shivsomashekhar
Well-Known Member
There has been some discussion on the nature of Brahman, Nirguna vs. Saguna, real vs.temporary, etc.
Here is Shankara himself on the subject. I am pulling this text from his Brahma Sutra Bhashya (commentary on Sutra 1.1.11).
Sutra 1.1.11 - And because revealed in the Upanishads.
Excerpts from Shankara's commentary: Brahman is known in two aspects - one as possessed of the limiting adjunct constituted by the diversities of the Universe, which is a modification of name and form and the other, devoid of all conditioning factors and opposed to the earlier. There are many texts which by making a division between the subject matters of knowledge and ignorance, show in a thousand ways these two aspects of Brahman: (Brhadaranyaka 4.5.15, Chandogya 7.24.1, Taittiriya 3.12.7, Shvetashvatara 6.19, Brhadaranyaka 2.3.6, Brhadaranyaka 3.8.8).
That being the case, it is in the state of ignorance that Brahman can come within the range of empirical dealings, comprising the object of meditation, the meditator and so on.
....
Thus also, it is fact that although the knowledge of the Self results in instantaneous liberation, yet its instruction is imparted with the help of some relationship with some conditioning factor.
Accordingly, although the relationship with the conditioning factor is not the idea sought to be imparted, still from the reference to the superior and inferior Brahman the doubt may arise that the knowledge refers to either of the two and this has to be decided upon by taking into consideration the trend of the sentences.
......
Some more context. Shankara lived around 1300 years ago. By the time of Vidyaranya and Madhusaudhana Saraswati, several centuries had already passed and therefore, we should accept some level of drift. Fast forward to present times and the drift is even more pronounced. If people are truly serious about Advaita, they should go to authentic sources. Modern age Gurus are not going to cut it and can only present a diluted rendering - far from Shankara's doctrine.
Here is Shankara himself on the subject. I am pulling this text from his Brahma Sutra Bhashya (commentary on Sutra 1.1.11).
Sutra 1.1.11 - And because revealed in the Upanishads.
Excerpts from Shankara's commentary: Brahman is known in two aspects - one as possessed of the limiting adjunct constituted by the diversities of the Universe, which is a modification of name and form and the other, devoid of all conditioning factors and opposed to the earlier. There are many texts which by making a division between the subject matters of knowledge and ignorance, show in a thousand ways these two aspects of Brahman: (Brhadaranyaka 4.5.15, Chandogya 7.24.1, Taittiriya 3.12.7, Shvetashvatara 6.19, Brhadaranyaka 2.3.6, Brhadaranyaka 3.8.8).
That being the case, it is in the state of ignorance that Brahman can come within the range of empirical dealings, comprising the object of meditation, the meditator and so on.
....
Thus also, it is fact that although the knowledge of the Self results in instantaneous liberation, yet its instruction is imparted with the help of some relationship with some conditioning factor.
Accordingly, although the relationship with the conditioning factor is not the idea sought to be imparted, still from the reference to the superior and inferior Brahman the doubt may arise that the knowledge refers to either of the two and this has to be decided upon by taking into consideration the trend of the sentences.
......
Some more context. Shankara lived around 1300 years ago. By the time of Vidyaranya and Madhusaudhana Saraswati, several centuries had already passed and therefore, we should accept some level of drift. Fast forward to present times and the drift is even more pronounced. If people are truly serious about Advaita, they should go to authentic sources. Modern age Gurus are not going to cut it and can only present a diluted rendering - far from Shankara's doctrine.
