I asked this a few days ago to one of the followers of advaita and his reply was something like -
Yes ... Brahman the Absolute does have a mind/ego/intellect in a sheathless state and IT can do all the thinking, willing, witnessing in that sheathless state. That was his opinion. Do the rest of you advaitins here also agree with him and hold the same belief?
No, the follower is wrong. The correct answer is that since Nirguna Brahman is beyond word and thought it is impossible to ascribe any mental state to it. Sakti is inactive in that state.
... If you do, then answer me this question and i really want to know this.
Even if we (as embodied jivas), go on and negate or transcend our individual minds/egos and starts dwelling in our Original Higher state Brahman, during turiya or moksha, are we completely rejecting the mind/ego?
Yes, there cannot be an ego in the Turiya state.
... I mean after rejecting one type of mind/ego (the individual one) aren't we situating ourselves in another type of mind/ego (the universal one)?
Its like, transcending from bad ego to good ego.
IMO, the very thought, "I AM Supreme, eternal, infinite, universal consciousness" is also a kind of ego (although an universal one).
A purified ego only exists at the level of Saguna experience where Shakti is active. At the Turiya level Sakti is inactive and hence there is no ego.
Sri Ramakrishna says that the 'salt doll' i.e. the ego dissolves in that state.
Sri Ramakrishna's conversation now turned to the Knowledge of Brahman.
MASTER: "Brahman is beyond vidya and avidya, knowledge and ignorance.
It is beyond maya, the illusion of duality.
"The world consists of the illusory duality of knowledge and
ignorance. It contains knowledge and devotion, and also attachment to
'woman and gold; righteousness and unrighteousness; good and evil. But
Brahman is unattached to these. Good and evil apply to the jiva, the
individual soul, as do righteousness and unrighteousness; but Brahman
is not at all affected by them.
"One man may read the Bhagavata by the light of a lamp, and another
may commit a forgery by that very light; but the lamp is unaffected.
The sun sheds its light on the wicked as well as on the virtuous.
"You may ask, 'How, then, can one explain misery and sin and
unhappiness?' The answer is that these apply only to the jiva. Brahman
is unaffected by them. There is poison in a snake; but though others
may die if bitten by it, the snake itself is not affected by the
poison.
"What Brahman is cannot be described. All things in the world — the
Vedas, the Puranas, the Tantras, the six systems of philosophy — have
been defiled, like food that has been touched by the tongue, for they
have been read or uttered by the tongue. Only one thing has not been
defiled in this way, and that is Brahman. No one has ever been able to
say what Brahman is."
VIDYASAGAR (to his friends): "Oh! That is a remarkable statement. I
have learnt something new today."
MASTER: "A man had two sons. The father sent them to a preceptor to
learn the Knowledge of Brahman. After a few years they returned from
their preceptor's house and bowed low before their father. Wanting to
measure the depth of their knowledge of Brahman, he first questioned
the older of the two boys. 'My child,' he said, 'you have studied all
the scriptures. Now tell me, what is the nature of Brahman?' The boy
began to explain Brahman by reciting various texts from the Vedas. The
father did not say anything. Then he asked the younger son the same
question. But the boy remained silent and stood with eyes cast down.
No word escaped his lips. The father was pleased and said to him: 'My
child, you have understood a little of Brahman. What It is cannot be
expressed in words.'
"Men often think they have understood Brahman fully. Once an ant went
to a hill of sugar. One grain filled its stomach. Taking another grain
in its mouth it started homeward. On its way it thought, 'Next time I
shall carry home the whole hill.' That is the way shallow minds think.
They don't know that Brahman is beyond one's words and thought.
However great a man may be, how much can he know of Brahman? Sukadeva
and sages like him may have been big ants; but even they could carry
at the utmost eight or ten grains of sugar!
"As for what has been said in the Vedas and the Puranas, do you know
what it is like? Suppose a man has seen the ocean, and somebody asks
him, 'Well, what is the ocean like?' The first man opens his mouth as
wide as he can and says: 'What a sight! What tremendous waves and
sounds!' The description of Brahman in the sacred books is like that.
It is said in the Vedas that Brahman is of the nature of Bliss — It is
Satchidananda.
"Suka and other sages stood on the shore of this Ocean of Brahman and
saw and touched the water. According to one school of thought they
never plunged into it. Those who do, cannot come back to the world
again.
"In samadhi one attains the Knowledge of Brahman — one realizes
Brahman In that state reasoning stops altogether, and man becomes
mute. He has no power to describe the nature of Brahman.
"Once a salt doll went to measure the depth of the ocean. (All laugh)
It wanted to tell others how deep the water was. But this it could
never do, for no sooner did it get into the water than it melted. Now
who was there to report the ocean's depth?"
The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna, Chapter 3, Visit to Vidyasagar
