Splitting hairs on a bald head

Gummuluru Murthy gmurthy at MORGAN.UCS.MUN.CA
Tue Nov 18 09:11:57 CST 1997

On Tue, 18 Nov 1997, Gregory Goode wrote:

> > 2.  Nirguna Brahman, by definition, cannot be described.
> Agree!

If I can intrude into the discussion for a minute.

It is true that Nirguna Brahman cannot be defined. But, why do we want to
define Nirguna Brahman ?  The concept that Nirguna Brahman as the base of
all is there and we are that Nirguna Brahman is all that is required. It
is only our intellect that tries to define the Entity, but cannot define
It and goes through the feelings of disappointment and elation. There are
many writings what Nirguna Brahman is not (neti, neti of the upanishhads;
nirguna, nishhkala etc descriptions by Shri Shankara in Viveka ChuDAmaNi,
Atma Bodha, Upadesha sahasri).

My feeling is: know the limitation of the intellect. While the intellect
delving into what Nirguna Brahman is is a beautiful intellectual exercise,
it is all that is, a beautiful intellectual exercise and only of
theoretical interest. See oneself as nishchalatvam that calm, quiet ocean
with everything superposed on It which is not you.

The above is not to curtail the nice discussion, but I thought I should
express the futility of such an exercise. May be, the subject title above
tells it all.

> Om!
> --Greg

Gummuluru Murthy
... aham-bhAvodayAbhAvo bodhasya paramAvadhih ...
                        Shri Shankara in Viveka ChuDAmaNi (verse 422)

The culmination of knowledge is the absence of the sense of "I" of the ego

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list