Re: saguna and nirguna

From the Bhakti List Archives

• November 15, 2002


Dear Friends,

Some members have had a knee-jerk reaction to Pradeep Janakiraman's
comment that the Parabrahman "is both 'Nirgunam' (without Rajas, 
and Tamas gunas) and yet 'Sagunam' posessing Ananta-Kalyaana-Gunams."
Apparently the objection is to the word "nirguna".

I should point out that Pradeep has carefully delineated
what he meant by nirguna and saguna and his words are consistent
with Visishtadvaita.  'nirguna' is very different from 'nirvisesha',
though the former can mean the latter.  In the Upanishads, however,
nirguna means bereft of defiling gunas -- consisting of pure
sattva. As Alavandar rhetorically asks, "parama-sattva samASrayaH
kaH" -- Who else is the abode of pure sattva? 

Or we could turn to Sri Ramanuja's mangala-sloka to Vedarthasangraha:

  nirmala-ananta-kalyANa-nidhayE vishNavE namaH |

where the two polarities of being both totally bereft of 
mundane, defiling qualities and being the abode of all
auspiciousness is declared.

It is interesting to note that purity is not the same
as auspiciousness. Something can be pure but not necessarily
mangalam or auspicious. The Parabrahman contains both
as essential facets of Its being.

Sri Abhinava Ranganatha Parakala Swami who adorned the
seat of Sri Parakala Matha for decades this past century,
used to opine that Visishtadvaitins should not abandon
but _champion_ the term nirguna, to underscore its
difference from nirvisesha.  The former, after all, is
used in many places in the Vedanta, Itihasa, and Purana,
whereas the latter is a peculiarity of the school of
Advaita.

aDiyEn rAmanuja dAsan,
Mani





--------------------------------------------------------------
           - SrImate rAmAnujAya namaH -
To Post a message, send it to:   bhakti-list@yahoogroups.com
Group Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bhakti-list
Archives: http://ramanuja.org/sv/bhakti/archives/
 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/