• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Bhedabheda

shivsomashekhar

Well-Known Member
Is this from a Bhedabheda perspective, or is this your personal opinion?

Advaita is the only Vedanta tradition that supports the concept of Nirguna Brahman. The concept has been heavily criticized by other traditions.

For instance, the Shata Dushani (Vishistadvaita) devotes an entire section to its criticism of Nirguna Brahman. I believe Madhva (Dvaita) criticizes the concept in his Mayavada Khandana, but I do not have access to that text. Also in the Sutra Bhashya, Mandukya Upanishad's treatment of Turiya, etc.
 
Last edited:

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
No. The concept of Nirguna Brahman is peculiar to Advaita and has no place in other traditions of Vedanta. There is only one Brahman and this Brahman has an infinite number of auspicious gunas.
:) I stand corrected. Brahman is always Saguna in all branches of Vedanta except in Guadapada's Advaita. Sankara too accepts Saguna in Vyavaharika.
If we qualify Brahman in any way, then we are talking of Saguna. Only the undifferentiated can be Nirguna.
Shatadushani (FYI): A hundred Faults.
 
Last edited:

SalixIncendium

अग्निविलोवनन्दः
Staff member
Premium Member
Before any sort of debate ensues here regarding the concepts of Brahman, spectifically Nirguna Brahman, I created a thread here to discuss.
 

Martin

Spam, wonderful spam (bloody vikings!)
How about this for a crude analysis:

Bheda = Atman different from Brahman = Dvaita.

Abheda = Atman same as Brahman = Advaita.

Bhedabheda = Atman part of Brahman = Vishishadvaita (?).
 
Top