Mantra - 12

 One post from Facebook 

"Nirguna Brahma leads to Hell,

Saguna Brahma leads to deeper hell. 

Balance is key....

Reference is from Ishavasya Upanishad - Mantra -12 

अन्धं तम: प्रविशन्ति येSसंभूतिमुपासते |

ततो भूय इव ते तमो च उ संबूत्यागुं रता: || 12

andham tama: pravishanti ye asambhootimupaasate, 

Tato bhooya iva te tamo cha vu sambhootyaagum rataa: - 12

Meaning -

Those who are engaged in the worship of Demigods enter into the darkest region of ignorance; and still more so do the worshippers of Impersonal Absolute. 

The Sanskrit word sambhootim means "origin".

The Sanskrit words in this mantra, asambhootim refers to those who have no independent existence [DemiGods]; sambhootim refers to the Impersonal Absolute.

To answer the question above ....

In the original Sanskrit verse there is no mention of the words "Nirguna Brahman, Saguna Brahman or Hell".... Only the words .... sambhootim, asambhootim, andam tama: .....

So in simple words it says....

Those who are engaged in the worship of Demigods ... like Indra, Varuna, Vayu: ....etc., enter into the darkest region of ignorance; and still more so do the worshippers of Impersonal Absolute formless Supreme Lord.

From Google search -

Yes, the statement "Nirguna Brahman is unmanifest & Saguna Brahman is manifest" is generally correct within the context of Advaita Vedanta and many Hindu philosophical traditions. 

However, this distinction is more about perspective than it is about two separate entities. Both terms refer to the same Reality. 

Here is a breakdown of the concepts:

1. Nirguna Brahman (Unmanifest/Attribute-less)

• Definition: Nir (without) + Guna (qualities/attributes). It is the Absolute, formless, quality-less, and unchanging substrate of existence.
• Unmanifest: Because it is beyond time, space, and causation, it cannot be perceived by the senses or fully grasped by the mind.
• Nature: Pure Consciousness, Sat-Chit-Ananda (Existence-Knowledge-Bliss). 

2. Saguna Brahman (Manifest/With Attributes)

• Definition: Sa (with) + Guna (qualities/attributes). It is Brahman perceived through the lens of Maya (cosmic illusion/limitations).
• Manifest: This is God with form (Ishvara or personal deities), which can be worshipped and contemplated.
• Nature: Creator, sustainer, and destroyer of the universe. It is the formless Brahman "frozen" into form by devotion, similar to how water freezes into ice. 

Key Nuances

• It is ONE Brahman: Nirguna is not "lesser" or "more" than Saguna; they are two sides of the same coin.
• Maya makes the difference: When Reality is viewed from a standpoint of absolute knowledge (Jnana), it is Nirguna. When viewed from within the world of duality (empirical, transactional reality), it appears as Saguna.
• Purpose: Saguna Brahman is considered easier to worship for ordinary people (Bhakti), while Nirguna is the goal of meditation and knowledge (Jnana). 

Conclusion: The statement is a correct description of the two aspects of the Divine as understood in Vedantic teaching, where the unmanifest (Nirguna) appears as the manifest (Saguna) to the human observer. 

..............................

You are correct that focusing exclusively on Advaita Vedanta and the concept of Maya when explaining Brahman can narrow the scope of a subject that is interpreted in many ways across different Indian philosophical schools. 

Here is a breakdown of why that perspective arises and why it may feel limiting:

• Why Maya is Frequently Included: When discussing the absolute nature of Brahman (Nirguna Brahman—formless, non-dual), the philosophy of Advaita (as taught by Adi Shankaracharya) is the most prominent framework that utilizes the concept of Maya to explain how the One appears as many. In this view, Maya is the "power of illusion" that causes the non-dual Brahman to be perceived as the empirical world of multiplicity.
• The "Dominant" Context: The assertion that Advaita is the "dominant" philosophy is largely a historical and academic one. From the 14th century onwards,, and later, through 19th-century Neo-Vedanta movements, Advaita has been presented by many as the supreme, or most "complete" understanding of the Upanishads.
• Why It Can Be Misleading (The Other Schools): It is inaccurate to say Advaita represents the totality of Hindu thought. Other major Vedantic schools offer very different, equally important explanations of Brahman:
  • Vishishtadvaita (Ramanuja): Views the world and individual souls as real, constituting the "body" of Brahman (God), rather than an illusion.
  • Dvaita (Madhvacharya): A strictly dualistic view that insists on a fundamental, permanent difference between the individual soul and God (Brahman).
  • Bhakti Traditions: Many traditions focus on Saguna Brahman (God with attributes/form), where the world is not viewed as illusion (Maya) but as a real creation of the Divine, to be loved and worshipped. 

Conclusion:
While Advaita Vedanta is a significant and influential, often academically dominant, school of Indian philosophy, it is not the only one. A balanced explanation of Brahman should ideally recognize that other traditions (Vishishtadvaita, Dvaita) do not necessarily consider the world to be Maya (illusion) and view Brahman differently than the non-dualistic Advaita approach. 

It is fair to say that using Advaita as the sole lens is a specific, rather than universal, perspective.