Why is it called Self?

[silence]

Dear Friends,

Why is Brahman called Self? This seems basic and almost ignored, but I keep wondering ........... why is it not called Brahman, or in English God or truth or something else. Why specifically the word 'Self' when the word is misleading and may lead us to conflate it with the ego?

Because in the end, there is no I - there is only one reality which is Brahman - so isn't Self the wrong word to use (because it often means I)?

Thanks,
Suresh

[Krishnan]

Om Namo Bhagavate Sri Ramanaya

Dear Devotee,

I am as much a 'newbie' as you are, if not more, but my take on this is that calling it by some other name will cause us to associate with it something external - something that is outside us. By calling it the Self, the message is that it is us all the while and there is nothing external in that Reality. Having said that, the name is just a property and since finally, the Reality is above intellect, beyond a certain point, it can only be experienced and the images that the name might conjure up in the mind are irrelevant.

Pranams,
Krishnan

[Hari]

There can be innumberable interpretations but I will try to put it this way: There is only Chaitanya (Consciousness). Its external manifestation is called Brahman. When we speak about Brahman within us we call It Atman (Self). Self-realization is to fall down the illusive boundary between Atman and Brahman and realize that It is all Chaitanya or Parabrahman.

[Subramanian.R]

Self means 'I'. Since in every living being who says I am so and so, Self stays within permanently, it is called Self.
In fact, Self has no name. It is given that name because it denotes the 'I' before and after realization. Atman, Brahman,
Param - are also other names..

Arunachala Siva. 

[Nagaraj]

The concept of 'Self' in buddhist connotation is the ego, the mind. The Buddhist do not have a name for the supreme reality, the supreme truth, hence they term it as 'Shunya' literally meaning nil, nothing, or that which cannot be defined, infinite or valueless.

Jesus was the Son of God, Jesus called the God as the Father, but the Father himself did not. The son addresses his source as 'Father'. the same way, is the understanding of 'Brahman', 'Atman' or the 'Self' addressed by the Vedic seers. Here the concept of 'Self' is the supreme reality, whose nature is by itself, discerned by terms such as 'undefined', 'attribute-less', immeasurable', 'un-quantifiable' - such is that Self.

if this Tatva is known, we can use any term we want provided the term conveys or discerns the essence as above in general.

--