Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 51

Thread: BG 4.16 - Is the Supreme originally manifest or originally formless?

  1. #21
    Join Date
    February 2012
    Location
    india
    Age
    63
    Posts
    171
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: BG 4.16 - Is the Supreme originally manifest or originally formless?

    Namaste
    some questions come to my mind when I see Krishna has been described illusion or in terms of an equation.
    To me, jnan in Gita comes directly from sri Krishna whom some call sagun brahma whereas the jnan in uapanishad comes indirectly from rishies and Gita is also regarded thirteenth Upanishad. so in every step seeking quotation from Upanishad is not justified. Gita has not come from nirgun sri Krishna. when Sri Krishna says “ mama maya” , it does mean that he is the master of maya. it is not that if there is no maya , there is no Krishna ; Krishna controls maya , Krishna is not dependent on maya for existence. How far it is right to say Krishna = Brahman + maya. Is it 2 + 2 = 4 ? ? can swarup of sri Krishna be explained in terms of so simple equation. which Upanishad tells that Brahman + maya = Krishna ? Is this equation derived from Gita itself. does any scripture say that if Brahman is not added to maya there will be no sri Krishna. I think Gita is misunderstood. Sri Krishna says I am the abode of Brahman. I control maya. ‘I’ definitely mean sagun sakar Krishna to whom arjuna is speaking. when people unable to define or describe or even think of Brahman or maya how can they define Krishna with the help of Brahman and maya ?
    I do not understand how can maya or ajnan associate itself with Brahman . Does it mean that maya is more powerful than Brahman or how can a nirgun nirvishes Brahman have a power like maya of its own?
    who comes first brahman or maya ? definitely Brahman comes first. where does nirgun Brahman get maya to become sagun iswara. If Brahman is supreme nirgun without second what is need of nirgun Brahman to become sagun. only nirgun Brahman is real and rest is superimposed on nirgun brahman done by maya then what is the function of sagun Brahman ? does illusion need any care ?

    If Krishna is illusion a game of mind then who is telling arjuna Gita ? Are veda and Upanishad also illusion or not. Is knowledge from veda, Upanishad and Gita also illusion . Krishna illusion, arjuna illusion ,gita is also illusion only Brahman real. I think the swarup of Brahman or maya should not be discussed at convenience that it is like this or not like this. Has anybody come back to tell how he experienced Brahman or maya ? therefore ,It is better to rely on what bhagavan sri Krishna himself describes about himself and maya and also jagat. Krishna says that “ it is under my lead that prakriti brings forth all things, both animate or inanimate” - does it seem illusion ?
    Is only Krishna = Brahman + maya ? what about Vishnu, ganapati, surya, lakshmi, Ram, Shiva. are these also Brahman + maya ?
    It is very easy to tell that Krishna = Brahman + maya. what is the swarup of maya ? what is the relation between Brahman and maya ,whether Brahman is the source of maya or it is an independent of brahman ? how Brahman is called nirgun nirvikara if it has got maya as its power. It is said that where there is brahman or jnan there is no maya but here it is stated so easily that Krishna = Brahman + maya . if there is Brahman + maya then there must be brahman – maya, what is that ?

  2. #22
    Join Date
    June 2010
    Location
    Kolkata
    Posts
    834
    Rep Power
    491

    Re: BG 4.16 - Is the Supreme originally manifest or originally formless?

    I would put it this way.

    The most permanent form is the basic characteristics of anything. The other forms are temporary and not the basic charateristics. They are formed in certain conditions but come back to the permanent form when the conditions are removed.

    Water is liquid - that is the basic charaterictics. When cold it becomes ice - but is is temporary. When it is no more cold - it is water again.

    Similarly for this entire creation. This is something out of certain conditions. These are non permanent. The permanent is formless, attributeless, changeless, timeless - consciousness only. That is the basic charateristics of Supreme.
    Love and best wishes:hug:

  3. #23
    Join Date
    June 2013
    Location
    Maharashtra
    Posts
    570
    Rep Power
    1125

    Smile Re: BG 4.16 - Is the Supreme originally manifest or originally formless?

    Quote Originally Posted by jopmala View Post
    Namaste
    some questions come to my mind when I see Krishna has been described illusion or in terms of an equation.
    To me, jnan in Gita comes directly from sri Krishna whom some call sagun brahma whereas the jnan in uapanishad comes indirectly from rishies and Gita is also regarded thirteenth Upanishad. so in every step seeking quotation from Upanishad is not justified. Gita has not come from nirgun sri Krishna. when Sri Krishna says “ mama maya” , it does mean that he is the master of maya. it is not that if there is no maya , there is no Krishna ; Krishna controls maya , Krishna is not dependent on maya for existence. How far it is right to say Krishna = Brahman + maya. Is it 2 + 2 = 4 ? ? can swarup of sri Krishna be explained in terms of so simple equation. which Upanishad tells that Brahman + maya = Krishna ? Is this equation derived from Gita itself. does any scripture say that if Brahman is not added to maya there will be no sri Krishna. I think Gita is misunderstood. Sri Krishna says I am the abode of Brahman. I control maya. ‘I’ definitely mean sagun sakar Krishna to whom arjuna is speaking. when people unable to define or describe or even think of Brahman or maya how can they define Krishna with the help of Brahman and maya ?
    I do not understand how can maya or ajnan associate itself with Brahman . Does it mean that maya is more powerful than Brahman or how can a nirgun nirvishes Brahman have a power like maya of its own?
    who comes first brahman or maya ? definitely Brahman comes first. where does nirgun Brahman get maya to become sagun iswara. If Brahman is supreme nirgun without second what is need of nirgun Brahman to become sagun. only nirgun Brahman is real and rest is superimposed on nirgun brahman done by maya then what is the function of sagun Brahman ? does illusion need any care ?

    If Krishna is illusion a game of mind then who is telling arjuna Gita ? Are veda and Upanishad also illusion or not. Is knowledge from veda, Upanishad and Gita also illusion . Krishna illusion, arjuna illusion ,gita is also illusion only Brahman real. I think the swarup of Brahman or maya should not be discussed at convenience that it is like this or not like this. Has anybody come back to tell how he experienced Brahman or maya ? therefore ,It is better to rely on what bhagavan sri Krishna himself describes about himself and maya and also jagat. Krishna says that “ it is under my lead that prakriti brings forth all things, both animate or inanimate” - does it seem illusion ?
    Is only Krishna = Brahman + maya ? what about Vishnu, ganapati, surya, lakshmi, Ram, Shiva. are these also Brahman + maya ?
    It is very easy to tell that Krishna = Brahman + maya. what is the swarup of maya ? what is the relation between Brahman and maya ,whether Brahman is the source of maya or it is an independent of brahman ? how Brahman is called nirgun nirvikara if it has got maya as its power. It is said that where there is brahman or jnan there is no maya but here it is stated so easily that Krishna = Brahman + maya . if there is Brahman + maya then there must be brahman – maya, what is that ?
    Namaste , Jopmala

    This is because You have taken maya as reality. Although maya has no existence, you have taken it as in existence !

    Calling him as a divine person, you are just downgrading krishna who is parabramhan. Calling him as a person, you are indirectly saying that bramhan is not omnipresent and he is not equally everywhere.


    Iswara is the manifestation of bramhan with form ( maya) , are the words of Upanishads . There is no any change in bramhan even if he takes the saguna roop ( form) .Although krishna , whose nature is of formless bramhan, takes the human form ,yet his formless nature doesn't vanish .... Bramhan remains as it is, It is changeless, beyond the seeing and non-seeing and Krishna says who takes him as a person is a deluded person. The ignorant doesn't know supreme nature of Krishna, which is called as bramhan by vedic pandits . They see him in form but don't understand who is this krishna ! His dark color is the representation of mysterious illusion due to which braman gets covered by maya .

    No one knows how krishna is formless although he takes the form ! Realising him as all pervading bramhan is the realisation. Realising him as a divine person is not a realisation .

    Who is krishna ! How he acts? how he plays leela ?

    Understanding of leela is nothing but a understanding of how krishna plays leela though he is a non doer . But some people wander here and there asking what is his leela ? And finally they call it as a divine !


    Jai srimati rukmini Krishna !
    Last edited by hinduism♥krishna; 21 October 2013 at 10:51 AM.
    Hari On!

  4. #24

    Re: BG 4.16 - Is the Supreme originally manifest or originally formless?

    Quote Originally Posted by yajvan View Post
    hari o
    ~~~~~~
    namasté



    It is of great import to the reader that the author provides the translations for the śloka-s that are offered i.e. beyond the transliteration. The reader which may be new to HDF will appreciate this.

    iti śiva



    namaste

    I have edited this post to add the translation as per your request :
    Quote Originally Posted by smaranam View Post
    shriyah: kAntAh: kAntah: parama-purushah: kalpataravo
    dhrumA bhumis chintAmaNi-gaNa-mayi toyam amrutam
    kathA gAnam nATyam gamanam api vaMshi priya-sakhI...
    Last edited by smaranam; 28 October 2013 at 09:00 AM.
    || Shri KRshNArpaNamastu ||

  5. #25
    Join Date
    February 2012
    Posts
    1,525
    Rep Power
    2741

    Re: BG 4.16 - Is the Supreme originally manifest or originally formless?

    Namaste

    Is this about verse 4.6 or 4.16?

    I do not know much about Gita, but it seems that there is an emphasis on action, even within renunciation the jiva does not renounce action but only the fruits of action. Devotion is an action, so in what location or situation is action a possibility of jiva and action when you acknowledge there is also the divine?

    Action occurs within a realm, where there is a concept of location.

    It seems the Gita is mentioning 3 things, 3 locations for divine, and not just 2?

    Brahman the All-pervading sheath, like a halo that is a spiritual substance that supports a frame or worlds where it is possible for a localized Paramatma to reside within the midst of an all pervading halo ...

    Paramatma or Super Soul which is the ability of such a soul to be localized and in the heart of beings giving them the ability to express their nature and to observe or witness what they do ...

    Bhagavan or God as Person Who can also be in a realm where we may not be at the moment, where God too can have independence that allows God to become an object of devotion or love ...

    And then beings move between and within and around all 3?

    Why cannot all three exist, and have always existed?

    Om Namah Sivaya

  6. #26
    Join Date
    December 2012
    Posts
    552
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: BG 4.16 - Is the Supreme originally manifest or originally formless?

    Namaste
    Quote Originally Posted by smaranam View Post
    DhAma is spiritual, so can it be a "geographical" location? OK, not geo becs geo is earth. So, can it be a spatial location?
    dhAma is a state of being, a state of consciousness, in which the conscious could be in the sweet company of My Sweet Lord ... WHERE?
    Where the mind travels.
    ...
    You will never be able to find this shvetadvIpa (white island) on any map.
    Because it is beyond time and space!
    ...
    vRndAvan : A state of being, a state of consciousness facilitated by the Grace of the Lord of the Heart - Shri KRshNa Govind VAsudeva
    ...
    Allow me to reconstruct this:
    Katha Upanishad 1.3.9 says that vishnoh padam is a state that the Supreme Super Higher consciousness reveals to the lower local mind at the end of the journey.

    Please note that the Supreme Consciousness, VAsudev did not have to "reach" anywhere, but He is so graceful, so kind, so compassionate that He reveals this state of being to the mind-heart.
    ...
    That which the vedantins describe as unmanifest infallible, ... supreme destination, that state or level of consciousness from which, having attained it, one never returns [to the lower mundane consciousness] - that is My supreme abode.
    Lord's abode viṣṇoḥ padam is not just a state of consciousness!
    It is one exact place that is said to be a residence or abode of the Lord and His devotees, liberated souls.

    regards

  7. #27
    Join Date
    June 2013
    Location
    Maharashtra
    Posts
    570
    Rep Power
    1125

    Wink Re: BG 4.16 - Is the Supreme originally manifest or originally formless?

    Quote Originally Posted by brahma jijnasa View Post
    Namaste


    Lord's abode viṣṇoḥ padam is not just a state of consciousness!
    It is one exact place that is said to be a residence or abode of the Lord and His devotees, liberated souls.

    regards
    Namaste ,

    It's your belief ! However , Upanishads describe both vishnu loka and shiva loka at the supreme level !

    But Upanishads didn't define them as a state of final moksha !

    Dhanyavad !

    Jai shrimati ruknini krushn !

  8. #28
    Join Date
    September 2008
    Location
    Sri. Valkalam, Kerala, SI
    Posts
    604
    Rep Power
    977

    Re: BG 4.16 - Is the Supreme originally manifest or originally formless?

    Quote Originally Posted by hinduism♥krishna View Post
    [color="blue"].Although krishna , whose nature is of formless bramhan, takes the human form ,yet his formless nature doesn't vanish ....
    Jai srimati rukmini Krishna !


    Dear HK,

    Exactly; to see these words without any contradiction between the personal and the impersonal attributes of the Lord, we should be able see and treat Krishna as our own Guru.

    The Chandogya Upanishad refers to Krishna as Brahmavit-the knower of Brahman- as he was instructed with the science of the absolute by the sage Ghora Angira, who is the priest of Sun god. Chandogya Up. (3.17.6)

    ‘Brahma veda brahma eva bhavati’-one who knows that Spureme Brahman verily becomes Brahman itself. Mundaka (3.2.10)

    Though we are strong believers of the knowledge handed over in regular succession without gaps thorough millenniums, are not sure, whether the Krishna mentioned in the Chandogya Upanishad as a Guru is the same Krishna of Vaikunda, who is metaphorically illustrated as a cowherd-God in rather later Vedic texts like the Puranas and the Itihas.

    We think it would be ideal to see Krisha as a sage or a Guru, who is both personal and impersonal at once; and hence he is omnipresent,omniscient and omnipotent as well.

    गुरुरेव परं ब्रह्म तस्मै श्रीगुरवे नमः ॥१॥

    Gurureva Param Brahma Tasmai Shrii-Gurave Namah ||1||

    The Guru is Verily the Para-Brahman (Supreme Brahman); Salutations to that Guru.


    It is only a POV. Love
    Last edited by brahman; 14 November 2013 at 04:59 AM.
    ॐ इदम् न मम
    be just l we happy

  9. #29
    Join Date
    December 2012
    Posts
    552
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: BG 4.16 - Is the Supreme originally manifest or originally formless?

    Namaste
    Quote Originally Posted by ShivaFan View Post
    Is this about verse 4.6 or 4.16?
    It seems that OP, Cosinuskurve, made a mistake, we are not talking about verse 4.16 but 4.6.

    Quote Originally Posted by ShivaFan View Post
    It seems the Gita is mentioning 3 things, 3 locations for divine, and not just 2?

    Brahman the All-pervading sheath, like a halo that is a spiritual substance that supports a frame or worlds where it is possible for a localized Paramatma to reside within the midst of an all pervading halo ...

    Paramatma or Super Soul which is the ability of such a soul to be localized and in the heart of beings giving them the ability to express their nature and to observe or witness what they do ...

    Bhagavan or God as Person Who can also be in a realm where we may not be at the moment, where God too can have independence that allows God to become an object of devotion or love ...

    And then beings move between and within and around all 3?

    Why cannot all three exist, and have always existed?
    According to Gaudiya vaishnavas Brahman is not one exact place, but is all-pervading aspect or feature of the Lord who is Parabrahman or Supreme Brahman. Thus Brahman is all-pervading feature of the Lord in which He does not manifests as a person, and thus it's impersonal feature of the Lord. It is said that Brahman is all-pervading spiritual light or glow of the Lord's body. Sometimes it's called brahmajyoti, brahma -- Brahman, jyoti -- light or glow. The light or glow is nothing personal, it does not have any personal properties, it is impersonal feature of the Lord who is Supreme Person.

    Paramatma is yet another feature of the Lord. It is just a partial manifestation of Lord Krishna. This means that Lord Krishna as the Supreme Person is also manifested in the form of Paramatma which is also a person, but has only a part of the personal qualities of Lord Krishna. That is why it is said that Paramatma is only a partial representation of Lord Krishna. While Lord Krishna has all the personal qualities in full, Paramatma has only a part of the personal qualities of Lord Krishna.

    Bhagavan is feature of the Lord in which He manifests as a person or God in some of His eternal forms as Lord Vishnu, Krishna, Rama, Narasimha, Sadasiva, Varaha, etc. Of all these personal forms of the Lord only Lord Krishna has all the personal qualities in full or 100%, ie it is only Lord Krishna who is 100% the Supreme Person while all the others (Vishnu, Rama, Narasimha, Narayana, Sankarshana, Sadasiva, Varaha, etc.) have only a part of these Lord Krishna's 100% qualities.
    Do you remember that? You're the one who quoted from Garga samhita in "Re: LORd SIVA : A Gaudiya Vaisnava Perspective"
    That the Lord appears in the form of Lord Krishna in the most complete manner than in other forms is confirmed in Garga Samhita. I have examined extract from Garga Samhita provided by you in my post #158 on page 16:
    http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/sho...7144#post97144

    It is said that Paramatma is localized in the heart of every living being and in every atom of this material world. It is said that Paramatma does not exist in Vaikuntha because there the Lord is not separate from jiva soul.

    Sometimes the term "Brahman" denotes all three Brahman, Paramatma and Bhagavan, and sometimes even denotes jiva soul.
    The Lord, brahmajyoti and jivas exist eternally.

    regards

  10. #30
    Join Date
    June 2013
    Location
    Maharashtra
    Posts
    570
    Rep Power
    1125

    Thumbs Up Re: BG 4.16 - Is the Supreme originally manifest or originally formless?

    Quote Originally Posted by brahman View Post




    Dear HK,

    Exactly; to see these words without any contradiction between the personal and the impersonal attributes of the Lord, we should be able see and treat Krishna as our own Guru.

    The Chandogya Upanishad refers to Krishna as Brahmavit-the knower of Brahman- as he was instructed with the science of the absolute by the sage Ghora Angira, who is the priest of Sun god. Chandogya Up. (3.17.6)

    ‘Brahma veda brahma vea bhavati’-one who knows that Spureme Brahman verily becomes Brahman itself. Mundaka (3.2.10)

    Though we are strong believers of the knowledge handed over in regular succession without gaps thorough millenniums, are not sure, whether the Krishna mentioned in the Chandogya Upanishad as a Guru is the same Krishna of Vaikunda, who is metaphorically illustrated as a cowherd-God in rather later Vedic texts like the Puranas and the Itihas.

    We think it would be ideal to see Krisha as a sage or a Guru, who is both personal and impersonal at once; and hence he is omnipresent,omniscient and omnipotent as well.

    गुरुरेव परं ब्रह्म तस्मै श्रीगुरवे नमः ॥१॥

    Gurureva Param Brahma Tasmai Shrii-Gurave Namah ||1||

    The Guru is Verily the Para-Brahman (Supreme Brahman); Salutations to that Guru.


    It is only a POV. Love
    Dhanyavad ! Its right that bramhan has two aspects ie .Impersonal and personal. But as we know ,in bhagavad gita ,krishna refused to call himself as a person . He stated his real identity as bramhan.

    Upanishads strongly supports bramhan as formless And at the end ,they negates the formless too . It is undefined ,beyond comprehension , beyond personal and impersonal . I know Upanishads uses formless only to negate form . In fact bramhan is beyond form and formless concepts .

    If bramhan is non dual ,without a second , then where iz the duality ,where is the duality of personal impersonal , where is the superiority of impersonal or personal !

    Bramhan is the highest self ,where all dualities stop and the knower of bramhan becomes bramhan himself .

    Jai shri govinda !

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. The Supreme Personality...
    By yajvan in forum God in Hindu Dharma
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 30 October 2013, 08:26 PM
  2. Ancient Egyptian Religion
    By Tyrannos in forum Other Dharma Traditions
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 07 December 2011, 11:42 PM
  3. Shri Rudra - Sankarshana Moorti Swaroopo ??
    By giridhar in forum Shaiva
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 10 July 2011, 06:27 AM
  4. What is the goal of life?
    By atanu in forum Philosophy
    Replies: 59
    Last Post: 07 September 2010, 03:44 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •