Journal of Hindu-Christian Studies Volume 14 Article 7 January 2001 Heirarchies in the Nature of God? Questioning The "Saguna- Nirguna" Distinction in Advaita Vedanta Anantanand Rambachan Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.butler.edu/jhcs Part of the Religion Commons Recommended Citation Rambachan, Anantanand (2001) "Heirarchies in the Nature of God? Questioning The "Saguna-Nirguna" Distinction in Advaita Vedanta," Journal of Hindu-Christian Studies: Vol. 14, Article 7. Available at: https://doi.org/10.7825/2164-6279.1250 The Journal of Hindu-Christian Studies is a publication of the Society for Hindu-Christian Studies. The digital version is made available by Digital Commons @ Butler University. For questions about the Journal or the Society, please contact [email protected]. For more information about Digital Commons @ Butler University, please contact [email protected]. Rambachan: Heirarchies in the Nature of God? Questioning The "Saguna-Nirguna" Distinction in Advaita Vedanta Hierarchies in the Nature of God? Questioning The Saguna-Nirguna Distinction in Advaita Vedanta Anantanand Rambachan Saint Olaf College THE Advaita tradition has not merely been multiplicity. Nirguna brahman, so the focus of my scholarly work; my personal characterized, is not responsible for the world-view has· been shaped by its insights world-creation, since it is presented as being and I continue to be deeply influenced by its beyond activity and causation. understanding of human existence. One cannot, however, ignore the challenges of On the one hand there is brahman claims which are different from one's own which is One only, which is fonnless, and my encounter with other Hindu attribute less and actionless. On the traditions and other religions has led to a re­ other, there is the world of perceivable evaluation of many aspects of my Advaita objects, diverse in name and fonn. This is the phenomenal world, the heritage. I have chosen, in what follows, to world of the many. Brahman is one; reflect on how my original understanding is the world is many, brahman is being transformed by encounters with other attributeless, nirguna; objects are traditions by focusing on the Advaita qualified by attributes, they are representation of brahman as nirguna and saguna. Brahman has no name or saguna. A more detailed treatment, both of fonn; objects have different fonns and the problems of this doctrine and the names. Brahman is inactive and implications, for Advaita, of an alternative pennanent; the objects of the world are expression of the nature of brahman, active and subject to change. What is exceeds the limits of this study and is the the link between the two? What is the modus operandi of the transition of the focus of my current scholarly project. In this One into the many?2 study I must be content with sharing some of the specific questions I have asked, selective The modus operandi or connecting elements of my critique, and the general principles between nirguna brahman and the direction of my re-assessment of the Advaita world, according to this viewpoint, is maya. doctrine of God. Without maya, nirguna brahman cannot Contemporary commentators on the make the transition from impersonal Advaita Vedanta tradition commonly consciousness to personal creator. 3 It is distinguish between two orders or levels of brahman associated with maya which is the the absolute (brahman) and propose a origin and source of the world and which is hierarchy between these. One is para or referred to as saguna brahman. Saguna higher brahman and the other is apara or brahman is also equated with isvara, the lower brahman. I The higher brahman is lord of the creation.4 Saguna brahman is referred to as nirguna brahman, the absolute regarded by Advaita interpreters as lower non-dual brahman, transcending time, (apara) because, 'among things, it is space, causation and relations. It is beyond conditioned and related to the world. all action and change and free from any "Saguna brahman is God as appearance and Hindu-Christian Studies Bulletin 14 (2001) 13-18 Published by Digital Commons @ Butler University, 2001 1 Journal of Hindu-Christian Studies, Vol. 14 [2001], Art. 7 14 Anantanand Rambachan not as reality."s Isvara is related to the world is inconsistent with its non-dual nature. Such and defined through that relationship, a distinction becomes particularly whereas nirguna brahman is brahman-in­ problematic when there is a hierarchical itself and beyond all definitions. It is higher ordering and one is considered higher (para) (para) because it is neither cause nor effect. and the other lower (apara). Surely, the nature of brahman does not admit of Brahman-in-itself is neither the cause distinctions of any kind and the necessity nor the effect of anything. If it is the and purpose of these must be queried and effect of something else, then it has a assessed. Is it, for example, a part of beginning, and whatever has a isvara's self-consciousness to regard beginning must have an end. It means brahman as having two levels of being, one that it will cease to be eternal. If it is the cause of anything, then it becomes higher and the other lower and to identify relational. In that case, it is not better with the lower? The distinction also, as than the things of the world which are noted above, has implications for the relational. 6 Advaita understanding of and relationship with other traditions. The same writer adds that the association of It seems to me that the main purpose of brahman with maya represents a climb the Advaita interpreters, in proposing a down in the status of brahman. Whereas higher and lower brahman, is to account for there is no distinction between substance the origin of the universe in a sentient and and attributes in nirguna brahman,saguna intelligent cause, while, at the same time, brahman possesses attributes (gunas) and "protecting" brahman from what the this is another reason for characterizing tradition sees to be the drawbacks and 7 saguna brahman as lower. limitations of ascribing creatorship and a The distinction between a higher and relationship with the world to brahman. lower brahman is not just a mode of Creatorship, and all that it implies in speaking about the absolute which is internal Advaita, is thus attributed to saguna to the Advaita tradition. It is applied outside brahman while nirguna brahman is seen as Advaita to evaluate the doctrine of God in entirely free from all involvements in the other Hindu traditions as well as in other world process except as the ground or religions. It may not surprise one to note that substratum (adhisthana) of the creative the God of other Hindu traditions and other process. Is the Advaita concern about the so­ religions is generally equated with lower called defects and limitations of ascribing brahman. The language is often arrogant creatorship to brahman valid? Is it necessary and supercilious. to address this concern by proposing that brahman possesses a two-fold nature, one It is Saguna-Brahman that men (sic) higher and the other lower? worship under different names and Let us begin by conSidering the issue of forms, such as Jaweh, Allah, Jesus, change and activity. Since the act of creation Rama Krishna, Siva and a myriad appears to imply change and activity and others. It is God as Saguna-Brahman brahman, by definition, is free from all that is endowed with such qualities as love, kindness, mercy, and justice. In change and activity, brahman, it is so brief, Saguna-Brahman is personal argued, cannot be directly involved in the God. 8 world process. Such involvement is for the lower or saguna brahman. What is most This description of brahman as nirguna interesting here is that the Advaita tradition and saguna is not without problems and, in which is particularly concerned, in the spite of its prevalence in Advaita rhetoric, doctrine of nirguna brahman, with deserves reconsideration. It suggests a deconstructing anthropomorphic bifurcation in the nature of brahman which understandings of brahman raises a problem which is created by the anthropomorphic https://digitalcommons.butler.edu/jhcs/vol14/iss1/7 DOI: 10.7825/2164-6279.1250 2 -- Rambachan: Heirarchies in the Nature of God? Questioning The "Saguna-Nirguna" Distinction in Advaita Vedanta Hierarchies in the Nature of God? 15 imagination. When the human being, limited It moves and it moves not; It is far and by space and time engages in action, such It is near; It is within all this and It is action necessarily implies change. The also outside all this. 10 same, however, ought not to be assumed for brahman who is the origin of space and time "Sitting," says the Katha Upanisad (1.2.21), and who brings forth the world without any "he moves far; lying he goes everywhere." loss or change of self-nature (svarupa). It is In a well-known sequence of verses in the not necessary, in other words, to suggest a Bhagavadgita (13: 15-17), Krsna enunciates hierarchical bifurcation in the nature of the mystery of brahman as both immanent brahman, in order to preserve brahman's and transcendent, involved in the world­ nature, since the creative act does not alter process and free from its finitude and limits. or diminish this nature. Advaita interpreters are responding to a problem which, in fact, Shining by the functions of the senses, only arises from understanding the creative yet freed from all the senses unattached yet maintaining all, fre~ act of brahman on the analogy of finite from the qualities yet experiencing the human activity. qualities. If we turn to the Upanisads, the primary Outside and inside beings, those that authoritative sources of the Advaita are moving and not moving, because of tradition, we see that the many analogies its subtlety This is not comprehended.