3

Some people write that the Brahman is the ultimate state of consciousness and everything we touch smell or observe are nothing but the different manifestation of this Brahman. However I am very troubled by the fact that there is no argument provided for this. On what authority should I accept this description of the Brahman? Why has this idea convinced the ancients such that even today we are reading their teachings?

I believe that the conclusion "Brahman is consciousness" is based upon a very human experience and that is subjectivity and consciousness just like we sculpt and draw images of the Gods in our own image i.e. human form/animal form. Can someone shed light on the matter?

2
  • vedanta categorically states one cannot prove the existence of brahman (to another person), because the only way we can communicate with another person is via the material world (5 senses), and brahman is beyond those senses. it's like trying to smell with your eyes, you cannot, it's a fundamental limitation. then how is brahman different from some imaginary sky fairy if it's existence cannot be proven, you ask ? Vedanta only says 'cannot be proven to others', you can definitely prove to yourself. and rishis give you a scientific method to do so via penance. – mar Apr 21 '19 at 19:31
  • There is no logical proof or argument for brahman. If there were, then science would have accepted brahman. In advaita vedanta (and other schools of vedanta), brahman can be known only from scriptures. – user16581 Apr 22 '19 at 3:51

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .