Guest guest Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 Respected and learned Gurus, While reflecting on whether I should meditate on Brahman in a Nirguna or Sagun aspect, I understand that it is much easier to do so on the Sagun aspect as you have finite things to put your mind on. But deep inside I know that Brahman is Formless, so if I think of Brahman as Birthless, undecaying, deathless, without beginning or end, unmanifest, infinite, a witness, formless, pure without any vasanas, self illuminating, the only truth. omnipotent, omniscient, etc., etc., how can I categorize these qualities? These are definitely not attributes and neither are they descriptive adjactives ( or are they?) nor do they represent a quality. So WHAT are these? Secondly Sir, is it ok to reflect on such Nirguna qualities with the aim of a better understanding of the Self? Hari Om and Pranaams! Sunil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 18, 2010 Report Share Posted February 18, 2010 Namaste. The term " nirguNa " itself is self-explanatory. So how do one reflect on the qualities of nirguna. Secondly, Acharya Sankara in BSB says that " pariNAma prakriyAm chAshrayati saguNeShUpasanEShu. " which implies that for mandAdhikArIs sagunopasana is the 1st rung of the ladder. When this upasana gets mature, " ahamgrahopasana " should be taken up. This upasana matures in the advaita siddhi with sarvAtmanabhava. BTW, many mistake the " guNa " in nirguNa to be qualities or attributes but it is the prakriti in the form of sattva, rajas, tamas. regs, sriram advaitin , Sunil Goel <sunilgoel29 wrote: > > Respected and learned Gurus, > > While reflecting on whether I should meditate on Brahman in a Nirguna or > Sagun aspect, I understand that it is much easier to do so on the Sagun > aspect as you have finite things to put your mind on. But deep inside I know > that Brahman is Formless, so if I think of Brahman as Birthless, undecaying, > deathless, without beginning or end, unmanifest, infinite, a witness, > formless, pure without any vasanas, self illuminating, the only truth. > omnipotent, omniscient, etc., etc., how can I categorize these qualities? > These are definitely not attributes and neither are they descriptive > adjactives ( or are they?) nor do they represent a quality. So *WHAT* are > these? > > Secondly Sir, is it ok to reflect on such Nirguna qualities with the aim of > a better understanding of the Self? > > Hari Om and Pranaams! > > Sunil > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 18, 2010 Report Share Posted February 18, 2010 Sunilji - PraNAms I think some one has recommended to study the scriptures under a competent guru to have a clear understanding what is saguna and nirguna imply. You cannot meditate on nirguna- or any-THING you meditate on has to have saguna - the attributes. Nirguna is negation of guNas - It goes with the statement na iti na iti - not this not this as any -this- has gunas - Hence all those things you have specified - starting from say - infinite - is to negate all that you can meditate on or conceptualize is not that. By rejecting anything and everything that you can meditate on you arrive at only one solution the meditator, the subject, himself who cannot be negated or meditated. To arrive at that ultimate truth is what the teaching is meant for. For that only a proper study of scriptures is essential. Hope this helps. Hari Om! Sadananda --- On Wed, 2/17/10, Sunil Goel <sunilgoel29 wrote: Sunil Goel <sunilgoel29 Swaroopa of Nirguna advaitin Wednesday, February 17, 2010, 9:08 AM  Respected and learned Gurus,  While reflecting on whether I should meditate on Brahman in a Nirguna or Sagun aspect, I understand that it is much easier to do so on the Sagun aspect as you have finite things to put your mind on. But deep inside I know that Brahman is Formless, so if I think of Brahman as Birthless, undecaying, deathless, without beginning or end, unmanifest, infinite, a witness, formless, pure without any vasanas, self illuminating, the only truth. omnipotent, omniscient, etc., etc., how can I categorize these qualities? These are definitely not attributes and neither are they descriptive adjactives ( or are they?) nor do they represent a quality. So WHAT are these?  Secondly Sir, is it ok to reflect on such Nirguna qualities with the aim of a better understanding of the Self?  Hari Om and Pranaams!  Sunil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 18, 2010 Report Share Posted February 18, 2010 advaitin , Sunil Goel <sunilgoel29 wrote: > > Respected and learned Gurus, > I know that Brahman is Formless, so if I think of Brahman as Birthless, undecaying, deathless, without beginning or end, unmanifest, infinite, a witness, formless, pure without any vasanas, self illuminating, the only truth. omnipotent, omniscient, etc., etc., > Hari Om and Pranaams! > > Sunil > Hari Om Shri Sunil Goelji, Pranaams! If one only thinks of Brahman as such and such it is only upAsana. Only when he thinks of that Brahman as he(AtmA) himself, that is called samAdhi-abhyAsa(meditation). To meditate of oneself as not other than Brahman with your list, it is termed as hrdi-antar-shabda-anuviddha-savikalpa-samAdhiH. (drg-drSya-viveka verse 25). sva-anubhUti-rasa-AveshAt savikalpaH drshyashabdau upekShya nirvikalpaH samAdhiH bhavati. (verse 26) tat brahma tvam asi iti Atmani bhAvaya. (Vivekachoodamani verses 254 - 263) In Shri Guru Smriti, Br. Pranipata Chaitanya Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.