so we are 'that' which we cannot conceive, though we want to, yet are miserable without understanding.
i feel better...
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
Saguna and Nirguna
"To resolve such passages in the upanishads, advaita vedAnta maintains that really brahman is devoid of all attributes, and is therefore known as nirguNa. brahman may be described as in the upanishads, as Truth (satyam), Knowledge (jnAnam), Infinite (anantam), or as Being (sat), Consciousness (cit), Bliss (Ananda), but none of these terms can be truly interpreted as attributes of brahman as a Super-person/God. Rather, it is because brahman exists, that this whole universe is possible. It is because brahman exists that man ascribes attributes to brahman. However, brahman's true nature cannot be captured in words, for all these attributes are ultimately just words. Hence, it is man's ignorance of Its true nature that postulates attributes to brahman, thereby describing It in saguNa terms (with attributes). This saguNa brahman is ISvara, the Lord, whose essential reality as brahman is not dependent on anything else, and does not change because of the production of this universe. Therefore, advaita holds that brahman's own nature (svarUpa- lakshaNa) is devoid of any attributes (nirguNa), while It is seen for the temporary purposes of explaining creation (taTastha- lakshaNa) to be ISvara, with attributes (saguNa)."
The above is from: http://www.advaita-vedanta.org/avhp/ad-phil.html
It is interesting that the author of the above says that in the Mahakavya 'tat tvam asi' Sankara takes 'tat' as saguna Brahman -Isvara. interesting...
The above is from: http://www.advaita-vedanta.org/avhp/ad-phil.html
It is interesting that the author of the above says that in the Mahakavya 'tat tvam asi' Sankara takes 'tat' as saguna Brahman -Isvara. interesting...
blabbin bout Brahman
From a GR post:
I think the dualist role is tricky because it would involve of conceiving a saguna Brahman form completely free from our own ego and mental tinges that form the substance of thought about such things. So essentially until one is liberated (whatever that would mean) one cannot know the saguna, we only ascribe qualities to it the mind and ego can employ, which wouldn't be Brahman, it would be our projections about what we think Brahman is. That is my beef, so to speak, with popular 'personalism' ala GV.
One more comment, then I'll shut up. The common way particularly Vaisnava schools have dealt with this impasse is to say that sastra is praman, and the sastra tell you what saguna Brahman is. The point being, just have faith that this is somebody's realization of the absolute, and that it really is what god looks like (e.g. cowerd dressed in Gupta period clothing etc.)
The conception of the Isvara was present in the later Upanishads and the Sankhya influenced Yoga of Patanjali; saguna yes, but much different than what a modern Vaisnava would think of as Krishna and bhakti...
The point is religion progresses and changes, does the Absolute? Are there various levels of consciousness and dimensions? To hell if I know (or not I guess).
I think the dualist role is tricky because it would involve of conceiving a saguna Brahman form completely free from our own ego and mental tinges that form the substance of thought about such things. So essentially until one is liberated (whatever that would mean) one cannot know the saguna, we only ascribe qualities to it the mind and ego can employ, which wouldn't be Brahman, it would be our projections about what we think Brahman is. That is my beef, so to speak, with popular 'personalism' ala GV.
One more comment, then I'll shut up. The common way particularly Vaisnava schools have dealt with this impasse is to say that sastra is praman, and the sastra tell you what saguna Brahman is. The point being, just have faith that this is somebody's realization of the absolute, and that it really is what god looks like (e.g. cowerd dressed in Gupta period clothing etc.)
The conception of the Isvara was present in the later Upanishads and the Sankhya influenced Yoga of Patanjali; saguna yes, but much different than what a modern Vaisnava would think of as Krishna and bhakti...
The point is religion progresses and changes, does the Absolute? Are there various levels of consciousness and dimensions? To hell if I know (or not I guess).
Monday, February 25, 2008
more thoughts
I wonder what is at the basis of depressions, driven by desires unsatiated? Lonliness? What is beyond it? Of this life that is either tumultuous or deadly silent. Is there anything beyond this? How to fill up the hours if it is all illusion anyway? Feeling tired.
a new end
no intention of sounding depressing, but i have been busy being depressed. not really angry at her just angry at shit. various shits. shits amounting to wondering if there is indeed no purpose to life and love is a complete illusion. unacted desires wish their way into your words, cloud your vision like a bottle of cheap whisky and leaves you in the morning with the same pain in your gut. but you know it will wear off. ahh. the terrors of the mind, and the minds of other people.
It would be a lie to say that getting older is not helping my outlook on death, but my appeal to women may decline. spent my youth wandering looking for god, scared i'll spend my old age lookin for babes. boredom and monotony are insidious. foes that love inertia. my life seems to lean inert.
the thesis is pretty much done. thats why I have a lot of time on my hands. need to be making resume etc. i need to find out the meaning of life first though.
It would be a lie to say that getting older is not helping my outlook on death, but my appeal to women may decline. spent my youth wandering looking for god, scared i'll spend my old age lookin for babes. boredom and monotony are insidious. foes that love inertia. my life seems to lean inert.
the thesis is pretty much done. thats why I have a lot of time on my hands. need to be making resume etc. i need to find out the meaning of life first though.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
