Is the Vedic Brahman - Nirguna or Saguna?

Vedic / VedAntic Brahman, is it Saguna (with attributes) or Nirguna (devoid of any
attributes)? This is the fundamental problem on which Vedantins have debated a lot.

Vedas have reference to both Nirguna and Saguna aspects of Brahman which could also
be taken as aikya (oneness) and bheda (difference) vAkyas (statements).

In Advaita, the non-dual Brahman alone is real and therefore accepted as nameless,
formless and therefore Nirguna attribute-less reality. The reference to Saguna is taken
to be secondary or relative reality.

In V.Advaita and Dvaita Brahman is identified as Narayana who is complete with infinite
auspicious attributes and so Saguna. The Nirguna aspect is interpreted as devoid of
trigunas - Sattva, Rajas and Tamas of Prakrithi or material nature.

Meditation on Brahman becomes easier when it is endowed with attributes. In Dvaita
and V.Advaita meditation on Brahman in the form of Narayana is recommended. In Advaita
also, meditation on any ishta devata (favorite God) recognized in the Veda is recommended
as a initial step to attain chitta shuddhi (purity of heart) which is believed to lead to
the realization of Nirguna or Attribute-less Brahman or the Atman/Self.

In the Buddhistic tradition ultimately there is shunya or nothing. But still in the
Buddhistic meditation, it is recommended to attain thoughtless state by consciously removing
any thought that gets created. Some teachers recommend to just remain a silent witness to any
thoughts that arise in the mind. Such thoughts may remain for a while but eventually, it is
supposed to go away leading to a thoughtless state. But still the self or the Atman
experiencing this thoughtless state cannot get eliminated. So Buddhism can be said to
be covered Advaita Vedanta.

So many non-traditional Advaitins also adopt the same meditation technique. Killing or
remaining as a silent witness for thoughts that eventually die away may lead to
the attainment of the Atman which is the Shiva tattva. Interestingly Shiva is identified
as the destroyer. Even in the embodied state all food items that the jiva consumes loses
its name/form (gets destroyed) and becomes one with the eater. So Jiva tattva is nothing
but the Shiva tattava.

Vedantic meditation invariably involves Rishi, chandas/mantra and devata. Traditional
Vedantic Meditation is essentially japa - constant repetition of any mantra of Vedically
identified devata. This is also accompanied by constant remembrance of the divine
form of the devata. Traditional Advaita still goes by this Saguna meditation which
is believed to lead eventually to the attainment of Nirguna Brahman.

Vishnu is well known as the sustainer or protector of good and destroyer of evil.
So Vaishnava meditation is essentially Saguna meditation or japa that involves usage
of any mantra pertaining to Vishnu, predominantly the ashtakshara. So one single mantra
or thought on Vishnu is constantly sustained. It may also involve constant performance
of puja or archana of chosen form of Vishnu in the mind. Experience of multiple auspicious
forms of Brahman / Narayana is also recommended and could arise due to listening to
various kathas or pastimes or leelas of Vishnu and His many avataras or incarnations.

Now what is the conclusion? is the Vedic Brahman Nirguna or Saguna?

As already mentioned in Dvaita and V.Advaita Brahman is Saguna in the form of Narayana.
Sri AdiShankara explicitly states many times in his works that Brahman is both Nirguna
and Saguna. Meditation on Nirguna Brahman is impossible. So there is no doubt that
traditional Vedic/Vedantic Brahman for upAsana is Saguna. But ultimately Brahman is the
supreme Self of all which is totally independent. So whether it is nirguna or saguna
the knower only knows.

Who is the deity that represents saguna Brahman?

In Dvaita and V.Advaita, it is doubtlessly Sriman Narayana. In Advaita it could
be Narayana, Shiva or Shakti or any ishta devata heralded in the Vedas. Sri Shankara
in one of his works identifies the supreme as "ShankaraNarayana". Probably this view
might help to integrate the Shaiva and Vaishnava traditions.

Whatever may be the name/form of the deity, it would be perfect to identify that supreme
Brahman with the entire universe - the universal purusha as identified in the Purusha Sukta
and the eleventh chapter of Bhagavad Gita . The entire universe is that Supreme purusha
or Brahman. One cannot go wrong in this meditation on the universal purusha as there
is no second entity other than that. The absolute dependence and existence of every being
and everything in that universal person can never be denied by any truthful person.

Namaste
Suresh

Creation Puzzle

Science may not accept a God as a creator or efficient cause of the world as there is no tangible proof. But all religions believe in a creator God who is an efficient cause for the world, like a potter creating 

a pot.

But most of the religions outside of the Hindu fold, have problem in answering the question - Where was God existing before creating space and time?

This problem could be overcome only when God is accepted to be the source of all existences including space and time. That means S/He should be all pervading and eternal (defying space and time) and the only source/abode/destination of all spatio temporal entities.

Vedas explicitly declare that God as the universal Self is ever existing and from Him space/time and all other name/forms arise. It also further states that He enters into all name/forms and supports/controls from within as the indwelling ParamAtma (Supreme Self) or the AntaryAmi of all, supporting everything as His body. This "entry" of God into all created entities is similar to space entering the pot when the pot is created. It is also like the spirit self "entering" the body when the body is created/formed/manifested. As the Soul/Self alone is identified through the body, God alone is identified through all entities including space and time. So Vedic God, when identified as the Supreme Self that shines in all, unites science and religion and makes everything spiritual.

So for the question - is the world of name/forms real or not? 

Yes, as a dependent reality from the point of view of the absolutely Self that always remains a witness to name/forms that constantly arise/remain/return back to the Absolute Self. The entire world is in the form of the body that derives it's reality/existence from the Supreme Self. This view supports Dvaita and V.Advaita and even Advaita from the transactional or vyavahara point of view.

No, from the point of view of the same Self that never "sees" any space-time name/forms external to "itSelf" as a separate reality. This absolute Self always "sees" itself and nothing else. This supports paramartha of advaita.

Can God/Brahman be something other than the absolute Self? This is not a possibility as anything other than the Self is non-Self which is spatio-temporal and dependent. Also Vedas, Gita and Brahma Sutra explicitly identify Brahman/God as the all pervading and indwelling Self.

Dvaitin's objection:
This goes against veda, gita and sutra. Veda - "Vishwam satyam maghavAna", gita - "chaturvaraNyam maya srushtam...", sutra - "om bheda vyapadeshaat om"

Advaitins answer:
All those statements are not contradicted as the non-dual Self or Brahman alone, is identified through all space-time/name-forms. All such name/forms are still a dependent reality that arise, remain and merge back into the Self, which is non-dual. The Self is different from all name/forms that derive their reality or existence from the Self only.

Dvaitin: There are so many selves / jivas and so existence cannot be non-dual.

Advaitin: All the many selves are "embodied selves". They have no identification without a body - prAkrita or aprAkrita (material or otherwise). Also all the many selves are seen or established in One Self/Brahman who is everywhere and non-dual. This is similar to fire which is one and many at the same time.

Dvaitin: Vedic statements - "tad aikshata bahusyam prajayeya" and "atmano antaro yamayati" makes the advaitic Self saguna.

Advaitin: Yes, the Self is "saguna" in relation to the body/universe, as the body cannot exist without Brahman/Self. But Brahman or the Self by itself is nirguna because it is independent, non-related, non-dual and beyond all the three gunas of prakriti/nature. 

The same Brahman appears to be born through every name/form. This ofcourse points to saguna Brahman only. But the saguna characteristics attributed to Brahman is valid only when it is endowed with the indescribable power of mAya.

Jiva with limited knowledge and Ishwara with unlimited knowledge are in relation to maya. Ishwara is always associated with maya which is brought out explicitly in V.Advaita where nArAyaNa is inseparable from lakShmi. This is valid in Dvaita also.

All the three views gets integrated when Brahman is realized as the Self of all supporting the entire universe as body. So Advaita is not opposed to both Dvaita and V.Advaita when all dualities and multiplicities are seen in One Brahman. All particular identifications of multiple entities culminate in the same non-dual Brahman who is everywhere as the inner Self.

Advaita recommends to identify the shuddha brahman as the essential non-dual Self and this is nirguna in the sense that it is indescribable or beyond all the three gunas. When the mind is withdrawn into Brahman/Self then the non-duality and nirgunatva of Brahman can be experienced at least theoretically.

The world of multiplicities is therefore seen as a reflection of God or Brahman situated as the absolute Self in all. The body is obviously a reflection of the soul/Self.  For all practical purposes looking upon the entire universe as a manifestation or body of God/Brahman unites all views.

When Advaita says the "world is illusion" it could also be taken as something that is temporary. From that point, all worldly pleasures including the ones enjoyed in devaloka or heaven is an illusion. Brahman who is already indwelling in all is the real source of all pleasure. This cannot be denied by Dvaitin or V.Advaitins! Likewise Advaitin's also have to accept the world as a dependent reality or body of God/Brahman. These truths are very much experiential.

There is no use in endless tarka or arguments. Sincere truth seekers should have no issues to contemplate on the non-dual Brahman as the Self of the universe in whom all the infinite selves/name/forms are established.

All creation of name/forms including space/time must begin, remain and end in the timeless eternal Self that shines in all.


Namaste
Suresh

Vedic Yagya is the basis of all Morality

The ultimate rule of Morality is Yagya or sacrifice which is the essence
of Veda. In simple words one should feed other deserving selfless beings
(like the devatas-gods / pitrus-forefathers, animals, plants, sadhus or
renounced beings, guests) before feeding oneself.

Feeding/serving others around us before feeding/serving oneself therefore
should be universally acceptable even by atheists who may not accept Vedas.

But Vedic view provides a philosophical basis for this universal view.
God who is in all should be recognized and served first before recognizing
Him within oneself. Serving others forms pravrutti and serving oneself
by withdrawing everything into oneself forms nivrutti and Dharma comprises
of both.

God himself in the form of food, air, water, five elements, is teaching
this ideal all the time. Humans are supposed to just follow or be in tune
with this natural law. Hindu Vedic dharma based on sacrifice is thus natural
and so is sanatana or eternal.

On the other hand, feeding oneself alone at the expense of or by ignoring
others is selfish. Feeding others alone at the expense of or by ignoring
oneself is Altruism. Both are un-natural and causes disharmony and sorrow.
This is nothing but karma which is a reaction to the selfish actions that
is not in tune with nature or universe which is the very manifestation
of sacrifice or yagya.

The principle of yagya thus involves giving (more) by taking (less) which
alone can keep the wheel of dharma moving and sustain harmonious existence
that lead us towards perfection. Vedic sacrifices offer oblations to gods
or devatas or divinities who work behind all the elements and natural
forces. In return devatas bless the world with proper and timely rains,
harvest and sumptuousness. Vedic sacrifice or pancha maha yagnya includes
offerings to animals and humans that are more tangible than the unseen
devatas and pitrus.

An impartial observation would reveal that every human action is a yagya.
Simple act like eating food for instance is a yagya where the food is
offered as an oblation onto the gastric fire which is a manifestation
of Vedic God called Vaishwanara. Similarly every perception is a yagya
where the sense objects are offered as an oblation in the fire of the
senses/mind/consciousness. Similarly every action performed for the
good of the world outside is a yagya where God indwelling in world
is served.

If every action is a yagya, then what about evil or destructive actions?
are they also yagya? No. In a typical yagya all evil is always controlled
or destroyed to yield good. Ego which is at the root of evil is an
object of sacrifice in the fire of good/selflessness in a typical Vedic
yagya.

The golden rule of morality is to treat others as one treats oneself.
When this is expanded to include all the different beings above and below
humans (like, devatas/gods, Rishis, pitrus/forefathers, animals, plants,
sadhus or renunciates and so on) then it leads to Morality based on Vedic
yagya or sacrifice or dharma that incorporates within itself the universal
truth of sustaining sat or truth by destroying asat or untruth.

Namaste
Suresh

Should Vedas be rejected?

Poorvapaksha:
Upanishads came after Buddha and so they have borrowed all
good ideas like liberty, equality and fraternity from Buddhism.
So they can be accepted as valid for today. But Vedas have to be rejected
as they talk about many gods, divide humanity based on chaturvarna and preach
inequality and suppression of women and shudras who are said to belong to the
fourth or the lowermost varna or caste.

Explanation:

It is good that someone sees some value in Buddhism and Buddha is recognized
as an incarnation Vishnu in the Bhagavatam which is a scripture based on Veda.
Buddha neither supported nor rejected varnasharma. Infact he accepted the
ideal of dharma which has its roots in the Vedas. The ideal of dharma as
"parartha karma" or "selfless service to others according to one's capability"
is a natural truth which no thinking man can ignore.

Truth and Dharma always go together and they are eternal. Vedas and Upanishads
are well known as author-less and so eternal and faultfree. Vedas and Upanishads
form one single body of knowledge. They are like head and torso which cannot be
separated. Vedas predominantly deal with karma/dharma and Upanishads deal with
the supreme Brahman, the absolute truth.  So the claim that upanishads came later
does not hold water.

The idea of liberty, equality and fraternity has its roots in the Vedic view
that the absolute God Brahman, is the inner Self of all names/forms both sentient
and insentient. This absolute Self that shines in all is immutable, indubitable
and timeless. It is the source, abode and destination of the entire universe
of diverse name/forms.

So Vedic God as the indwelling Self of all obviously unites the entire world of
diversity made of guna, karma and varna. All noble ideas simply cannot fall from
the sky. Every noble thought must arise in the mind of a selfless person who has
realized the Vedic God / Brahman or the universal absolute Self that knows no
bounds and abides in all.

Then what about bad and destructive thoughts? Should that also be attributed to
Vedic God Brahman? No way! Bad or selfish thoughts has its roots in the selfish
mind or constricted view of man that is limited to one's own limited personality.
It does not recognize the Vedic truth that the entire universe is the body or
personality of God and instead looks upon the universe as an object of enjoyment!
Thus selfish and bad thoughts has its origin in the ego.

As Vedic Brahman is the source of all noble thoughts, no human can take credit
for the ideas of liberty, equality and fraternity. The recognition of Brahman
as the universal Self that abides in all provides the philosophical basis for
all such ideals.

Though there is equality based on the existence of Brahman in all, there is also
difference based on the body/mind/intellect. Nobody is created equal and so the
duty or dharma differs according to one's BMI capability.

Vedas stand for Dharma which is nothing but "parartha karma" or "service to others"
based on one's capability. Vedas stand for dharma karma or the "right action" and
upanishads for Brahman / Truth / jnana or Consciousness. Vedas stand for the limbs
and Upanishads for the head. Taking only the upanishads and rejecting vedas amounts
to cutting off the head from the torso resulting in death. This is not desirable.

So there is jnyAna in karma and vice-versa. Every human action is actually a yagya
or sacrifice or worship of God who is within and without.

If the society is taken to be an organic entity like a human body then the four
varnas correspond to the four important parts of the body - head, arms, thighs and
feet. No part is high or low. Each part is different and equally important and has
its own role to perform for the overall benefit of the being. So Varnashrama which
is the essence of Veda is the law of co-operation, leading to professional harmony,
natural division of labor, which is very vital for any society. Absence of
Varnashrama leads to mere competition or survival of the fittest mentality which is
a jungle law and not human.

Every civilized society has these four varnas or classes and there is a need
therefore to keep it going for the healthy growth and existence of the society.
Whether these varnas are maintained based on birth or by nature is debatable but their
existence and sustenance cannot be denied. When Family is seen as an institution that
naturally sustains the four varnas it results in birth based varna. But it is always
possible for anyone to have a guna that is different from the rest of the family.
In such a situation it is always possible for him or her to change varna/profession
by working with an expert belonging to the other varna/profession. But still family
based profession always has advantages and can naturally sustain diversity.

What is needed is an impartial understanding of Vedic Varnashrama where unity in
diversity is perfectly achieved by recognizing the non-dual God/Brahman as the
indwelling Self of all, sustaining the entire universe as His body.

The validty of Vedas and the Vedic God in the form the universe is self-valid
as one's absolute dependence on the universe for existence cannot be denied
bu any sane human. Truth seekers who are true to themselves have no choice but
to accept Vedas.

Namaste

Suresh