[Advaita-l] BG 2.45: nirguNa or saguNa?

[Mahesh Ursekar]

Pranams:
 Your knowledge on the Upanishads is clearly very deep and maybe the epithet 
of professor should have applied to you as well! :-)

>> prabhuji, as far as my understanding goes..world does not disappear the 
*wrong* knowledge (avidyA) 
>> about world (i.e. world has a separate existence apart from brahman) 
disappears.
 You are right, *wrong* knowledge disappears, not the world. But some 
reasons why I yet feel some sattva is present in the Jnani:
 1. Can you tell me how you interpret statements made by Guadapada that 
there is no creation and Brahman is the only reality? And as far as I know 
Sankara does agree with him. If the Jnani sees the world outside then isn't 
that creation in some sense? 
2. Sankara interprets the world as ignorance of seeing the rope in the 
snake. Isn't the Jnani seeing the snake *and* the rope if s/he posits 
Brahman and the world? In fact, according the later philosophers of Advaita 
the claim is made that the world appears like a dream when Brahman is 
realized. Sankara never said that. 
3. In the Mundaka Upanishad passage of the two birds, why does he chose the 
higher bird to be Isvara and not Brahman? I think it is to allude to the 
fact that a Jnani is above the world and a samaric is not.
 >> Advaita does not have any problem with saguNa brahman...as this
>> categorization of brahman as para (nirguNa) & apara (saguNa) been 
approved [...]
 I agree with all you said above. It is closer to my heart that you know.
 Humble pranams, Mahesh
  

 On 6/15/05, bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com <bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com> wrote: 
> 
> praNAms Sri Mahesh Ursekar prabhuji
> Hare Krishna
> 
> MU prabhuji:
> 
> In fact, everywhere in the Upanishads, it is said the when
> Brahman is realized the world disappears!
> 
> bhaskar :
> 
> prabhuji, as far as my understanding goes..world does not disappear the
> *wrong* knowledge (avidyA) about world (i.e. world has a separate 
> existence
> apart from brahman) disappears. Even after realization jnAni continues to
> *see* the world as he used to before but this time with a sublative
> knowledge that world as such is not separate from THAT & it has temporary
> existence & restricted to particular state of waking!! Knowledge of Atman
> shall not straight-away throw the world into dark...atleast as per my
> understanding of advaita.
> 
> It would be interesting to note that shruti talks about disappearance of
> world after the dawn of knowledge...kindly provide me the shruti quotes we
> can together have a closer look into it.
> 
> MU prabhuji :
> 
> Finally, I do not see your objection to Saguna Brhaman.
> 
> bhaskar :
> 
> Advaita does not have any problem with saguNa brahman...as this
> categorization of brahman as para (nirguNa) & apara (saguNa) been approved
> by shruti itself (in praShnOpanishad there is a mention that OmkAra which
> is both para (higher) & apara (lower) brahman). Hence, we advaitins, donot
> have any right to object the aspect of saguNa brahman. But it is
> interesting to see shankara pUjya pAda's view on it....while answering to
> pUrvapakShi's objection that whether there are two brahmans higher & 
> lower,
> shankara clearly & bluntly says *YES* there are two since this is borne 
> out
> by shruti itself. But shankara further clarifies that here higher prahman
> means where brahman
> is taught by means of words such as astUlam (not gross) without names &
> forms, achintya, agrAhya, apramEya & lower brahman is NOTHING BUT higher
> brahman qualified by some specific features for the purpose of upAsana or
> meditation. Aspirant (sAdhaka) who wants to meditate this highest reality
> treats this pure brahman as manOmaya ( made up of mind) prANamayi ( body
> with life-breath) bhArUpa etc.
> 
> Prabhuji, from the advaita perspective, it is quite evident from the above
> that saguNa brahman intended for meditation is para brahman itself. & it
> is clear that brahman endowed with qualities is objective reality &
> feasible for meditation to the
> aspirants who have mediocre intellects & who cannot rise to the level of
> the absolutely featureless parabrahman.
> 
> Sri Shankara calls the same reality as para brahman when it is made the
> subject of enquiry as reality & apara brahman when it is preferred in the
> shrutis as an objective reality for meditation. But shankara finally
> concludes that this saguNa brahman with upAdhi-s made up of avidyA
> only...(avidyA kalpita)
> 
> MU prabhuji:
> 
> It is as good as Brahman except for the purest form of Sattva in it. It is
> not Sankara but I think Vidyaranya does claim that Isvara is not deluded 
> by
> maya.
> 
> bhaskar :
> 
> prabhuji strictly speaking in advaita sense, there is no Ishvarahood or
> lordhood in absolute non-dual brahman becasue it invariably requires the
> distinction between the ordainer and the ordained, ruler & the world being
> ruled. But when advaita accepts the universe and its avyakta rUpa
> (seed-form) then attributeless brahman considered as the substratum of the
> appearance of world!! since there is absolutely no other source apart from
> brahman to this world appearance!!. From this stand point only
> vEdAnta/advaita accepts & attributes Ishvarahood or Lordship on brahman &
> his control over mAya/prakruti.
> 
> Humble pramans, Mahesh
> 
> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
> bhaskar
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> 
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
> 
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>