I think this is a duplicate Sethu: hinduism.stackexchange.com/questions/45833/…

It is svarupa lakshana. Just like fire is formless but hot and emits light. You can not have fire which is cold and dark.

I didnt understand both answers and both are really diverted and answered nothing IMO @Vivikta

If you understood please explain by making seperate quote for Sat Chit and Ananda

@GIRIBLR Sir really not getting you

It is an inbuilt quality. The qualities which give svarupa lakshana are identical with the thing itself and last as long as the thing last. Thus the svarupa lakshana of Brahman should consist of only lakshanas that are eternal. Otherwise, Brahman will not be eternal. Existence is always there and consciousness is always there.

These are not attributes of Nirguna Brahman which is Self,but very thing which everyone voluntarily-involuntarily struggles.Many humans-Asuras have struggled for body's immortality like Ravana,Hiranyakashyapa etc., but failed because body cant be made immortal,while real Self i.e. Nirguna Brahman in all is only immortal(Sat).Every being earns wealth,want to have beautiful wife,children but all is temporary as true source of Ananda was always again Self i.e. Nirguna Brahman & Chida(mental space) is where its all experienced. boloji.com/articles/1505/narada-and-the-illusion-of-maya

Understanding answer is secondary, if the question is already posted, same question cannot be asked again. You can ping the OP of the answer in comments in the original question and ask them to explain your doubts better.

Does this answer your question? How is Nirguna Brahman Nirguna if he is Sachidananda?

I already told you @Vivikta. Please read for yourself. None of the answers solve the doubt or even try to address it.

How does the answer not even address your question. First, upanishad source of sat chit ananda is provided. Then it is explained that Brahman can not be actually described. But the svarupa lakshana of Brahman is mentioned as sat chit ananda. As Brahman is eternal, then these lakshana also must be eternal. Then it is explained why satchitananda must be eternal individual. Universal consciousness is always existing and so is existence and this state of non dual is bliss. I have tried to address it. But it may not be clear but to say I haven't addressed it at all is incorrect.

Sir thanks for responding. Please dont mistake me. Either I am really poor at understanding or you are teaching at much higher level. I sincerely apologize to my harsh tune. I never intended to hurt you. Sir Taittreya Up 2.1 says Saytam Jnanam Anantam Bramha. So it means Existance Knowledge and Infitude. Not Consiouness. Lets talk one by one. If you mean sat as existance of self, yes. But again it has a form. It cant be formless. Same with Consiouness. Same with Ananda. Without form how can you experience all this ?Then how is Brahman nirakara? Why arent sat and chit mentioned in Principal ..

Principal Upanishads? Satya and Vijana are mentioned. @GIRIBLR

Second answer is completly out of topic IMO

Maybe I am poor in explaining but I have tried. Anyway, please see the following. Maybe the translations I have are wrong. Brahman is Consciousness.” —Ait. Up., III. 3. Brahman is Consciousness, Bliss.” —Brih. Up., III. 9. 28. Please check. Also I don't understand why you say consciousness has form. Consciousness can not have form. Existence is like clay and formless. The pot has form but is made up of clay. The second answer is also correct. It just says Brahman is beyond description and all these descriptions are meant for the ajnani to understand something that is beyond mind.

Based to Shankara, you cannot split up Sat-Chit-Ananda into three separate entities, just as you cannot separate light, heat and luminosity from fire. Just as luminosity is the nature of the Sun, coolness of water and heat of fire, so too the nature of the Atman is Eternity, Purity, Reality, Consciousness and Bliss. Atma Bodha 24

We cannot deny our own existence. Thus, we never were not existent and that we never will cease to be existent (even though our physical bodies may disappear) clearly proves that Atman always exists. Atman is Chit for it shines by itself unaided by any other light and illumines the whole universe by its own light. Just as we cannot deny existence, so also we cannot deny consciousness.

Sat, Chit and Ananda are one. Atman is partless and homogeneous. The three characteristics Sat, Chit and Ananda are not distinct from one another. When there is existence, there has to be consciousness. When there is only one, there is no fear of two and thus there is bliss.

We cannot deny our own existence. But after we die there is no "I feeling" . We can feel that Chit only as long as we have this Body. After we leave there is no Chit. I actually read this answer : qr.ae/pGs4Z0 and me as hard core advaithan got hurt and started looking for many doubts. I am not able to understand anything.

Universal Consciousness is not to be confused with the individual’s ego-consciousness. It is Pure Awareness. Consciousness in the sense of Reality does not imply that outside it something must exist as its object. Further, the view we don't exist without body is a charvaka view. Consciousness exists after the death of the body too. If you think consciousness arises from brain, it is a purely materialistic view. Advaita says individual consciousness operates through brain but is independent of it.

I am sorry for flooding with comments. Please see this from Swami sarvapriyananda. He will explain it much better sanskritimagazine.com/indian-religions/hinduism/…

@SethuSrivatsaKoduru Second answer is completly out of topic IMO Hello, I was the one who wrote the second answer. I wrote that strictly speaking, sat-chit-ananda cannot be directly applied to nirguna brahman because nirguna brahman is beyond words. Some quotations from Shankara are provided to show that nirguna brahman is beyond words. So sat-chit-ananda is still only an indication but not an direct description of nirguna brahman.

@zero I completely agree with you

@SethuSrivatsaKoduru Let us discuss here

@GIRIBLR Sir the think is you are saying "Consciousness exists after the death of the body too" But you arent saying how. Common observation does say it ceases to exist after death

thing*

How can Consiouness exist when there is no mind body and organs??What will you feel if there is nothing?

As I said, if you believe that consciousness does not exist after death of body, it is purely a charvaka view and is not vedanta at all. Chit can not be known but it continues to exist. Just like deep sleep.

Please read wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/the-brihadaranyaka-upanishad/d/…

Of course, nothing can convince you if you believe that brain produces consciousness. That is the view of majority of scientists and materialists. But that is not vedanta or even hinduism. That means everything dies after death of the body.

As I requested before, please read this sanskritimagazine.com/indian-religions/hinduism/…

@zero @MrGreenGold Maybe you can add to my answers?

@GIRIBLR your answers look fine. I just want to clarify that vedanta is not contradicting science because the consciousness produced by the brain is considered as reflected consciousness of brahman.

@SethuSrivatsaKoduru on the death of the brain, only the consciousness of brain is gone, ie, the reflection of brahman's consciousness by the brain is gone. Reflection defect does not affect brahman just as defect in mirror image cannot affect object.

@zero Yes, you are correct. It is like radio. The airwaves are still there but the radio is spoiled and thus does not pick up the airwaves. The problem is that though vedanta does not contradict science, there is no way to prove this. It is ultimately shabda pramana of the sages.

@GIRIBLR nice analogy 👍

There are four possibilities regarding consciousness and matter. Both exist, neither exist, only consciousness exists, only matter exists. The materialist stand is only matter is reality, consciousness comes from matter (brain).

The samkhya view is both exist, purusha and prakriti. Both are real and exist independently. This is pansychism. Science is now seeming towards this. They are now saying it is possible that consciousness is also a reality. Because to experience anything, you need a consciousness that seems to be apart from the matter. This is called the hard problem of consciousness.