Guest guest Posted June 14, 1999 Report Share Posted June 14, 1999 Hare Krishna. I would like to know in more detail do the advaitin worship arca-vigraha of Lord Krishna.I was reading Bagavad Gita and Krishna is saying I am the supreme Personality of God Head and pls let me know do advaitin accept Krishna as the supreme personality of Godhead? And what about Demigods to advaitin do worship? Please to all the list member's hope you all can enlighten this fallen soul. Haribol -Baktha Raja- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 14, 1999 Report Share Posted June 14, 1999 >"Linda Callanan" <shastra >advaitin ><advaitin > >Re: Clarification >Sun, 13 Jun 1999 23:47:55 -0400 > >"Linda Callanan" <shastra > >Hello Sadananda, > >In The Four Yogas by Swami Atmananda he explains the two part process of >Jnana Yoga. He states that first one has to learn and believe the >principals of advaita and then to meditate on those principals by >meditation >on the 'self'. It appears that what you state below is also the first >phase >of Jnana Yoga? > >Namaste, >Linda Yes I agree with Swami Atmanandaji. This vichaara is an inquiry, meditation involves conviction that truth is advaita. Then only the neti neti - I am not this not this works. Bhagawaan Ramana puts this clearly in his Upadesha saara Bhedha bhaavana soham mityasou bhaavanaabhidaa paavanii mata|| Meditation involving " I am differnt and He is different - involving Bhakta and the Lord" and that involved " soham" I am He - adviatic bhaavana - the second is supreme and more secred he says it is mata - mata means openion - it is sarva sammata or shaastra sammata - or his own openion. I cannot meditate on oneness unless I am throughly convinced of that. Hence all theses discussions and the need for discussion. shravaNa, manana and nidhidhyaasana or the three steps involved - first listening, then reflecting and finally contemplation on the truth expounded are the three steps. Hari Om! Sadananda _____________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 14, 1999 Report Share Posted June 14, 1999 > > S Rajalingam [sMTP:r32499] > Monday, June 14, 1999 10:01 AM > advaitin > Clarification > > "S Rajalingam" <r32499 > > Hare Krishna. [Madhava Replies:] Hare Krishna: I am here to share my views with you. > I would like to know in more detail do the advaitin worship arca-vigraha > of Lord Krishna.I was reading Bagavad Gita and Krishna is saying > I am the supreme Personality of God Head and pls let me know do > advaitin accept Krishna as the supreme personality of Godhead? [Madhava Replies:] In advaitic stand point of view, Krishna is nothing but the supreme personality, that is *in* all individuals. In terms of duality (dvaita) many questions do arise: * if Krishna is the supreme personality of God Head, then "who am I"? * Am I insignificant nothing? * Don't I have any thing to say? * Don't I have my own will to act? * Can't I decide what I need to do? * If he is God, how long do I have to accept his commands? * If he is God, why should he make somebody poor and somebody extremely rich? * If Krishna is GOD, who made him a God? Of course there should be somebody, who should have proclaimed *him* as God. * Other wise, if krishna declared *himself* as God, then *I* have as much right as Krishna has got to declare myself as God. Think of it... All questions, only because we accept some thing "other than us" as "higher than us". That makes one frightened, that leads one to doubt. In my opinion, any human, who has an questioning intellect, bows his head only because, either out of respect or out of fear. According to the doctrines of Advaita, there is no doubt: "You are God" tat-tvam-asi / ahaM-brahma-asmi/ ayaM-aatmA-brahma / prajnAnaM brahma. So, in my humble opinion, when krishna is declaring himself as supreme GOD, he is speaking in the pure advaitic stand point of view. Hence, in this sense, YES advaitins do accept Krishna (who is in all) as Supreme God. > And what about Demigods to advaitin do worship? [Madhava Replies:] According to Bhagawad Gita, there are three kinds of worshipers: Om tatsaditi nirdESO brAhaNAhstrividhA smRtAH (1) There are people who knows it as "OM". These are realized souls. They say "Om is every thing and I am Om", yet they worship the Om, that has personified as the entire creation. They are acting as "srEsta purushas" (elders). As told by Krishna in Gita: "yadihyahaM navartEyaM"... If I don't work, then the people will misunderstand my intentions and stop working. That will lead into chaos." (2) There are people who hears it as "tat" (that). They are told by elders, by epics, by vedas, by upanishads that --- *that* is there. Hence they worship out of respect, though they are not sure whether it is there or not. 99.99 percent of the worshipers, including me :-), fall in to this category. These people are frightened of unknown. (3) There are people who believe "for sure it is there" (sat). They worship thinking that "since it is there, I will come to know sooner or later". These people respect the unknown. If you fear --- you tend to war --- otherwise you surrender. As long as you fear --- you do pooja (worship) to the thing that has frightened you. By this act, you will be mentally pacified that it is not going to harm you. Worship to demigods is being done by this kind of people. By the way, there are people who believe that if you don't offer some thing, Lord Balaji will take revenge on you, or he punishes you :-) I always wonder, why should any *God* do that! Either you fear or you respect, you tend to express that through "pooja".. As long as - you maintain the dualistic stand point of view, either with this world or with the so-called entity called God, you should worship, there is no other go. Then the question, "what is advaitins role? should they do pooja even they know that it is "aatma" that is pervading every where? Should they encourage or discourage worship?" The answer is, as Bhagawad Gita says: "jOshayEt sarva karmANi vidvAn yuktaH samAcaran" The wise man (advaiti) will never contradict with worshipers, he will let them go (jOshayEt). For that will lead them one day to realize *that*. One day, for sure, they will question as that yejurvEda Rishi - "kasmai dEvAya havishA vidhEma"... "To which God am I offering all this?"... > > Please to all the list member's hope you all can enlighten > this fallen soul. [Madhava Replies:] According to advaita: There is no fallen soul and nobody is a sinner. This is just a discussion. I am giving here my stand point of view. Whether I am confirming to the advaitic point of view or not, the learned scholars of this list can decide. I would request your views and comments which will enable me to learn more. Best Regards, Madhava > ------ > Looking to expand your world? > > ONElist has over 165,000 e-mail communities from which to choose! > ------ > Discussion of the True Meaning of Sankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy > focusing on non-duality between mind and matter. List Archives available > at: /viewarchive.cgi?listname=advaitin > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 14, 1999 Report Share Posted June 14, 1999 At 12:56 PM 6/14/99 +0300, you wrote: >"Madhava K. Turumella" <madhava > (2) There are people who hears it as "tat" (that). They are told by >elders, by epics, by vedas, by upanishads that --- *that* is there. Hence >they worship out of respect, though they are not sure whether it is there or >not. 99.99 percent of the worshipers, including me :-), fall in to this >category. These people are frightened of unknown. I would say 99.99% is too high a number. Maybe 90%, if you include everyone. Advaitic awareness is growing rapidly as Advaita spreads to the West. The Internet has helped (and continues to help) greatly with this. I might suggest a mailing list devoted to general Advaita, for those who are very open-minded: <//NondualitySalon> > (3) There are people who believe "for sure it is there" (sat). They >worship thinking that "since it is there, I will come to know sooner or >later". These people respect the unknown. This is the category "I" fall into. But categories change, as does everything else that is dvaita. > Either you fear or you respect, you tend to express that through >"pooja".. As long as - you maintain the dualistic stand point of view, >either with this world or with the so-called entity called God, you should >worship, there is no other go. There is... there is raja, jnana, karma yogas... among other lesser known yogas such as Kundalini yoga. Worship (bhakta) is the slowest yoga. It can take several lifetimes (at least) to 'attain the goal' if the sole path is that of worship. Of course, no yoga is absolutely pure. Even Sankaracarya, a devout jnani, wrote devotional poetry. > According to advaita: There is no fallen soul and nobody is a >sinner. Absolutely true. Every soul is divine, only covered with layers of ignorance. Even the mass murderer possesses a divine soul, is Atman, only is ignorant of his true nature. > This is just a discussion. I am giving here my stand point of view. >Whether I am confirming to the advaitic point of view or not, the learned >scholars of this list can decide. Scholarship is not necessary, only understanding. Especially "authority" consisting of degrees, etc... means nothing in the least. Real understanding of Advaita ultimately comes not through the mind, but through direct experiencing of the Divine. In Sadhana, Tim ----- Visit The Core of the WWW at: http://www.eskimo.com/~fewtch/ND/index.html Music, Poetry, Writings on Nondual Spiritual Topics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 14, 1999 Report Share Posted June 14, 1999 S Rajalingam wrote: > > > Hare Krishna. > > I would like to know in more detail do the advaitin worship arca-vigraha > > of Lord Krishna.I was reading Bagavad Gita and Krishna is saying > I am the supreme Personality of God Head and pls let me know do > advaitin accept Krishna as the supreme personality of Godhead? > And what about Demigods to advaitin do worship? > Please to all the list member's hope you all can enlighten > this fallen soul. > > Haribol > -Baktha Raja- haribol! firstly, please understand that the idea of a "fallen soul" has no basis in reality. it is merely a thought; and among thoughts, the best of them are merely indicators pointing to that which *truly* resides in the jivatma, which is simply satchidananda. insofar as Bhagavan Krishna being the supreme godhead, the jnana darshana attests it is so. however, it also attests that, in truth, we are not different from Krishna...that once the ahamkar is released, we will indeed come to realize that we have *all along been* krsna, siva, and indeed the parabrahmam itself. as long as the ahamkar remains in tact, puja to Sri Krishna or other ishtha devata is one prescribed method. namaste Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 14, 1999 Report Share Posted June 14, 1999 Hari Om Shri Tim: I just want to assure you and other members of this list that Advaitin list is dedicated to general Advaita and is always open-minded. First, anyone who has access to Internet can access all the files in the Archives and everyone who wants to open his/her mind can join this list and there are no restrictions on the basis of race, sex, religion or nationality. This list gives everyone the freedom (with the added responsiblity) to express viewpoints in support or against any comments and articles. The added responsibility is to help the mind to focus more on the issues and less on the personalities. This list provides the conducive atmosphere for members to explain why they believe in what they believe. Members who have doubts can post any question are protected by the list policies which do not tolerate abusive and offensive languages. Let me this opportunity to clarify some similarities and differences between Advaita and Nonduality. Similarity: Brahman is the Ultimate reality Ignorance is the cause for the duality and hence needs to be expelled. Difference: Advaita explains the unique relationship between Brahman (God), Jiva (souls) and the World (matter) without contraditing the Truth described by the Vedas. They are inseparable. The apparant distinction between Brahman, Jiva and the World is due to the influence of Maya and Maya is neither real nor unreal. Jiva experiences the presence of Brahman by the experience of World. Swami Vivekananda explains it as follows: The world is the physical image of Brahman perceived by Jiva. This is just like seeing one's own reflection on the mirror. Please also note that Advaitin is not competing with other lists of Onelist family or other lists in the Internet family. To some extent, more lists do reduce unnecessary mail trafffic in indvidual mail boxes. Finally, I welcome ideas and suggestions from you and other members of the list to improve the quality and content of this list. This list is always open for suggestions and ideas. Hari Om! Ram Chandran Advaitin List Moderator Tim Gerchmez wrote: > > Tim Gerchmez <fewtch > ..................................... > I might suggest a mailing list devoted to general Advaita, for those who > are very open-minded: > > <//NondualitySalon> > ................................. > In Sadhana, > > Tim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 15, 1999 Report Share Posted June 15, 1999 71. Is God Formless? Some people may feel surprised at the description that God has thousand faces and thousands of eyes. Can God have eyes, ears and limbs like us? If He has also the same sort of body and organs as we have, how could He remain God then? He too has to belong to the category of human beings. Some others argue that such a body and limbs are but a figment of man's own imagination according to his capacity, and not a real description. Between God's form and our physical body there is a gulf of difference and only because they do not understand this they deny form to God as described in the Vedas and the Upanishads. The mere word 'body' need not shock us as dirty and unholy. There is a world of difference between our body of five elements stinking with filth, and the sweet-scented body and form of the Lord which is made of mere consciousness and bliss. If one is an earthen pot, the other is a golden one. The two are entirely different and they have different characteristics. Just because both have a similar shape and form we cannot put them on par. Sweets are made in different forms resembling various animals. But do not children eat them with relish? Even though the forms are different, they are all sweet being made of sugar. Just as there is a great difference between the beasts and the sweetmeat animals, there is an infinite difference between our body and God's. By conceding a body and form made of consciousness and bliss to the Supreme Lord we do not pull Him down to the level of the human beings. It is with this view that the Vedas and Puranas describe the Lord as formless. If in some places it is stated that God is formless, in many others, in the same scriptures, the wonderful and beautiful body and form of the God have been extensively described. We should examine these critically and reconcile them. Since God does not have an inert body made of five elements like ours, He is described as formless by the Srutis and Puranas; He has a supernatural body composed of truth, consciousness and bliss, and this lovely auspicious body is the cause of describing His form. We can remove this apparent contradiction in our scriptures only if we agree that God has a supernatural form. We can look at this problem from another angle. Every object in the universe, living or non-living, is just an image of the Almighty God. God is responsible for its very existence and activity. God pervades every object and activates it. Because of God there is activity in the universe. God is the object and everything else in the universe is His image. The various objects in the universe have diverse forms only because God pervades all these objects and gives them their individual forms. Unless the object has shape, its image cannot have any shape. The image may be dark or even distorted but there is some similarity in form between the two. There is a great difference between the Supreme God and the myriads of living and non living entities in the universe in their characteristics, but because of the object-image relationship, there must be some internal similarity in form. Different atoms join together and become different objects having different forms. For these atoms to join together into particular shapes, the infinite forms of God who is immanent in all objects in nature alone are responsible. tat.h sR^iShTavaa | tadevaanupraavishat.h | tadanupravishya | saccatyaccaabhavat.h | -- Taittiriyopanishad 2:6 (Having created the world, He entered in it, having entered it He was called by its very name sat and sat and became its foundation and controller.) The Upanishad says that nature takes different forms so pleasing to the eye only because of the presence of God inside every object in the universe. As the same water filled in different pots with different shapes takes up different forms, so also the same Godhead entering into different living and non living entities in the universe takes different forms. Only because God has form, nature could be endowed with so many forms and so much variety and beauty. It is better to describe Him as having infinite forms rather than describe Him as formless as He is the object for all the images, and all-pervading. Arjuna saw with his supernatural eyesight such a God of infinite shapes and forms, of infinite auspicious qualities, made of the essence of consciousness and bliss, taking the same form as the image He pervades and at the same time not being affected or touched by its physical characteristics. Some people are of the view that the form and shape of the Almighty Lord described in the Vedas and Puranas are purely imaginary and not at all real. We have accepted the Vedas and Puranas as the supreme authorities in spiritual matters in our Hindu religion. How then could we ever contradict ourselves and say that they preach false and imaginary ideas about God and thus misguide and confuse the people? How could the lovely form of God seen after several years of severe penance and meditation by the supreme devotees like Dhruva be utterly imaginary? What we see by our physical eyesight may sometimes be illusory. But how could the things seen by Arjuna with a divine sight, specially endowed by God, be untrue? Illusory objects have no existence in reality. Arjuna has seen with his own eyes the Almighty God's infinite forms. He has also seen the lesser gods like Brahma and Rudra offering prayers in devotion to God. This shows that not only whatever is mentioned in the epics regarding the other worlds are not the figments of their authors' imagination but, also, whatever of the physical world we see with our eye is also true and real. If the world were unreal, as some believe, Arjuna could not have seen with the divine sight the earth and the heavens under the providence of the Supreme Lord. Thus it is undoubtedly true that whatever Arjuna has seen in the Cosmic Form of the Supreme Soul, the individual soul and the physical world are all real and mutually distinct. Madhava K. Turumella wrote: > "Madhava K. Turumella" <madhava > > > > > S Rajalingam [sMTP:r32499] > > Monday, June 14, 1999 10:01 AM > > advaitin > > Clarification > > > > "S Rajalingam" <r32499 > > > > Hare Krishna. > [Madhava Replies:] > Hare Krishna: > > I am here to share my views with you. > > > I would like to know in more detail do the advaitin worship arca-vigraha > > of Lord Krishna.I was reading Bagavad Gita and Krishna is saying > > I am the supreme Personality of God Head and pls let me know do > > advaitin accept Krishna as the supreme personality of Godhead? > [Madhava Replies:] > In advaitic stand point of view, Krishna is nothing but the supreme > personality, that is *in* all individuals. > > In terms of duality (dvaita) many questions do arise: > * if Krishna is the supreme personality of God Head, then "who am > I"? > * Am I insignificant nothing? > * Don't I have any thing to say? > * Don't I have my own will to act? > * Can't I decide what I need to do? > * If he is God, how long do I have to accept his commands? > * If he is God, why should he make somebody poor and somebody > extremely rich? > * If Krishna is GOD, who made him a God? Of course there should be > somebody, who should have proclaimed *him* as God. > * Other wise, if krishna declared *himself* as God, then *I* have as > much right as Krishna has got to declare myself as God. > > Think of it... All questions, only because we accept some thing > "other than us" as "higher than us". That makes one frightened, that leads > one to doubt. In my opinion, any human, who has an questioning intellect, > bows his head only because, either out of respect or out of fear. > > According to the doctrines of Advaita, there is no doubt: "You are > God" tat-tvam-asi / ahaM-brahma-asmi/ ayaM-aatmA-brahma / prajnAnaM brahma. > > So, in my humble opinion, when krishna is declaring himself as > supreme GOD, he is speaking in the pure advaitic stand point of view. > Hence, in this sense, YES advaitins do accept Krishna (who is in all) as > Supreme God. > > > And what about Demigods to advaitin do worship? > [Madhava Replies:] > > According to Bhagawad Gita, there are three kinds of worshipers: > > Om tatsaditi nirdESO brAhaNAhstrividhA smRtAH > > (1) There are people who knows it as "OM". These are realized > souls. They say "Om is every thing and I am Om", yet they worship the Om, > that has personified as the entire creation. They are acting as "srEsta > purushas" (elders). As told by Krishna in Gita: "yadihyahaM navartEyaM"... > If I don't work, then the people will misunderstand my intentions and stop > working. That will lead into chaos." > > (2) There are people who hears it as "tat" (that). They are told by > elders, by epics, by vedas, by upanishads that --- *that* is there. Hence > they worship out of respect, though they are not sure whether it is there or > not. 99.99 percent of the worshipers, including me :-), fall in to this > category. These people are frightened of unknown. > > (3) There are people who believe "for sure it is there" (sat). They > worship thinking that "since it is there, I will come to know sooner or > later". These people respect the unknown. > > If you fear --- you tend to war --- otherwise you surrender. As > long as you fear --- you do pooja (worship) to the thing that has frightened > you. By this act, you will be mentally pacified that it is not going to harm > you. Worship to demigods is being done by this kind of people. By the way, > there are people who believe that if you don't offer some thing, Lord Balaji > will take revenge on you, or he punishes you :-) I always wonder, why should > any *God* do that! > > Either you fear or you respect, you tend to express that through > "pooja".. As long as - you maintain the dualistic stand point of view, > either with this world or with the so-called entity called God, you should > worship, there is no other go. > > Then the question, "what is advaitins role? should they do pooja > even they know that it is "aatma" that is pervading every where? Should > they encourage or discourage worship?" > > The answer is, as Bhagawad Gita says: > > "jOshayEt sarva karmANi vidvAn yuktaH samAcaran" > > The wise man (advaiti) will never contradict with worshipers, he > will let them go (jOshayEt). For that will lead them one day to realize > *that*. One day, for sure, they will question as that yejurvEda Rishi - > "kasmai dEvAya havishA vidhEma"... "To which God am I offering all this?"... > > > > > Please to all the list member's hope you all can enlighten > > this fallen soul. > [Madhava Replies:] > > According to advaita: There is no fallen soul and nobody is a > sinner. > > This is just a discussion. I am giving here my stand point of view. > Whether I am confirming to the advaitic point of view or not, the learned > scholars of this list can decide. I would request your views and comments > which will enable me to learn more. > > Best Regards, > Madhava > > > ------ > > Looking to expand your world? > > > > ONElist has over 165,000 e-mail communities from which to choose! > > ------ > > Discussion of the True Meaning of Sankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy > > focusing on non-duality between mind and matter. List Archives available > > at: /viewarchive.cgi?listname=advaitin > > > > ------ > Where do some of the Internet's largest email lists reside? > > At ONElist - the most scalable and reliable service on the Internet. > ------ > Discussion of the True Meaning of Sankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy focusing on non-duality between mind and matter. List Archives available at: /viewarchive.cgi?listname=advaitin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 15, 1999 Report Share Posted June 15, 1999 > > S Rajalingam [sMTP:r32499] > Tuesday, June 15, 1999 3:17 PM > advaitin > Re: Clarification > > 71. Is God Formless? > [Madhava Replies:] Hari Om! My dear friend, since you have posted as a reply to my mail, I am assuming the responsibility to answer for this post, only once. Some people may feel surprised at the description that God has thousand faces and thousands of eyes. Can God have eyes, ears and limbs like us? [Madhava Replies:] I don't think so. He who studied veda will never be surprised. He who does not know only surprises at that number. You are referring the description of God in PurushaSuktam (RigVeda) --- "sahasrapoorushaM dEvaM sahasrAksha ssahaSrapAt"... This is what the problem with the translators. They say "God has got thousand faces and thousand eyes". First of all, you should understand what exactly it means by "thousand" in the vedic language. According to Amara and Nirukta "SataM miti sahasrmiti anaMtO vai nAmadhEyAni" Means: "The word "sata" and "sahsra" used in vEda are synonyms for 'infinite'." Lord is described in terms of infinite. You want more reference? > Some others > argue that such a body and limbs are but a figment of man's own > imagination > according to his capacity, and not a real description. Between God's form > and our physical body there is a gulf of difference and only because they > do > not understand this they deny form to God as described in the Vedas and > the > Upanishads. [Madhava Replies:] Absolutely baseless. I am surprised, which veda, which upanishad you are referring to? "brahmavit brahmaiva bhavati" -- "he who knows God will become God" is this not a vedic saying? > The mere word 'body' need not shock us as dirty and unholy. > There is a world of difference between our body of five elements stinking > with filth, and the sweet-scented body and form of the Lord which is made > of > mere consciousness and bliss. If one is an earthen pot, the other is a > golden one. [Madhava Replies:] Again, know what is the real meaning of "hiraN" and why the so-called God is discribed as "hiraN". "hiraN" is translated into English as "Gold". It does not give the true vedic meaning. (Physical body, mental body, casual body) + (hiraNmayapurusha *tainted by* jeevabhaava) = Jeeva The hiranmayapurusha (the golden one - consciousness) is the God in you, me and everyone. He is all pervading. The realized soul is nothing but God: "sa paryagAt SukramkAya mavraNaM aSnAviragaM suddhamapApaviddhaM kavirmaneeshee paribhoo svayaMbhooH....SASvateebyaHssamAbhyaH" After realizing that he is nothing but the brahman, the realized soul becomes all pervading, he becomes bodiless (akAyaM), he will no more get hurt by the wounds of the painful life (avraNaM), he becomes purified (suddhaM), he becomes absolutely pure from the so-called *sin* (apApaviddhaM). He becomes a poet (kavi), he becomes wise (maneeshi), he becomes birthless (svayaMbhooH). He commands the time. (by the way, if we think that God is having a form, then according to this verse the realized soul commands the God, because God is shown as kAla (time) in Gita "kAlOsmi lOkakshayakRt pravRddaH" :-)) All the above upanishadic saying is just describing about what happens to a realized soul. He is described no less than any so-called God (as per your mail). So where do you draw the line? Where do you draw the line? --- between a realized soul and the so-called Golden bodied God (as per you) Think of it... All is said by the same Veda and Upanishads. > By conceding a body and form > made of consciousness and bliss to the Supreme Lord we do not pull Him > down > to the level of the human beings. It is with this view that the Vedas and > Puranas describe the Lord as formless. [Madhava Replies:] Your view is WRONG! adRSyE bhAvanA nAsti dRSyamEtad vinaSyati avarNa masvaraM brahMa kadhaM dyAyaMti yOginaH || - uttaraGita 1.32 Meaning: That which can't be seen, can not be meditated upon... and that which is being seen all changes and perishes in time. Then how are these yogies meditating upon indescribable and formless brahman! tatrApidahraM gaganaM viSOkaM (bRhadAraNyaka - 8.1) Since they need to have a form in order to meditate upon, they imagined a form. After reaching a perticular stage in sadhana, the yogies go beyond the form and realize the homogeneous mass of consciousness, called the kAraNabrahma which is in you me and every where . Since karanabrahma can't be described, they said it is formless. If in some places it is stated that God is formless, in many others, in the same scriptures, the wonderful and beautiful body and form of the God have been extensively described. We should examine these critically and reconcile them. Since God does not have an inert body made of five elements like ours, He is described as formless by the Srutis and Puranas; He has a supernatural body composed of truth, consciousness and bliss, and this lovely auspicious body is the cause of describing His form. We can remove this apparent contradiction in our scriptures only if we agree that God has a supernatural form. [Madhava Replies:] Read the above explanation > We can look at this problem from another angle. Every object in the > universe, living or non-living, is just an image of the Almighty God. God > is > responsible for its very existence and activity. God pervades every object > and activates it. Because of God there is activity in the universe. God is > the object and everything else in the universe is His image. [Madhava Replies:] "biMba pratibiMba vAda" I am not new to this and this logic also has got a problem in it. If every body is God's image why is every body not behaving like him? Why should he activate *bad* people as well? NO.. I am not expecting answers because I am convinced that the above logic is wrong. > The various > objects in the universe have diverse forms only because God pervades all > > tat.h sR^iShTavaa | tadevaanupraavishat.h | > tadanupravishya | saccatyaccaabhavat.h | -- Taittiriyopanishad 2:6 > (Having created the world, He entered in it, having entered it He was > called > by its very name sat and sat and became its foundation and controller.) > [Madhava Replies:] This is what causes agony... Why do you mis-quote from upanishads? You have one point and you quote *one* verse from taittiriyOpanishad!!!!!!! Don't you have the moral responsibility to quote the entire anuvAka? Isn't this anuvAka showing the path of the realized soul and the illusion of creation? > The Upanishad says that nature takes different forms so pleasing to the > eye > existence in reality. Arjuna has seen with his own eyes the Almighty God's > infinite forms. [Madhava Replies:] Again flawed... it is not his *own* eyes. They are "divya chakshus". > He has also seen the lesser gods like Brahma and Rudra > offering prayers in devotion to God. [Madhava Replies:] Again, I demand to read the following verses of BhagawadGita from "JayaM" (mahAbhArata's original name). Arjuna questions Krisha in the "dRONaparva" about rudra: "saMgrAmE SAtravAneekaM SaroughairviSRjannahaM agratO lakshayE yAntaM purushaM pAvakaprabhaM || jvalaMtaM Soola mudyamya yAM diSaM pratipadyatE tastAM diSi.... ... madbhagnAnmanyatE janaH !!" O krishna! I see this mighty person with mated locks walking in front of my chariot. He got a fierce look in his face, with his trident he is ruthlessly killing everybody. All my enemies are getting killed even before I shoot them with my arrow. All the spectators are proclaiming that "Oh! Arjuna has killed" when in reality -- it is that person who killed my enemies. "who is that person"?" Then krishna chooses to reply to this question in bhismaparva at *mOkshadharma* (path of liberation) prakaraNa *only*: (WHY?) The answer is, if krishna answered that immediately it would have been misquoted as per the instance... > This shows that not only whatever is > mentioned in the epics regarding the other worlds are not the figments of > their authors' imagination but, also, whatever of the physical world we > see > with our eye is also true and real. If the world were unreal, as some > believe, Arjuna could not have seen with the divine sight the earth and > the > heavens under the providence of the Supreme Lord. Thus it is undoubtedly > true that whatever Arjuna has seen in the Cosmic Form of the Supreme Soul, > the individual soul and the physical world are all real and mutually > distinct. [Madhava Replies:] Let me quote from Sivagita "ArOpO buddhipoorvENa ya upAsA vidhiSca saH yOshityagni matiryatta dadhyAsa ssa udAhRtaH" - SivaGita - padmapurANa 12-12 Though God is not evident in the object, they enforce the Gods shape on the object and try to worship and meditate it is called as "adhyAsa". All your worship is nothing but "adyAsa". Advaita has got no problem with "adhyAsis" :-) Conclusively: "EkOvaSee sarva bhootaMtarAtmA EkaM roopaM bahudhA yaH karOti tamAtmasthaM Enu paSyaMti dheerAH tEshaM sukhaM SASvataM nEtarEShaM || ----kaThOpanishad 2.2.12 > Madhava K. Turumella wrote: > > > "Madhava K. Turumella" <madhava > > > > > > > > S Rajalingam [sMTP:r32499] > > > Monday, June 14, 1999 10:01 AM > > > advaitin > > > Clarification > > > > > > "S Rajalingam" <r32499 > > > > > > Hare Krishna. > > [Madhava Replies:] > > Hare Krishna: > > > > I am here to share my views with you. > > > > > I would like to know in more detail do the advaitin worship > arca-vigraha > > > of Lord Krishna.I was reading Bagavad Gita and Krishna is saying > > > I am the supreme Personality of God Head and pls let me know do > > > advaitin accept Krishna as the supreme personality of Godhead? > > [Madhava Replies:] > > In advaitic stand point of view, Krishna is nothing but the > supreme > > personality, that is *in* all individuals. > > > > In terms of duality (dvaita) many questions do arise: > > * if Krishna is the supreme personality of God Head, then "who > am > > I"? > > * Am I insignificant nothing? > > * Don't I have any thing to say? > > * Don't I have my own will to act? > > * Can't I decide what I need to do? > > * If he is God, how long do I have to accept his commands? > > * If he is God, why should he make somebody poor and somebody > > extremely rich? > > * If Krishna is GOD, who made him a God? Of course there should > be > > somebody, who should have proclaimed *him* as God. > > * Other wise, if krishna declared *himself* as God, then *I* > have as > > much right as Krishna has got to declare myself as God. > > > > Think of it... All questions, only because we accept some thing > > "other than us" as "higher than us". That makes one frightened, that > leads > > one to doubt. In my opinion, any human, who has an questioning > intellect, > > bows his head only because, either out of respect or out of fear. > > > > According to the doctrines of Advaita, there is no doubt: "You > are > > God" tat-tvam-asi / ahaM-brahma-asmi/ ayaM-aatmA-brahma / prajnAnaM > brahma. > > > > So, in my humble opinion, when krishna is declaring himself as > > supreme GOD, he is speaking in the pure advaitic stand point of view. > > Hence, in this sense, YES advaitins do accept Krishna (who is in all) as > > Supreme God. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.