Brahman cannot be Nirguna. It is simply Nira-Kara.

First of all i would like to know the meaning of the term 'NIR'.
Does 'Nir' means beyond or without? If it is the latter, then my question is, how can the ultimate reality be without qualities, when the advaitins themselves claim that everything resides within Brahman.
By everything they mean prakriti as well.

The advaitins say that prakriti/maya is not a separate entity and is simply Brahman's power.
So if prakriti (which is full of gunas) is Brahman's power, which doesn't exist outside brahman but within brahman, then that makes Brahman full of gunas. Isn't it?

For example, if you burn a woolen cloth, the molecules/atoms that are the building blocks of the cloth doesn't cease to exist. The same way, if we look at this reality or creation, from an ontological PoV, then even after the so called destruction of the cosmos at the end of one kalpa, the elements, molecules, gunas etc. doesn't cease to exist. They remain in a latent, avyakta, formless state.
The 3 gunas namely, sattva, rajas, tamas of Prakriti (brahman's power) doesn't cease to exist after destruction, at the end of kalpa. They remain in a state of equilibrium or in a state of dormancy (in a seed like state) that will again manifest as the universe in the next kalpa.

My point is, if the gunas of prakriti remain in the lap of brahman in a dormant state, then does that make Brahman without qualities or with qualities. You be the judge. How did the ancient rishis fail to notice this simple fact.

Brahman in my opinion, is simply nirakara (formless) in its true state and therefore no one can fathom 'IT' ... It is not Nirguna, since prakriti (which is full of qualities) dwells within brahman and not outside it. Would love to hear your opinions on this. Thanks.

There are levels of reality

Bramhan' is nirguNa in both senses - beyond guNas and without prAkrut guNa - sattva raja tama , in different contexts

Just as the dream world is not real, at the level of the waker, the prakruti-manifestation of the gross world is a dream world, not real at the highest pArmArthik level. The dream gets over and only Bramhan' is left.

Just as we do not carry our dream entities, places , things, along with us in the waking world, Bramhan' does not carry mAyA in the pAramArthic turIyam, and at that level it is nirguN - beyond guNa, above and beyond mAyA , ever untouched by mAyA , but also without the guNa

MAnDukya Upanishad is the best reference for this.

Parameshwar, BhagavAn , when interacting with the devotees, remains nirguN perpetually - both beyond guNas and either with vishuddha sattva or nirguNa

Namaste ameyAtmA ji,

Such a wonderful reply and has been with me since you posted it, dandavats.

Namaste Red Dragon ji,

Its a good question and a logical one that comes up in when we learn Vedanta, and it can be perplexing, I hope you can understand ameyAtmA reply, it covers everything.

Namaste Markandeya ji

Thanks for your kind words. The msg is a bit concise, but I think Red Dragon has understood, he has studied advaita.

praNAm

Namaste ameyAtmA ji,

Another great reply. These things perplexed me at one level for quite some time too. I only just noticed recently Red Dragons posts with very good content and questions, maybe there is time delay on his posts. this area of vedanta is very crucial and not always understood or often hard to explain and you have done it so well.

Dandavats

Namaste Red Dragon Ji,

I will try try to explain how I have dealt with and understand these questions.

Quote:

---

Does 'Nir' means beyond or without? If it is the latter, then my question is, how can the ultimate reality be without qualities, when the advaitins themselves claim that everything resides within Brahman.
By everything they mean prakriti as well.

---

Everything resides in consciousness, nothing can possible exits without consciousness, a dead person can not read or write this post, for this post to exist there has to be consciousness, are the words on the screen in and of them selves conscious. In a similar way prakriti resides in consciousness and cannot exist independent.

My sanskrit is not very good just writing as I understand, nir means without, but there is a context that is para or fully transcendent, without or beyond applies but also within the context of para or superior, superior meaning refined or more subtle and vast, less constricted, its not abstract or empty, if we analyses the tri loka~3 worlds, 3 states of consciousness, sense consciousness is not as developed as mind consciousness, para superior more refined, subtle and vast than 5 senses is mind consciousness, senses are locked into objects and have limited scope of movement and ability, mind is more vast and has greater potentials than the senses and can direct the senses, but also mind can operate without senses, senses cannot operate without mind, one can travel from one location to another by mind in the time of a thought, where as sense contact travel is limited and slower, if I think of the Moon I am there conscious of the moon in a moment, if i travel by spacecraft takes longer, so my context to para as superior is more vast and with more ability. Para to this is Buddhi intellect and para to Buddhi is Brahman, Brahma is boundless, vast without any limitation or conditioning of the gunas.

Buddhi~ spiritual intellect is higher than mind, mind is based on sense perception and ideas, the highest the mind can go is the rational and the philosophical. To understand Brahman the intermediate para state of Buddhi unlocks and reveals both the nature of prakirit and brahman and brings total unification and liberation from the bound into the vast. brahman which is always nirguna is not just without anything or beyond everything , para superior and refined is also applied in my understanding of nirguna Brahma, its is simple more vast, subtle and refined with more powers than the 3 worlds, sense, mind and buddhi which reside in Brahman and by realisation destroys all limitations. In this way Brahman is para and full with vastness and is considered as Bhuman, full, complete and whole.




Pranam

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Red_Drag0n

First of all i would like to know the meaning of the term 'NIR'.
Does 'Nir' means beyond or without? If it is the latter, then my question is, how can the ultimate reality be without qualities, when the advaitins themselves claim that everything resides within Brahman.
By everything they mean prakriti as well.

The advaitins say that prakriti/maya is not a separate entity and is simply Brahman's power.
So if prakriti (which is full of gunas) is Brahman's power, which doesn't exist outside brahman but within brahman, then that makes Brahman full of gunas. Isn't it?

For example, if you burn a woolen cloth, the molecules/atoms that are the building blocks of the cloth doesn't cease to exist. The same way, if we look at this reality or creation, from an ontological PoV, then even after the so called destruction of the cosmos at the end of one kalpa, the elements, molecules, gunas etc. doesn't cease to exist. They remain in a latent, avyakta, formless state.
The 3 gunas namely, sattva, rajas, tamas of Prakriti (brahman's power) doesn't cease to exist after destruction, at the end of kalpa. They remain in a state of equilibrium or in a state of dormancy (in a seed like state) that will again manifest as the universe in the next kalpa.

My point is, if the gunas of prakriti remain in the lap of brahman in a dormant state, then does that make Brahman without qualities or with qualities. You be the judge. How did the ancient rishis fail to notice this simple fact.

Brahman in my opinion, is simply nirakara (formless) in its true state and therefore no one can fathom 'IT' ... It is not Nirguna, since prakriti (which is full of qualities) dwells within brahman and not outside it. Would love to hear your opinions on this. Thanks.

---

namaste
Pl refer 27/3 4,5/7 Gita .
jsk