Brahman

Brahman is a concept present in Vedic Samhitas, the oldest layer of the Vedas dated to the 2nd millennium BCE. For example,[27]

The Ṛcs are limited (parimita),
The Samans are limited,
And the Yajuses are limited,
But of the Word Brahman, there is no end.

— Taittiriya Samhita VII.3.1.4, Translated by Barbara Holdrege[27]

The concept Brahman is referred to in hundreds of hymns in the Vedas.[28] For example, it is found in Rig veda hymns such as 2.2.10,[29] 6.21.8,[30] 10.72.2[31] and in Atharva veda hymns such as 6.122.5, 10.1.12, and 14.1.131.[28] The concept is found in various layers of the Vedic literature; for example:[28] Aitareya Brahmana 1.18.3, Kausitaki Brahmana 6.12, Satapatha Brahmana 13.5.2.5, Taittiriya Brahmana 2.8.8.10, Jaiminiya Brahmana 1.129, Taittiriya Aranyaka 4.4.1 through 5.4.1, Vajasaneyi Samhita 22.4 through 23.25, Maitrayani Samhita 3.12.1:16.2 through 4.9.2:122.15. The concept is extensively discussed in the Upanishads embedded in the Vedas (see next section), and also mentioned in the vedāṅga (the limbs of Vedas) such as the Srauta sutra 1.12.12 and Paraskara Gryhasutra 3.2.10 through 3.4.5.[28]

Jan Gonda states that the diverse reference of Brahman in the Vedic literature, starting with Rigveda Samhitas, convey "different senses or different shades of meaning".[32] There is no one single word in modern Western languages that can render the various shades of meaning of the word Brahman in the Vedic literature, according to Jan Gonda.[32] In verses considered as the most ancient, the Vedic idea of Brahman is the "power immanent in the sound, words, verses and formulas of Vedas". However, states Gonda, the verses suggest that this ancient meaning was never the only meaning, and the concept evolved and expanded in ancient India.[33]

Barbara Holdrege states that the concept Brahman is discussed in the Vedas along four major themes: as the Word or verses (Sabdabrahman),[34] as Knowledge embodied in Creator Principle, as Creation itself, and a Corpus of traditions.[35] Hananya Goodman states that the Vedas conceptualize Brahman as the Cosmic Principles underlying all that exists.[10] Gavin Flood states that the Vedic era witnessed a process of abstraction, where the concept of Brahman evolved and expanded from the power of sound, words and rituals to the "essence of the universe", the "deeper foundation of all phenomena", the "essence of the self (Atman, soul)", and the deeper "truth of a person beyond apparent difference".[36]

Swan (Hansa, हंस) is the symbol for Brahman-Atman in Hindu iconography.[37][38]

The primary focus on the early Upanishads is Brahmavidya and Atmavidya, that is the knowledge of Brahman and the knowledge of Atman (self, soul), what it is and how it is understood.[39] The texts do not present a single unified theory, rather they present a variety of themes with multiple possible interpretations, which flowered in post-Vedic era as premises for the diverse schools of Hinduism.[9]

Paul Deussen states that the concept of Brahman in the Upanishads expands to metaphysical, ontological and soteriological themes, such as it being the "primordial reality that creates, maintains and withdraws within it the universe",[40] the "principle of the world",[40] the "absolute",[41] the "general, universal",[42] the "cosmic principle",[43] the "ultimate that is the cause of everything including all gods",[44] the "divine being, Lord, distinct God, or God within oneself",[45] the "knowledge",[46] the "soul, sense of self of each human being that is fearless, luminuous, exalted and blissful",[47] the "essence of liberation, of spiritual freedom",[48] the "universe within each living being and the universe outside",[47] the "essence and everything innate in all that exists inside, outside and everywhere".[49]

Gavin Flood summarizes the concept of Brahman in the Upanishads to be the "essence, the smallest particle of the cosmos and the infinite universe", the "essence of all things which cannot be seen, though it can be experienced", the "self, soul within each person, each being", the "truth", the "reality", the "absolute", the "bliss" (ananda).[36]

According to Radhakrishnan, the sages of the Upanishads teach Brahman as the ultimate essence of material phenomena that cannot be seen or heard, but whose nature can be known through the development of self-knowledge (atma jnana).[50]

Viswanatha Thalakola summarizes that according to the principal Upanishads, Brahman is the foundation of all things in the universe. There is nothing beyond Brahman. There is nothing that can exist independently of Him. Brahman is described in many ways.[51] He is:

• That is self-existent. That is without beginning and end.
• That has no parent or master. That has no origin.
• That is omnipresent, omniscient and omnipotent.
• That is beyond name and form and beyond the five senses.
• That is beyond the reach of words and thoughts.
• That is beyond time, space, and causality.
• That is inexhaustible, eternal, and immutable.
• That is pure and bright.
• That is Truth.
• That is pure consciousness.
• That is boundless joy.
• That is both immanent and transcendent at the same time.
• That is both having form and formless.
• That is both personal and impersonal.
• That is both the manifested and the unmanifested.
• That is stationary and moving.
• That is far and also very near.
• That is an eternal reality.
• That is the creator of time and master of Nature.
• That is diversely manifesting.
• That shines and everything shines after Him (sun, stars, etc).
• That cannot be seen or seized.
• That dwells in the hearts of all creatures as Atman.
• That is the eternal witness who watches our work from within.
• That is the bridge to immortality.

The Upanishads contain several mahā-vākyas or "Great Sayings" on the concept of Brahman:[52]

The Upanishad 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.[60] 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 (the inner essence, 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 Indian philosophies.[60][61][62]

This whole universe is Brahman. In tranquility, let one worship It, as Tajjalan (that from which he came forth, as that into which he will be dissolved, as that in which he breathes).

— Chandogya Upanishad 3.14.1[60][63]

Man is a creature of his Kratumaya (क्रतुमयः, will, purpose). Let him therefore have for himself this will, this purpose: The intelligent, whose body is imbued with life-principle, whose form is light, whose thoughts are driven by truth, whose self is like space (invisible but ever present), from whom all works, all desires, all sensory feelings encompassing this whole world, the silent, the unconcerned, this is me, my Self, my Soul within my heart.

— Chandogya Upanishad 3.14.1 – 3.14.3[60][64]

This is my Soul in the innermost heart, greater than the earth, greater than the aerial space, greater than these worlds. This Soul, this Self of mine is that Brahman.

— Chandogya Upanishad 3.14.3 – 3.14.4[63][64]

Paul Deussen notes that teachings similar to above on Brahman, re-appeared centuries later in the words of the 3rd century CE Neoplatonic Roman philosopher Plotinus in Enneades 5.1.2.[63]

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?[65] Brahman is the ultimate "eternally, constant" reality, while the observed universe is a different kind of reality but one which is "temporary, changing" Maya in various orthodox Hindu schools. Maya pre-exists and co-exists with Brahman—the Ultimate Reality, The Highest Universal, the Cosmic Principles.[66]

In addition to the concept of Brahman, Hindu metaphysics includes the concept of Atman—or soul, self—which is also considered ultimately real.[66] 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.[67] Those that consider Brahman and Atman as same are monist or pantheistic, and Advaita Vedanta, later Samkhya[68] and Yoga schools illustrate this metaphysical premise.[69][70][71] In schools that equate Brahman with Atman, Brahman is the sole, ultimate reality.[72] 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.[73][74]

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.[66] 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.[66]

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.[75] 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 a part of the ultimate nirguna Brahman[76] 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.[76]

Brahman, along with Soul/Self (Atman) are part of the ontological[77] premises of Indian philosophy.[78][79] Different schools of Indian 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".[80][81]

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.[82][83][84] 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.[82]

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).[85]

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.[86] The Carvaka school denied Brahman and Atman, and held a materialist ontology.[87]

Brahman and Atman are key concepts to Hindu theories of axiology: ethics and aesthetics.[88][89] Ananda (bliss), state Michael Myers and other scholars, has axiological importance to the concept of Brahman, as the universal inner harmony.[90][91] Some scholars equate Brahman with the highest value, in an axiological sense.[92]

The axiological concepts of Brahman and Atman is central to Hindu theory of values.[93] 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.[94] Tietge states that even in non-dual schools of Hinduism where Brahman and Atman are treated ontologically equivalent, the theory of values emphasizes 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.[95]

The axiological theory of values emerges implicitly from the concepts of Brahman and 'Atman, states Bauer.[96] 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.[96] 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.[96][97] Ignorance is to assume it evil, liberation is to know its eternal, expansive, pristine, happy and good nature.[96] The axiological premises in the Hindu thought and Indian 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.[98] 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.[98]

Brahman and Atman are very important teleological concepts. Teleology deals with the apparent purpose, principle or goal of something. In the first chapter of the Shvetashvatara Upanishad, these questions are dealt with. It says :

"People who make inquiries about brahman say:

What is the cause of Brahman? Why were we born? By what do we live? On what are we established? Governed by whom, O you who know Brahman, do we live in pleasure and in pain, each in our respective situation?

— Svetashvatara Upanishad, Hymns 1.1[99][100]

The main purpose of the Brahman and why it exists is a subjective question according to the Upanishads. One can only find out its true purpose when one becomes the Brahman as the Brahman is all the knowledge one can know itself. Hence, complete answers for anything in life can only be determined or obtained when the Brahman is realized as the Brahman is all the complete knowledge itself. This is said in the Aitareya Upanishad 3.3 and Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 4.4.17 and many other Upanishads.

Knowledge is the eye of all that, and on knowledge it is founded. Knowledge is the eye of the world, and knowledge, the foundation. Brahman is knowing.

— Aitereya Upanishad, Hymns 3.3[101][102]

One of the reasons to why the Brahman should be realized according to the Upanishads is because it removes suffering from a person's life. This is because the person has the ability and knowledge to discriminate between the unchanging (Atman and Brahman) and the ever-changing (Prakrit) and so the person is not attached to the transient. Hence, the person is only content with the self and not his body or anything other than the self.

In Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 3.9.26 it mentions that the atman 'neither trembles in fear nor suffers injury' and in the Isha Upanishad 6-7 it too talks about suffering as non existent when one becomes the Brahman as they see the self in all beings and all beings in the self. Therefore, the apparent purpose of Brahman is in discussion in the Upanishads but the Brahman itself is the only self-contained purpose and true goal according to the Upanishads, so posing the question is redundant. The Upanishads consider the Brahman the only actual worthwhile goal in life and ultimately one should aim to become it as it is the means and an end in and of itself to ultimate knowledge, immortality, etc. So the question of what is the ultimate purpose of everything including the Brahman is answered by realizing or attaining the Brahman as the Brahman itself is ultimate knowledge. Hence, the Brahman is a teleological concept as it is the ultimate purpose and goal of everything possible and permeates everything and is in everything.

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 a sense of oneness with all existence, self-realization, indescribable joy, and moksha (freedom, bliss),[103] 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.[104]

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.[19] 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.[105]

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.

Part of a series on
Advaita
Schools Classical Advaita Vedanta Bhāmatī Vivarana Shaivism/Tantra/Nath Kashmir Shaivism Pratyabhijna Nath Inchegeri Sampradaya New movements Neo-Advaita Nondualism
Concepts Classical Advaita vedanta Atman Brahman Avidya Ajativada Mahāvākyas Om Tat Tvam Asi Three Bodies Aham Cause and effect Kosha Kashmir Shaivism Pratyabhijna so'ham
Practices Guru Meditation Svādhyāya Sravana, manana, nididhyasana Jnana yoga Rāja yoga "Unfoldment of the middle" Self-enquiry
Moksha Moksha Anubhava Turiya Sahaja
Texts Advaita Vedanta Prasthanatrayi Principal Upanishads Brahma Sutras Bhagavad Gita Shankara Upadesasahasri Attributed to Shankara Vivekachudamani Atma bodha Other Avadhuta Gita Yoga Vasistha Yoga Yajnavalkya Advaita Bodha Deepika Dŗg-Dŗśya-Viveka Vedantasara of Sadananda Kashmir Shaivism Shiva Sutras of Vasugupta Neo-Vedanta Works by Vivekananda Inchegeri Sampradaya Dasbodh
Teachers Classical Advaita Vedanta Gaudapada Adi Shankara Mandana Misra Sureśvara Vācaspati Miśra Padmapadacharya Amalananda Chandrashekarendra Saraswati Vidyaranya Bharathi Tirtha Modern Advaita Vedanta Vijnanabhiksu Swami Sivananda Swami Chinmayananda Swami Dayananda Ramana Maharshi Nisargadatta Maharaj Shaivism/Tantra/Nath Gorakshanath Matsyendranath Advaita teachers Neo-Advaita Ramakrishna Swami Vivekananda H. W. L. Poonja Other Osho Eckhart Tolle
Influences Mimamsa Nyaya Samkhya Sramanic movement Yoga Hinduism Vedas Upanishads Vedanta Buddhism Precanonical Buddhism Madhyamika Yogacara Buddha-nature
Monasteries and Orders Classical Advaita Vedanta Dashanami Sampradaya Shri Gaudapadacharya Math Sringeri Sharada Peetham Govardhana Pīṭhaṃ Dvāraka Pīṭhaṃ Jyotirmaṭha Pīṭhaṃ Modern Advaita Vedanta Divine Life Society Chinmaya Mission Arsha Vidya Gurukulam Neo-Vedanta Ramakrishna Mission
Scholarship Academic Paul Deussen Daniel H. H. Ingalls Richard De Smet Paul Deussen Eliot Deutsch Sengaku Mayeda Max Muller Hajime Nakamura Patrick Olivelle Anantanand Rambachan Arvind Sharma Non-academic David Godman
Categories Advaita Advaita Vedanta Vishishtadvaita Vedanta Advaita Shaivism Kashmir Shaivism Inchegeri Sampradaya Nondualism Neo-Advaita teachers

Advaita Vedanta espouses nondualism. Brahman is the sole unchanging reality,[72] 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.[6][82][106] 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 intellectual knowledge), but it can be learned and realized by all human beings.[21] 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.[75] The Brahman is not an 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 which truly exists.[72] 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 by any other means besides self inquiry.[107]

In Advaita Vedanta, nirguna Brahman, that is the Brahman without attributes, is held to be the ultimate and sole reality.[72][76] Consciousness is not a property of Brahman but its very nature. In this respect, Advaita Vedanta differs from other Vedanta schools.[108]

Example verses from Bhagavad-Gita include:

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[109][110]

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[111]

— Bhagavad Gita

Part of a series on
Vaishnavism
Supreme deity Vishnu (Narayana) / Krishna / Rama / Vithoba
Important deities Dashavatara Matsya Kurma Varaha Narasimha Vamana Parasurama Rama Balarama Krishna Buddha Kalki Other Avatars Nara-Narayana Hayagriva Dhanvantari Prithu Mohini Venkateswara Balarama Consorts Lakshmi Bhūmi Sita Radha Rukmini Alamelu Related Garuda Hanuman Shesha Sastha
Holy scriptures Vedas Upanishads Agamas Brahma Sutras Bhagavad Gita Mahabharata Ramayana Harivamsa Divya Prabandha Gita Govinda Puranas Vishnu Bhagavata Naradiya Garuda Padma Agni
Sampradayas Sri (Vishishtadvaita) Brahma (Dvaita, Acintyabhedabheda) Rudra (Shuddhadvaita) Kumara (Dvaitadvaita)
Teachers–acharyas Nathamuni Nammalvar Yamunacharya Ramanuja Pillai Lokacharya Vedanta Desika Manavala Mamunigal Nimbarka Madhva Dnyaneshwar Vishnuswami Vidyapati Vallabha Ramananda Kabir Dadu Dayal Sankardev Madhavdev Chaitanya Jiva Goswami Harivansh
Related traditions Bhagavatism Vaikhanasas Pancharatra Thenkalais Vadakalais Munitraya Krishnaism Warkari Mahanubhava Haridasa Sahajiya Baul Pushtimarg Ekasarana Gaudiya ISKCON Radha-vallabha Ramanandi Kapadi Balmiki Kabir panth Dadu panth Pranami Swaminarayan
Hinduism portal

Brahman of Dvaita is a concept similar to God in major world religions.[19] Dvaita holds that the individual soul is dependent on God, but distinct.[19]

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

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

The Acintya Bheda Abheda philosophy is similar to Dvaitadvaita (differential monism). In this philosophy, Brahman is not just impersonal, but also personal.[112] 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).[112]

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. 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.

The Bhakti movement of Hinduism built its theosophy around two concepts of Brahman—Nirguna and Saguna.[113] Nirguna Brahman was the concept of the Ultimate Reality as formless, without attributes or quality.[114] Saguna Brahman, in contrast, was envisioned and developed as with form, attributes and quality.[114] The two had parallels in the ancient pantheistic unmanifest and theistic manifest traditions, respectively, and traceable to Arjuna-Krishna dialogue in the Bhagavad Gita.[113][115] 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.[115] Nirguna bhakta's poetry were Jnana-shrayi, or had roots in knowledge.[113] Saguna bhakta's poetry were Prema-shrayi, or with roots in love.[113] In Bhakti, the emphasis is reciprocal love and devotion, where the devotee loves God, and God loves the devotee.[115]

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.[114] 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.[116]

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".[117] 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.[117] These were two alternate ways of imagining God during the bhakti movement.[113]

The spiritual concept of Brahman is far older in the Vedic literature, and some scholars suggest deity Brahma may have emerged as a personal conception and icon with form and attributes (saguna version) of the impersonal, nirguna (without attributes), formless universal principle called Brahman.[125] In the Hindu texts, one of the earliest mentions of deity Brahma along with Vishnu and Shiva is in the fifth Prapathaka (lesson) of the Maitrayaniya Upanishad, probably composed in late 1st millennium BCE, after the rise of Buddhism.[126][127][128]

The early Buddhists attacked the concept of Brahma, states Gananath Obeyesekere, and thereby polemically attacked the Vedic and Upanishadic concept of gender neutral, abstract metaphysical Brahman.[129] This critique of Brahma in early Buddhist texts aim at ridiculing the Vedas, but the same texts simultaneously call metta (loving-kindness, compassion) as the state of union with Brahma. The early Buddhist approach to Brahma was to reject any creator aspect, while retaining the value system in the Vedic Brahmavihara concepts, in the Buddhist value system.[129] According to Martin Wiltshire, the term "Brahma loka" in the Buddhist canon, instead of "Svarga loka", is likely a Buddhist attempt to choose and emphasize the "truth power" and knowledge focus of the Brahman concept in the Upanishads.[130] Simultaneously, by reformulating Brahman as Brahma and relegating it within its Devas and Samsara theories, early Buddhism rejected the Atman-Brahman premise of the Vedas to present of its own Dhamma doctrines (anicca, dukkha and anatta).[131]