--- In [email protected], "BillyG." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], cardemaister <no_reply@> wrote: > > It's not my intention to be nasty, but I don't think it's > > a trivial matter if you confuse for instance "brahma"(Brahman, > > the Absolute) with "brahmaa" (the Creator). > > The reason Swami Yogananda uses Brahm, with the silent a or short a, > is to denote the underlying Creative Intelligence of the Universe as > opposed to its personalized use as the Holy Triad, (Brahmaa, Vishnu, > Shiva), so that is the distinction...your argument would be with Swami > Yogananda, not me. > > MMY also uses Brahm to connote the Purusha, however you must remember > that God is both manifest AND Unmanifest, so MMY is referring to both, > because God IS both! MMY also has used the word Brahman....so now > he's using TWO words! Two different meanings. > > Brahman-Unmanifest, Absolute, beyond Creation. > > Brahm-Manifest Creative Intelligence, omnipresent in Creation. > > Brahmaa-Only one part of the trinity, the whole trinity being Brahm. > > This is the distinction FYI, whether or not it is accurate or not I > don't know, you be the judge. >
I don't believe you'll encounter the form "brahm" in "polished" Sanskrit transliteration. Otherwise, the case is closed for my part. :)
