Then what is the source of the three gunas?
Here you are speaking of creationism.
In your concept, nirguna brahman is the creator or a point from which gunas emanate. This is in sharp contrast with advaita.
To advaitins, nirguna brahman has no relation to the universe, while saguna brahman is the creator, has attributes and various states of being. But the Advaitin Sadhaka seeks to dissolve his self in nirguna.
When you meditate, your mind goes blank spaced out, some may experience this as a 'vast expanse'; while some may not be aware of anything at all.
Without realising how much time passed by you will experience this 'blanked' out state, until your body starts giving trouble, like numbing sesation in the leg. But after a while the brain stops reacting to such sensations as it become more and more absorbed into the blank-ness.
Without realsing your breathing may become extremely slow. It may even get stopped for a long time as awareness of breath also become lost. And that's it. That's dissolution. You have dissolved your mind and senses.
This blank state or nirguna does not seek to create gunas. Why shoud it? Instead it is seeking to get rid of its gunas, and merge into emptiness of eternity. This is nirguna -- emptiness. No attributes exist here.
But before you start, as a sadhaka, you may invoke saguna brahman (the one with attributes). Some sadhakas choose the destructing principle of Kali, Shiva or any istha deva, to guide. Some invoke the creation principle of Vishnu, to create the ability in them to merge into an limitless expanse.
If a sadhaka feels anger can help destroy gunas and blank out the mind, then s/he could choose Ugra-Narayana, as ishta devata. Yes, even anger can be permitted by some siddha gurus in the rudra and/or ugra amsam / aspect; as it is beleived to help faster progression (by exhausting and draining out the mind).
There is simply no barrier on which principle aspect of emotion you choose and the ishta devata. If you do not want an ishta-devata, you can choose your guru as your saguna guide also.
Here you will invoke aspects of saguna brahman, similarly how you seek blessing of your mother before you start anything. Some may want to venerate the Saguna in idol form. Some visuaise Saguna in mind and do not require the idol form.
In Shankara's advaita, nirguna is purely nondual and is just "itself" -- one in which a sadhaka seeks to dissolve himself.
But your view is totally different. I am not able to call your version of brahman as Nirguna Brahman. Instead lets call it SAB (SravnA's Brahman). Your SAB has a "balance" of qualities and is even the creator of gunas.
Before you move on to anything else, you need to properly define your SAB. If it is creator of gunas, then what is this SAB's principal creative force, from where does this creative force come, how does it function, and so on.
OK call conscience as brahman or as the voice of brahman. I think you are aware that according to advaita, atman is brahman and that brahman is veiled by maya. I think mentioning maya here lets you get a better picture what I am trying to say.
Lets leave maya aside for now. Your primary step is to define SAB properly. If you want to call conscience as SAB, the you will need to addrress problems mentioned in point 4 below
omniscience, omnipotence follows from the nirguna nature. But I think we first settle the issue of what nirguna means.
Please explain "nirguna-nature"; and how can omnipotence and omniscience come from nirguna nature? And who gets to define these qualities?
IMO you cannot call SAB nirguna. Unless you want to challenge Shankara's bhasya on Brahma Sutra or any of his Shlokas, Sayings, etc, and postulate that his attributeless nirguna is faulty.
Being judgemental indicates subjectivity and is not defined on the basis of the circumstances. The important point is to uphold the dharma and that implies objectivity and is farthest from being judgemental.
Smt HH, I have picked out and have expressed my views on what I think are salient to our discussion. If you think I have left out something important please do point it out.
Sravna, i have explained nirguna from the meditation pov. Without using complicated advaita terms. This i hope will help you understand what is nirguna practically.
If you call conscience as brahman (as you did in point 2), then your SAB will be a judgemental-consience or judgemental-brahman, whose judgements even vary based on circumstances.
In such case, SAB would be a highly judgemental, and egoistical brahman. If it has to analyse and judge, it cannot have a "balance" of gunas. Unfortuantely, you define such an SAB as full and complete, omniscient and omnipotent, which is illogical.
Sravna, must say i have moved out of philosophy. So i may not able to help you much, though i can provide some pointers how you cud improvise on SAB (even if you do not select specific texts as your pramana). I don't know about you and your interest in advaita, but i gave up philosophy becoz i felt to tide over life one requires something that can offer solace, comfort and above all the promise of hope.
Am put off by reform movements in jainism, casteism in hinduism, too much empasis on philosophy in buddhism, insufficient ontologies in sikhism...there is not a single perfect religion on earth. There is no perfect philosophy either.
I invoke some deities, keep my offerings very simple, am enthralled by chants and hymns, and after its all done, i try to attempt the limitless expanse of the mind. That's all.
I prefer being a tribal having no religion, no text corpus, no grand philosophies, nothing to loose, nothing to gain.
Regards.
