01-27-2005, 01:06 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-Ashok Kumar+Jan 26 2005, 06:31 AM-->QUOTE(Ashok Kumar @ Jan 26 2005, 06:31 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--> Also if the saguna brahman can not be subrated, then how could one even reach nirguna brahman? And what is the need for the nirguna brahman for the theory? It seems saguna brahman would do just fine?
According to Gangajal, in vishistadvaita, one has the equation:
brahman = narayana + jiva + jagat
I think Narayana is being called the saguna-brahman here. But I don't think adding saguna brahman, saguna jivas and saguna jagat could ever produce a nirguna brahman. So brahman on the left side of the equation must be something saguna too.
Actually at this moment, this equation is thoroughly confusing for me. Hopefully Gangajal would clarify further the relationship between brahman on the left side and narayana on the right side.. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I am impressed by lot of responses. Let me first answer these questions by Ashok Kumar. Both Nirguna and Saguna Brahman have to be there because both are experienced. The Upanishads mention them because obviously they have been experienced. So any theory has to account both.
So now the question is if saguna Brahman can not be sublated then how can Nirguna Brahman be reached? Yes, it is true that in Nirvikalpa Samadhi one looses one's I-ness and hence there is no observer to observe any attribute. This does not mean that Saguna Brahman has been sublated. It is like water is formless in certain temperature range while it is with form, ice, in another temperature range. Just because ice melts beyond a certain temperature does not mean that ice has been sublated. Bhaktas experience bhava samadhi where they do not experience Nirguna Brahman and only experience Saguna Brahman. Does that mean that Nirguna Brahman is nonexistent? Just as water appears to be formless or with form depending on the temperature, Brahman appears as Nirguna when a person's I disappears during Nirvikalpa Samadhi while the same Brahman appears as Saguna when the person's I is present. Saguna and Nirguna Brahman are merely two different aspects of the same Reality.
I give below these 2 quotes from Svetasvatara. Up to back up the point I am making. . The Rishi is saying in 3.8 that knowing that knowing the great Person is the ONLY way to transcend death. Then in 3.10 the same Rishi is saying that the only by knowing the formless one can become immortal. 3.8 is for the person who traverses the path of Bhakti while 3.10 is for the Jnani.
******************************************************************************************************************
I know this great Person who is resplendent like the sun and is beyond darknesss. By knowing him alone one transcends death; there is no other path to go by. (Sv. Up 3.8)
That which is higher than that superior (cause of the world) is without FORM
and without disease. Those who know This, they become immortal, while others get
only sorrow. (Sv Up 3.10)
******************************************************************************************************************
I give below 2 more quotes. 3.16 and 3.19 are apparently quite contradictory. Surely one thing can not both have hands and feet everywhere and be without hands and feet. This apparent contradictory stance is forced on the Rishi because Brahman is both Nirguna and Saguna.
******************************************************************************************************
It has hands and feet everywhere, and eyes, heads and faces everywhere, and I
t is possessed of ears everywhere. It exists among all the creatures, pervading
all. (Sv Up 3.16)
He is without hands and feet, (and yet) moves and grasps; He sees, (though) w
ithout eyes; He hears (though) without ears. He knows ehatever is to be known, a
nd of Him there is no knower. They speak of Him as the first, the Supreme Person
(Purusham mahantam). (Sv Up 3.19)
***********************************************************************************************************
Now let me discuss the equation Brahman=Narayana+Jiva+Jagat. Yes, Brahman is Saguna here since Ramanujacharya can not accept the concept of Nriguna Brahman. Look at the equation and you will see that Jiva and Jagat form the body of Brahman. Since Ramanuja's Brahman has to have a body he can not acknowledge Nirguna Brahman since body would become an attribute of such a Brahman..
According to Gangajal, in vishistadvaita, one has the equation:
brahman = narayana + jiva + jagat
I think Narayana is being called the saguna-brahman here. But I don't think adding saguna brahman, saguna jivas and saguna jagat could ever produce a nirguna brahman. So brahman on the left side of the equation must be something saguna too.
Actually at this moment, this equation is thoroughly confusing for me. Hopefully Gangajal would clarify further the relationship between brahman on the left side and narayana on the right side.. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I am impressed by lot of responses. Let me first answer these questions by Ashok Kumar. Both Nirguna and Saguna Brahman have to be there because both are experienced. The Upanishads mention them because obviously they have been experienced. So any theory has to account both.
So now the question is if saguna Brahman can not be sublated then how can Nirguna Brahman be reached? Yes, it is true that in Nirvikalpa Samadhi one looses one's I-ness and hence there is no observer to observe any attribute. This does not mean that Saguna Brahman has been sublated. It is like water is formless in certain temperature range while it is with form, ice, in another temperature range. Just because ice melts beyond a certain temperature does not mean that ice has been sublated. Bhaktas experience bhava samadhi where they do not experience Nirguna Brahman and only experience Saguna Brahman. Does that mean that Nirguna Brahman is nonexistent? Just as water appears to be formless or with form depending on the temperature, Brahman appears as Nirguna when a person's I disappears during Nirvikalpa Samadhi while the same Brahman appears as Saguna when the person's I is present. Saguna and Nirguna Brahman are merely two different aspects of the same Reality.
I give below these 2 quotes from Svetasvatara. Up to back up the point I am making. . The Rishi is saying in 3.8 that knowing that knowing the great Person is the ONLY way to transcend death. Then in 3.10 the same Rishi is saying that the only by knowing the formless one can become immortal. 3.8 is for the person who traverses the path of Bhakti while 3.10 is for the Jnani.
******************************************************************************************************************
I know this great Person who is resplendent like the sun and is beyond darknesss. By knowing him alone one transcends death; there is no other path to go by. (Sv. Up 3.8)
That which is higher than that superior (cause of the world) is without FORM
and without disease. Those who know This, they become immortal, while others get
only sorrow. (Sv Up 3.10)
******************************************************************************************************************
I give below 2 more quotes. 3.16 and 3.19 are apparently quite contradictory. Surely one thing can not both have hands and feet everywhere and be without hands and feet. This apparent contradictory stance is forced on the Rishi because Brahman is both Nirguna and Saguna.
******************************************************************************************************
It has hands and feet everywhere, and eyes, heads and faces everywhere, and I
t is possessed of ears everywhere. It exists among all the creatures, pervading
all. (Sv Up 3.16)
He is without hands and feet, (and yet) moves and grasps; He sees, (though) w
ithout eyes; He hears (though) without ears. He knows ehatever is to be known, a
nd of Him there is no knower. They speak of Him as the first, the Supreme Person
(Purusham mahantam). (Sv Up 3.19)
***********************************************************************************************************
Now let me discuss the equation Brahman=Narayana+Jiva+Jagat. Yes, Brahman is Saguna here since Ramanujacharya can not accept the concept of Nriguna Brahman. Look at the equation and you will see that Jiva and Jagat form the body of Brahman. Since Ramanuja's Brahman has to have a body he can not acknowledge Nirguna Brahman since body would become an attribute of such a Brahman..