Interface administrators, Administrators (Semantic MediaWiki), Curators (Semantic MediaWiki), Editors (Semantic MediaWiki), Suppressors, Administrators, trusted
12,552
edits
Blavatsky H.P. - Footnote to Is Brahmoism True Hinduism: Difference between revisions
Blavatsky H.P. - Footnote to Is Brahmoism True Hinduism (view source)
Revision as of 12:55, 29 August 2025
, 29 Augustno edit summary
m (Pavel Malakhov moved page Blavatsky H.P. - Footnote to “Is Brahmoism True Hinduism?” to Blavatsky H.P. - Footnote to Is Brahmoism True Hinduism) |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
| previous = Blavatsky H.P. - From Keshub to Maestro Wagner via the Salvation Camp | | previous = Blavatsky H.P. - From Keshub to Maestro Wagner via the Salvation Camp | ||
| next = Blavatsky H.P. - Footnote to “Self-Contradictions of the Bible” | | next = Blavatsky H.P. - Footnote to “Self-Contradictions of the Bible” | ||
| alternatives = | | alternatives = | ||
| translations = | | translations = | ||
}} | }} | ||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
{{Style P-Title|FOOTNOTE TO “IS BRAHMOISM TRUE HINDUISM?”}} | {{Style P-Title|FOOTNOTE TO “IS BRAHMOISM TRUE HINDUISM?”}} | ||
{{HPB-CW-comment|view=center|[''The Theosophist'', Vol. IV, No. 5, February, 1883, p. 117]}} | |||
{{Vertical space|}} | {{Vertical space|}} | ||
{{HPB-CW-comment|[A correspondent, whose letter is published under the above title, quotes the Mundakopanishad, Sect. I, Pt. i, 5, as follows: “. . . The superior knowledge is that by which the | {{HPB-CW-comment|[A correspondent, whose letter is published under the above title, quotes the ''Mundakopanishad'', Sect. I, Pt. i, 5, as follows: “. . . The superior knowledge is that by which the {{Style S-Small capitals|undecaying}} (God) is known.” To this H. P. B. appends the following footnote:]}} | ||
The term “Undecaying” may, or may not, have meant “God,” as translated by the writer, in the mind of the author of Mundakopanishad, but we have every reason for doubting the correctness of the meaning given. No Upanishad mentions anywhere a personal god, and we believe such is the god of the Brahmos—since he is endowed with attributes in themselves all finite. The “Undecaying” means in the Upanishads—the eternal unborn, uncreated, infinite principle or Law—Parabrahm in short, not Brahm which is quite another thing. | The term “Undecaying” may, or may not, have meant “God,” as translated by the writer, in the mind of the author of ''Mundakopanishad'', but we have every reason for doubting the correctness of the meaning given. No Upanishad mentions anywhere a ''personal'' god, and we believe such is the god of the Brahmos—since he is endowed with ''attributes'' in themselves all finite. The “Undecaying” means in the Upanishads—the eternal unborn, uncreated, infinite principle or Law—Parabrahm in short, not Brahm which is quite another thing. | ||