The correct meaning of verse 14.27

[devotee]

Namaste Phil,

Thanks for correction. It is indeed sixth vibhakti and not seventh.
However, I don't find your arguments convincing for the following reasons :

a) Please give proof why Brahman should be treated as Neuter gender ? Any PramANa from any authentic book will do. In my opinion, it should be treated as Masculine gender. With Masculine gender ending with "a" sound at the end, it should follow the forms of "Gaja", Baalaka" etc.

b) Even if Brahman is to be treated as Neuter Gender, which It should not be, the form will still be "BrahmaNasya" for the sixth vibhakti as then it would follow the form of Vana (forest) as form of words ending with "a" sound.

This video gives forms of Vana which is a neuter gender ending in "an" sound. However, let me clarify that I have not seen any noun ending with "an" sound being treated differently than nouns with "a" sound. You may be able to clarify this point. :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IPshFFIbhQU

PS : Please read the footnote below the video : All अकारान्त (words ending with letter अ) नपुन्सकलिङग् (neuter gender) noun words are declined similar to वन (Van). So, once you learn the vibhakti (declension) of वन (Van), you have learnt the declensions of all the अकारान्त (words ending with letter अ) नपुन्सकलिङग् (neuter gender) noun words. That means, you know how to use all अकारान्त नपुन्सकलिङग् noun words in correct grammatical manner. It is so easy.

Are you sure, Brahmana in sixth vibhakti should be read as "Brahmanas" ? Can you give any proof ?

c) Please note that BrahmaNo has been used in the verse without any sandhi. There are other verses too in BG where it has been used independently. Therefore, can you tell us how this logic of sandhi fits in here ?

OM

[devotee]

Namaste Seeker,

Doesn't advaitins believe that any being that realizes Self , is identified as Self? If Krishna is such an exalted figure - I believe he was , since he showed viswaroopa to Arjuna by just touching him - is it incorrect to equate Krishna to Brahman?

Is this just a question of how we choose to name the Nameless? Does it mater whether we name the Supreme one as Brahman or Shiva or Narayana or Krishna?

You have not read my post correctly. I have said that Krishna is both Saguna and Nirguna Brahman. So, if the verse means to say that Krishna as NirguNa Brahman is the abode/ support/base/substratum of Saguna Brahman then the meaning doesn't violate Shruti. See, there are many verses in Bhagwad Gita where Lord Krishna portrays Himself as NirguNa Brahman.

So, Krishna is Brahman and there cannot be any doubts at all. The question is how to interpret the verse without violating Shruti ?

OM

[devotee]

Namaste Sahas,

Yes, you are right. My memory failed me !

It should be Sukhasyaikantikasya and not Sukhasyaikantimeva. However, my area of focus was the first part of the verse, as there is no issues in the second part and therefore, no harm really done.

OM

[Sahasranama]

It's indeed a minor problem. I remember that once before you quoted sanshayatma pranashyati from the Bhagavad Gita, but that should have been sanshayatma vinashyati. Just letting you, it's not relevant to the arguments here.

[Sahasranama]

a) Please give proof why Brahman should be treated as Neuter gender ? Any PramANa from any authentic book will do. In my opinion, it should be treated as Masculine gender. With Masculine gender ending with "a" sound at the end, it should follow the forms of "Gaja", Baalaka" etc.

Brahman can be used both as a neuter word and as a masculine word depending on the context and meaning. You can look this up in the Monnier Williams dictionary.

But the gender does not prove your point here, because a nAntaH-puMlinga shabda is not declined similarly to an a-karantaH puMlinga shabda. And a nAntaH napuMsaka linga shabda is not declined as an akarantaH napuMsaka linga shabda either. Therefore, whether it is neuter or masculine does not matter, either way it will not be declined as Gaja, Balaka, etc.

b) Even if Brahman is to be treated as Neuter Gender, which It should not be, the form will still be "BrahmaNasya" for the sixth vibhakti as then it would follow the form of Vana (forest) as form of words ending with "a" sound.

No, not all neuter words are declined similarly to vana. Brahman is not an a-karantaH word like vana, but a nAntaH word.

This video gives forms of Vana which is a neuter gender ending in "an" sound. However, let me clarify that I have not seen any noun ending with "an" sound being treated differently than nouns with "a" sound.

a-karanta words and nAnta words are declined differently. Look at any table of Sanskrit declensions like the Shabdamanjari or Shabdarupavali and this becomes quite apparent.

Since you ask for proof, here it is, Brahman is declined similarly to Atman:

[devotee]

Thanks, Sahas ! However, why should it not use the Singular number ? Then it should have been used as Aatmanah/Brahmanah ? Why should we accept that BrahmaNo means "of BrahmaN" in Shashthi and not "Brahman" in PrathamA ?

OM

[Sahasranama]

The singular is used here, but the visarga changes because of Sandhi.

[devotee]

But where is sandhi ? With which word ? The version of Bhagwad Gita printed from Gita Press, Gorakhpur writes this :

"Brahmano hi pratishThaahm ..."

I don't see any sandhi here.

OM

[Sahasranama]

But where is sandhi ? With which word ? The version of Bhagwad Gita printed from Gita Press, Gorakhpur writes this :

"Brahmano hi pratishThaahm ..."

I don't see any sandhi here.

There is always sandhi, sometimes it is not apparent. First of all there is an internal sandhi in the word brahmaNas refered by pANini in sutra 8.4.1. raShAbhyAM no NaH samAnapade. This says that the na-kAra turns into a Na-kAra, because of the repha in brahman. There is also a external sandhi which turns brahmanas into brahmanaH or into brahmano before consonants when preceded by an a-kAra. I do not know the exact reference for this rule, but when I find it I will let you know.

Why should we accept that BrahmaNo means "of BrahmaN" in Shashthi and not "Brahman" in PrathamA ?

According to the declension table from the shabdarupavali which I have attached in the image, the singular nominative (prathamA) form of brahman is brahmA.

[devotee]

There is always sandhi, sometimes it is not apparent. First of all there is an internal sandhi in the word brahmaNas refered by pANini in sutra 8.4.1. raShAbhyAM no NaH samAnapade. This says that the na-kAra turns into a Na-kAra, because of the repha in brahman. There is also a external sandhi which turns brahmanas into brahmanaH or into brahmano before consonants when preceded by an a-kAra. I do not know the exact reference for this rule, but when I find it I will let you know.

Thanks. However, Sandhi (means "joining") is always of word with another word, as far as I know. However, there may be some exceptions. I will also look up for any such rule.

OM