01-25-2005, 05:43 AM
Sridhar ji,
I think you have made a very good point. There is still a puzzle regarding both Shankara and Ramanuja regarding their attitude towards Brahman. Shankara downgrades Saguna Brahman while Ramanuja does not even want to acknowledge the possibility of Nirguna Brahman at all. I don't understand why both Saguna and Nirguna Brahman can not be of equal value? If Brahman is truly infinite then IT must include both possibilities. I give below a quote from Sri Ramakrishna:
" No one can say with finality that God is only 'this' and nothing else. He
is formless and again He has forms. For the bhakta He assumes forms. But He
is formless for the jnani, that is, for him who looks on the world as a mere
dream. The bhakta feels that he is one entity and the world as another.
Therefore God reveals Himself to him as a Person. But the jnani - the
Vedantist, for instance - always reasons, applying the process of 'Not this,
not this'. Through this discrimination he realizes, by his inner perception,
that the ego and the universe are both illusory, like a dream. Then the jnani
realizes Brahman in his own consciousness. He can not describe what Brahman
is.
Do you know what I mean? Think of Brahman, Existence-Knowledge-Bliss
Absolute, as a shoreless ocean. Through the cooling influence as it were, of
the bhakta's love, the water has frozen at places into blocks of ice. In
other words, God now and then assumes various forms for His lovers and reveals
Himself to them as a Person. But with the rising of the sun of knowledge,
the blocks of ice melt. Then one doesn't feel any more that God is a Person,
nor does one see God's forms. What He is can not be described. Who will
describe Him? He would do so disappears. He cannot find his 'I' anymore.
If one analyzes oneself, one doesn't find any such thing as 'I'. Take an
onion, for instance. First of all peel off the red outer skin; then you find
thick white skins. Peel these off one after the other, and you won't find
anything inside.
In the state a man no longer finds the existence of his ego. And who is there
left to seek it? Who can describe how he feels in that state - in his own Pure
Consciousness - about the real nature of Brahman? There is a sign of Perfect
Knowledge. Man becomes silent when It is attained. Then the 'I', which may be
likened to the salt doll, melts in the ocean of Existence-Knowledge-Bliss
Absolute and becomes one with It. Not the slightest distinction is left."
- Sri Ramakrishna
I think you have made a very good point. There is still a puzzle regarding both Shankara and Ramanuja regarding their attitude towards Brahman. Shankara downgrades Saguna Brahman while Ramanuja does not even want to acknowledge the possibility of Nirguna Brahman at all. I don't understand why both Saguna and Nirguna Brahman can not be of equal value? If Brahman is truly infinite then IT must include both possibilities. I give below a quote from Sri Ramakrishna:
" No one can say with finality that God is only 'this' and nothing else. He
is formless and again He has forms. For the bhakta He assumes forms. But He
is formless for the jnani, that is, for him who looks on the world as a mere
dream. The bhakta feels that he is one entity and the world as another.
Therefore God reveals Himself to him as a Person. But the jnani - the
Vedantist, for instance - always reasons, applying the process of 'Not this,
not this'. Through this discrimination he realizes, by his inner perception,
that the ego and the universe are both illusory, like a dream. Then the jnani
realizes Brahman in his own consciousness. He can not describe what Brahman
is.
Do you know what I mean? Think of Brahman, Existence-Knowledge-Bliss
Absolute, as a shoreless ocean. Through the cooling influence as it were, of
the bhakta's love, the water has frozen at places into blocks of ice. In
other words, God now and then assumes various forms for His lovers and reveals
Himself to them as a Person. But with the rising of the sun of knowledge,
the blocks of ice melt. Then one doesn't feel any more that God is a Person,
nor does one see God's forms. What He is can not be described. Who will
describe Him? He would do so disappears. He cannot find his 'I' anymore.
If one analyzes oneself, one doesn't find any such thing as 'I'. Take an
onion, for instance. First of all peel off the red outer skin; then you find
thick white skins. Peel these off one after the other, and you won't find
anything inside.
In the state a man no longer finds the existence of his ego. And who is there
left to seek it? Who can describe how he feels in that state - in his own Pure
Consciousness - about the real nature of Brahman? There is a sign of Perfect
Knowledge. Man becomes silent when It is attained. Then the 'I', which may be
likened to the salt doll, melts in the ocean of Existence-Knowledge-Bliss
Absolute and becomes one with It. Not the slightest distinction is left."
- Sri Ramakrishna