Vedanta - Discussion Forum I (introductory))

[Sunder]

<!--QuoteBegin-gangajal+Jan 26 2005, 05:09 AM-->QUOTE(gangajal @ Jan 26 2005, 05:09 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--> P.S. All I would like to say is that Brahman is both Saguna and Nirguna. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
to whom?

PS: I enjoyed the rest of the post, and shall reply it at leisure, once I get home.. <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->

added later:

PPS: With all due respects Gangajal ji. When you asked me to leave Vidyaranya's definition at the doorstep as it is not acceptable to Ramanujacharya, I agreed with you. Now you bring in definitions of Sri Ramakrishna. This would not be acceptable arguments as Vedantic discussions are based on the Shruthi and Smrithi, and Brahmasutra. If Sri Ramakrishna's statements are Pramana - based on his experience, then Sri Vidhyaranya Swami, and Sri Ramana Maharshi's teachings will be equally applicable as a counter.

Thus I propose we stick to Prasthana Thraya.