Now thats the "Rose" that is a "Rose" by any name and will smell as sweet.
Well re-written. If the essence/unique-quality of the Rose that counts, why is that particular form for that essence/quality? Can any other form suit its Rose-ness?
Have u heard of this poem by one Toru Dutt?
The Lotus, Toru Dutt
Love came to Flora asking for a flower
That would of flowers be undisputed queen,
The lily and the rose, long long had been
Rivals for that high honour. Bards of power
Had sung their claims. "The rose can never tower
Like the pale lily with her Juno
"But is the lily lovelier?" Thus between
Flower fractions rang the strife in Psyche's bower.
"Give me a flower delicious as the rose
And stately as the lily in her pride"-
"But of what colour?"- "Rose red," Love first chose,
Then prayed, - "No, lily-white, - or both provide";
And Flora gave the lotus, "rose red" dyed
And "lily white," queenliest flower that blows
Isn't Lotus having the 'Rose-ness' and the 'Lili-ness', altogether a different object, superior than Rose and Lily?
In such a case, doesn't the best of all forms, best of all essence and superset of all, make Brahman alltogether a different one than the individual forms?