Kenopanishad : ( 18/01/2013. )

29/10/2018 Mantras 4 to 8 Post - 1. Brahmam should be known to be other than what can be expressed by speech, thought of by the mind, seen by the eyes, heard by the ears, or revealed by life’s functions. The nature of Truth can be known through denials alone. We cannot call Brahmam sat, because it is the opposite of asat. It cannot be called asat, because it is the opposite of sat. It cannot be called sadasat, i.e., a combination of sat and asat, because this becomes self-contradictory. It cannot be said to be beyond sat and asat, because this is unintelligible. Thus we are cornered in every way, and all definitions of Brahmam become impossible. The only way of ascertaining it is, therefore, to deny everything that we know through the senses or through the mind. Brahmam is sometimes called in the Upanishads asat or non-existence, because the seers of the Upanishads wanted to make it clear that Brahmam is nothing that exists according to our conceptions of existence. Brahm

10/10/2018 Mantram - 3. Post - 2. An object can be defined or perceived through its class, quality and action. But the Atman does not belong to any class, and it is devoid of quality and action. Perception and inference fail in their attempt to know the Atman. Perception is private knowledge, valid only to the perceive-rs and therefore not trustworthy. Inference is the result of perception and so it, also, is untrustworthy. Agama or intuition is the only source of valid knowledge. Perception and inference differ in their characteristics in accordance with different places, times, persons, objects and conditions. Intuitive knowledge is not in need of cognitive instruments or any external source of knowledge. The knowledge of everything that is known is the result of the interaction of the natures of the subject and the object. But true knowledge is not the result of any interaction. True knowledge is self-luminous. Hence the Atman is not the unknown also. The Atman is assume