Brahman (ब्रह्मन्)

From Dharmawiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
ToBeEdited.png
 This article needs editing.

Add and improvise the content from reliable sources.

Brahman (Samskrit : ब्रह्मन्) signifies the Absolute, Eternal, Changeless, Infinite element without attributes, qualities beyond name and form, yet all encompassing the universe called variously as Brahman, Purusha, Parabrahma, Satya.

IT, that nameless, formless supreme being is the goal of a sadhaka engaged in the practice of Paravidya, (the Brahmavidya) knowing which is the Supreme Wisdom (Jnana) achieved through the paths laid down in the various texts, discussed through ages in the Upanishads and Brahmasutras.[1]

While the samskrit word Brahman (ब्रह्मन्) used in this article is a pratipadika (a stem), this entity is referred to mostly as Brahma padarth or Parabrahma, Paramatma etc in the various texts. The first case ending of Brahman (ब्रह्मन्) is Brahma (ब्रह्मा) which should not be confused with the deity Brahma who is the creator among the trimurthis (Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva).

परिचयः ॥ Introduction

An abstract but highly discussed word, Brahman, is the core of the Vedanta and Upanishad texts, a concept fundamental and unique to Sanatana Dharma. No other philosophy in the world, in the history of thought, has evolved and discussed the concept of Brahman; it is the most ancient mystery of the worlds. All sampradayas are unified in agreeing to the existence in an attributeless supreme entity, while variations amongst them are seen only with respect to the path followed to understand and experience Brahman.

वेदान्तमते ‘वस्तु सच्चिदानन्दाद्वयं ब्रह्म तथा अज्ञानादिसकलजडसमूहोऽवस्तु ।’ ‘ब्रह्मैव नित्यं वस्तु तदन्यदखिलमनित्यम् ।’[2]
vedāntamate ‘vastu saccidānandādvayaṁ brahma tathā ajñānādisakalajaḍasamūho'vastu ।’ ‘brahmaiva nityaṁ vastu tadanyadakhilamanityam ।

व्युत्पत्तिः॥ Etymology

Brahman (ब्रह्मन्) is derived from the dhatus बृहँ and बृहिँ in the meaning of वृद्धौ (vrddhi)[2] - बृंहति वर्द्धते निरतिशयमहत्त्व-लक्षणवृद्धिमान् भवतीत्यर्थः - to expand, grow, enlarge, one which is beyond comparison. It is used to explain the concept of the transcendent and immanent ultimate reality, Supreme force which is attributeless.

Brahman is thus a gender-neutral concept that implies greater impersonality than masculine or feminine conceptions of a deity. Brahman is referred to as the supreme self.

It is distinct from:

  • A Brahmana (ब्राह्मणम्) which is the prose explanation of the mantras, one of the four divisions of the Vedic texts.
  • A Brahmana (ब्राह्मणः) (masculine) is one who belongs to the Brahmana varna (first of the four varnas); in this usage the word is usually rendered in English as Brahmin (ब्राह्मणः).
  • Brahma (ब्रह्मा) is a deity who has the role of the creator among the Trimurtis, having a lifetime measured in kalpas (see Kala)
  • Ishvara (ईश्वरः), in Advaita, is identified as a partial worldly manifestation (with limited attributes) of the ultimate reality, the attributeless Brahman. In Visishtadvaita and Dvaita, however, Ishvara (the Supreme Controller) has infinite attributes and the source of the impersonal Brahman.

Evolution of Concept of Brahman

The Upanishads which develop ideas that are in germ in the Samhitas are the only source of definite knowledge, to answer the questions which ever baffled the human mind. Questions that man is trying to answer from ages include

  • whether our personality survives death
  • where does man go after death
  • is there existence of life in a world called heaven
  • does he ever return to this world
  • what is the final goal of life
  • nature of the final goal of the world
  • nature and definition of the supreme entity that man believes in
  • nature of Atman and its relationship with the each other and with Supreme entity
  • what is the ultimate truth of existence

Obviously no other knowledge source has ever attempted to answer such questions and Upanishads give us the last word on all such matters. Through no other means is it possible for us to get convincing answers to our queries regarding them. Not being the work of man (Apaurusheya) Upanishads are free from the usual shortcomings of all human endeavor such as error, doubt, and deception. It is open to us all to verify their statements by actual experience along the lines prescribed by them. The truths inculcated in them are not mere theories, but facts, and as such are invulnerable.[3]

Shvetasvatara Upanishad in the very first instance puts forth these questions as deliberated by the Brahmavadins

ॐ ब्रह्मवादिनो वदन्ति ।

किं कारणं ब्रह्म कुतः स्म जाता जीवाम केन क्व च सम्प्रतिष्ठा । अधिष्ठिताः केन सुखेतरेषु वर्तामहे ब्रह्मविदो व्यवस्थाम् ॥ १ ॥ (Shve. Upan. 1.1.1)

Summary : People accustomed to deliberate on Brahman discuss : What is the nature of Brahman, the Source (किं कारणं ब्रह्म)? From what have been born (कुतः स्म जाता)? By what do we live (जीवाम केन)? And where do we exist, rest, at the time of dissoution (क्व च सम्प्रतिष्ठा)? O Knowers of Brahman, regulated by whom (अधिष्ठिताः केन) do we conform to the system regarding happiness and its opposite namely sorrows (सुखेतरेषु वर्तामहे)?

In this way the question "What is the cause" (किं कारणं । kiṁ kāraṇaṁ) pertains to the primordial cause of the regulation of creation, continuance and dissolution.[4]

ब्रह्मतत्वम् ॥ Nature of Brahman

Discussion on Brahmatattva or nature of Brahman is extensive and ageless with numerous Upanishad and Vedanta bhashyas on the subject. Putting together the Upanishadic and Brahmasutra explanations, Brahman is said to have the following features

  • All-perceiving (सर्वानुभूः)
  • Immortal (तदमृतँ)
  • Eternal (नित्यम्)
  • Formless (अरूपम्)
  • Undiminishing (अव्ययम्)
  • Hidden in every being (भूतेषु गूढः)
  • Constant (ध्रुवं)
  • Birthless (अजः)
  • Lacks vital force (अप्राणः)
  • Without mind (अमनाः)
  • Unattached (असङ्गम्)
  • Without beginning or end (अनाद्यनन्तं)
  • Unfathomable (अग्राह्यम्)
  • Cannot be inferred (अलक्षणं)
  • Unthinkable (अचिन्त्यम्)
  • Indescribable by words (अव्यपदेश्यम्)
  • Distinct from Buddhi (महतः परं)
  • Pure Intelligence (प्रज्ञानघन)
  • Pure Consciousness (चैतन्यमात्रम्)

Unity of Jivatma and Brahman

When Nachiketa presses Yama to reveal to him the supreme secret, Yama says [5]

यदेवेह तदमुत्र यदमुत्र तदन्विह । मृत्योः स मृत्युमाप्नोति य इह नानेव पश्यति ॥ १० ॥

मनसैवेदमाप्तव्यं नेह नानाऽस्ति किंचन । मृत्योः स मृत्युं गच्छति य इह नानेव पश्यति ॥ ११ ॥ (Kath. Upan. 2.1.11)[6]

Summary : The entity that exists in all beings from Brahma down to immovable and appears as non-Brahman owing to limiting factors (Jiva) is different from Supreme Brahman is subject to birth and death. What indeed is here, is there and what is there is here. He who sees as though there is difference between the two, goes from death to death. This is to be attained through the Manas only. There is no diversity between the Self and Supreme Brahman.[7]

Brhdaranyaka Upanishad also lays emphasis of the Unity of Jiva and Brahman (2.4.6-9). In the Yajnavalkya and Maitreyi Samvada, the very nature of Atman is defined. All the brahmanas, kshatriyas, the whole world, the countless devatas and all beings are the form of Atman only.[5]

Mandukya Upanishad's Mahavakya reinstates the concept of unity of Atma and Paramatma.

सर्वं ह्येतद् ब्रह्मा अयमात्मा ब्रह्म। This Atma is Brahman (Mand. Upan. 2)

Mundakopanishad, says Brahman is "That which cannot be seen or grasped, which has neither origin nor properties, which has neither eyes nor ears, neither hands nor feet, which is eternal, all-pervading, omnipresent 'and extremely subtle, Imperishable which the rshis regard as the origin of all beings."

The Upanishads discuss the metaphysical concept of Brahman in many ways, such as the Śāṇḍilya doctrine in Chapter 3 of the Chandogya Upanishad, among of the oldest Upanishadic texts. The Śāṇḍilya doctrine on Brahman is not unique to Chandogya Upanishad, but found in other ancient texts such as the Satapatha Brahmana in section 10.6.3. It asserts that Atman (Soul, Self inside man) exists, the Brahman is identical with Atman, that the Brahman is inside man – thematic quotations that are frequently cited by later schools of Hinduism and modern studies on Bharat's philosophies.[8]

Brahman as in Different Sampradayas

Everyone of the vedantic system-builders - Shankara, Ramanuja, Madhava and others-has followed his own standpoint in his commentary of the Upanishads, bringing a mind illumined and directed by his own individual spiritual experience to bear upon his task and interpreted all the passages to uphold his position and popularize the system of thought he expounded.[9]

Nirguna Brahma (Advaita)

Advaita Vedantins totally dismiss the concept that Brahman and Jagat (world) are completely distinct from each other and their tattva is explained in Shri Adishankara Bhashyas. Brahman is Nirguna, without attributes, and is Real; all else is unreal; Jivatma and Paramatma are the same without any difference. According to them the idea of difference arises from Avidya (nescience, ignorance, lack of yadartha jnana) and when Atma transcends Avidya, it brings about the realization of the All-ness and wholeness of the Atman as indicated by the vidya-sutra

आत्मेत्येवोपासीतात्र ह्येते सर्व एकं भवन्ति । (Brhd. Upan.1.4.7)[10]

The Universe springs from Brahman, just like hairs on a man's head; it is the work of Maya. Cause and effect are one and the same (कार्यकारण-अभेदः) just like an aggregation of threads is seen in the form of a cloth. As long as the Atma identifies itself with the Upadhis (vehicle of atma), it remains bound in Samsara, when it Knows Itself as Self, it becomes free from Samsara. For those who are not yet ready for this effort of Self Knowledge, ritual is not only desirable but also necessary. Those who reached the point where Atma only attracts them, Jnanam is enough and by Sadhana they achieve Brahman, the goal. However, a Jnani does not abstain from Karma or actions (similar as in Samkhya siddhanta), he best understands them and actively engages in them, being unattached to the results and not by the dictate of desire. Such a person is called Jivanmukta.

For example, Chandogya Upanishad describes the unity of Jiva and Brahman, in the conversation between Uddalaka and Shvetaketu. Kathopanishad also proclaims that he who sees as though there is difference between the two (Jiva and Brahman) will be engaged in cycle of birth and death. Jnana that they are one and the same is to be attained through the Manas only. There is no diversity between the Jivatma and Supreme Brahman. (Kath. Upan. 2.1.11)[11]

Saguna Brahma (Dvaita and Visishtadvaita)

The Dvaita Vedantins uphold the distinctness of Paramatma from Jivatma both in material world and in Moksha. It teaches that Vishnu is the Supreme Deity and formed the Universe out of Prkriti which is already existing. Here the concept of Supreme (Brahman) is seen in Vishnu, who is the efficient cause of the Universe. It follows the Samkhya darshana way of describing the evolution and that Jiva travels on a spiritual journey to attain the Paramatma. Jiva attains Moksha in which it remains in Bhoga (भोगः । enjoyment of eternal bliss) with the Paramatma. The Jiva reaches one or other of the four conditions

  1. Sarupya (सारूप्यम् । Same form as the Divine Form)
  2. Salokya (सालोक्यम् । Residence in the same loka as the Divine Form eg : Goloka)
  3. Sannidhya (सान्निध्यम् । Being in proximity to the Divine Form)
  4. Sayujyam (सायुज्यम् । Union with the Divine Form).

However, this union is not to be considered as one of identity of nature. (Page 33 of Reference[1]).

The Vishistadvaita Vedantins uphold separateness of Jivatma and Paramatma but that Jivatma is a separate entity which are Vyakta (व्यक्तः । manifested) during the period of activity and when Pralaya (प्रलयः । ) approaches they are drawn in and become Avyakta (अव्यक्तः । Unmanifested) Paramatma or Brahman. Vishistadvaita is a path for those who conscious of the separation, and long for union with the Supreme, and they find solace in worship and devotion of Ishvara (Saguna Brahman). Brahman is the highest Reality, the One, but has attributes inseparable from Himself. From Brahman, comes the Sankarshana (संकर्षणः) or Jivatma, the separated Atma (soul), which produces Pradyumna (प्रद्युम्नः) the Mind, which in turn produces Aniruddha (अनिरुद्धः) the I (Ahamkara principle). Thus Brahman is the object of worship on whom Jivatma depends on, Jivatma being not Brahman but a part of it. The separation is insisted on but union is sought.[1]

Discussion

Brahman as a metaphysical concept

Brahman is the key metaphysical concept in various schools of Hindu philosophy. It is the theme in its diverse discussions to the two central questions of metaphysics: what is ultimately real, and are there principles applying to everything that is real?[12] Brahman is the ultimate "eternally, constant" reality, while the observed universe is different kind of reality but one which is "temporary, changing" Māyā in various orthodox Hindu schools. Māyā pre-exists and co-exists with Brahman – the Ultimate Reality, The Highest Universal, the Cosmic Principles.[13]

In addition to the concept of Brahman, Hindu metaphysics includes the concept of Atman – or soul, self – which is also considered ultimately real.[13] The various schools of Hinduism, particularly the dual and non-dual schools, differ on the nature of Atman, whether it is distinct from Brahman, or same as Brahman. Those that consider Brahman and Atman as distinct are theistic, and Dvaita Vedanta and later Nyaya schools illustrate this premise.[14] Those that consider Brahman and Atman as same are monist or pantheistic, and Advaita Vedanta, later Samkhya[15] and Yoga schools illustrate this metaphysical premise.[16][17][18] In schools that equate Brahman with Atman, Brahman is the sole, ultimate reality.[19] The predominant teaching in the Upanishads is the spiritual identity of soul within each human being, with the soul of every other human being and living being, as well as with the supreme, ultimate reality Brahman.[20][21]

In the metaphysics of the major schools of Hinduism, Maya is perceived reality, one that does not reveal the hidden principles, the true reality – the Brahman. Maya is unconscious, Brahman-Atman is conscious. Maya is the literal and the effect, Brahman is the figurative Upādāna – the principle and the cause.[13] Maya is born, changes, evolves, dies with time, from circumstances, due to invisible principles of nature. Atman-Brahman is eternal, unchanging, invisible principle, unaffected absolute and resplendent consciousness. Maya concept, states Archibald Gough, is "the indifferent aggregate of all the possibilities of emanatory or derived existences, pre-existing with Brahman", just like the possibility of a future tree pre-exists in the seed of the tree.[13]

While Hinduism sub-schools such as Advaita Vedanta emphasize the complete equivalence of Brahman and Atman, they also expound on Brahman as saguna Brahman – the Brahman with attributes, and nirguna Brahman – the Brahman without attributes.[22] The nirguna Brahman is the Brahman as it really is, however, the saguna Brahman is posited as a means to realizing nirguna Brahman, but the Hinduism schools declare saguna Brahman to be ultimately illusory.[23] The concept of the saguna Brahman, such as in the form of avatars, is considered in these schools of Hinduism to be a useful symbolism, path and tool for those who are still on their spiritual journey, but the concept is finally cast aside by the fully enlightened.[23]

Brahman as an ontological concept

Brahman, along with Soul/Self (Atman) are part of the ontological[24] premises of Bharat's philosophy.[25][26] Different schools of Bharat's philosophy have held widely dissimilar ontologies. Buddhism and Carvaka school of Hinduism deny that there exists anything called "a soul, a self" (individual Atman or Brahman in the cosmic sense), while the orthodox schools of Hinduism, Jainism and Ajivikas hold that there exists "a soul, a self".[27][28]

Brahman as well the Atman in every human being (and living being) is considered equivalent and the sole reality, the eternal, self-born, unlimited, innately free, blissful Absolute in schools of Hinduism such as the Advaita Vedanta and Yoga.[29][30][31] Knowing one's own self is knowing the God inside oneself, and this is held as the path to knowing the ontological nature of Brahman (universal Self) as it is identical to the Atman (individual Self). The nature of Atman-Brahman is held in these schools, states Barbara Holdrege, to be as a pure being (sat), consciousness (cit) and full of bliss (ananda), and it is formless, distinctionless, nonchanging and unbounded.[29]

In theistic schools, in contrast, such as Dvaita Vedanta, the nature of Brahman is held as eternal, unlimited, innately free, blissful Absolute, while each individual's soul is held as distinct and limited which can at best come close in eternal blissful love of the Brahman (therein viewed as the Godhead).[32]

Other schools of Hinduism have their own ontological premises relating to Brahman, reality and nature of existence. Vaisheshika school of Hinduism, for example, holds a substantial, realist ontology.[33] The Carvaka school denied Brahman and Atman, and held a materialist ontology.[34]

Brahman as an axiological concept

Brahman and Atman are key concepts to Hindu theories of axiology: ethics and aesthetics.[35][36] Ananda (bliss), state Michael Myers and other scholars, has axiological importance to the concept of Brahman, as the universal inner harmony.[37][38] Some scholars equate Brahman with the highest value, in an axiological sense.[39]

The axiological concepts of Brahman and Atman is central to Hindu theory of values.[40] A statement such as ‘I am Brahman’, states Shaw, means ‘I am related to everything,’ and this is the underlying premise for compassion for others in Hinduism, for each individual's welfare, peace, or happiness depends on others, including other beings and nature at large, and vice versa.[41] Tietge states that even in non-dual schools of Hinduism where Brahman and Atman are treated ontologically equivalent, the theory of values emphasize individual agent and ethics. In these schools of Hinduism, states Tietge, the theory of action are derived from and centered in compassion for the other, and not egotistical concern for the self.[42]

The axiological theory of values emerges implicitly from the concepts of Brahman and Atman, states Bauer.[43] The aesthetics of human experience and ethics are one consequence of self-knowledge in Hinduism, one resulting from the perfect, timeless unification of one's soul with the Brahman, the soul of everyone, everything and all eternity, wherein the pinnacle of human experience is not dependent on an afterlife, but pure consciousness in the present life itself.[43] It does not assume that an individual is weak nor does it presume that he is inherently evil, but the opposite: human soul and its nature is held as fundamentally unqualified, faultless, beautiful, blissful, ethical, compassionate and good.[43][44] Ignorance is to assume it evil, liberation is to know its eternal, expansive, pristine, happy and good nature.[43] The axiological premises in the Hindu thought and Bharat's philosophies in general, states Nikam, is to elevate the individual, exalting the innate potential of man, where the reality of his being is the objective reality of the universe.[45] The Upanishads of Hinduism, summarizes Nikam, hold that the individual has the same essence and reality as the objective universe, and this essence is the finest essence; the individual soul is the universal soul, and Atman is the same reality and the same aesthetics as the Brahman.[45]

Brahman as a soteriological concept: Moksha

Main article: Moksha

The orthodox schools of Hinduism, particularly Vedanta, Samkhya and Yoga schools, focus on the concept of Brahman and Atman in their discussion of moksha. The Advaita Vedanta holds there is no being/non-being distinction between Atman and Brahman. The knowledge of Atman (Self-knowledge) is synonymous to the knowledge of Brahman inside the person and outside the person. Furthermore, the knowledge of Brahman leads to sense of oneness with all existence, self-realization, indescribable joy, and moksha (freedom, bliss),[46] because Brahman-Atman is the origin and end of all things, the universal principle behind and at source of everything that exists, consciousness that pervades everything and everyone.[47]

The theistic sub-school such as Dvaita Vedanta of Hinduism, starts with the same premises, but adds the premise that individual souls and Brahman are distinct, and thereby reaches entirely different conclusions where Brahman is conceptualized in a manner similar to God in other major world religions.[48] The theistic schools assert that moksha is the loving, eternal union or nearness of one's soul with the distinct and separate Brahman (Vishnu, Shiva or equivalent henotheism). Brahman, in these sub-schools of Hinduism is considered the highest perfection of existence, which every soul journeys towards in its own way for moksha.[49]

Schools of thought

Vedanta

The concept of Brahman, its nature and its relationship with Atman and the observed universe, is a major point of difference between the various sub-schools of the Vedanta school of Hinduism.

Advaita Vedanta

Main article: Advaita Vedanta

Advaita Vedanta espouses nondualism. Brahman is the sole unchanging reality,[19] there is no duality, no limited individual souls nor a separate unlimited cosmic soul, rather all souls, all of existence, across all space and time, is one and the same.[50][29][51] The universe and the soul inside each being is Brahman, and the universe and the soul outside each being is Brahman, according to Advaita Vedanta. Brahman is the origin and end of all things, material and spiritual. Brahman is the root source of everything that exists. He states that Brahman can neither be taught nor perceived (as an object of knowledge), but it can be learned and realized by all human beings.[52] The goal of Advaita Vedanta is to realize that one's Self (Atman) gets obscured by ignorance and false-identification ("Avidya"). When Avidya is removed, the Atman (Soul, Self inside a person) is realized as identical with Brahman.[22] The Brahman is not outside, separate, dual entity, the Brahman is within each person, states Advaita Vedanta school of Hinduism. Brahman is all that is eternal, unchanging and that is truly exists.[19] This view is stated in this school in many different forms, such as "Ekam sat" ("Truth is one"), and all is Brahman.

The universe does not simply come from Brahman, it is Brahman. According to Adi Shankara, a proponent of Advaita Vedanta, the knowledge of Brahman that shruti provides cannot be obtained in any other means besides self inquiry.[53]

In Advaita Vedanta, nirguna Brahman, that is the Brahman without attributes, is held to be the ultimate and sole reality.[19][23] Consciousness is not a property of Brahman but its very nature. In this respect, Advaita Vedanta differs from other Vedanta schools.[54]

Example verses from Bhagavad-Gita include:

<poem> The offering is Brahman; the oblation is Brahman; offered by Brahman into the fire of Brahman. Brahman will be attained by him, who always sees Brahman in action. – Hymn 4.24[55][56]

He who finds his happiness within, His delight within, And his light within, This yogin attains the bliss of Brahman, becoming Brahman. – Hymn 5.24[57] </poem>

— Bhagavad Gita

Visishtadvaita Vedanta

The Brahman of Visishtadvaita is not exactly same as individual Atman, rather it is synonymous with Narayana, the transcendent and immanent reality.[citation needed] Brahman or Narayana is Saguna Brahman, one with attributes, one with infinite auspicious qualities, and not the Advaita concept of attributeless Nirguna Brahman.[citation needed]

Dvaita Vedanta

Template:Vaishnavism Brahman of Dvaita is a concept similar to God in major world religions.[48] Dvaita holds that the individual soul is dependent on God, but distinct.[48]

Dvaita propounds Tattvavada which means understanding differences between Tattvas (significant properties) of entities within the universal substrate as follows:[citation needed]

  1. Jîva-Îshvara-bheda — difference between the soul and Vishnu
  2. Jada-Îshvara-bheda — difference between the insentient and Vishnu
  3. Mitha-jîva-bheda — difference between any two souls
  4. Jada-jîva-bheda — difference between insentient and the soul
  5. Mitha-jada-bheda — difference between any two insentients

Achintya Bheda Abheda

The Acintya Bheda Abheda philosophy is similar to Dvaitadvaita (differential monism). In this philosophy, Brahman is not just impersonal, but also personal.[citation needed] That Brahman is Supreme Personality of Godhead, though on first stage of realization (by process called jnana) of Absolute Truth, He is realized as impersonal Brahman, then as personal Brahman having eternal Vaikuntha abode (also known as Brahmalokah sanatana), then as Paramatma (by process of yoga-meditation on Supersoul, Vishnu-God in heart) – Vishnu (Narayana, also in everyone's heart) who has many abodes known as Vishnulokas (Vaikunthalokas), and finally (Absolute Truth is realized by bhakti) as Bhagavan, Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is source of both Paramatma and Brahman (personal, impersonal, or both).[citation needed]

Vaishnavism

Main article: Vaishnavism

All Vaishnava schools are panentheistic and perceive the Advaita concept of identification of Atman with the impersonal Brahman as an intermediate step of self-realization, but not Mukti, or final liberation of complete God-realization through Bhakti Yoga.[citation needed] Gaudiya Vaishnavism, a form of Achintya Bheda Abheda philosophy, also concludes that Brahman is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. According to them, Brahman is Lord Vishnu/Krishna; the universe and all other manifestations of the Supreme are extensions of Him.[citation needed]

Bhakti movement

Main article: Bhakti movement

The Bhakti movement of Hinduism built its theosophy around two concepts of Brahman – Nirguna and Saguna.[58] Nirguna Brahman was the concept of the Ultimate Reality as formless, without attributes or quality.[59] Saguna Brahman, in contrast, was envisioned and developed as with form, attributes and quality.[59] The two had parallels in the ancient panthestic unmanifest and theistic manifest traditions, respectively, and traceable to Arjuna-Krishna dialogue in the Bhagavad Gita.[58][60] It is the same Brahman, but viewed from two perspectives, one from Nirguni knowledge-focus and other from Saguni love-focus, united as Krishna in the Gita.[60] Nirguna bhakta's poetry were Jnana-shrayi, or had roots in knowledge.[58] Saguna bhakta's poetry were Prema-shrayi, or with roots in love.[58] In Bhakti, the emphasis is reciprocal love and devotion, where the devotee loves God, and God loves the devotee.[60]

Jeaneane Fowler states that the concepts of Nirguna and Saguna Brahman, at the root of Bhakti movement theosophy, underwent more profound development with the ideas of Vedanta school of Hinduism, particularly those of Adi Shankara's Advaita Vedanta, Ramanuja's Vishishtadvaita Vedanta, and Madhvacharya's Dvaita Vedanta.[59] Two 12th-century influential treatises on bhakti were Sandilya Bhakti Sutra – a treatise resonating with Nirguna-bhakti, and Narada Bhakti Sutra – a treatise that leans towards Saguna-bhakti.[61]

Nirguna and Saguna Brahman concepts of the Bhakti movement has been a baffling one to scholars, particularly the Nirguni tradition because it offers, states David Lorenzen, "heart-felt devotion to a God without attributes, without even any definable personality".[62] Yet given the "mountains of Nirguni bhakti literature", adds Lorenzen, bhakti for Nirguna Brahman has been a part of the reality of the Hindu tradition along with the bhakti for Saguna Brahman.[62] These were two alternate ways of imagining God during the bhakti movement.[58]

Comparison of Brahma, Brahman, Brahmin and Brahmanas

Brahma is distinct from Brahman.[63] Brahma is a male deity, in the post-Vedic Puranic literature,[64] who creates but neither preserves nor destroys anything. He is envisioned in some Hindu texts to have emerged from the metaphysical Brahman along with Vishnu (preserver), Shiva (destroyer), all other gods, goddesses, matter and other beings.[65] In theistic schools of Hinduism where deity Brahma is described as part of its cosmology, he is a mortal like all gods and goddesses, and dissolves into the abstract immortal Brahman when the universe ends, thereafter a new cosmic cycle (kalpa) restarts again.[64][66]

Brahman is a metaphysical concept of Hinduism referring to the ultimate unchanging reality,[63][67][68] that, states Doniger, is uncreated, eternal, infinite, transcendent, the cause, the foundation, the source and the goal of all existence.[65] It is envisioned as either the cause or that which transforms itself into everything that exists in the universe as well as all beings, that which existed before the present universe and time, which exists as current universe and time, and that which will absorb and exist after the present universe and time ends.[65] It is a gender neutral abstract concept.[65][69][70] The abstract Brahman concept is predominant in the Vedic texts, particularly the Upanishads;[71] while the deity Brahma finds minor mention in the Vedas and the Upanishads.[72] In the Puranic and the Epics literature, deity Brahma appears more often, but inconsistently. Some texts suggest that god Vishnu created Brahma (Vaishnavism),[73] others suggest god Shiva created Brahma (Shaivism),[74] yet others suggest goddess Devi created Brahma (Shaktism),[75] and these texts then go on to state that Brahma is a secondary creator of the world working respectively on their behalf.[75][76] Further, the medieval era texts of these major theistic traditions of Hinduism assert that the sagunaTemplate:Refn Brahman is Vishnu,[77] is Shiva,[78] or is Devi[79] respectively, they are different names or aspects of the Brahman, and that the Atman (soul, self) within every living being is same or part of this ultimate, eternal Brahman.[80]

References

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 Sanatana Dharma : An Advanced Textbook of Hindu Religion and Ethics. (1903) Benares : The Board of Trustees, Central Hindu College
  2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 Shabdakalpadruma (See ब्रह्म)
  3. ↑ Swami Madhavananda author of A Bird's-Eye View of the Upanishads (1958) The Cultural Heritage of India, Volume 1 : The Early Phases (Prehistoric, Vedic and Upanishadic, Jaina and Buddhist). Calcutta : The Ramakrishna Mission Institute of Culture. (Pages 345-365)
  4. ↑ Swami Gambhirananda (2009 Fourth Edition) Svetasvara Upanishad With the Commentary of Sankaracharya. Kolkata: Advaita Ashrama (Page 45-46)
  5. ↑ 5.0 5.1 Sharma, Ram Murthy. (1987 2nd edition) Vaidik Sahitya ka Itihas Delhi : Eastern Book Linkers (Page 143)
  6. ↑ Kathopanishad (Adhyaya 2, Valli 1)
  7. ↑ Swami Gambhirananda (1989 Second Edition) Eight Upanishads, Volume 1 (Isa, Kena, Katha,and Taittriya) With the Commentary of Sankaracarya. Calcutta: Advaita Ashrama
  8. ↑ Chandogya Upanishad with Shankara Bhashya Ganganath Jha (Translator), pages 150-157
  9. ↑ Swami Madhavananda author of A Bird's-Eye View of the Upanishads (1958) The Cultural Heritage of India, Volume 1 : The Early Phases (Prehistoric, Vedic and Upanishadic, Jaina and Buddhist). Calcutta : The Ramakrishna Mission Institute of Culture. (Pages 333-344)
  10. ↑ Brhadaranyaka Upanishad (Adhyaya 1)
  11. ↑ Swami Gambhirananda (1989 Second Edition) Eight Upanishads, Volume 1 (Isa, Kena, Katha,and Taittriya) Calcutta: Advaita Ashrama
  12. ↑ Edward Craig (1998), Metaphysics, Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ISBN 978-0415073103, Accessed (June 13, 2015)
  13. ↑ 13.0 13.1 13.2 13.3 Archibald Edward Gough (2001), The Philosophy of the Upanishads and Ancient Bharat's Metaphysics, Routledge, ISBN 978-0415245227, pages 47-48
  14. ↑ Roy W. Perrett (Editor, 2000), Bharat's Philosophy: Metaphysics, Volume 3, Taylor & Francis, ISBN 978-0815336082, page xvii; KK Chakrabarti (1999), Classical Bharat's Philosophy of Mind: The Nyaya Dualist Tradition, State University of New York Press, ISBN 978-0791441718 pages 279-292
  15. ↑ John C. Plott et al (2000), Global History of Philosophy: The Axial Age, Volume 1, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-8120801585, pages 60-62
  16. ↑ Julius Lipner (2004), The Hindu World (Editors: S Mittal and G Thursby), Routledge, ISBN 0415215277, pages 22-23
  17. ↑ Laurie Patton (2004), The Hindu World (Editors: S Mittal and G Thursby), Routledge, ISBN 0415215277, pages 45-50
  18. ↑ JD Fowler (1996), Hinduism: Beliefs and Practices, Sussex University Press, ISBN 978-1898723608, pages 135-137
  19. ↑ 19.0 19.1 19.2 19.3 AC Das (1952), Brahman and Māyā in Advaita Metaphysics, Philosophy East and West, Vol. 2, No. 2, pages 144-154
  20. ↑ William Indich (2000), Consciousness in Advaita Vedanta, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-8120812512, page 5
  21. ↑ Paul Hacker (1978), Eigentumlichkeiten dr Lehre und Terminologie Sankara: Avidya, Namarupa, Maya, Isvara, in Kleine Schriften (Editor: L. Schmithausen), Franz Steiner Verlag, Weisbaden, pages 101-109 (in German), also pages 69-99; Advaita Vedanta - A Bird's Eye View, Topic III: Philosophy of Advaita Vedanta, D. Krishna Ayyar (2011)
  22. ↑ 22.0 22.1 Anantanand Rambachan (2001), Heirarchies in the Nature of God? Questioning The "Saguna-Nirguna" Distinction in Advaita Vedanta, Journal of Hindu-Christian Studies, Vol. 14, No. 7, pages 1-6
  23. ↑ 23.0 23.1 23.2 William Wainwright (2012), Concepts of God, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Stanford University, (Accessed on: June 13, 2015)
  24. ↑ that is things, beings or truths that are presumed to exist for its philosophical theory to be true, and what is the nature of that which so exists?; see: Edward Craig (1998), Ontology, Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ISBN 978-0415073103
  25. ↑ Edward Craig (1998), Ontology, Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ISBN 978-0415073103, Accessed (June 13, 2015)
  26. ↑ Stephen H. Phillips (2001), Could There Be Mystical Evidence for a Nondual Brahman? A Causal Objection, Philosophy East and West, Vol. 51, No. 4, pages 492-506
  27. ↑ KN Jayatilleke (2010), Early Buddhist Theory of Knowledge, ISBN 978-8120806191, pages 246-249, from note 385 onwards; Steven Collins (1994), Religion and Practical Reason (Editors: Frank Reynolds, David Tracy), State Univ of New York Press, ISBN 978-0791422175, page 64; Quote: "Central to Buddhist soteriology is the doctrine of not-self (Pali: anattā, Sanskrit: anātman, the opposed doctrine of ātman is central to Brahmanical thought). Put very briefly, this is the [Buddhist] doctrine that human beings have no soul, no self, no unchanging essence."; Edward Roer (Translator), Shankara's Introduction, p. 2, at Google Books, pages 2-4 Katie Javanaud (2013), Is The Buddhist 'No-Self' Doctrine Compatible With Pursuing Nirvana?, Philosophy Now; John C. Plott et al (2000), Global History of Philosophy: The Axial Age, Volume 1, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-8120801585, page 63, Quote: "The Buddhist schools reject any Ātman concept. As we have already observed, this is the basic and ineradicable distinction between Hinduism and Buddhism".
  28. ↑ M Prabhakar (2012), Review: An Introduction to Bharat's Philosophy, Philosophy in Review, 32(3), pages 158-160
  29. ↑ 29.0 29.1 29.2 Barbara Holdrege (2004), The Hindu World (Editors: S Mittal and G Thursby), Routledge, ISBN 0415215277, pages 241-242
  30. ↑ Anantanand Rambachan (2014), A Hindu Theology of Liberation: Not-Two Is Not One, State University of New York Press, ISBN 978-1438454559, pages 131-142
  31. ↑ Ian Whicher (1999), The Integrity of the Yoga Darsana: A Reconsideration of Classical Yoga, State University of New York Press, ISBN 978-0791438152, pages 298-300; Mike McNamee and William J. Morgan (2015), Routledge Handbook of the Philosophy of Sport, Routledge, ISBN 978-0415829809, pages 135-136, Quote: "As a dualistic philosophy largely congruent with Samkhya's metaphysics, Yoga seeks liberation through the realization that Atman equals Brahman; it involves a cosmogonic dualism: purusha an absolute consciousness, and prakriti original and primeval matter."
  32. ↑ Francis Clooney and Tony Stewart (2004), The Hindu World (Editors: S Mittal and G Thursby), Routledge, ISBN 0415215277, pages 166-167
  33. ↑ Randy Kloetzli and Alf Hiltebeitel (2004), The Hindu World (Editors: S Mittal and G Thursby), Routledge, ISBN 0415215277, page 554
  34. ↑ Michael Myers (2000), Brahman: A Comparative Theology, Routledge, ISBN 978-0700712571, pages 30-31
  35. ↑ R Prasad and P.D. Chattopadhyaya (2008), A Conceptual-analytic Study of Classical Bharat's Philosophy of Morals, Concept, ISBN 978-8180695445, pages 56-59
  36. ↑ GC Pande (1990), Foundations of Bharat's Culture, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-8120807105, pages 49-50
  37. ↑ Michael W. Myers (1998), Śaṅkarācārya and Ānanda, Philosophy East and West, Vol. 48, No. 4, pages 553-567
  38. ↑ Robert S. Hartman (2002), The Knowledge of Good: Critique of Axiological Reason, Rodopi, ISBN 978-9042012202, page 225
  39. ↑ TMP Mahadevan (1954), The Metaphysics of Śaṁkara, Philosophy East and West, Vol. 3, No. 4, pages 359-363
  40. ↑ Arvind Sharma (1999), The Puruṣārthas: An Axiological Exploration of Hinduism, The Journal of Religious Ethics, Vol. 27, No. 2, pages 223-256
  41. ↑ JL Shaw (2011), Freedom: East and West, SOPHIA, Vol 50, Springer Science, pages 481–497
  42. ↑ Katherine L Tietge (1997), Ontology and Genuine Moral Action: Jñaña (Intuitive Perception) Ethics and Karma-Yoga in Sankara's Advaita Vedanta and Schopenhauer's On the Basis of Morality, Ph.D. Thesis, Dept. of Philosophy, Southern Illinois University (USA), Archive Link
  43. ↑ 43.0 43.1 43.2 43.3 Nancy Bauer (1987), Advaita Vedānta and Contemporary Western Ethics, Philosophy East and West, Vol. 37, No. 1, pages 36-50
  44. ↑ Arvind Sharma (2000), Classical Hindu Thought: An Introduction, Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0195644418, pages 57-61
  45. ↑ 45.0 45.1 NA Nikam (1952), A Note on the Individual and His Status in Bharat's Thought, Philosophy East and West, Vol. 2, No. 3, pages 254-258
  46. ↑ Anantanand Rambachan (1994), The limits of scripture: Vivekananda's reinterpretation of the Vedas, University of Hawaii Press, pages 124-125
  47. ↑ Karl Potter (2008), The Encyclopedia of Bharat's Philosophies: Advaita Vedānta Up to Śaṃkara and His Pupils, Volume 3, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, pp 210-215
  48. ↑ 48.0 48.1 48.2 Michael Myers (2000), Brahman: A Comparative Theology, Routledge, ISBN 978-0700712571, pages 124-127
  49. ↑ Betty, Stafford (2010) "Dvaita, Advaita, And Viśiṣṭadvaita: Contrasting Views Of Mokṣa", Asian Philosophy, pages 215-224
  50. ↑ Jeffrey Brodd (2009), World Religions: A Voyage of Discovery, Saint Mary's Press, ISBN 978-0884899976, pages 43-47
  51. ↑ Rosen Dalal (2014), Hinduism: An Alphabetical Guide, Penguin, ISBN 978-8184752779, see article on Brahman
  52. ↑ Arvind Sharma (2007), Advaita Vedānta: An Introduction, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-8120820272, pages 19-40, 53-58, 79-86
  53. ↑ Anantanand Rambachan (1994), The limits of scripture: Vivekananda's reinterpretation of the Vedas. University of Hawaii Press, pages 125, 124
  54. ↑ [Sangeetha Menon (2007), Advaita Vedānta], Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
  55. ↑ Christopher Key Chapple (Editor) and Winthrop Sargeant (Translator), The Bhagavad Gita: Twenty-fifth–Anniversary Edition, State University of New York Press, ISBN 978-1438428420, page 224
  56. ↑ Jeaneane D. Fowler (2012), The Bhagavad Gita, Sussex Academic Press, ISBN 978-1845193461, page 83
  57. ↑ Christopher Key Chapple (Editor) and Winthrop Sargeant (Translator), The Bhagavad Gita: Twenty-fifth–Anniversary Edition, State University of New York Press, ISBN 978-1438428420, page 266
  58. ↑ 58.0 58.1 58.2 58.3 58.4 Karen Pechilis Prentiss (2014), The Embodiment of Bhakti, Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0195351903, page 21
  59. ↑ 59.0 59.1 59.2 Jeaneane D. Fowler (2012), The Bhagavad Gita, Sussex Academic Press, ISBN 978-1845193461, pages xxvii-xxxiv
  60. ↑ 60.0 60.1 60.2 Jeaneane D. Fowler (2012), The Bhagavad Gita, Sussex Academic Press, ISBN 978-1845193461, pages 207-211
  61. ↑ Jessica Frazier and Gavin Flood (2011), The Continuum Companion to Hindu Studies, Bloomsbury Academic, ISBN 978-0826499660, pages 113-115
  62. ↑ 62.0 62.1 David Lorenzen (1996), Praises to a Formless God: Nirguni Texts from North India, State University of New York Press, ISBN 978-0791428054, page 2
  63. ↑ 63.0 63.1 Helen K. Bond; Seth D. Kunin; Francesca Murphy (2003). Religious Studies and Theology: An Introduction. New York University Press. p. 231. ISBN 978-0-8147-9914-7.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  64. ↑ 64.0 64.1 R. M. Matthijs Cornelissen (2011). Foundations of Bharat's Psychology Volume 2: Practical Applications. Pearson. p. 40. ISBN 978-81-317-3085-0.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  65. ↑ 65.0 65.1 65.2 65.3 Wendy Denier (1999). Merriam-Webster's Encyclopedia of World Religions. Merriam-Webster. p. 437. ISBN 978-0-87779-044-0.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  66. ↑ Jeaneane D. Fowler (2002). Perspectives of Reality: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Hinduism. Sussex Academic Press. p. 330. ISBN 978-1-898723-93-6.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  67. ↑ William Sweet (2006). Approaches to Metaphysics. Springer. pp. 145–147. ISBN 978-1-4020-2182-4.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  68. ↑ H. James Birx (2005). Encyclopedia of Anthropology. SAGE Publications. p. 1279. ISBN 978-1-4522-6536-0.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  69. ↑ J. L. Brockington (1998). The Sanskrit Epics. BRILL Academic. p. 256. ISBN 90-04-10260-4.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  70. ↑ Denise Cush; Catherine Robinson; Michael York (2012). Encyclopedia of Hinduism. Routledge. pp. 114–115. ISBN 978-1-135-18979-2.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  71. ↑ Edward Craig (1998). Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Brahman to Derrida. Routledge. pp. 1–4. ISBN 978-0-415-18707-7.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  72. ↑ Julius Lipner (1994). Hindus: Their Religious Beliefs and Practices. Routledge. pp. 43–44. ISBN 978-0-415-05181-1.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  73. ↑ S. M. Srinivasa Chari (1994). Vaiṣṇavism: Its Philosophy, Theology, and Religious Discipline. Motilal Banarsidass. p. 147. ISBN 978-81-208-1098-3.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  74. ↑ Wendy Doniger O'Flaherty (1981). Siva: The Erotic Ascetic. Oxford University Press. p. 125. ISBN 978-0-19-972793-3.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  75. ↑ 75.0 75.1 David Kinsley (1988). Hindu Goddesses: Visions of the Divine Feminine in the Hindu Religious Tradition. University of California Press. p. 137. ISBN 978-0-520-90883-3.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  76. ↑ Stella Kramrisch (1992). The Presence of Siva. Princeton University Press. pp. 205–206. ISBN 0-691-01930-4.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  77. ↑ Mark Juergensmeyer; Wade Clark Roof (2011). Encyclopedia of Global Religion. SAGE Publications. p. 1335. ISBN 978-1-4522-6656-5.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  78. ↑ Stella Kramrisch (1992). The Presence of Siva. Princeton University Press. p. 171. ISBN 0-691-01930-4.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  79. ↑ David Kinsley (1988). Hindu Goddesses: Visions of the Divine Feminine in the Hindu Religious Tradition. University of California Press. p. 136. ISBN 978-0-520-90883-3.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  80. ↑ William K. Mahony (1998). The Artful Universe: An Introduction to the Vedic Religious Imagination. State University of New York Press. pp. 13–14, 187. ISBN 978-0-7914-3579-3.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
Retrieved from ‘https://dharmawiki.org/index.php?title=Brahman_(ब्रह्मन्)&oldid=120105’