[Advaita-l] Partlessness of Brahman and Maya

[V Subrahmanian]

Thanks for this authoritative reply Venkat ji. That gives a firm idea of
the meaning of the term.

Regards
Subbu

On Fri, 21 Jun 2019, 13:32 Venkatraghavan S via Advaita-l, <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> Namaste Subbuji,
> In sAnkhya, the idea that puruSha is devoid of the sattva, tamas and rajo
> guNa-s is found in the sAnkhya kArika-s. kArika 11 refers to *vyaktam* and
> *pradhAnam* as being *triguNam*, and puruSha as *tadviparItastathA ca
> pumAn, *laying the foundation for the puruSha being nirguNam (that is,
> devoid of sattva, rajas and tamah attributes). However, the term
> "*nirguNam*",
> appears later.
>
> gauDapAda in his *sAnkhya kArikA bhAShya*, uses the term "*aguNa*" for the
> puruSha, but the meaning is the same as the term nirguNa, ie one where the
> triguNa-s are absent. Now, it is not certain whether the author of this
> bhAShya is the same gauDapAda as the author of the mANDUkya kArika-s. Be
> that as it may, in the jayamangalA commentary to the sAnkhya kArika-s,
> whose author is said to have preceded vAcaspati miSra, we find the term
> "nirguNa" itself.
>
> Both mImAmsa and nyAya, guNa-s define multiple guNa-s inhering in a
> substance, however I have not come across references within pUrva mImAmsa
> or nyAya literature for the term nirguNa. The Atma, in both nyAya and
> mImAmsa, is saguNa.
>
> Regards,
> Venkatraghavan
>
> On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 1:52 PM V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 12:22 AM Venkatraghavan S via Advaita-l <
> > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Sudhanshu ji,
> > >
> > > Pl cite reference for nirguNatva of guNas. That will solve many issues
> > for
> > > > me.
> > > >
> > > There is some evidence of this within sAnkhya literature.
> > >
> > > nirguNa can mean two things - the absence of sattva, rajas, tamo guNa-s
> > or
> > > the absence of attributes such as rUpa, rasa, gandha etc.
> > >
> >
> > Thanks for this very informative post, Venkat ji.  Is the term 'nirguna'
> > present in Nyaya, Sankhya, Mimamsa?  I am asking because, non-advaitins
> > generally hold 'nirguna' to mean 'absence of despicable traits/attributes
> > in Brahman (Vishnu).'
> >
> > warm regards
> > subbu
> >
> >
> >
> > > Now, we cannot hold that guNa-s such as sattva etc. have other guNa-s
> > such
> > > as sattva, etc. in them, because that would lead to infinite regress.
> > With
> > > respect to attributes like rUpa, rasa, gandha etc, we can turn to
> > sAnkhya
> > > kArika and its bhAShya. The tenth kArika is as follows:
> > > हेतुमदनित्यमव्यापि सक्रियमनेकमाश्रितं लिङ्गम्।
> > > सावयवं परतन्त्रं व्यक्तं विपरीतमव्यक्तम् ।।
> > >
> > > Gaudapadacharya in his sAnkhya kArika bhAShya says that the word
> > > विपरीतमव्यक्तम्
> > > in the kArika above leads to avyakta (= pradhAna) itself being
> > > niravayava . Interestingly,
> > > he does so on the basis of the absence of shabda, sparsha, rUpa, rasa,
> > > gandha in pradhAna (अवयवा: शब्दस्पर्शरूपरसगन्धा:...तथा सावयवं व्यक्तं,
> > > निरवयवमव्यक्तम् | न हि शब्दस्पर्शरसरूपगन्धा: प्रधाने सन्ति |) . Now,
> > these
> > > avayavA-s are what the naiyyAyika refers to as guNa-s .
> > >
> > > It is not possible for us to differentiate between the guNa-s of
> sattva,
> > > rajas and tamas from pradhAna (प्रधानमपि गुणैर्न भिद्यते, अन्ये गुणा:,
> > > अन्यत् प्रधानमेवं विवेकं याति says gauDapAdAchArya in the next kArika's
> > > bhAShya), hence as pradhAna does not have those attributes, it follows
> > that
> > > guNa-s also do not have those attributes.
> > >
> > >
> > > > Can niravayatva itself be held to be sufficient to proclaim
> nirguNatva?
> > > >
> > >
> > > So, in answer to the above question, in sAnkhya, the absence of guNa-s
> > such
> > > as shabda, sparsha, rUpa, rasa and gandha is the basis for pradhAna
> being
> > > called niravayava.
> > >
> > >
> > > >  I would like your view regarding the usage of word nirguNa in
> Vedanta.
> > > > Does it have nyAya-guNa connotation or sAmkhya-guNa connotation or
> > both?
> > > >
> > > Both.
> > > In the BGB 13.12, shankarAchArya argues that Brahman does not have
> > > guNa-s (in the nyAya sense of attributes inhering in a substance) and
> > thus
> > > is beyond the reach of words - ‘शुक्लः’ ‘कृष्णः’ इति वा गुणतः...नापि
> > गुणवत्
> > > , येन गुणशब्देन उच्येत, निर्गुणत्वात् ।
> > > In BGB 13.14, shankarAchArya says that Brahman is nirguNa in the sense
> of
> > > the absence of sAmkhya guNas  निर्गुणं सत्त्वरजस्तमांसि गुणाः तैः
> वर्जितं
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > Venkatraghavan
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> > > http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe or change your options:
> > > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
> > >
> > > For assistance, contact:
> > > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> > http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
> >
> > To unsubscribe or change your options:
> > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
> >
> > For assistance, contact:
> > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>