanishadic doctrine of Brahman.[27]
- ^ The Oxford Dictionary of World Religions, ed. John Bowker, OUP, 1997
- ^ Both terms are used by Radhakrishnan
- ^ The phrase 'Divine Ground' was in modern times coined by Aldous Huxley in his widely read comparative study of mysticism The Perennial Philosophy. Divine Ground (Paul Tillich popularized the expression 'Ground of Being' to refer to God) is a neutral term to express the common experience of mystics in diverse religious traditions of an Absolute Ground in which phenomena appear to have their root and origin. Theistic religions refer to this ground as God or Godhead whereas Eastern transtheistic religions use terms such as Tao, Dharmakaya or Clear Light. Among modern authors who use the expression 'Ground' is Tibetan Buddhist teacher Sogyal Rinpoche (see his book The Tibetan Book of Living and Dying)
- ^ pp.77, Radhakrishnan, S, The Principal Upanisads, HarperCollins India, 1994
- ^ Aitareya Upanishad 3.3
- ^ Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 4.4.5,
- ^ Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 1.4.10,
- ^ Chhāndogya Upanishad 6.8.7 et seq.
- ^ Madhavacarya, Mayavada sata dushani, text 6
- ^ Chhāndogya Upanishad 3.14.1
- ^ Nrisimhauttaratāpini, cited in Swami Nikhilananda, The Upanishads: A new Translation Vol. I.
- ^ In the Bhagavad Gītā, Krishna also describes the nature of Brahman. For example, he says "And I am the basis of the impersonal Brahman, which is immortal, imperishable and eternal and is the constitutional position of ultimate happiness" (brahmano hi pratishthaham...) B-Gita (As-it-Is) 14.27 Translation by A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada
- ^ Veda means 'knowledge' and not merely epistemic knowledge but knowledge of the eternal truth that one's ultimate nature is pure consciousness and independent of material form (cf. Gnosis
- ^ a b Not Masculine or Feminine (see Grammatical gender).
- ^ http://srimadbhagavatam.com/sb Bhaktivedanta VedaBase: Śrīmad Bhāgavatam
- ^ [1] The mahat-tattva is the total cause of the total cosmic manifestation; and that total substance of the material cause, in which there are three modes of nature, is sometimes called Brahman. The Supreme Personality impregnates that total substance, and thus innumerable universes become possible. This total material substance, the mahat-tattva, is described as Brahman in the Vedic literature (Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad 1.1.19): tasmād etad brahma nāma-rūpam annaḿ ca jāyate. The Supreme Person impregnates that Brahman with the seeds of the living entities. The twenty-four elements, beginning from earth, water, fire and air, are all material energy, and they constitute what is called mahad brahma, or the great Brahman, the material nature. As explained in the Seventh Chapter, beyond this there is another, superior nature — the living entity. Into material nature the superior nature is mixed by the will of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and thereafter all living entities are born of this material nature. The scorpion lays its eggs in piles of rice, and sometimes it is said that the scorpion is born out of rice. But the rice is not the cause of the scorpion. Actually, the eggs were laid by the mother. Similarly, material nature is not the cause of the birth of the living entities. The seed is given by the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and they only seem to come out as products of material nature. Thus every living entity, according to his past activities, has a different body, created by this material nature, so that the entity can enjoy or suffer according to his past deeds. The Lord is the cause of all the manifestations of living entities in this material world.
- ^ Anantanand Rambachan, The limits of scripture: Vivekananda's reinterpretation of the Vedas. University of Hawaii Press, 1994, pages 125, 124: [2].
- ^ api — but, samradhane — intense worship, pratyaksa — as directly visible, anumanabhyam — as inferred from scripture
- ^ Merv Fowler, Zen Buddhism: Beliefs and Practices (Brighton: Sussex Academic, 2005), p. 30: "Upanisadic thought is anything but consistent; nevertheless, there is a common focus on the acceptance of a totally transcendent Absolute, a trend which arose in the Vedic period. This indescribable Absolute is called Brahman […] The true Self and Brahman are one and the same. Known as the Brahman:atman synthesis, this theory, which is central to Upanisadic thought, is the cornerstone of Indian philosophy. The Brahman:atman synthesis, which posits the theory of a permanent, unchanging self, was anathema to Buddhists, and it was as a reaction to the synthesis that Buddhism first drew breath."
- ^ Merv Fowler, Zen Buddhism: Beliefs and Practices (Brighton: Sussex Academic, 2005), p. 47: "It is here that the tensions between the two systems become manifest, however, to such an extent that they part company, for what is real to one is anathema to the other. For the Upanisadic sages, the real is the Self, is atman, is Brahman. […] To the Buddhist, however, any talk of an atman or permanent, unchanging Self, the very kernel of Upanisadic thought, is anathema, a false notion of manifest proportion."
- ^ Damien Keown, Buddhism (NY: Sterling, 2009), p. 70
- ^ David Webster, The Philosophy of Desire in the Buddhist Pali Canon (London: RoutledgeCurzon, 2005), p. 96: "The metaphysical basis of Buddhist thought—arising from the anatta doctrine—is such that the desire for the atman, for Brahman, for a theistic deity, all these are routes to dukkha rather than liberation."
- ^ Merv Fowler, Buddhism: Beliefs and Practices (Brighton: Sussex Academic, 1999), p. 34: "It was inevitable that the non-theistic philosophy of orthodox Buddhism should court the older Hindu practices and, in particular, infuse into its philosophy the belief in a totally transcendent Absolute of the nature of Brahman."
- ^ Merv Fowler, Buddhism: Beliefs and Practices (Brighton: Sussex Academic, 1999), p. 34
- ^ William Theodore De Bary, cited in Merv Fowler, Buddhism: Beliefs and Practices (Brighton: Sussex Academic, 1999), p. 98
- ^ Merv Fowler, Buddhism: Beliefs and Practices (Brighton: Sussex Academic, 1999), p. 81
- ^ Merv Fowler, Buddhism: Beliefs and Practices (Brighton: Sussex Academic, 1999), p. 82: "The original writers of these Mahayana texts were not at all pleased that their writings were seen to contain the Brahman of the Upanisads in a new form. The authors of the Lankavatara strenuously denied that the womb of Tathagatahood, [...] was in any way equatable with the 'eternal self', the Brahmanical atman of Upanisadic thought. Similarly, the claim in the Nirvana Sutra that the Buddha regarded Buddhahood as a 'great atman' caused the Yogacarins considerable distress."
