• Welcome to Tamil Brahmins forums.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our Free Brahmin Community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

why do we need Dwarapalakas in temples?

Jaykay767

Well-known member
Wow...Jaykay ji..so you are saying prior to Shankara everything was almost Abrahamic?
Satan concept..heaven ..hell.etc?

Then why dont we incorporate Abrahamic religions too into Hinduism? After all there is an Allopanishad.
My view has always been the other way. That abrahamic religions comes from the ancient Hindu thought of school.

Yes, prior to Shankara, our concept was rooted in heaven, hell, kailasam, Vaikuntam, yamalokam, etc.. And not to forget chitraguptan and thrishanku !!

so fundamentally dualism was the dominant thought !! That humans and gods are different and that praying to God along with good karmas will lead us to heaven and if not to hell !!

this is why shankara's Advaita is so path breaking and was so revolutionary in his time !!!
 

renuka

Well-known member
As it is, Mr Vaagmi Ji is upset with me. If I say, Vaishnavism is influenced by any other, I will have to face his wrath !!!

LOL
Lol!
Why be scared of a human being?

Dont be afraid of the truth..the only wrath one should be afraid of is the wrath of ignorance.
 

agopal

Member
"Root up and branches down is this ancient asvattha tree, that (its source) is pure. That is Brahman and that alone is called immortal. On that, do all worlds depend and none passes beyond that. This verily is that.".

Katha Upanishad 2.3.1

Dwarapalakas are souls that are responsible for helping you "start" climb the tree and hence set up to verify your purity.
So, if Everything is Brahman what then is impurity and why is it not allowed up the tree? Ponder!

The Truth.​
 
Last edited:

prasad1

Well-known member
"Root up and branches down is this ancient asvattha tree, that (its source) is pure. That is Brahman and that alone is called immortal. On that, do all worlds depend and none passes beyond that. This verily is that.".

Katha Upanishad 2.3.1

Dwarapalakas are souls that are responsible for helping you "start" climb the tree and hence set up to verify your purity.
So, if Everything is Brahman what then is impurity and why is it not allowed up the tree? Ponder!

The Truth.​

If everything is in Brahman, impurity too is Brahman.
There is no qualification of Brahman.
If the impurity is outside Brahman then the definition of Brahman is wrong.

Brahman, as understood by the scriptures of Hinduism, as well as by the 'acharyas' of the Vedanta school, is a very specific conception of the Absolute. This unique conception has not been replicated by any other religion on earth and is exclusive to Hinduism. Thus to even call this conception of Brahman "God" is, in a sense, somewhat imprecise. This is the case because Brahman does not refer to the anthropomorphic concept of God of the Abrahamic religions. When we speak of Brahman, we are referring neither to the "old man in the sky" concept nor to the idea of the Absolute as even capable of being vengeful, fearful or engaging in choosing a favorite people from among His creatures. For that matter, Brahman is not a "He" at all, but rather transcends all empirically discernable categories, limitations, and dualities.
https://www.thoughtco.com/brahman-of-the-vedas-1770045
 

a-TB

Well-known member
"Root up and branches down is this ancient asvattha tree, that (its source) is pure. That is Brahman and that alone is called immortal. On that, do all worlds depend and none passes beyond that. This verily is that.".

Katha Upanishad 2.3.1

Dwarapalakas are souls that are responsible for helping you "start" climb the tree and hence set up to verify your purity.
So, if Everything is Brahman what then is impurity and why is it not allowed up the tree? Ponder!

The Truth.​
The above message is written without any comprehension and defies logic.
I agree with Mr Prasad. If everything is Brahman, then the dwarapalakas are also Brahman. Why should they help me climb the tree which is also Brahman.

It is this kind of blabbering messages that give bad name to our scriptures.
 

agopal

Member
If impurities are Brahman, then is it ok like Bill gates did to show the bottle of sh** or bring a botttle of sh** to the temple or a bucket full of blood for Abisheka to a Perumal temple? There is some innate sense of purity required of devotees and that’s exactly what I am referring to. What about evil? it is considered sacrilege to murder someone in temple or some place of worship. Why is that? There is something that is Pure in there that unblemished ‘thing’ which is Perfect , pure and full and that is Brahman! Only if such a thing exists you can purify yourself with sanctity and Bhakti. But, then where would you fit those impurities? Our sages did consider it and referred to it as Para Brahman which doesn’t have any qualities. Sure you can fit in impurities and evil in there. The Brahman you are referring to is Para Brahman and so does the Upanishads.However, there are no mantras for PB exactly for this reason . It is the real whole. The impure and pure, evil and the good and encompasses everything conceivable and inconceivable and everything else dead or alive. So it is considered not worship worthy just because it is part impure. That however maintains the balance between Dark and Light, Dead and Living, Evil and Good. When you follow the right path doing good etc. you reach Brahman that is pure.that is the path I’m referring to like Vishnu who has door keepers to keep impurity at bay. Now there are people who do dark deeds like black magic, sacrifices etc to achieve higher levels in he ‘other’ side like the asuras and they do achieve powers as appropriate like Nirrti who is given southwest direction in Homa kunda. I hope I explained it clearly now even after your hurting remarks.
 

prasad1

Well-known member
Agopalji,
Please do not confuse Laws with Brahman.
There is nothing outside of Brahman.
Laws are part of jagat.

Brahma Satyam Jagat-mithyä Jivo Brahmaiva Näparah ||

Sri Sankaracharya sums up the entire message of Vedanta in three crisp aphorism like sentences. They are :
(a) Brahma Satyam, (b) Jagat Mithya, and (c) Jivo Brahmaiva naparah.
Brahma Satyam :
Brahman is the all pervasive life principle, consciousness. Not the conditioned consciousness which manifests at the level of brain, but 'that' which exists before & inspite of the manifestation too. Not 'consciousness of something', but the very conscious principle as such. Contrary to what some people believe that 'life' is a product of some chemistry, the Upanishads thunder that Consciousness is that which isthe ultimate truth, the timeless & transcendental reality. It exists first and matter follows after. This is not only what the scriptures reveal, but also what is logical too. If we look at matter - the atoms, the electron, proton etc then we find that these things are so perfectly created & organised that there has to be some intelligence working. That which existed before to have brought about such an orderly & beautiful creation has to be a conscious entity. We can never imagine the whole process getting started with lifeless, inert matter. Consciousness alone has to be the first & eternal reality. Rest is created, and is thus perishable. That is what this sutra reveals. Brahma Satyam. The word satya means that which exists in all the three periods of time. Past, present & future. That which transcends time, and is thus timeless. That which exists at all times, that which cannot be effaced by time. Consciousness is that which not only exists at all times but also at all places. It exists as the very truth of all that is. It is the atma of everything - living or non-living things. It is our basic essence, our truth too. That is the God which we all worship.
Jagat Mithya :
The word Jagat embraces in itself this entire world, this cosmos. All that which is or can be an 'object' of our knowledge. It includes not only the gross but also the subtle 'objects'. The thoughts, emotions, the energy all come under this word 'Jagat'. That which is near or far, inside or outside, now or later, good or bad everything is part of this Jagat. This word has been described as reffering to that which is 'Jayate gachati iti jagat', i.e. that which is born & dies is jagat. Birth & death are movements in time. That which is in time constantly changes, there is a constant flux. Something starts this process of activation & manifestation of time and thus we see this dynamic flux. A realm of experience presents itself in front of us. What exactly starts this process is a different matter, but the point here is that all what is thus brought about is ultimately transient, is not ultimately there. It is comparable to being in a dream world. Something activates the process of dreaming, and when it does get activated we see a realm of experience which is not ultimately there. Mithya is that which is not there in all three periods of time. That which had a birth at a particular time and that which will certainly die at some point of time. It is there in this present moment, because of some reason - known or unknown. The above aphorism of 'Jagat Mithya' thus implies that all what is available for experience is transient.
Mithya also implies that which does not have the capacity to give us that which we basically seek. It is certainly beautiful,in fact very beautiful, it is also true that 'objects' of the world alone are useful for our worldly needs & purposes, but at the same time this is also a fact that we basically remain where we were. It is like eating a dream food, with which we never satiate our hunger. However much we eat the dream food, we will still remain basically hungry. Whatever we have sought in this world may have helped our life to get comfortable & organised, but has certainly not helped us in eliminating the fundamentaldesire 'to seek' something more. Like hunger the seeking still remains as it is. The only difference is that it now manifests differently. That which is Mithya does not have any independent existence, thus it is not really dependable, for the simple reason that it itself is perishable. What ever our heart basically seeks will never be got from this Jagat. That is the implication of this sutra. It is something to be seen in a detached way & not taking too seriously. Whatever happens in the world never really matters, knowing this a person should not plan to aggrandise & enjoy, he should rather serve & give. This philosophical tenet, which is a fact of life provides us a logic & basis for our religious values, culture & even the real goal of life.
Jivo Brahmaiva naparah :
This sutra means that 'every jiva - the apparent limited & finite entity is basically the infinite & limitless Brahman, and nothing else. The truth & essence of an indiidual is the truth & essence of this whole world or rather God. Every Jiva is basically God himself wearing a cloak of limited equipments, and moreover, identified with ones equipment he lives a limited & transient life. It is basically a case of non-apprehension followed by mis-apprehension of the truth of oneself. We take ourselves to be limited and therefore we are & remain limited. Body & all our equipments are certainly limited in time &space but 'I' who knows and objectifies all these is not. A seer is always different from seen. We are conscious of the body & mind complex so we have to be different from them. We are that which knows, that which illumines, that eternal life principle - Brahman. The Upanishads reveal that whoever knows his or her true reality is a healthy person, rest are diseased. They are certainly not at ease, there seems to be some bug in them. It is the bug of mis-apprenhension of ones true self as a limited guy. If we were really limited then someone 'could' have helped us, but when we just errorneously take ourselves to be limited then it is something which God also cannot do anything about, except come and provide right knowledge. It is we who have to pause, think, deliberate, meditate & realise. Everything of this individual gets changed, except the 'I' - the self-effulgent, blissful essence. One who knows that alone lives a true life which every human deserves to live. That alone was the secret of all saints, sages & even the avatar purushas. This alone is the real teaching of all our scriptures.
The awakening of limited Jiva to the realm of limitless Brahman is not a journey in the realm of time, but it is by transcending the very time, by right knowledge. Karma is a means to attain something in the realm of time, so it is not really relevent here. With karma we attain that which is unattained. In karma we turn our attention to that which should be rather than that which is. So in order to awake to our true self, one has to keep aside all cravings to 'do or achieve something'. One has to relax and be highly observant and see some fundamental facts of life & our true self. That which is limitless & infinite is not sometjhing to be attained but that which is to be known. It is already attained, one should realise that 'I am already that', We just have to directly know it. All sadhanas are directedonly for this ultimate goal of life. This is the objective of sanyas & Moksha. Drop the hankering for everything, relax, and see that which alone is.
Consequences of the opposite :
If a person does not understand & see these facts directly then it is obvious that the fellow will take resort to that which is its opposite. Lets see what will be the consequences of that. Such a person is too fascinated by the glare of the world, he will remain an extrovert, and also an eternal seeker. To live an ego-centric existence will be his destiny, and to face the music of egocentricity an unavoidable fact. Inside him there will always remain a sense of lack and outside he will continuously keep on seeking something or the other. He will take worldly things too seriously, and will be able to go to any extent for achieving such worldly things. Such people alone play dangerous games with nature and will still not be satisfied with it. Resorting to that which is opposite amounts to create & produce the devils. Communicating these tenets of Vedanta alone amounts to helping the individual in particular & also the world at large. This is what all Rishis declared, this is what Lord Ram & Krishna lived and this is what Bhagwan Sankaracharya worked & lived for. Lets go into these deeply and see these facts of life. Lets redeem ourselves with true knowledge.
-------------------------------------
OM TAT SAT

http://vedantamission.tripod.com/gurus/adisank3.htm
 

agopal

Member
Prasadji, I wholeheartedly agree with Adishankaras message and Iam well aware of Supreme Brahman or Nirakar and Nirguna Para Brahman and know that that is all there is. It is also called Purusha the unchanging one in the upanishads. However, one part of it is constantly changing one callled the Prakriti and that is the Nature you are referring to. I call it the second bird that eats the fruit of Karma when Purusha the first bird watches on.
Mundaka 3.1.1.
“Two identical birds that are eternal companions perch in the very same tree. One eats many fruits of various tastes. The other only witnesses without eating.”

The impurities that I am referring to and what you are referring to in the ‘Consequence of the oppositeis’ section ALL are the result of the actions of the Second bird that eats the fruit. And as part of nature we have to undergo the tribulations of the impurities as well. Did the second bird knew the consequences of its actions ? Most likely not, So it is in eternal pain and sorrow a part of which we all share living in this Jagat. But when it sees its true source the unblemished immortal one which is the first bird of which it is a part of it takes heart again and becomes pure. Imagine all of the Jivatmas that exist in nature as residing in the Second bird. When any of the Jivatmas in Nature experiences the First bird it becomes pure and that is what we describe as Moksha. Now where are the devils? The proverbial darkness? It is still part of the Second bird. They are more ignorant extroverted and worldly as you described. But, does that mean they cannot get Moksha? They never knew that the first bird existed! Had they, may be they would have changed the ways. That is the whole reason for erstwhile evil or egocentric Kings to become great Rishis like Vishwamitra. Now what about Pitr? The bodily dead but those that exist as souls?
Can they get Moksha, the rig Veda classification of Agni daghdha and Anagni dhagdas the ones whose body is burnt by Agni and those whose are not? If they exist as souls can they get Moksha post death? The opposites you mentioned . What prevents them from getting Moksha. Their bodies burnt once they shed their sins and repent they are eligible to get Moksha as well right? Nirrti is one such soul. Kala Bhairava and Bhairavi is another such. They need to see the Pure one and realize that it exists. Now let’s turn to the first bird. There could be enlightened beings souls Jivatmas as part of the First bird! They are the proverbial beings of ‘Light’ with halo around their souls. That are immortal as well. They are the keepers of the spiritual path so that any misguided Jivatmas from the Second bird are to repent and realize the truth about the first bird they are guided properly. The Trimurtis included. Includes their consorts as well.Indra, Agni, Vayu, Rudras, Adityas etc. are part of the First Bird.
Now, the First bird, the Second bird, the Universe, the tree that that they perch on, all such trees and all such birds are all Para Brahman and that is the Supreme Soul the real ‘One’ or is it Zero?
Now you do want some Pure souls and keep them Pure for the rest of the impure creations to climb up is what I’m trying to say!
 

agopal

Member
In addition, the Light beings as part of the first bird also needs to realize more right? Their jobs involve lifting up ignorant Jivatmas but they also need to realize that there are many such light beings they need to realize the Absolute principle that they are part of - the pure consciousness itself that is the TAT SAT. Now every Abisheka to the trimurtis etc is performed with the chanting of Purusha Sukta. While the Purusha that sacrificed his body that gave rise to the entire creation is remembered, bear in mind that it is our description of the Purusha which is very very limited. The Truth cannot be described by words Sanskrit or English. It cannot be reached by thoughts or actions or physical senses. Then no amount of description helps. No amount of experience helps. Yes you may realize and experience the light beings and think that is the truth. But just the fact that you are able to understand means that it is incomplete as understanding can go only up to a certain extent as it is thought based. The closest to the description of Truth but lowest still is the description that I found in the book ‘ The serpent Power’ by Arthur Avalon. It describes something called the Purana Purusha ‘The Ancient Purusha’ everything conceivable and inconceivable is in Him. But he is in eternal repose His consciousness is the Truth it seems.Note that it is not the Rig Vedic Purusha sukta referred to. This description comes out of tantric texts from West Bengal scholars .. anyway so much for my blabbering
 
Last edited:

renuka

Well-known member
The problem is Brahman concept is not as easy as we think.

Everything is from Brahman but everything is NOT Brahman.

Krishna says clearly in Geeta.." All beings are in me but I am not in them"

So this is clear enough that there is a difference between the Unmanifested and the Manifested.

In an manifested state..logically nothing is Brahman...therefore creation can have purity and impurity and both are NOT Brahman cos Brahman is beyond duality.

In an unmanifested state verily only Brahman exist.

Coming back to.Dwarapalakas...they are not Brahman.
What is their function?
Do they exists?
Are they angels?
We dont really know but we should stop attributing a divine status to everything cos as Krishna said..." I am in them.but they are not in Me".
 
Last edited:

prasad1

Well-known member
Dwarapalakas like Jaya & Vijaya were guarding Vikunta, and they even stopped Sanat Kumars.

So this so called god is guarded by an ignorant or misguided person.
This god instead of taking responsibility for not training the guards, let them take the punishment.

When I was a child I assumed this god to be a king, so these stories made sense.
But now I no longer believe this God to be a King.
If he is Brahman the everything is in it, and it is in everything.
What Krishna said or misinterpreted by humans is not important.
 

renuka

Well-known member
Dwarapalakas like Jaya & Vijaya were guarding Vikunta, and they even stopped Sanat Kumars.

So this so called god is guarded by an ignorant or misguided person.
This god instead of taking responsibility for not training the guards, let them take the punishment.

When I was a child I assumed this god to be a king, so these stories made sense.
But now I no longer believe this God to be a King.
If he is Brahman the everything is in it, and it is in everything.
What Krishna said or misinterpreted by humans is not important.
Recently one of my sanskrit student who is into spirituality told me the same as what you said...that is at a Higher level everything is consciousness so everything is the same..only the " ignorant" see it as different.

So I wrote H20( water) and H202(Hydrogen Peroxide) on the white board.

I asked my student.." are these the same?"

The student replied " yes ..everything is consciousness"

I said " ok..in.that case when you are thirsty next i would give you H202 to drink"

Likewise Prasad ji..

We can not say everything is Brahman in a manifested state.

Manifested state comes with polar opposites of a dual kind.

No one is denying Brahman but in a manifested form everything IS NOT Brahman.

If we can understand this concept we can understand the differences we see..the various grades of worship..the gunas etc..the need for some to adhere to rituals..kula devata etc.

For those of us who want a direct communion we chose a Saguna Brahman that comes with no partners or no form and just One method.
 

prasad1

Well-known member
I am no authority on anything. I am just expressing my opinion.
In life, you can choose any method of worship or no worship at all. It is a choice.

My contention in the original post was why is 'god' being protected by dwarapalakas?

If Brahman is subtler than space, you can not lock it up in any building or statues. Brahman does not need protection from 'enemies'.

If this 'god' has to be kept away from 'others' then it defies the definition of Brahman.

You can not segregate "pot space" from "open space", once the pot is broken the pot space and open space become the same.

According to Swami Dayananda:

The space inside a pot is called pot-space. If the pot-space assumes its own self-identity, it will naturally suffer from a sense of limitation and will compare itself to the space inside other pots and to the entire space within the room. In terms of this analogy, Vedanta tells the apparent individual that he is not pot-space, but rather the space that exists everywhere, the space that accommodates all that appears to be, the space that is ever present and all-pervasive, the space that is itself limitless and in which pot-space abides as nothing other than an
apparently limited unit. In truth, there is no question of limitation, and any suffering caused by the sense of limitation is only due to ignorance of one’s true nature. In order to remove the self-dissatisfaction that results from this sense of smallness, the pot naturally longs to become the room. In reality, however, it need not become anything, for it already is limitless space. Just so, according to Vedanta, the self is the whole and, therefore, there is no reason for dissatisfaction.
Moreover, an honest analysis of one’s own efforts to effect a permanent change in one’s character or living condition, a change that will bring about lasting peace and happiness, clearly indicates that the process of becoming is not going to establish one as the acceptable self.
But perhaps there is another possibility. Perhaps the self is already acceptable. Perhaps the cause of one’s self-dissatisfaction is ignorance rather than inadequacy, confusion rather than incompleteness. If such is the case—and Vedanta unequivocally states that it is—then understanding is the only corrective, and the self-knowledge revealed through Vedanta the only meaningful pursuit.
Speaking as the self, Krishna says, “This whole universe is pervaded by Me in My unmanifest aspect. All beings abide in Me; I do not abide in them” (Bhagavad Gita, 9.4). In other words, while all forms of relative knowledge depend on you, you do not depend on what you know. Such understanding frees you from the feelings of inadequacy and incompleteness that compel you to accumulate more and more information and experience in the hope that such objects will finally make you acceptable. It also enables you to see that you are already perfect just as you are. In this way, self-knowledge eliminates suffering and allows you to fully embrace and enjoy your life.
http://www.nevernotpresent.com/faqs/try-vedanta/
 
Last edited:

agopal

Member
Recently one of my sanskrit student who is into spirituality told me the same as what you said...that is at a Higher level everything is consciousness so everything is the same..only the " ignorant" see it as different.


So I wrote H20( water) and H202(Hydrogen Peroxide) on the white board.

I asked my student.." are these the same?"

The student replied " yes ..everything is consciousness"

I said " ok..in.that case when you are thirsty next i would give you H202 to drink"

Likewise Prasad ji..

We can not say everything is Brahman in a manifested state.

Manifested state comes with polar opposites of a dual kind.

No one is denying Brahman but in a manifested form everything IS NOT Brahman.

If we can understand this concept we can understand the differences we see..the various grades of worship..the gunas etc..the need for some to adhere to rituals..kula devata etc.

For those of us who want a direct communion we chose a Saguna Brahman that comes with no partners or no form and just One method.
Narada Rishi, however begs to differ. In Shatamana stotram

‘Sakalam nishkalam shuddham, Nirgunam guna shashwatham’ stating both prakriti / saguna brahman and nirguna is part of Narayana!

Adishankara as well in
Pratah smarami hridisanskrithatma tattvam
Sachith Sukam paramam sagathim turiyam
Yay swapna jagarat sushupte ne veti nityam
Tat Brahma nishkalama ha nacha boota sangaha

http://greenmesg.org/stotras/brahman/pratah_smarami.php
 

renuka

Well-known member
Narada Rishi, however begs to differ. In Shatamana stotram

‘Sakalam nishkalam shuddham, Nirgunam guna shashwatham’ stating both prakriti / saguna brahman and nirguna is part of Narayana!

Adishankara as well in
Pratah smarami hridisanskrithatma tattvam
Sachith Sukam paramam sagathim turiyam
Yay swapna jagarat sushupte ne veti nityam
Tat Brahma nishkalama ha nacha boota sangaha

http://greenmesg.org/stotras/brahman/pratah_smarami.php
As I said..we Hindus do NOT have a uniform understanding and everyone has their version of Brahman...just too many directions.

The philosophy compass of Sanathana Dharma never points North.
 

a-TB

Well-known member
I am no authority on anything. I am just expressing my opinion.
In life, you can choose any method of worship or no worship at all. It is a choice.

My contention in the original post was why is 'god' being protected by dwarapalakas?

If Brahman is subtler than space, you can not lack it up in any building or statues. Brahman does not need protection from 'enemies'.

If this 'god' has to be kept away from 'others' then it defies the definition of Brahman.

You can not segregate "pot space" from "open space", once the pot is broken the pot space and open space become the same.

According to Swami Dayananda:






http://www.nevernotpresent.com/faqs/try-vedanta/
I looked up Gita 9.4 cited, and guess what Gita 9.5 says exactly opposite. All beings are not in me or something to that effect. So there is confusion about this Brahman idea all around.
 

a-TB

Well-known member
The problem is Brahman concept is not as easy as we think.

Everything is from Brahman but everything is NOT Brahman.

Krishna says clearly in Geeta.." All beings are in me but I am not in them"

So this is clear enough that there is a difference between the Unmanifested and the Manifested.

In an manifested state..logically nothing is Brahman...therefore creation can have purity and impurity and both are NOT Brahman cos Brahman is beyond duality.

In an unmanifested state verily only Brahman exist.

Coming back to.Dwarapalakas...they are not Brahman.
What is their function?
Do they exists?
Are they angels?
We dont really know but we should stop attributing a divine status to everything cos as Krishna said..." I am in them.but they are not in Me".
How can everything be from Brahman and not Brahman? If the world is not Brhaman , then what is it? If there are things outside Brahman, then Brahman cannot be the only thing. So it is hard to accept the statements. I dont even know what is this manifest and unmanifest comes in if all that is only Brahman
 

renuka

Well-known member
How can everything be from Brahman and not Brahman? If the world is not Brhaman , then what is it? If there are things outside Brahman, then Brahman cannot be the only thing. So it is hard to accept the statements. I dont even know what is this manifest and unmanifest comes in if all that is only Brahman
Geeta explains well...give it a read again.

Let me try giving my opinion here(unproven opinion)..

Water...at the molecular level its H20 .

Now the H20 molecule resides in the human body, in plants, in animals, in clouds etc.

All of them house H20 molecules.

H20 is in all of them but they are not in H20 and neither is the human body/plants/animals/clouds H20.

Just replace H20 with Brahman in my above example.

I hope I made some sense.
 
Last edited:

prasad1

Well-known member
I beg to differ from that explanation.
Brahman is more like space and energy, only a bit more subtle.
Everything is in Brahman, and everything is Brahman, but Brahman is not limited by anything.
That limit does not exist, but in translation or explanation, that word "LIMIT" is lost.

If the word limiting is included then Gita makes sense.
 
Top