‘AHAM BRAHMASMI’ (I AM ONLY BRAHMA)………!

[SPHOORTHIOUM]

Sphoorthi Oum,

Reference : Page 2 from Maro Manasu Book written by Guruji

If either think as, ‘I am only Brahma’; ‘Brahma in me only’, or think
in some other way then, firstly, ‘I’, should be known… ‘Brahma’,
should be known. ‘I – Brahma’, when these two are compared, that such
a thing called, ‘I’, is either Brahma, or not will be known. To think
is different, to conclude, whether it is, like that, or not, is
different. To think, without proof, is indeed distant to thought,
reflection!

‘I’, means, body, its shape, face, its profile, bio-data…. not just
these. So also, I, is not, only until, mind, its instinctive quality,
and entity. Having said that, it is not possible to consider ‘I’, as
‘soul’. Body, its life force, mind and its entity…, different to these
‘I’, is, sounding, as ‘self’ (my). So, in saying my body, my life
force, my mind, such a thing as, ‘self’ and ‘I’, is not just, body,
mind! So also, in the matter of soul also, that what ‘I’ is, saying
is….. as, ‘my’ soul,only… that means along with body, mind, so soul
also, is not ‘I’. In this, the expression, of ‘pair
of opposite’, is clear. So, who? which? what? is ‘I’.

To say, ‘my’, it is also considered, as the expression, of ‘ego’. As a
matter of fact, such a thing as ego is, the instinct of quality and
attribute! This is sensory mind related only! But, in saying, ‘my
mind’, it is really not becoming, the mind of, ‘my’ (Self)! That
means, along with body, and mind, soul also is not ‘I’; that means,
such a thing as I, is it related to something else,other than these
three?

In, ‘Aham Brahmasmi’, is Aham (my, I) egoistic qualitative instinct?
So,‘my’, ‘I’ – which are behaving as ‘doer’ for body, mind, and soul–
all the three – are not, they! Even this is clear! Then, what is such
a thing called, ‘I’. With what can that be known?

To know is knowledge. To get to know is, the attempt made for the sake
of that. That which makes an attempt, is different to this. If the
thing called, to do, is considered as karma, for karma, doer is
essential! By saying, ‘I’, ‘my’ only, ‘doer’ will be known. To make
known doer, is not egoism, is it! So, to say, ‘I, my’, is not egoism.
But, in ‘Aham Brahmasmi’, is ‘Aham’,egoism only?

Next, if it comes to the matter of Brahma…, what is ‘Brahma’? In
saying, ‘Aham Brahmasmi’, it is only, ‘I am Brahma’, but, not ‘my’
Brahma. That which is sounding in ‘my’ – in saying my body, my mind,
my soul – is the feeling of doer! Not expressed in saying ‘I am only
Brahma’. That means, ‘I – Brahma’, it looks as if there is no
difference between these two.

Instead, if I, Brahma, are considered as one only, then along with
doer, for everything that is,‘his’, as ‘I’, Brahma itself, should be
considered as doer!......... but Brahma means……………?

The philosophical expedition that has happened for that explanation
itself is…….., the objective of this book.

In this expedition, Nature, body – mind – Jeevatmn – its ‘self’ –
spirit…., about these; so also, their related science, materiality,
spirituality – the examination of these too has happened. There is
‘life’ in all these. Therefore, firstly, only when the importance of
life is being recognized, as individual human being, family,
society….. thereafter, materiality, spirituality,religion,
philosophy….., whatever it may be, there would be justification
(purpose), for the related knowledge, and acquisition of knowledge.

Some matters of interests that I have expressed, in this book, may be
distant to certainties of imaginations, principally, scientific
matters, may be felt, as ‘fiction’. Even so, for their examination,
and for the proof of their certainty, may be tried in another angle.

So also, the opinions, the examples of Puranas, that I have expressed,
in the religious and philosophical matters, explanations from the
viewpoint of language, relating to those various sectors, are only for
the convenience of specification of the subject but, not comparison;
only for the specification of the subject but, not criticism. Not
against the sentiment…, No prejudice! These are indeed the matters
written, keeping in view, ‘Practical Philosophy – Religious Humanity’…

With Love & Regards,
Sphoorthi Family