Does om purnam imply that we should be complete and so we should be Krishna?
Does it answer your question? Question, doesn't Om Purnam Adah Purnam, the idea that everything is complete, imply that we as souls should also be complete. And if we are complete, then we should be complete in all respects. And complete in all respects means that we should be God.
So doesn't Om Purnam Adah Purnam support Mayavada or Advaitavada that we are one with God? Answer, no, not at all. Because the invocation itself clearly talks about difference. That there is that and there is this.
Om Purnam Adah, that absolute to which I am meditating on, that is complete. Purnam Idam. So this is also complete.
And what comes from that here is also complete. Purnasya Purnam Adaya. And then what remains is also called Purnam Evavashishyate.
So the point is, now this verse is a meditation which is coming from an enlightened person. So now we at our level don't see such completeness. We may feel that, oh, this world has so many problems.
Too hot, too cold, so many natural calamities. We don't really feel completeness all around us. So this is not a conditioned soul's perception.
This is an enlightened soul's perception. So now within that enlightened soul's perception, what is said is there is this and there is that. So if Advaitavada were what were being advocated by this verse, then there would be no perception of this and that.
There would be only that and everything else would be illusion. So the very fact that there is perception of the absolute truth, which is emanating various things, that indicates that this verse in and of itself does not support Advaitavada, that everything is one. And now if everything has to be complete in the same sense, then everything essentially becomes one.
But this verse doesn't say everything is complete in the same sense. So now in what sense does it mean? There is a clear difference in there is this and there is that and there is this. And this is complete.
That is also complete. So now this differentiation of such a differentiation between this and that, that is analyzed by the great Vedantic commentators in various ways. So this differentiation between this and that, the Advaitins try to interpret it as an illusion.
That actually there is only that. There is no this at all. Brahma, Satya, Jagan, Mithya.
But this verse is talking about this exists and this is also complete. So that interpretation is actually countered by the verse itself. So now the theistic Vedantic commentators, that means Ramanacharya, Madhvacharya, Baldevidya Bhushan, they explain this in various ways.
Now one of the common denominators in their various explanations is that there is independent completeness and there is dependent completeness. So completeness has to be evaluated in terms of purpose. We cannot evaluate any device appropriateness, usefulness, completeness, perfection, if we divorce it from its purpose.
Now, say if I have a sophisticated cell phone, some smartphone, and I can type much better than on a small phone with it. But then if I decide to type my next book on that smartphone, it will be very difficult. And I will start saying that this smartphone is useless, it can't type that.
And the smartphone is not meant for typing a book. If I want to type a book, I have to have a laptop with a comfortably large and soft keyboard. So the point here is, we can trash anything as useless, if we divorce the thing from its purpose and evaluate it for some other purpose.
Therefore, the evaluation of completeness has to be done in the context of purpose. Now Krishna alone is the independent absolute truth. So he is complete in all respects, but we are dependent absolute truths.
So the same Aishwarya Upanishad later talks about how we have to live in harmony. Ishavasya principle, tena bhunjita, we should take our own quota. And even when there is, so if we say Aishwarya Upanishad is the evolution of thought, even towards the end, when it says that please remove, shranmaye patre, in the 15th verse it says, please remove the effulgence with which your real face is covered, shani effulgence, and it concludes with, please guide me on the right path.
So the point is that the difference between us and the absolute truth is maintained throughout the Aishwarya Upanishad. And this indicates that our completeness, because we are energies, our completeness has to be evaluated or understood in the context of the purpose of our existence. We are parts of Krishna and we are meant to serve Krishna as his parts.
So and in loving and serving him as his parts, we experience supreme happiness. So as parts, we are complete. So Srila Prabhupada in his Aishwarya Upanishad gives the example of a hand.
He says the hand is well equipped for doing its purpose. We have a thumb which comes around to give us a grip and we have four fingers of different lengths, which can also help us in holding things better. But now if I try to use the hand as a leg, it does not function for that.
If I try to use the hand as a substitute for the head, it does not function for that. And if the hand is disconnected from the body, then also it doesn't function. So the hand has to be used for its function and it can be used for its function when it's connected with the whole.
So like that we souls are also Anandmayo Abhyasa. We are meant to be happy. But how are we, when can we be happy? When we pursue happiness in the right way.
When the hand is used for the right purpose. So the purpose of our existence is to love and serve Krishna. And when we do that, then we experience supreme happiness.
We experience unlimited happiness. And that is the perfection of our life. So therefore, this verse, this completeness does not support Advaita Vata.
Rather it supports the understanding that there is what is called as Parinam Vata. There is absolute truth and there is energies. Advaita Vata is Vibharta Vata.
So actually there is absolute truth and there is energies. And the energies, they are complete when they are serving the complete whole. So now matter and material world is temporary, especially in its forms.
But it is complete in terms of serving its purpose. It offers us two things. Its purpose is to offer experimentation and rectification.
Offer a forum for experimentation and rectification. So the souls who want to enjoy separate from God, the material world offers a forum for their experimentation. They can try to enjoy in various ways.
And for those souls who want to turn towards God, the same material world, the same material nature can offer us valuable lessons by observing nature, by observing things around us. We can learn lessons by which we can return to God. So the material world is perfect in the sense of the purpose it is meant to serve.
But it is not perfect as a forum for eternal or unlimited enjoyment because that is not its purpose. So every purpose, when we evaluate a design, every object in terms of its purpose, then we can see whether it is complete or not. And the Isopoetia talks about that remains complete is the absolute truth is independently complete.
And we are dependently complete. Thank you.