[Advaita-l] Why should Brahman be without form or attributes?
kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com
Mon Jun 18 05:53:39 CDT 2012
Suresh - PraNAms
Not sure your background.
Brahman means infinite - guna is an attribute belongs to prakRiti. Only finite can have attributes that differentiates one finite from the other. Even infinite is only negation of any finiteness. advaita means non-dual and it has to be infinite since duality implies divisions while infinite cannot have divisions. Hence advaita cannot have divisions since it is infinite and hence it has to be nirguNa.
However infinte cannot be recognized or known since it is infinite. Scriptures point out that it is of the nature of existence-consciousness. Hence it can be known via finites that exists using the conscious subject that I am.
The rest you need to contemplate on.
--- On Mon, 6/18/12, Suresh <mayavaadi at yahoo.com> wrote:
From: Suresh <mayavaadi at yahoo.com>
Subject: [Advaita-l] Why should Brahman be without form or attributes?
To: advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org
Date: Monday, June 18, 2012, 1:29 AM
Let's say Brahman has form and attributes. In what way would it affect advaita? Why can't advaita still be right even if we admit Brahman to be saguna only and not nirguna? Is this nirguna concept indispensable?
I can understand concepts like maya, avidya etc. as indispensable - they explain the wrong identification of self with not self, duality in this world, and so on. But I don't see how advaita would collapse by rejecting nirguna brahman concept.
Please remember ... this thread isn't about whether nirguna concept is right or wrong (so please don't post a thousand posts on that and digress) but whether advaita would still be right without it.
To unsubscribe or change your options:
For assistance, contact:
listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list